HP ?

[ajpag]

Specing a new truck for a new business venture.
C5500 Chevy. The up fitter offers the 210 HP
and the 300 HP 6.6. Of course at differnt prices.
He tells me that the 210 gets better mileage?
They both have the same tourque spec's so what
gives. I could go with the 210 I guess and install
a programer so if I want more power, I could crank
it up. Also, the 210 is set up with the 1000 Allison and the 300 with a 2200. You would think
that with a lower gear in the 2200 it would be the
other way around. Rear end gear is 4.88 or 5.13.
Likely go with the 88's. Opinions and advice please...

[MartyB]

The 1000 and 2200 have the same 5 gears in the tranny, only difference is the 1000 is good to 19500 GVWR and 26K GCWR , the 2200 is good to 26K GVWR and GCWR.

The 210 is rev limited to about 2600-2800 RPM vs the 300 being able to get into the mid 3000 range. SO yes, the 210 will give you better mileage, BUT what are you using hte truck for? Pulling a trailer, then the 300 from the get go would be the better choice, if using it as a Truck mover, ie the truck only, then the 210 could be a better way to go.

If you need more GCWR than what those Allison trannies offer, you may want to look at the 6500 or 7500 with the 7.8 dmax I6 or the 7.2L cat motors, THen you can get a 2400 allison (33GV/GVWR rating) in some instances with a lower first gear, or the 6 spd version of it in the 3000 series with a 40-80K GCWR rating.

THere is not a right or wrong way, other than how you will use the truck, either could be the wrong rig, one could be right, or both could be right. How you use it, what you are doing are the big factors in choosing an MDT.

[ajpag]

Marty, thanks for the reply. I

[MartyB]

Anthony,

If you go to Allisons website, there is some 2000 series rigs with the same ratio's as the 1000, along with some with the ratio's you mentioned. Personally, I would prefer the 2000/2400 which have the ratio's you mention, if it is the 2100/2200, then you get the taller ratio's, ie the 3.10-.72 vs teh 3.54-.74. Especially for stop and go, the lower ratios would be better than the taller ones.

Also, look at teh HP curves of the two rigs, The 210 is the rated HP at 2800 R's or so, the 300 one may also be rated at 210 at 2800 R's too, you just have a few more R's availible for more HP. In you shoes, and mine with my Navistar Dump truck, those extra R's are not worth having, as you spend most of your time in the 16-2800 RPM range, even with my 05 3500, I am rarely above 2800 RPMS, so a lower HP, same torque motor that gets me better MPG would be fine by me. Along with lower axel or tranny gears, as I can tell, it is only a matter of time before I stall my 05 out on a 20+% grade due to the tall gearing in the 1000 series tranny.

I am not sure where you live, but if on the coast of CA, it has some steep short roads like here in the Seattle area, that is where the torque and lower tranny gears in first make sense. I would look at the 4.88's if it were me, the 5.13 will limit you a bit on the top end when you do get on the freeway. If you have to get the 1000 geared tranny gears, then get the 5.13's for the take off, otherwise, the lower 2400 tranny will be best with the 4.88's. I do not think you are getting the 2400 gear sets tho, more likely the 2100-2200 gears.

[ajpag]

Marty, overall, I'm leaning towards the 210. I got the actual spec's as to packages and what gives you what. The up fitter I will be going with has units at 19,500 GVW, which doesn't make me feel comfortable. I learned yesterday that if I spec the 8000# front and at least the 15,000# rear, I not only get the 2200 but also 4 piston
rear calipers as opposed to 2 piston. With the weight I anticipate loaded, I believe that I can build a setup that will not only work well, but last a while. What are your thoughts on suspension? Right now I'm thinking I'll go with multileaf front and rear with sway bars. Some have suggested to me to go taper leaf in the front for a better ride quality. I likely
will stay back from going with the 19,000 rear
even though it increase the differential size. My feeling is it may be overkill to the tune of added
pounds that would actually decrease fuel mileage.
I live in the Bay Area and will have a mix of stop and go and freeway. Based on that I will go with the 4.88's. After this, it will be easier when I build the second truck, for sure. Thanks for the reply... Anthony.

