8.

2011

www.trucker.de
VOLVO FMX 460
e
ssu
al I

in our 8x4 Dump Truck Benchmark Test

eci
Sp
 Fotos: Karel Sefrna

2
Trucker 8/2011
 BENCHMARK TEST8X4 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 3
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 Solid footing at the

the oil pan dump controls

The transmission tunnel

limits cab space

To change bulbs,
the housing first has
to be removed

Dhe powerful motor helps to gloss over the

weaknesses of the automatic transmission

w The German top dogs

of construction vehi-
cles arent about to let
someone else take away their terri-
tory: Mercedes and MAN current-
who have traditionally kept their
main focus on long-range trans-
port, to throw down the gauntlet:
DAF has set its CF 85.460 FAD
against the MAN TGS 35.440, whi-
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,
on: the philosophies of the indivi-
dual manufacturers are too varied,
as are the demands of the custo-
mers who order them. It comes as
no surprise, then, that the unloa-
Karel Sefrna

ly cover 70 percent of the market. le Scania has puts its money on the when it comes to construction ve- ded weights of the trucks we tested
This has been reason enough G440 and Volvo is counting on the hicles it is difficult to find different ranged from 13.4 metric tons for
for their competitors in the north, comparatively young FMX 460. As models with the same configurati- the lightweight-designed Scania to

4 Trucker 8/2011
 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
When tyre pressure was too low, a compressor provided a boost had to cope with rapid changes bet-
ween hard and soft surfaces. Mano-
nearly 15 tons for the DAF CF. If Our test consisted of two parts: euvring performance and the abili-
only the weight of the frames are a loaded drive over terrain, where ty to steadily and evenly distribute
taken into account, the range drops the main focus was on gearbox per- loads, as is often needed in road-
to between 9.8 and 10.8 tons. formance, and our traditional laying, were further main criteria.
Only a gearbox that can rapidly ad-
just 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 trans-
mission does the best job of com-
bining these qualities and wi-
thout having to fall back on its
special off-road mode. When sur-
face conditions change drastically,

Sensible: the skid plate is in front of With the MAN, too, the entire
the cooling coils and exhaust pipes housing has to be
removed to change
out a bulb

Stylish cab. The back of the cab is some-

what 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 sho-
wed real stand-up performan

