Sp

eci
al I
ssu
e

www.trucker.de

8.2011

VOLVO FMX 460

in our 8x4 Dump Truck Benchmark Test

Trucker 8/2011

Fotos: Karel Sefrna

BENCHMARK TEST
8X4 Dump trucks 440 to 460 hp

A Northerly
Wind on the
Construction Site
Dutch and Swedish brands hope to take over more worksites
in the German-speaking region in future. The MAN TGS
35.440 answered its Nordic competitors challenge.

Trucker 8/2011

BENCHMARK TEST 8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s

DAF C F 85.460 FA D
Snapshot: DAF has stayed true to its roots: the CF successfully completed all
tasks and above all racked up points off the street with an affordable price
tag, solid quality, and support services geared to middle-class needs.
+ powerful motor, solid build quality and construction packagee
doesnt set the standard in any category
A metal plate protects
the oil pan

Solid footing at the

dump controls

The transmission tunnel

limits cab space
To change bulbs,
the housing first has
to be removed

The German top dogs

of construction vehicles arent about to let
someone else take away their territory: Mercedes and MAN currently cover 70 percent of the market.
This has been reason enough
for their competitors in the north,

Trucker 8/2011

who have traditionally kept their

main focus on long-range transport, to throw down the gauntlet:
DAF has set its CF 85.460 FAD
against the MAN TGS 35.440, while Scania has puts its money on the
G440 and Volvo is counting on the
comparatively young FMX 460. As

Mercedes couldnt offer a 32-ton

truck, Wrth provided an Actros
4148 in its stead to ensure the
benchmark test was representative.
Unlike in long-range transport,
when it comes to construction vehicles it is difficult to find different
models with the same configurati-

on: the philosophies of the individual manufacturers are too varied,

as are the demands of the customers who order them. It comes as
no surprise, then, that the unloaded weights of the trucks we tested
ranged from 13.4 metric tons for
the lightweight-designed Scania to

Karel Sefrna

Dhe powerful motor helps to gloss over the

weaknesses of the automatic transmission

When tyre pressure was too low, a compressor provided a boost

nearly 15 tons for the DAF CF. If

only the weight of the frames are
taken into account, the range drops
to between 9.8 and 10.8 tons.

Our test consisted of two parts:

a loaded drive over terrain, where
the main focus was on gearbox performance, and our traditional

street test, which consisted of rural

road and highway sections and a
short inner-city drive. For the latter
test, fuel economy was the primary
factor considered.
In the terrain test, the trucks
had to cope with rapid changes between hard and soft surfaces. Manoeuvring performance and the ability to steadily and evenly distribute
loads, as is often needed in roadlaying, were further main criteria.

Sensible: the skid plate is in front of

the cooling coils and exhaust pipes

Only a gearbox that can rapidly adjust to changing conditions can

prevent trucks from getting stuck
or stalling out, allowing slow but
steady creeping under the heaviest
loads.
The Volvo FMXs I-Shift transmission does the best job of combining these qualities and without having to fall back on its
special off-road mode. When surface conditions change drastically,

With the MAN, too, the entire

housing has to be
removed to change
out a bulb

Stylish cab. The back of the cab is somewhat cramped by the air filter housing

MAN TG S 35.440 8 x 4 B B
Snapshot: Thanks to its perfect steering and astoundingly powerful engine, the MAN
delivered much better driving performance than its tall, spacious cab might lead you to
believe. But the Tipmatic transmission proved to be poorly suited to off-road driving.
+ precise steering, powerful engine, stylish interior
comparatively speaking, Tipmatic does not shift well off-road

Very powerful for so little

displacement: the D20 showed real stand-up performan

The sturdy steps and

handrail make it easier to check the
dump controls

BENCHMARK TEST 8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s

SCAN IA G 440 C B
Snapshot: With its (too) long hypoid axle
and no additional brake, the Scania is extremely tailored to delivering the lightest
possible construction certainly interesting when every gram counts, but
hardly a suitable configuration for King
Offroad.
+ perfect

ergonomics, lightweight,
good fuel economy
loud, engine brake, low-quality interior

Optimal: a broad
fold-out step, easyto-remove headlight assembly

The long gear ratio hardly helps the EGR motor

Suitable ground clearance, despite
the fuel-efficient hypoid axles

the Swede immediately downshifts

from sixth to first gear. Driving
uphill in terrain and reversing on
rock piles are further tasks the
FMX masters with ease. Our test
driver Dirk Behnke, who just like
our second member of the benchmark team, Pitter Kurscheid uses
several brands of 6x4 and 8x4

