Canadian Railroads > Walmart's new "supercube" truck

Walmart Canada has introduced a new type of truck for service on the multi-lane highways of Ontario and Quebec.

It features a 60ft.5in long trailer, which also includes a drop floor ahead of the wheels. The cabover "Freightliner" tractor has no sleeper, instead a 10ft "dromedary" behind the cab allows for even more haulage space.

The following links show details:

http://www.core77.com/blog/transportation/walmarts_new_supercube_increase_sustainability_by_designing_bigger_trucks_23804.asp

http://www.walmartgreenroom.com/2013/03/walmart-canadas-new-wheels-turn-heads/

Is this a pilot project for similar trucks on the US Interstate system?

Will other road haulers introduce similar highway vehicles to compete?

Does this represent a further threat to intermodal freight traffic on the railways?

What distances are these expected to go? Note there is no comment about the safety or comfort of the driver in that new cab. Also - it seems the extra box might not be widely adopted, since it about Walmarts (or other retail/deliveries) needs.

eminence_grise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Is this a pilot project for similar trucks on the
> US Interstate system?
>

Kind of doubtful as each state sets the maximum length/width. But the USDOT does set guidelines which are here:
http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/publications/size_regs_final_rpt/
Scroll down to Table 1 to see the maximum size per state.

daniel

Heard the term 'drum box' before, interesting to hear it was from the word 'dromedary'. It was referred to with another term that I would not type here, but it indicated an extra load that paid for a little something extra for the driver.

Anyways, 60ft seems a bit much, they have enough trouble with 54ft.

53' is the law in U.S. for a single box; many states allow multiple trailers

That 'dromedary' box behind the cab is nothing new. One of the major moving companies (Atlas Van Lines, I think) has been using them for years, and the included photos show Manitoulin Transport's versions, circa 1980. Photos courtesy of hankstruckpictures.com

And the Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO) has also approved 53-foot A-trains for use on the 400-series highways (among other restrictions because of their overall size).

Does the '30% more volume' mean the vehicle is exempt from the MTO's weight limits? Personally, I wouldn't want to haul an extra 7.1 feet around city streets (speaking from experience, 53' is challenging enough!).

---

---

---

Oregon allows cargo carrying length of 71.5 feet. Three trailers in train on certain routes.
RB

A solid 60 feet like that is going to clip a lot of stuff making tight turns if it's allowed on anything other than major highways.

The gross weight limits wouldn't be an issue for this setup, loads for retail stores generally ''cube out'' before they approach legal weight limits. Sears line haul ran similar trucks with the box & a pair of 28' pups in western Canada for many years. As far ar being a threat to intermodal, it's unlikely. This setup would be used for running from the distributio centre to the stores, work that is done by truck anyway.

Until fairly recently, the White Pass & Yukon Route had a trucking subsidiary. Because the Yukon is a territory (as opposed to a Province which has a legislature which can pass regulations), there are fewer regulations regarding road transport.

This has resulted in some interesting truck and trailer configurations.

Although the various truck picture sites don't show an example, I'm pretty sure WP&Y replaced certain train services with trucks, with a dromedary trailer behind the cab which handled mail and express. Because the load limit on northern highways changes with the seasons and the state of the permafrost, there were some interesting trailer wheel configurations to lower the axle load during spring thaw.

The truck paint scheme changed from green and yellow to blue and white at the same time the railway changed their paint scheme.
The trucks also carried the totem pole trade mark of the WP&Y.

I'm not sure if the Walmart "super cube" would be street legal in the US. It looks like it might comply with the maximum length limit, but could it stay below the 80,000 lb. total weight for combined cab and trailer?

Truckers are really feeling the hurt right now, from high fuel prices, a driver shortage, tighter hours of service regulation, a pending requirement for electronic logbooks, and an FMCSA program that rates each trucking company based on the safety record of its drivers. All of this, while it may make the roads safer, also increases costs.

