If you enjoy this web site, please show your support.

Truck Driving Jobs

Author Topic: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!  (Read 10523 times)

mike b

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #30 on: January 06, 2006, 06:36:06 PM »
Here's one with the stacks on the side. I'm still undecided on if I like the new front end, I can't help but think it would look nicer with a chrome bumper.



In my opinion these aerodynamic type trucks look A LOT better if they have the fairings around the fuel tanks :-P.

Hank's Truck Forum

Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #30 on: January 06, 2006, 06:36:06 PM »

mike b

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #31 on: January 06, 2006, 06:47:51 PM »
I think that when Pete discontinued the 377 that the 387 probably didn't sell as well as they wanted it to so they came up with this one. With this model you have a wide range of sleeper choices instead of just a couple like the 387. Also the bunks can be removed to make the truck more versatile on the used truck market.

I agree, I would also add that I think PACCAR saw the continued popularity of the T-600 despite the T-2000,Century,770,387 etc... So peterbilt introduced the? 386 to appeal to those of us who like trucks that still have that classic N. American truck look on the inside.? That?s my theory anyway :|.

mike b

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #32 on: January 06, 2006, 07:17:33 PM »
What about the 385? I tought that one was the replacement of the 377, as they're very similar


Back in the 1990?s and in the early part of the current century Peterbilt offered the 377 and the 385 at the same time. The 385 is basically designed around the same basic theory as the old FLD112 and the 9200 & 9100.. They are built specifically to take advantage of small bore engines for weight conscious users. The old 377 had enough room under the hood for a 3406,N14 etc.


mike b

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #33 on: January 06, 2006, 08:30:57 PM »
Though it doesn't look bad, I can't catch up to the concept. Taking the classic cab & adding this round japanese plastic look to it just doesn't make sense to me. If I wan'a go for the modern look I can take 387 & have a spacious modern cab with it.



The Freightliner concept of building modern cabs with a classic look makes a lot more sense to me for everyday business, though nothing can match an old KW 900 or 379 Pete.

I personally prefer smaller cabs, they are easier to heat and cool and you can? SAFLY reach the passenger seat to get something :-D 8-). Furthermore the Volvo 610 I sometimes have the misfortune of driving is always having windshield wiper icing problems while driving in heavy snow storms because the thing is so big :?. In a few extreme cases I have had to hang my head out the side window to see the road :evil: :roll:. The windshields on the FLD120?s 8-) and petes 8-) I have driven in the past? did not ice up nearly as bad as the Volvo :roll:. The Volvo has a good defroster so the only thing I can think the problem could be is the size and or the shape of the windshield (its not flat glass) :? . I can see the advantage of a? larger cab for team operations but not for solo?s, after all my job is to drive the truck not run a marathon across it :lol:. I know a lot of drivers like the larger cabs so to each his own, I still like the little ones.





Gary Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6105
  • Fleet eye for the Chicken guy
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #34 on: January 06, 2006, 10:32:42 PM »
In my opinion these aerodynamic type trucks look A LOT better if they have the fairings around the fuel tanks :-P.


With me, it depends on the truck.  IMHO for example, Freightliners look good with or without fuel tank fairings, Volvo VNs look incomplete without them.  To me, the 386 isn't so radically streamlined as to require skirting in order to look right.

Like so many aspects of spec'ing a heavy truck, it is a judgement call whether or not to spec lower skirting.  While the skirts save fuel, they add weight and can get in the way of maintenence work.  There is also a school of thought that holds that because they direct air away from the underside of the truck, they adversly affect brake cooling, a consideration when operating in mountainous terrain.

It's a Mack thing. you wouldn't understand.....

"Every highway, just beyond the high beams"

Rob Archer

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21150
  • Forum Administrator
    • Slickpic
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #35 on: January 07, 2006, 06:37:10 AM »
Does the exterior sunvisor create much drag?

Gary Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6105
  • Fleet eye for the Chicken guy
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #36 on: January 07, 2006, 11:43:31 PM »
Does the exterior sunvisor create much drag?

Most sunvisors have a small gap between the rear edge of the visor and the cab in orderto allow air to escape.
It's a Mack thing. you wouldn't understand.....

"Every highway, just beyond the high beams"

Gary Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6105
  • Fleet eye for the Chicken guy
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #37 on: January 07, 2006, 11:46:10 PM »
Does the exterior sunvisor create much drag?

It's a Mack thing. you wouldn't understand.....

"Every highway, just beyond the high beams"

silver92

  • Regular Membership
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 130
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #38 on: January 09, 2006, 09:33:33 AM »
They still make a 385 but only in a daycab.

I read that too, but the 2005/06 in this picture has a sleeper. http://hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/bc_trucks/2005/aug19/dsc_6468.jpg

The 386 looks alright but I don't want to see the other models discontinued.

Felipe Garcia

  • Regular Membership
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2214
    • FelipeGarcia | Aviation & Truck Photography
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #39 on: January 09, 2006, 12:58:40 PM »
Maybe it's still offered, or the owned added it.
My website
Truck Photography, Mixers and more.
http://www.felipe-garcia.net
UPDATED 13JUL12

benrk

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #40 on: January 10, 2006, 06:00:43 PM »
@mike b

If you don't like Volvo's (Scandinavian) winter skills try other euro trucks, like IVECO or Renault, which are from warmer countrys, a trucking mag here took the test, it was terrible, only Scania & Volvo looked halfway good.

The icing of the windshield is something about the size I think, glass is not a good insulation material, the bigger the windshield the more warmth you loose, once the air has crossed a large windshield it's almost as cold as the outside.

That's what happened @ the test too, the Renault Magnum, originating from a country with majorly easy winters, having this giant "aquarium frontwall" failed so badly, they couldn't see anything up @ the arctic circle.

mike b

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2006, 06:41:49 PM »
@mike b

If you don't like Volvo's (Scandinavian) winter skills try other euro trucks, like IVECO or Renault, which are from warmer countrys, a trucking mag here took the test, it was terrible, only Scania & Volvo looked halfway good.


IVECO or Renault are not sold in the US.

benrk

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #42 on: January 10, 2006, 08:15:48 PM »
"IVECO or Renault are not sold in the US."

Not anymore at least, still once in a while some poor *Deleted* here in Europe doesn't have a clue about real winters & gets send north with such crap...

off topic anyways  :wink:

Lil Pete Boy

  • Guest
Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2006, 06:38:17 PM »
My dad is in the middle of taking delivery of 1 or 2 of those. :-D

Hank's Truck Forum

Re: I saw a new 386 Peterbilt!!
« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2006, 06:38:17 PM »

Truck Driving Jobs