[MartyB]

Anthony,

Now that I am reading this, re you're building a tool truck, ie contractor, or Matco/equal tool truck?

I personally would go with the 15K RA. While you may be under the GVWR of a 19500 rig with a 13K RA. You may end up with ALL the wt on the RA of the tools when loaded. SOmetimes one needs to plan not only for the GVWR/payload part of the equation, but how the load may get loaded!

On my rig, I have been under GVWR more than one time coming out of a quarry, only to wiegh the axels, and be over the RA capacity. For me with a 6K front, it is real easy to go over! I am at 5900 empty, with the older NA7.3 motor. If caught by the DOT, I get an overload on the rear, depending upon how far over. Also the bigger brakes for the 23K GVWR rig sounds like a winner to me if in the Bay area. As you have a lot of steeper roads off the ocean like we do here in Seattle, ie one road in town in 15% for a mile! Another that I know of is 18%. Not fun starting one when stopped and low on power, ie torque and gearing between the tranny and axels.

If doing the matco type tool truck, have you looked at the W/T series rigs? a bit smaller length wise, better turning etc. Altho if using off road in a contruction tool carrier environment, the LCF are not as good as a conv due to load distribution. ie a highe % on the front axel, so they sink sometimes where the Conv will drive thru softer grounds.

Marty

[ajpag]

It's good to see someone else who understands what
needs to be accomplished. The up fitter has been good at responding to my questions but still as a
business owner, he wants to sell what he has in stock, first. That's a good point about the scales
and one I must admit I had neglected to consider.
Just by the basic design, the major constant weight is on the rear. I've done the numbers several times and even though it would work with the smaller rear, the measure of confidence to me
is go bigger. Also when we talk about brakes, I speced the factory exhaust brake too. Some have said to go aftermarket but I feel comfortable with the OEM installed in lieu of warranty, etc.
This truck will spend a great deal of time running
to make money - I'm sure you know the name of the game - If it's down so is the pocket book.

I looked hard at the T series and although they drive nice, I guess I'm just old school and feel
better in a conventional. Also a big plus is the
walk-thru. Hopefully will save a few steps in getting the job done.

[MartyB]

Do you have the truck yet, or speced/being built!

Marty

[ajpag]

No, I don't have the truck yet. I speced it with the up fitter and he has gone to pool to see if they have something close to what I want. I've been away from home for the last several days so I haven't followed up. Also, I will be contacting a local medium dealer who a friend uses for all of his T series trucks, to see if they might be of help. I'll need to be up and running in January, at least that's the plan... Guess I'm just stubborn. I'll keep you posted.

[MartyB]

2 months since last post, do we have a truck yet?

Marty

[ajpag]

In a word, no. Lead time became a problem so I began looking for a unit that was close to what I wanted and what I felt would last the long haul. After searching for what seems like forever, I found a 2005, C5500, 300 HP with 22,950 GVW and all the rest. Guy had taken delivery in August of this year and due to health resons, now wants to downsize so it would have been a slam dunk, or one would have thought. After jumping through the hoops and over the hurdles, the finance company said no. Back to square one. Know anyone in the finance world? Every turn has taught me a new lesson. Thanks for the post and I

[MartyB]

Lack of financing eh......know that feeling, I needed to come up with an extra $4G to get my 3500 last summer. Went thru and ugly divorce in late 02-03, credit is all f'd up etc. I did get the thing tho.

Whom did you try with? Sometimes a local bank can be better than GMAC, other time GMAC is easier. More down in my case helped with US Bank. A local bank was helpful in refinancing my bobcat and trackhoe into payments a third of the size when going thru the divorce, ie the one with my bus acct etc.

Another option is a lease. There are some folks that will do $1 buyout leases too, so you can deduct like a lease, or as a purchase. Finance rate will be a bit higher this way tho I have used this method for some of my equipment, like the $3-5G mowers I use, my trackhoe as examples.

Are there any used rigs costing less $$$$ outhere?

Not sure what to say, other than hang in there, and try other sources. A letter with how long you have been in business may help, how the truck will help in lowering current costs etc......that helped with my refinance too!

Marty