So truckers are nearly desperate to get a weight increase. What has been proposed is a 97,000 lb. gross weight on six axles (tractor and trailer) vs. the current 80,000 lb. on five. USDOT has just engaged a contractor to examine this and a couple of other proposed configurations. Problems include: braking performance, bridge loadings (bridges don't care about axles, they care about total weight), and length overall.

Going to 97,000 lbs. could also make it more difficult for railroads to run double-stack equipment, since a 40' box grosses 65,000 lbs. and well capacity is 130,000. Ad 10% to the weight of the box and you're no longer able to stack two maximum-weight boxes. So it will be interesting to see what the USDOT study concludes.

Me, I say let truckers run anything they want, but charge them by the pound. If they overload bridges, make them pay for that too. Require antilock brakes. That will make the economics of monster "road trains" questionable.

Some US states are allowing 57' trailers now but its just a hand full

Posted from Android

shoretower Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Me, I say let truckers run anything they want, but
> charge them by the pound. If they overload
> bridges, make them pay for that too. Require
> antilock brakes. That will make the economics of
> monster "road trains" questionable.

The trouble is, charging for road use "by the pound" is a linear type of cost recovery model, but the damage heavy vehicles cause to the infrastructure is very much an exponential type of thing. I've heard it said that the typical loaded 18 wheeler causes 10,000 times the wear and tear damage of a standard automobile.

Ray

inRVA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What distances are these expected to go? Note
> there is no comment about the safety or comfort of
> the driver in that new cab. Also - it seems the
> extra box might not be widely adopted, since it
> about Walmarts (or other retail/deliveries) needs.

Google maps show the distance on Highway 401 and Highway 20 Autoroute between Quebec City QC and Windsor ON, basically the urban heartland of eastern Canada (401 and 20 are the same highway, Quebec calls it Route 20) as 1300 kms (900 miles?) with a driving time of 13 hours.

There are some long established truck stops around Cornwall ON where Quebec (routiers or camioneurs) change with Ontario truckers, often swapping tractors.

There are older portions of the multi lane highway network with significant weight and length restrictions for trucks, as in the Metropolitan Boulevard in Montreal and the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto.

Unlike the US Interstate network, the construction and maintenance of the multi lane, limited access highway network in Canada is the responsibility of the Provinces in which the road is built. For many years, trucking across Canada was hampered by a lower maximum axle loading in the Province of Manitoba.

Keeping this in a railroad context, Highway 401/20 is rarely more than a mile or so from paralell CN and CP tracks, and especially in the case of the CN, there are long established relationships between some shippers and the railways. That said, both CP and CN have lost traffic to the trucking industry on these routes, sometimes because the truckers offered more timely and efficient service.They have sometimes lured traffic away from truckers also. Similarly, this is where Greyhound and Megabus compete directly with Via Rail corridor services also.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/07/13 10:27 by eminence_grise.

Freightliner hasn't built the cab-over Argosy model used here for the North American market in years (the ones they do build are for markets like Austrailia & South Africa). Wonder how much it took to get these "North American Compliant"?


eminence_grise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Walmart Canada has introduced a new type of truck
> for service on the multi-lane highways of Ontario
> and Quebec.
>
> It features a 60ft.5in long trailer, which also
> includes a drop floor ahead of the wheels. The
> cabover "Freightliner" tractor has no sleeper,
> instead a 10ft "dromedary" behind the cab allows
> for even more haulage space.
>
> The following links show details:
>
> http://www.core77.com/blog/transportation/walmarts
> _new_supercube_increase_sustainability_by_designin
> g_bigger_trucks_23804.asp
>
> http://www.walmartgreenroom.com/2013/03/walmart-ca
> nadas-new-wheels-turn-heads/
>
> Is this a pilot project for similar trucks on the
> US Interstate system?
>
> Will other road haulers introduce similar highway
> vehicles to compete?
>
> Does this represent a further threat to intermodal
> freight traffic on the railways?

