AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

P LETTER OF THE WEEK

12th February 2009
Page 22
Page 22, 12th February 2009 — P LETTER OF THE WEEK
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Will these new noses and radiators change the traditional 'truck look'?

AS AN AVID READER of CM and having just looked through a recent copy, I must put `pen to paper' and comment on two recent articles. In CM 22 January, I noticed a piece called `New Mercs in the wings' and this, for me, has raised a few questions.

I can't help noticing your comment: "...to meet Euro-6, truckmakers are expected to use both SCR and EGR in order to drive NOx levels down even further. This means engines are going to produce more heat, and manufacturers will have to redesign the cooling systems to cope" followed by "high-mounted towering cabs making room for bigger radiators': This moves me on to my real question, and makes me wonder how much space in the concept `Crash Zone Scania' CA head-on meeting', CM 15 January) is needed for a much bigger radiator, thus addressing your comment... "...manufacturers will have to redesign the cooling systems to cope': Are we saying that to keep things cool "if you don't go up, you'll need to move forward"? After all, "back and down both have limitations" — these being engine, axle and asphalt.

I also wonder what impact the extra 600mm of nose will have on the vehicle's length. Since it's a fixed 600mm, will overall vehicle length, a legislative restriction, have to change? Furthermore, how does an operator cope with a permanent 350kg on the front axle and the impact that has (bigger tyres and a move from 7,100 to 7,500kg front axles). While I'm 100% behind safety and openly applaud manufacturers for addressing the issue, are we really heading for heavy front-axle trucks that look like Snoopy?

William Simons Milton Keynes