Trucker 8/2011

dump trucks in his

own comp any,
notes, Slips into
and back out of gears very smoothly,
can readily be driven without using
the power program or shifting
manually: an opinion shared by his fellow testers.
The only minus points in this regard: at higher RPMs the FMX can
at times upshift, even if the engine
brake is used. In terms of off-road
performance, despite its length, the
Volvo benefits from the broad ratio
spread of its lower gears, an impressive amount of subjectively felt tor-

Simple, clean lines characterize the cab interior

que, and the fastest shift times of

those trucks tested.
The DAF also banks on torque,
demonstrating its ability to easily
master terrain without switching to
off-road mode. However, when the
mode was activated, the CF started
hectically shifting between first and
second gear. It also responded to
rapid changes in surface conditions
by downshifting to first, though not
as smoothly as the Volvo.

OFFROAD, THE AS-TRONIC

CAN GET TOUCHY

It was only the brawny torque of its

MX engine that saved the CF from
coming to a complete standstill.
Thanks to Hillholder, it also mana-

ged to pull successfully in difficult

terrain, though not quite as well as
the FMX. Reversing did not go so
smoothly: Poor pull performance:
the transmission jumps back out of
the gears too early, making the
truck roll away, noted Behnke with
regard to this exercise at the dumping station. Our MAN truck,
which also uses the ZF AS-Tronic,
had the same difficulties.
The MAN also had trouble
with the other exercises. Where the
DAF and Volvo simply marched
on, the MANs Hillholder shut off
before the AS-Tronic was fully in
gear; as a result, the driver had to
hit the gas to keep the truck moving. And switching to the cleaner-

shifting Dx mode actually made

matters worse: on soft ground, the
MAN bogged down entirely. And
the imprecise and somewhat sluggish harmonization between shifting and clutching made the roadlaying exercise bumpier than need
be. It is true that it takes some time
to get a feel for how to drive the
MAN off-road, but, just as in longdistance transport, one suspects
that the AS-Tronic has since been
left behind by the competition.
Scania threw its hat in the ring
with an Opticruise model with
clutch: after some acclimation to
the clutch pedal, the Swede mastered all sections of the course just
like a truck with manual transmis-

sion, as the driver always had the

option of more precisely dosing
power which can be a real help
off-road. On the other hand, this
calls for more active control on the
part of the driver. The Opticruise
box demonstrated good shift
speeds; nevertheless it didnt prove
fast enough for the soft-ground
text: if the driver didnt hit the pedal quickly enough, the Scania
stalled out.

THE SCANIA CAME WITH A

LONG HYPOID AXLE

The Volvos performance was just

as impressive on the street as in the
quarry. It demonstrated ample torque, even if the measured values

Setting the tyre pressures exactly, taking into account the air temperature

tell a different story: thanks to their

shorter gear ratios, the AS-Tronic
trucks clearly outperformed the
long gear-ratio Swedes in terms of
acceleration and elasticity. One of
the Volvos strengths is its powerful,
multi-stage VEB+ engine brake,

which easily kept its speed under

control even on very steep inclines.
Here too, though, the I-Shift transmission can upshift when RPMs
get too high; when this happens,
the FMX can demonstrate dangerous runaway behaviour, even

VOLVO F M X 460
Snapshot: Thanks to its fast and intelligent I-Shift
system, the Volvo did the best job of ploughing
through terrain. This also helped to make up for
the somewhat (too) long gear ratios. The most
cramped interior of the trucks tested.
+ rapid shifting, powerful engine, good sound
cramped cab, steering is a bit shaky, even with
engaged engine brake the I-Shift can upshift
Air filter, storage box, and engine: not much room left for
protective clothing

The undercarriage is protected by

robust Swedish steel

Easily accessible, powerful engine

Because of the air vent, the steps

are pushed back and the air filter is
moved up

Trucker 8/2011

BENCHMARK TEST 8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s

The Mercedes Actros 4148 (background) wasnt in the running, but served to put tested values in perspective

if the engine brake is on. The MAN

showed that such situations can be
handled much more smoothly:
while its pretarder-boosted Brakematic did not demonstrate quite as
strong subjective braking, the braking power could be dosed perfectly and is ideally tuned to the ASTronic transmission. The DAFs
MX engine brake is clumsy in comparison: the only options are on
and off, and switching always means downshifting. The steering
wheel-mounted Speed Limiter, in
contrast, offers a much better option. Once the top speed has been
set, the MX brake and AS-Tronic
determine together which will do a
better job of maintaining the selected speed.
In contrast, the Scanias exhaust
cut-out, which is not only weak but
also activated by an unergonomic

