SCS General Discussion Thread

User avatar
KanameChidori
Posts: 24
Joined: 31 Aug 2020 16:45

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8341 Post by KanameChidori » 25 Jul 2021 19:15

i do like that new Pete look
User avatar
mackintosh
Posts: 3057
Joined: 03 Feb 2013 17:58
Location: Warsaw, Poland

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8342 Post by mackintosh » 25 Jul 2021 20:16

Bit late to the party but FWIW I do like both the new Pete and the Kenworth. These new American trucks are growing on me. Still not a fan of the "classics" though, I'm afraid.
User avatar
dkasper00
Posts: 2854
Joined: 07 Jan 2017 22:59
Location: NJ

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8343 Post by dkasper00 » 25 Jul 2021 20:49

I like some classics (Mack R Series, Mack DM, Mack RB, Mack B series, Autocar) seeing as I grew up around them, my family had a fleet consisting of R Series, DM and a RB and two Autocars. Others I can tolerate in small doses(W900, Pete 389, Freightliner FLB.) Nothing wrong with them at all, just no memories.
In a world full of swift drivers, I'm an O/O.
Some newbie driver
Posts: 7198
Joined: 12 Dec 2018 11:37

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8344 Post by Some newbie driver » 25 Jul 2021 22:17

What I don't understand about those "aerodynamic" models is the "step" between the front cabin (narrower) and the back rest zone (wider). Wouldn't be way more aerodynamic if there would be no step but a continuous surface? There's no need for the zone of the door (on the outside) to be parallel to the main axis of the truck; it could be sloped to transition from one width to the other.

It's like they were intentionally sacrificing aerodynamics there so the trucks weren't so different to classics (that always had well differentiated the two volumes of the cabin and the rest zone). They don't make them as good as they can't just because they fear the purchasers will look for another model?
User avatar
supersobes
Global moderator
Posts: 13712
Joined: 07 Dec 2016 21:53
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8345 Post by supersobes » 25 Jul 2021 23:16

You mean a truck like the Kenworth T2000 where the cab and the sleeper were the same width?

[ external image ]
User avatar
StenioBlackHawnk
Posts: 334
Joined: 25 Nov 2015 22:40
Location: Brazil - Betim
Contact:

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8346 Post by StenioBlackHawnk » 26 Jul 2021 00:25

T2000 is the ugliest KW ever made tbh :lol:
User avatar
SirVirgoTheMess
Posts: 7898
Joined: 13 Aug 2017 13:09
Location: Quebec,CA

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8347 Post by SirVirgoTheMess » 26 Jul 2021 00:38

[Post deleted,because off-topic]
Last edited by SirVirgoTheMess on 26 Jul 2021 11:56, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
harishw8r
Posts: 4100
Joined: 14 Mar 2020 05:52
Location: Moon
Contact:

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8348 Post by harishw8r » 26 Jul 2021 02:58

The Kenworth Multipla and the Fiat T2000 both looks good. 😍

Speaking of Kenworth, SCS has to rework on the ‘Dynamic’ wheel rims. The slots (holes) seem to be way bigger than irl.
User avatar
Bandit & The Snowman
Posts: 3239
Joined: 23 Oct 2014 15:55
Location: East Bound and Down
Contact:

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8349 Post by Bandit & The Snowman » 26 Jul 2021 08:02

The Multipla is just grotesque but I respect the idea to be just different.

The KW T2000 is still one of my favorites, it’s one of the reasons why I play Pedal to the Metal again now and then. (Okay it’s also the fastest truck in that game.) I once saw one near Berlin/GER and indeed its sleek aerodynamic cabin and sleeper unit did look good to me.
User avatar
Trucker_71
Posts: 3438
Joined: 09 Apr 2018 07:35
Location: Abbotsford BC Canada

Re: SCS General Discussion Thread

#8350 Post by Trucker_71 » 26 Jul 2021 09:41

I once drove a T-2000 for about a week as a courtesy vehicle from Kenworth. It seemed large & clumsy but had tons of room inside. ;)
Post Reply

Return to “Offtopic and other voices”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: David.D and 7 guests