The sturdy steps and

handrail make it ea-
sier to check the
dump controls
BENCHMARK TEST 8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s
Optimal: a broad
fold-out step, easy-
to-remove head-
light assembly
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 bench-
mark team, Pitter Kurscheid uses
several brands of 6x4 and 8x4
6 Trucker 8/2011
The long gear ratio hardly helps the EGR motor Simple, clean lines characterize the cab interior
dump trucks in his que, and the fastest shift times of
own comp any, those trucks tested.
notes, Slips into The DAF also banks on torque,
and back out of ge- demonstrating its ability to easily
ars very smoothly, master terrain without switching to
can readily be dri- off-road mode. However, when the
ven without using mode was activated, the CF started
the power pro- hectically shifting between first and
gram or shifting second gear. It also responded to
manually: an opi- rapid changes in surface conditions
nion shared by his fellow testers. by downshifting to first, though not
The only minus points in this re- as smoothly as the Volvo.
gard: at higher RPMs the FMX can
at times upshift, even if the engine OFFROAD, THE AS-TRONIC
brake is used. In terms of off-road CAN GET TOUCHY
performance, despite its length, the It was only the brawny torque of its
Volvo benefits from the broad ratio MX engine that saved the CF from
spread of its lower gears, an impres- coming to a complete standstill.
sive amount of subjectively felt tor- Thanks to Hillholder, it also mana-
SCAN IA G 440 C B
Snapshot: With its (too) long hypoid axle
and no additional brake, the Scania is ex-
tremely tailored to delivering the lightest
possible construction certainly in-
teresting when every gram counts, but
hardly a suitable configuration for King
Offroad.
+ perfect
 ergonomics, lightweight,
good fuel economy
loud, engine brake, low-quality interior
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 dum-
ping 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 mo-
ving. 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 slug-
gish harmonization between shif-
ting and clutching made the road-
laying 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 long-
distance 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 ma-
stered all sections of the course just
like a truck with manual transmis-
Air filter, storage box, and engine: not much room left for
protective clothing
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 pe-
dal quickly enough, the Scania Setting the tyre pressures exactly, taking into account the air temperature
stalled out.
tell a different story: thanks to their which easily kept its speed under
THE SCANIA CAME WITH A shorter gear ratios, the AS-Tronic control even on very steep inclines.
LONG HYPOID AXLE trucks clearly outperformed the Here too, though, the I-Shift trans-
The Volvos performance was just long gear-ratio Swedes in terms of mission can upshift when RPMs
as impressive on the street as in the acceleration and elasticity. One of get too high; when this happens,
quarry. It demonstrated ample tor- the Volvos strengths is its powerful, the FMX can demonstrate dan-
que, even if the measured values multi-stage VEB+ engine brake, gerous 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
The undercarriage is protected by
engaged engine brake the I-Shift can upshift
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 7
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 Brake-
matic did not demonstrate quite as
strong subjective braking, the bra-
king power could be dosed perfect-
ly and is ideally tuned to the AS-
Tronic transmission. The DAFs
MX engine brake is clumsy in com-
parison: the only options are on
and off, and switching always me-
ans downshifting. The steering
wheel-mounted Speed Limiter, in
contrast, offers a much better opti-
on. Once the top speed has been
set, the MX brake and AS-Tronic
determine together which will do a
better job of maintaining the se-
lected 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 tire-
some. On steep roads, downshif-
ting and additional (manual) bra-
king 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 industri-
al 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
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 en-
gines, the MAN dump truck per-
formed extremely well, while the
Scania displayed surprisingly little
power; our DAF and Volvo models
were closer to standard perfor-
mance.
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 consumpti-
on: unlike the Efficient Liners, the
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 roo-
my and high-quality; only the not-
quite-perfect ergonomics and so-
mewhat 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

Tyre pressures were painstakingly recorded After the terrain test: dumping the load for the empty drive test One stage of the benchmarking was a road test