rubber foot switch just as it was a

few decades back, is positively tiresome. On steep roads, downshifting and additional (manual) braking are a must.
The easy-to-wash G-type cab
also does little to contribute to a
sense of comfort: though it offers
the best ergonomics and clean
workmanship, it nevertheless has
all the charm of a Swedish industrial town in winter. The same is true
of the sound: whereas Scanias
long-range transport trucks set the
standard when it comes to noise
insulation, in the basic model we
tested you could hear everything
going on under the cab.
And in the rural road section of
the test, there was quite a bit going
on, thanks to the terribly long axle
the Scania had to manoeuvre with.
This may not have affected its total

Tyre pressures were painstakingly recorded

Trucker 8/2011

score, but certainly meant more

downshifting: when faced with a
dip followed by a steep incline, the
incredibly sure-footed MAN
ploughed right through in eleventh
gear, while the Scania, which has
the same horsepower, only made it
through in ninth. Worth noting: in
comparison to other long-distance
transport trucks with similar engines, the MAN dump truck performed extremely well, while the
Scania displayed surprisingly little
power; our DAF and Volvo models
were closer to standard performance.

THE MANS STEERING IS A

MODEL OF PRECISION

That the MAN TGS was designed

with a focus on more power can
also be seen in its fuel consumption: unlike the Efficient Liners, the

After the terrain test: dumping the load for the empty drive test

TGS chugs down litre after litre. Its

comparatively short axle and
(despite its minimal displacement)
extremely high-torque engine
compensated for the AS-Tronics
long shift delays, allowing it to fly
through the rural roads section like
no other.
The TGS also raises the bar
when it comes to tight steering: as
the leaf springs absorb all shocks
from uneven ground, it glides as if
it were on rails. The interior is roomy and high-quality; only the notquite-perfect ergonomics and somewhat bulky steering wheel could
be better. And the engine runs at
least 1500 RPMs at motorway
speeds, which, together with the
tall cab, doesnt exactly help the fuel
consumption.
The Volvo is closer to the
ground and, thanks to its throaty

One stage of the benchmarking was a road test

D13 engine, feels a bit more confident. It also makes the most relaxed
impression on the street, even if the
engine brake and transmission
dont work together quite so
smoothly as in the MAN.
The materials for the interior
are also of lower quality than those
in the MAN not to mention the
limited amount of room, which is
just enough for larger drivers, and
the jerky steering. The larger engine and good ratio spread for the
lower gears skilfully gloss over its
long axle.

THE DAF CF 460 WAS

SURPRISINGLY ECONOMICA

This is not so necessary with the

DAF: the CFs cab is similarly uncomfortable to that of the Volvo,
though it does offer a bit more
room. The materials are of suitable
quality, the craftsmanship is solid,
and the engine can be much more
clearly heard than in the MAN or
the Volvo. On the rural roads section of the test, the DAF was reminiscent of the MAN: for both
trucks, the AS-Tronic let the RPMs
drop nearly off the scale, which the
MX engine handled with ease. The
fact that the MAN had the advantage of essentially being on its own
test track could be seen in the details: the DAFs shifting was a bit
more jittery, though one can get
used to it with a bit of time. Worthy
of note: despite having the least kilometres (less than 8,000) and AP
axles, the DAF was nearly as econo-

mical as the lightweight and fueloptimized Scania. But the Swedes

may have overdone it a bit in certain aspects of the Scanias design:
the clutch certainly helped it in the
off-road part of the test, but in

terms of comfort it could definitely

use a retarder and a few more accessories; in our benchmarking,
the lightweight-design King was
the least favourite to drive. The
DAF, its hefty counterpart, didnt

shine in any particular category,

but did perform most of the tasks
we set it to solidly and at an incredibly low price. Or, in other
words: considering how cheap the
DAF is, its not bad at all.
But our real champion is also
the newest model: not because Volvo extended the FM line to the
FMX, but because I-Shift was simply the best transmission of those
tested. And it is in exactly this point
where the MANs otherwise excellent system integration falters,
though it did perform impressively
on its home turf and set new standards for power and steering.
When deciding which truck to
buy, though, not only the quality or
the price, but also repairs and service are key: it is only those who
excel in the last category who will
also win customers individual
benchmarkings.

