[riwiseuse]

Originally Posted by TerraSerenity

I like the 4X4-

So the improved powerplant options on the isuzu caught my eye, especially the torque on the 6 cylinder because I'm worried about towing.

But the only cabover that seems to have a 4x4 option is the mitsubishi-fuso. But, insofar as I can tell this is the most underpowered truck on the market.

So I'm back to square one.

Ford has a cabover but only offers the 4.5 V6 powerstroke and no 4x4.

Obviously the sweetspot for these trucks is local delivery and I guess they just have not needed to enlarge their niche.

So maybe I'm back to looking at Kodiak/Topkick which is the shortest traditional cab (for given Cab to Axle they are about 16" shorter than and has 4x4 available. I prefer the Cummins powerplant but the C&C design on the GMC and the Allison transmission along with an installed base of a reasonably suitable diesel is like a siren's song. And i drove the dodge C&C the other day and the sitelines are the virtual opposite of a cabover. You have a nose sticking way out in front of you and you can't even see it.

I thought maybe my stunted 5' 9" frame was the problem, but I posted on a Cummins forum and guys who are 6' 3" and 6' 4" are chiming in saying they can't see the front passenger corner and just guess where it's at.

Just to add one more consideration, I'm always pushing the lowest deck height possible, so my work trucks are all toyota flatbeds mounted not to hit the tires until I hit 2 tons, at which point I put some blocks in.

Anyway, the only thing I don't like about the GMC 4x4 platform is it adds over 5" to the deck height. That seems pretty excessive. I haven't looked at it closely enough to see if you could go with underslung springs on the front axle and the 4x2 springs for the rear end to get that back. I didn't look at the relation of the engine mounting to the 4x4 axle when I looked at th eGMC cC&C so I've gotta go back.

In conclusion, topic: Barbara Streisands hands are like butter. Talk amongst your selves. I'll be interested in any experiences or platforms I may have overlooked.

Brian

[Squizzy Taylor]

Isuzu has a number of 4x4 trucks on the market...at least Down Under they do.

[riwiseuse]

Originally Posted by Squizzy Taylor

Isuzu has a number of 4x4 trucks on the market...at least Down Under they do.

I dropped a line to Isuzu asking about 4x4 and got a note back that they don' offer them in the North American market.


Just my luck.

They recommend GMC 4500 4x4. I really like the design of those trucks. Would prefer the cummins or Isuzu 6 cylinder engine, but I could get used to the Duramax. But the suzie 6 is one of those slightly slower lower horse big torque engines like the cummins. Since Isuzu and GMC trade engines around, it's too bad they don't consider trying out the Isuzu 6 in the Kodiak platform, but I digress.

The GMC C&Cs have about 14-16" shorter wheelbase for given Cab to Axle length and thus split the difference in curb to curb maneuverability between the dodge and ford C&Cs and a cabover.

Just wish I could work out how to get these Kodiak/Topkicks to sit lower. You pay a 4" penalty in frame height compared to both Dodge and Ford which have identical frame heights for 4x2 and 4x4 in the 4500 and 5500 series (the 3500s are a little shorter and the Ford 3500 4x2 is shorter than the 3500 4x4, Dodge the 4x2 and 4x4 are still identical height).

In all cases the the Dodge and Ford 4x4s are similar in frame height to the GMC 4x2 although the jimmy is the shortest by about 1/2".

This is side by side with 19.5s.

Now I know they use coil front ends, but I'm pretty sure they weren't a lot taller when Ford kept 'em shorter even when they had front leaves. I would think GMC could engineer this by running the front springs under the axle instead of over.

I'm concerned for loading height and 5th wheel swingover. Even 2" is a noticeable difference in those uses and 4" seems like a mile when I'm trying to get the back corners of a dump body to swing under a 5th wheel. And looking at them next to each other on an upfitters lot yesterday I was just stunned how much higher the 4x4 was - it was accentuated because all the 4x4's had 22.5s and the 4x2s had 19.5s. So the difference was more like 7".

Meantime, checked Hino and the Ford Cabovers and no 4x4s that I could find.
What weight models can you get in Australia and how high off the ground are the 4x4 frames. Do they put the 6 cyl in any of the 4x4s or I guess that is the same as asking whether they make any of the F series trucks with 4x4 or only the Ns. I guess maybe i could go to Isuzu.au or something like that to look 'em up but always like to talk with folks down under.

Only been there once but really loved it (although you guys really need the front end unloading concrete mixers. Ironically, they make the 11 yard bins there and ship to america but we don't ship the trucks back.).