MSchwiebert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Freightliner hasn't built the cab-over Argosy
> model used here for the North American market in
> years (the ones they do build are for markets like
> Austrailia & South Africa). Wonder how much it
> took to get these "North American Compliant"?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
All the major truck builders have quit building cabovers. The Argosy is made in Austrailia because they still are in demand there. Most of the western states (except CA) allow combinations with up to eight axles and a maximum gross wt. of 105,500 lbs. OR,ID,UT,MT,NV and specific Interstates in AZ and CO allow triples, and another combination known as Rocky Mountain Doubles. I'm not up to speed on the Canadian Provinces.

Larry Dodgion
Wilsonville, OR

As a now-retired PR guy for the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, I fired off a quick e-mail to one of former co-workers who is still at MTO. He is out of the office until tomorrow (Wednesday) but said the new truck/trailer combo being used by Walmart was approved about a year ago. He will email more info to me tomorrow.

For U-S readers: Ontario (and other Canadian provinces) allow much higher axle loading that most U-S states. The one U-S state that does allow higher over-all weights is Michigan, where I beleive they allow a total of 160,000 pounds - often on 7-axle trailers.

Ontario allows (last time I checked) 140,000 pounds ... but usually on 6-axle trailers. Note: that does not include the axles on the tractor.

From what I understand, the new Walmart combos must still remain within the overall maximum length that has been in effect for a number of years.

That notwithstanding, a couple of years ago, Ontario started allowing LCVs (long combination vehicles) which involve a three axle tractor pulling two 53-foot trailers on certain freeway routes. Quebec has permitted similar combinations for many years. Many U-S states have also permitted them, along with "triple" pup combinations. So far, Ontario has not permitted triples, although I have seen them in operation in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Alberta also permits "Rocky Mountain doubles" which is a 53-foot trailer and a 26 or 28-foot pup trailer. That combination is also popular in the states directly south of Alberta.

Will MacKenzie
Dundas, ON

eminence_grise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Google maps show the distance on Highway 401 and
> Highway 20 Autoroute between Quebec City QC and
> Windsor ON, basically the urban heartland of
> eastern Canada (401 and 20 are the same highway,
> Quebec calls it Route 20) as 1300 kms (900 miles?)
> with a driving time of 13 hours.

1300 km is actually just over 800 miles (807.5). The driving time of 13 hours is pretty liberal, considering the 100km/h speed limit on Canadian freeways; that doesn't leave a lot of time for rest-room or meal breaks unless one is going a bit faster than posted track speed. And is the 20 through Montreal fully grade-separated now? because it hasn't always been.

My understanding is that Freighliner builds them in Cleveland TN for the export markets where they are still used (not sure if they're shipped "complete" or CKD form though) - at least that was the case 3-4 years ago when I was still in the truck manufacturing industry. Daimler does the same for the Western Star trucks that are bound for Austraila - all are assembled in Portland and shipped down there.

truxtrax Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MSchwiebert Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Freightliner hasn't built the cab-over Argosy
> > model used here for the North American market
> in
> > years (the ones they do build are for markets
> like
> > Austrailia & South Africa). Wonder how much it
> > took to get these "North American Compliant"?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>snip<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> <<<<<<
> All the major truck builders have quit building
> cabovers. The Argosy is made in Austrailia because
> they still are in demand there. Most of the
> western states (except CA) allow combinations with
> up to eight axles and a maximum gross wt. of
> 105,500 lbs. OR,ID,UT,MT,NV and specific
> Interstates in AZ and CO allow triples, and
> another combination known as Rocky Mountain
> Doubles. I'm not up to speed on the Canadian
> Provinces.

In British Columbia LCV (long commercial vehicles)trucks have been permitted between Kamloops and Vancouver on the Coquihalla and Trans-Canada corridor only. These vehicles include "turnpikes" (2-48/53' trailers) and "Rocky Mountain Doubles" (1-48/53'- and 1-26/28' trailers.

As a result of the beetle kill the length of the "Super-B" wood chip and logging trucks has been extended from 25m to 27.5m (82ft to 90.2ft). These trucks are still standard height and width.