More Infos
www.trucker.de

TEST SUPPORT

Thanks for your help!

Goodyear equipped all trucks with
identical tyres and checked the air
pressure. At our partner Mnchner
Kiesunion (MKU), Thomas Wachter
made sure we had an excellent
test course and Stefan Pleynert
ensured smooth loading for the
fuel consumption test. Ford provided a driver transfer car. We would
also like to thank our two experts
Pitter Kurscheid and Dirk Behnke,
who helped us to realise our goal
of getting closer to the action!

Ford Mondeo 2.2 TCCI at the

MKU quarry in Eching

Goodyear Truck Force

with mobile tyre service

Trucker 8/2011

The DAF
surprised us
The Dutch scored points with
its powerful motor, which at
times did a betTester D. Behnke ter job of compensating for the transmissions
weaknesses in the off-road test
than the MAN, which offered more
room, a quieter engine and better
on-road comfort. Thanks to its fast
I-Shift gearbox, the Volvo set new
standards in off-road performance.
A pity: the dump box lever is extremely difficult to reach.
The MAN was
very powerful
With the DAF,
chatter is just part
of the package,
and is made up
for by the low price. In our test the Tester G. Grnig
Scania seemed a bit weaker than
usual; the MAN came across much
stronger and also scored points
with its great chassis. But off-road
the FMX, whose good gear ratio
spread made up for its long axle,
set new standards.
The CF has the
price to beat
In my opinion,
the MAN showed the best
driving performance and an
Tester P. Kurscheid extremely
strong engine. In the quarry, the
Volvo scored with its excellent shifting strategy. The DAF didnt show
any major strengths or weaknesses, but does offer a super price.
If I were to buy the Scania for the
work I do, I would definitely choose
a very different configuration.
Stepping up
the game
At the end of the
day, its clear: the
I-Shift definitely
gave the FMX
the edge; a 25ton towing ca- Tester G. Soller
pacity and a fording depth of 640
mm are further pluses. My on-road
favourite was the extraordinarily
surefooted and precisely manoeuvrable MAN TGS; its steering and
engine raise the bar.

EVALUATION IN POInts
Engine
Climbing performance
Responsiveness
Elasticity
Performance curve
Noise output - subjective
Noise output - constant, measured
Noise - measured under load
Engine brake performance
Fuel consumption
total
Gearbox on-road / off-road
Ease of use
Shift speed
Shifting strategy
Manoeuvring mode
Response to loading / unloading
total
Steering on-road / off-road
Precision
Straight-running
Compensation for irregularities / stones
total
Brakes on-road / off-road
Ability to dose braking
Responsiveness
Effectiveness
total
Suspension on-road / off-road
Comfort / stability
Shock absorption
Response to major shocks
total
Cab
Ease of entry
Orientation
Adjustable seat / steering wheel
Ergonomics - switches and controls
Storage - boots, prot. clothing, shovel, tools
Easy to clean - interior
Easy to clean - windscreen / side windows
Air conditioning / heater /defrost
Lighting
Storage - A4 documents, beverages
Workmanship, quality of materials
Positions of pedals
Construction package
Panorama view
total
Undercarriage
Ground clearance / fording depth
Oil pan- radiator protection
total
Maintenance / service
Heater air intake
Change headlight bulb
Change taillight bulb
Manually checking / adding oil
Engine accessibility
Air dryer
Number of lubrication nipples
Service interval - engine, gearbox, axles
Onboard tools
Windscreen washer
Replace side mirror
Pneumatic controls in cab
Tyre filling port
total
Prices
Guarantee / warranty
Base price
Resale price
Cost of replacement parts
Service stations
total
Total points