8 Trucker 8/2011

D13 engine, feels a bit more confi-
dent. 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 engi-
ne 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 un-
comfortable 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 sec-
tion of the test, the DAF was remi-
niscent 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 advan-
tage of essentially being on its own
test track could be seen in the de-
tails: 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 ki-
lometres (less than 8,000) and AP
axles, the DAF was nearly as econo-
mical as the lightweight and fuel-
optimized Scania. But the Swedes
may have overdone it a bit in cer-
tain aspects of the Scanias design:
the clutch certainly helped it in the
off-road part of the test, but in
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 provi-
ded 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!
terms of comfort it could definitely
use a retarder and a few more ac-
cessories; 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 in-
credibly 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 Vol-
vo extended the FM line to the
FMX, but because I-Shift was sim-
ply the best transmission of those
tested. And it is in exactly this point
where the MANs otherwise excel-
lent system integration falters,
though it did perform impressively
on its home turf and set new stan-
dards for power and steering.
When deciding which truck to
buy, though, not only the quality or
the price, but also repairs and ser-
vice are key: it is only those who
excel in the last category who will
also win customers individual
benchmarkings.
More Infos
www.trucker.de
Ford Mondeo 2.2 TCCI at the
MKU quarry in Eching
Goodyear Truck Force
with mobile tyre service
Trucker 8/2011 9
 TRUCKER SUMMARY EVALUATION IN POInts
The DAF DAF CF MAN TGS SCANIA G Volvo FMX
surprised us Engine max. points
Climbing performance 20 17 18 16 18
The Dutch sco- Responsiveness 20 16 18 14 18
red points with Elasticity 20 17 19 15 19
its powerful mo- Performance curve 20 16 19 17 19
tor, which at Noise output - subjective 15 13 14 13 15
times did a bet- Noise output - constant, measured 20 16 18 18 17
Tester D. Behnke ter job of com- Noise - measured under load 20 18 20 16 17
Engine brake performance 30 19 24 15 29
pensating for the transmissions Fuel consumption 35 31 16 32 27
weaknesses in the off-road test total 200 163 166 156 179
than the MAN, which offered more Gearbox on-road / off-road
room, a quieter engine and better Ease of use 20/20 16/15 16/15 16/14 17/19
Shift speed 40/40 25/25 30/25 26/25 35/38
on-road comfort. Thanks to its fast Shifting strategy 40/40 32/35 34/25 26/28 35/38
I-Shift gearbox, the Volvo set new Manoeuvring mode 20/20 16/16 18/12 18/20 20/19
standards in off-road performance. Response to loading / unloading 10/10 9/10 8/7 8/10 8/10
A pity: the dump box lever is extre- total 260 199 190 191 239
mely difficult to reach. Steering on-road / off-road
Precision 20/20 18/18 20/20 19/18 18/15
The MAN was Straight-running 20 18 19 19 18
very powerful Compensation for irregularities / stones 10/10 8/8 10/10 10/8 10/6
total 80 70 79 74 67
With the DAF, Brakes on-road / off-road
chatter is just part Ability to dose braking 10/10 8/8 8/7 10/9 10/10
Responsiveness 10/10 8/10 10/10 10/10 10/10
of the package,
Effectiveness 10/10 9/10 10/10 10/10 10/9
and is made up total 60 53 55 59 59
for by the low pri- Suspension on-road / off-road
ce. In our test the Tester G. Grnig Comfort / stability 10/10 7/8 8/9 8/9 10/8
Scania seemed a bit weaker than Shock absorption 10/10 8/8 8/9 8/8 9/8
Response to major shocks 10/10 8/8 10/10 7/7 8/8
usual; the MAN came across much
total 60 47 54 47 51
stronger and also scored points Cab
with its great chassis. But off-road Ease of entry 20 19 16 17 18
the FMX, whose good gear ratio Orientation 20 17 20 19 13
spread made up for its long axle, Adjustable seat / steering wheel 10/10 9/9 10/9 10/10 8/9
set new standards. Ergonomics - switches and controls 10 8 8 10 8
Storage - boots, prot. clothing, shovel, tools 20 14 15 14 13
The CF has the Easy to clean - interior 20 15 13 14 13
price to beat Easy to clean - windscreen / side windows 10/10 8/9 10/10 10/9 9/8
Air conditioning / heater /defrost 20 19 18 19 18
In my opinion, Lighting 10 9 9 9 7
the MAN sho- Storage - A4 documents, beverages 20 17 19 19 15
wed the best Workmanship, quality of materials 10 8 9 8 9
Positions of pedals 10 8 10 9 10
driving perfor-
Construction package 20 19 18 13 18
mance and an Panorama view 10 10 9 9 9
Tester P. Kurscheid extremely total 230 198 203 199 185
strong engine. In the quarry, the Undercarriage
Volvo scored with its excellent shif- Ground clearance / fording depth 20 16 15 18 19
ting strategy. The DAF didnt show Oil pan- radiator protection 20 18 18 18 18
total 40 34 33 36 37
any major strengths or weak- Maintenance / service
nesses, but does offer a super price. Heater air intake 10 10 10 10 10
If I were to buy the Scania for the Change headlight bulb 20 15 12 15 17
work I do, I would definitely choose Change taillight bulb 20 20 20 20 20
a very different configuration. Manually checking / adding oil 20 5 5 19 20
Engine accessibility 20 18 19 19 20
Stepping up Air dryer 10 8 8 10 10
Number of lubrication nipples 10 10 10 5 10
the game
Service interval - engine, gearbox, axles 20 15 14 13 19
At the end of the Onboard tools 10 8 10 10 10
day, its clear: the Windscreen washer 10 10 10 10 10
Replace side mirror 10 10 10 10 10
I-Shift definitely Pneumatic controls in cab 10 10 10 10 10
gave the FMX Tyre filling port 10 10 10 10 10
the edge; a 25- total 180 149 148 161 176
ton towing ca- Tester G. Soller Prices
pacity and a fording depth of 640 Guarantee / warranty 10 8 8 8 8
Base price 20 19 15 13 14
mm are further pluses. My on-road Resale price 20 12 18 17 15
favourite was the extraordinarily Cost of replacement parts 20 15 16 18 14
surefooted and precisely manoeu- Service stations 20 12 18 11 10
vrable MAN TGS; its steering and total 90 66 75 67 61
K. Sefrna