Brian

[Squizzy Taylor]

Well Brian, whatever the choice you make it will be a well researched decision. Just to add some insult to injury though you can view the ISUZU 4x4 models here:

Welcome to Isuzu Trucks Australia

[riwiseuse]

Originally Posted by Squizzy Taylor

Just to add some insult to injury though you can view the ISUZU 4x4 models

way cool, and Isuzu takes the 4x4 all the way up to 20000 kg in the F series. Guess I won't be looking into shipping costs though because the Chassis frames for FS-550 and FS800 are 45" and 47" above ground.

And the N series which is closer in capacity to the 4500/5500 american cab and chassis doesn't come with the 7.8 L (6 cyl.) and it is actually higher than the Kodiak by a couple inches, so I can sleep soundly tonite.

I'm actually quite surprised. I usually figure the Japanese engineered trucks to beat the AMerican on ergonomic design specs and the American trucks just out power them.

I'm sure these Isuzu's are great trucks and it is really something, but they aren't as close to the ground as I expected.

Brian

[Squizzy Taylor]

Brian, the 4x4's from both Mistubishi and ISUZU come with pretty jacked up suspension. The 4x4 system is also very heavy duty which equates to a lot more unsprung weight as well as rotating mass. I see a lot of guys getting into these when they are really doing 95% road use. At the end of the day they are probably paying more for fuel and maintenance than they need.

The AMT transmission sure is tempting though...I have driven a couple...but they are not available with 4x4.

None of the Japanese trucks are speed demons. I just prefer the way they work with heavy loads due to the way they are geared. I put my skid steer (226B) in the dump body and scoot around the streets with hardly any difference to empty. When I put the excavator in the back and hook up the tools trailer I sure know its there but the way the truck is geared it just gets on with the job.

[riwiseuse]

Originally Posted by Squizzy Taylor

Brian, the 4x4's from both Mistubishi and ISUZU come with pretty jacked up suspension. The 4x4 system is also very heavy duty which equates to a lot more unsprung weight as well as rotating mass. I see a lot of guys getting into these when they are really doing 95% road use. At the end of the day they are probably paying more for fuel and maintenance than they need.

Agree wholeheartedly. I like a 4x4 with manual outboard hubs so that you are not turning the stuff unless you're using it. I like the 4x4 as much for the low range as the all wheel. And that occasional need to get out of tough spot or help somebody else do the same.

Originally Posted by Squizzy Taylor

None of the Japanese trucks are speed demons. I just prefer the way they work with heavy loads due to the way they are geared. I put my skid steer (226B) in the dump body and scoot around the streets with hardly any difference to empty. When I put the excavator in the back and hook up the tools trailer I sure know its there but the way the truck is geared it just gets on with the job.

I tend to find this is a bigger issue when towing heavy weight rather than carrying it. You've got the extra rolling resistance of the extra tires and gear. But my excavator is 8 tons, so you got to have a pretty good rig to put it in the back (not to mention watching out for low bridges).

How heavy is your excavator?

Brian

[Squizzy Taylor]

Mine is the 3 tonne Yanmar...add to that a 1/4 tonne plate compactor...some buckets etc and I'm always on the GVM limit for the old NPR 400. In the older models...the NPR's 1st gear was basically a crawler gear...you don't need it on the road. I haven't spent much time on the six speeds only the AMT. We want to upgrade to a 7 tonne truck in the F series but times are a little tough

[riwiseuse]

wow,

I took a look under a Mitsubishi 4x4 cabover. Man do they get the body height thing. The oposite of American trucks, the frame is high in the front and actually doglegs so that it is lower in the back. Under 30". Lowest dually 14,000 truck bed I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, they only offer a little 4 cyl. that doesn't even keep the truck at speed going up hills never mind pulling a trailer.

I despair of finding the right mix.

Wasn't Mitsubishi partnering with chrysler? and cummins is partnering with chrysler. Why don't they cut a deal to offer the cummins engine in the Mitsubishi cabover, then I've found my truck.

Brian

[Squizzy Taylor]

Originally Posted by riwiseuse

wow,

I took a look under a Mitsubishi 4x4 cabover. Man do they get the body height thing. The oposite of American trucks, the frame is high in the front and actually doglegs so that it is lower in the back. Under 30". Lowest dually 14,000 truck bed I've ever seen.

Unfortunately, they only offer a little 4 cyl. that doesn't even keep the truck at speed going up hills never mind pulling a trailer.

I despair of finding the right mix.

Wasn't Mitsubishi partnering with chrysler? and cummins is partnering with chrysler. Why don't they cut a deal to offer the cummins engine in the Mitsubishi cabover, then I've found my truck.

Brian

Brian, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is 67% owned by none other than Caterpillar...hence the saying for the engines in Cat skids...Mitsupillars