worst score

10

Trucker 8/2011

best score

DAF CF

MAN TGS

SCANIA G

Volvo FMX

max. points
20
20
20
20
15
20
20
30
35
200

17
16
17
16
13
16
18
19
31
163

18
18
19
19
14
18
20
24
16
166

16
14
15
17
13
18
16
15
32
156

18
18
19
19
15
17
17
29
27
179

20/20
40/40
40/40
20/20
10/10
260

16/15
25/25
32/35
16/16
9/10
199

16/15
30/25
34/25
18/12
8/7
190

16/14
26/25
26/28
18/20
8/10
191

17/19
35/38
35/38
20/19
8/10
239

20/20
20
10/10
80

18/18
18
8/8
70

20/20
19
10/10
79

19/18
19
10/8
74

18/15
18
10/6
67

10/10
10/10
10/10
60

8/8
8/10
9/10
53

8/7
10/10
10/10
55

10/9
10/10
10/10
59

10/10
10/10
10/9
59

10/10
10/10
10/10
60

7/8
8/8
8/8
47

8/9
8/9
10/10
54

8/9
8/8
7/7
47

10/8
9/8
8/8
51

20
20
10/10
10
20
20
10/10
20
10
20
10
10
20
10
230

19
17
9/9
8
14
15
8/9
19
9
17
8
8
19
10
198

16
20
10/9
8
15
13
10/10
18
9
19
9
10
18
9
203

17
19
10/10
10
14
14
10/9
19
9
19
8
9
13
9
199

18
13
8/9
8
13
13
9/8
18
7
15
9
10
18
9
185

20
20
40

16
18
34

15
18
33

18
18
36

19
18
37

10
20
20
20
20
10
10
20
10
10
10
10
10
180

10
15
20
5
18
8
10
15
8
10
10
10
10
149

10
12
20
5
19
8
10
14
10
10
10
10
10
148

10
15
20
19
19
10
5
13
10
10
10
10
10
161

10
17
20
20
20
10
10
19
10
10
10
10
10
176

10
20
20
20
20
90
1200

8
19
12
15
12
66
979

8
15
18
16
18
75
1003

8
13
17
18
11
67
990

8
14
15
14
10
61
1054

K. Sefrna

TRUCKER SUMMARY

8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s BENCHMARK TEST
TechniCAL SPECIFICATIONS

Engine
Model / Type / Valves per cylinder
Bore x stroke (mm), Displacement (l)
Injection system / Exhaust purification
Max. power HP (kW) at 1/min
Max. torque (Nm) at 1/min
Gearbox / Clutch / Steering
Manufacturer / Model
Transmission
Gear ratio spread / Clutch / Diameter (mm)
St. manuf. / Model / Gear ratio / St. wheel dia. (mm)
Chassis
Front suspension
Rear suspension
Rear axle - Manuf. / Model / Gear ratio
Front axles - Manuf. / Model
Tyres
Cab
Model / Suspension
Brakes
Front / Rear
Engine brake /Retarder
Dimensions
L x W x H (mm)
Wheelbases (mm)
Capacities / Service intervals
Tank/AdBlue/Coolant/Motor oil/Transm./Rear axle oil (l)
Service interval engine (km)
Service interval gearbox (km)
Service interval axles (km)
Noise
Idling (all values in dB(A))
85 km/h roof closed / open
65 km/h roof closed
Motorway uphill (focus: performance) / Rural rd. (focus: torque)
Acceleration from 60 km/h / Engine brake engaged
Elasticity
60-70/60-80/60-85 km/h in 12th gear
60-70/60-80/60-85 km/h automatic
Fuel consumption, speed
Rural road, empty (l at km/h)
Rural road, loaded (l at km/h)
Motorway, empty
Motorway, loaded
Combined, empty
Combined, loaded
Combined
Empty weight, ground clearance
Chassis with box (Tanks full, 1 driver 80 kg) in kg
Fording depth / Clearance front / rear axles
Angle of driving slope front / rear / Ramp angle
Stabilisers 1st/2nd/3rd/4th axle
Lowest point 1st/2nd and 3rd/4th axle

worst score

DAF CF 85.460 FAD

MAN TGS 35.440 8x4 BB

Scania G 440 CB 8x4 MHZ

Volvo FMX 460 8x4

Paccar MX 340 / Inline 6 / 4

130 x 162 / 12.9
Unit injector / SCR
460 (340) at 1500-1900
2300 at 1000-1400

MAN D 2066 LF 57 / Inline 6 / 4

120 x 155 / 10.5
Common Rail / SCR
440 (324) at 1500-1900
2100 at 1000-1400

Scania DC 13 10 / Inline 6 / 4
130 x 160 / 12.7
Common Rail / EGR
440 (324) at 1900
2300 at 1000-1300

Volvo D 13 C / Inline 6 / 4
128 x 155 / 11.9
Unit pump / SCR
460 (338) at 1400-1900
2300 at 1000-1400

ZF / 12 AS2330 AS-Tronic
12-gear automatic
12.33 - 0.78/ ZF Sachs / 430
TRW / TAS 92 / 20.9:1 / 460