engine raise the bar. Total points 1200 979 1003 990 1054

worst score best score

10 Trucker 8/2011
 8 X 4 D u m p t r u c k s BENCHMARK TEST
TechniCAL SPECIFICATIONS

DAF CF 85.460 FAD MAN TGS 35.440 8x4 BB Scania G 440 CB 8x4 MHZ Volvo FMX 460 8x4
Engine
Model / Type / Valves per cylinder Paccar MX 340 / Inline 6 / 4 MAN D 2066 LF 57 / Inline 6 / 4 Scania DC 13 10 / Inline 6 / 4 Volvo D 13 C / Inline 6 / 4
Bore x stroke (mm), Displacement (l) 130 x 162 / 12.9 120 x 155 / 10.5 130 x 160 / 12.7 128 x 155 / 11.9
Injection system / Exhaust purification Unit injector / SCR Common Rail / SCR Common Rail / EGR Unit pump / SCR
Max. power HP (kW) at 1/min 460 (340) at 1500-1900 440 (324) at 1500-1900 440 (324) at 1900 460 (338) at 1400-1900
Max. torque (Nm) at 1/min 2300 at 1000-1400 2100 at 1000-1400 2300 at 1000-1300 2300 at 1000-1400
Gearbox / Clutch / Steering
Manufacturer / Model ZF / 12 AS2330 AS-Tronic ZF / 12 AS2130 AS-Tronic Scania GRSO 905 Volvo ATO 2612D
Transmission 12-gear automatic 12-gear automatic 12-gear automatic 12-gear automatic
Gear ratio spread / Clutch / Diameter (mm) 12.33 - 0.78/ ZF Sachs / 430 15.86 - 1.00 /ZF Sachs / 430 11.95 - 0.81 / ZF Sachs / 430 11.73 - 0.78 / ZF Sachs / 430
St. manuf. / Model / Gear ratio / St. wheel dia. (mm) TRW / TAS 92 / 20.9:1 / 460 ZF Servocom 17.0-20.0:1 /460 TRW / TAS 87 / 18.6:1 / 450 ZF Servocom 26.2:1 / 460
Chassis
Front suspension 2-leaf parable springs, 7.5 t 3-leaf parable springs, 8.0 t 2-leaf parable springs, 7.1 t 2-leaf parable springs, 7.5 t
Rear suspension 6-leaf trapeze springs, 21 t 5-leaf parable springs, 26 t 2+2-leaf parable springs, 21 t 3-leaf parable springs, 19 t
Rear axle - Manuf. / Model / Gear ratio AP / DAF 1355 T / i=4.05 AP / MAN HP(HPD)1352 / i= 4.00 Hypoid / Scania AD 1300P / i= 3.93 AP / Volvo RT2610HV / i=3.76
Front axles - Manuf. / Model Stub axles DAF 156 N Stub axles / MAN VO-09 Stub axles / Scania AM 900 Stub axles / Meritor FATYP290
Tyres Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5 Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5 Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5 Front / rear 315/80 R 22.5
Cab
Model / Suspension Day Cab / Coil springs M / Coil springs G / Coil springs L1EH1 / Coil springs
Brakes
Front / Rear Vent. disc brakes / Drum brakes Disc brakes / Drum brakes Disc brakes / Disc brakes Vent. disc brakes / Vent. disc brakes
Engine brake /Retarder Exhaust brake, MX engine Brake MAN Brake Matic/PriTarder Exhaust cut-out Volvo Engine Brake +
Dimensions
L x W x H (mm) 7930 / 2550 / 3580 8620 / 2550 / 3320 8000 / 2550 / 3010 8885/2500/ 3120
