1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182 
With Scania's reputation for engineering excellence, many aspects of this
Page 49
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
test would be big news only if they failed to meet the standards expected. The only area where the latest generation seems to have moved slightly backwards is noise suppression, now being merely very good. While the dynamics of this example didn't leave us quivering with excitement, driveiine options to suit specific needs are available.
Scania's pricing, on list at any rate, is competitive— but we suspect transaction prices may be lower elsewhere. As for the rear-steer element, CAP Monitor quotes a penalty of around £600 on the used
value due to the specialist nature, but again you take your choice.
Last year's epic CM 1,000-mile test notwithstanding, manufacturers taking the EGR route to Euro-4 have been reluctant to put trucks up for test. The 'common knowledge' around the truck stops is that you buy EGR for ease of use and SCR for economy, but we've had little opportunity to reach a decision. Yet probably the most significant fact to emerge from this test is that an EGR-equipped Euro-4 truck can deliver economy to match or improve on previous Euro-3 vehicles. With Scania's gauntlet thrown down, let's see who'll pick up the challenge.