ZF / 12 AS2130 AS-Tronic
12-gear automatic
15.86 - 1.00 /ZF Sachs / 430
ZF Servocom 17.0-20.0:1 /460

Scania GRSO 905

12-gear automatic
11.95 - 0.81 / ZF Sachs / 430
TRW / TAS 87 / 18.6:1 / 450

Volvo ATO 2612D

12-gear automatic
11.73 - 0.78 / ZF Sachs / 430
ZF Servocom 26.2:1 / 460

2-leaf parable springs, 7.5 t

6-leaf trapeze springs, 21 t
AP / DAF 1355 T / i=4.05
Stub axles DAF 156 N
Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5

3-leaf parable springs, 8.0 t

2-leaf parable springs, 7.1 t
5-leaf parable springs, 26 t
2+2-leaf parable springs, 21 t
AP / MAN HP(HPD)1352 / i= 4.00 Hypoid / Scania AD 1300P / i= 3.93
Stub axles / MAN VO-09
Stub axles / Scania AM 900
Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5
Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5

2-leaf parable springs, 7.5 t

3-leaf parable springs, 19 t
AP / Volvo RT2610HV / i=3.76
Stub axles / Meritor FATYP290
Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5

Day Cab / Coil springs

M / Coil springs

G / Coil springs

L1EH1 / Coil springs

Vent. disc brakes / Drum brakes

Exhaust brake, MX engine Brake

Disc brakes / Drum brakes

MAN Brake Matic/PriTarder

Disc brakes / Disc brakes

Exhaust cut-out

Vent. disc brakes / Vent. disc brakes

Volvo Engine Brake +

7930 / 2550 / 3580

2050 / 2300 / 1400 mm

8620 / 2550 / 3320

1795 / 2505 / 1400

8000 / 2550 / 3010

1520 / 2780 / 1350

8885/2500/ 3120
1995 / 2394 /1368

330/30/41/39/12/13+11.5
50,000 (constr.) / 1 year
300,000
100,000 /1 year

300/35/43/42/12/17.7+16.2
up to 120,000 (constr.)/ 1 year
up to 120,000
90,000 /2 years

300/-/40/43/16.5/11.2+11.2
30,000 (constr.) / 1 year
up to 120,000
120,000

350/35/38/33/13/26.5+24
up to 75,000 / 1 year
up to 180,000
up to 180,000

61
67 / 70
67
68 / 71
70 /68

61
64 / (66 tipped) / 69
63.5
67 / 64
67 / 65

54
68 / 70.5
65
70 / 68
70 / 72

59
67 / 70.5
64
70 / 67
69 / 67

10.11/19.04/23.56
6.92/19.48/24.99

8.33/16.87/21.29
7.03/19.39/24.60

13.93/23.77/28.93
9.88/20.88/28.03

10.95/22.13/27.28
10.95/21.00/26.13

27.44 l at 60.02 km/h

42.35 l at 55.08 km/h
22.13 l at 81.64 km/h
30.49 l at 80.51 km/h
25.74 l at 65.59 km/h
38.57 l at 61.59 km/h
32.16 l at 63.59 km/h

30.95 l at 60.32 km/h

42.56 l at 57.69 km/h
27.48 l at 83.26km/h
31.06 l at 79.79 km/h
29.86 l at 66.16 km/h
39.60 l at 63.47 km/h
34.73 l at 64.82 km/h

27.47 l at 59.61 km/h

41.33 l at 56.59 km/h
23.21 l at 81.07 km/h
30.53 l at 80.53 km/h
26.14 l at 65.30 km/h
37.89 l at 62.55 km/h
32.02 l at 63.93 km/h

26.96l at 58.90 km/h

43.37l at 55.80 km/h
22.89 l at 81.20 km/h
32.27 l at 80.55 km/h
25.74 l at 65.59 km/h
39.83 l at 61.90 km/h
32.79 l at 63.75 km/h

10,795 kg / 14,970 kg
500 / 370 / 305 mm
25/no info./no info.
Yes / yes / no / no
Axle / Axle attachment

10,475 kg / 14,300 kg
500 / 351/ 292 mm
26/47/41
Yes / no / yes / yes
Tie rod / Axle

9,860 kg / 13,320 kg
520 / 386 / 349 mm
24/50/40
Yes /yes / no /no
Axle / Shock absorber mount

10,527 kg / 14,260 kg
640 / 398 / 310 mm
21.1/25.3/35.3
Yes / yes / yes / yes
Axle / Axle attachment

best score
Trucker 8/2011

11