Wheelbases (mm) 2050 / 2300 / 1400 mm 1795 / 2505 / 1400 1520 / 2780 / 1350 1995 / 2394 /1368
Capacities / Service intervals
Tank/AdBlue/Coolant/Motor oil/Transm./Rear axle oil (l) 330/30/41/39/12/13+11.5 300/35/43/42/12/17.7+16.2 300/-/40/43/16.5/11.2+11.2 350/35/38/33/13/26.5+24
Service interval engine (km) 50,000 (constr.) / 1 year up to 120,000 (constr.)/ 1 year 30,000 (constr.) / 1 year up to 75,000 / 1 year
Service interval gearbox (km) 300,000 up to 120,000 up to 120,000 up to 180,000
Service interval axles (km) 100,000 /1 year 90,000 /2 years 120,000 up to 180,000
Noise
Idling (all values in dB(A)) 61 61 54 59
85 km/h roof closed / open 67 / 70 64 / (66 tipped) / 69 68 / 70.5 67 / 70.5
65 km/h roof closed 67 63.5 65 64
Motorway uphill (focus: performance) / Rural rd. (focus: torque) 68 / 71 67 / 64 70 / 68 70 / 67
Acceleration from 60 km/h / Engine brake engaged 70 /68 67 / 65 70 / 72 69 / 67
Elasticity
60-70/60-80/60-85 km/h in 12th gear 10.11/19.04/23.56 8.33/16.87/21.29 13.93/23.77/28.93 10.95/22.13/27.28
60-70/60-80/60-85 km/h automatic 6.92/19.48/24.99 7.03/19.39/24.60 9.88/20.88/28.03 10.95/21.00/26.13
Fuel consumption, speed
Rural road, empty (l at km/h) 27.44 l at 60.02 km/h 30.95 l at 60.32 km/h 27.47 l at 59.61 km/h 26.96l at 58.90 km/h
Rural road, loaded (l at km/h) 42.35 l at 55.08 km/h 42.56 l at 57.69 km/h 41.33 l at 56.59 km/h 43.37l at 55.80 km/h
Motorway, empty 22.13 l at 81.64 km/h 27.48 l at 83.26km/h 23.21 l at 81.07 km/h 22.89 l at 81.20 km/h
Motorway, loaded 30.49 l at 80.51 km/h 31.06 l at 79.79 km/h 30.53 l at 80.53 km/h 32.27 l at 80.55 km/h
Combined, empty 25.74 l at 65.59 km/h 29.86 l at 66.16 km/h 26.14 l at 65.30 km/h 25.74 l at 65.59 km/h
Combined, loaded 38.57 l at 61.59 km/h 39.60 l at 63.47 km/h 37.89 l at 62.55 km/h 39.83 l at 61.90 km/h
Combined 32.16 l at 63.59 km/h 34.73 l at 64.82 km/h 32.02 l at 63.93 km/h 32.79 l at 63.75 km/h
Empty weight, ground clearance
Chassis with box (Tanks full, 1 driver 80 kg) in kg 10,795 kg / 14,970 kg 10,475 kg / 14,300 kg 9,860 kg / 13,320 kg 10,527 kg / 14,260 kg
Fording depth / Clearance front / rear axles 500 / 370 / 305 mm 500 / 351/ 292 mm 520 / 386 / 349 mm 640 / 398 / 310 mm
Angle of driving slope front / rear / Ramp angle 25/no info./no info. 26/47/41 24/50/40 21.1/25.3/35.3
Stabilisers 1st/2nd/3rd/4th axle Yes / yes / no / no Yes / no / yes / yes Yes /yes / no /no Yes / yes / yes / yes
Lowest point 1st/2nd and 3rd/4th axle Axle / Axle attachment Tie rod / Axle Axle / Shock absorber mount Axle / Axle attachment

worst score best score

Trucker 8/2011 11