exactly !

The ones on the darkside development video are rail pressure tuning boxes they work very differently than this so shouldn't compare

To further confuse things there are two different sized gallons imperial and US

@@juliogonzo2718 confusion intensifies

There's me only getting 29 Lt per 100km from a fh500

@@kp-qr6hy I used to get 39L/100k in a tandem straight truck if that makes you feel better. It was 30,000kg with 4.10 axle pulling lots of hills mind you

Don’t forget too, the cetane level in Europe is higher than here in N America. Try adding cetane boost additive, make sure too that you’re tire pressure’s, filters and valve setup are all set correctly. I have a 378 with a Paccar and I’m returning on average 7.6mpg running 80k/lbs most trips. Another thing is, drive it like a truck and not a car, let it do the work instead of bullying it….easy on the throttle, and make max use of your jakes!!

Lets start with a smalltalk about fuel cost and ecodriving with driver first, shall we? Systems are not bad, wrong usage is. That sayd, driving myself Scania for last few years now, never used kickdown and have all gearbox modes activated, using only standard tho, with ability to go manual at every speed.

Absolutely, this is clearly not a hardware issue but a driver issue. New driver needs training, not more power.

@@Jellan Guess you've seen those new young guys, with enthusiastic eyesight and some old bloke's instruction to go full speed everywhere and anytime cause you're always, always in the hurry.😃 Let them drive their own and choose their instructors better, they'll figure it out that you actually can go full speed on highways, but freerolling and inertia is a thing too. Lorry is not a race car.

You're right about Scania leaving power and economy on the table in order to keep reliability and engine life at a maximum. Making any substantial increase in power will almost always reduce engine life and potentially reliability (you can't change the laws of physics), although how much can be difficult to say. With only a remap or 'tune' you're not increasing power by reducing restriction or making other physical changes, so it's probably increasing the boost level and fuelling which will spin the turbocharger faster and cause that to wear out slightly sooner, as well as increased wear on engine bearings and other components as a result of the higher cylinder pressures and loads within the engine, as well as increased heat for the oil and coolant systems to deal with. Big increases to the factory boost pressure setting can also make the turbocharger less efficient if it's operating out of its intended speed range. On a car where the actual time at high engine loads is minimal, I'd almost always use a "stage 1" (no physical change) remap, especially on a turbocharged car to get the most from the factory setup. But on a truck where they are frequently operated at medium to high engine loads for long periods, I'd probably keep it as Scania intended to maximise reliability.

@@serenahansen2394 Thanks for the detailed reply. 👍 I know there are warranty and statistical reasons why any manufacturer will want to keep things vanilla. Engineering best practice is to design in some margin for error to protect against defects, abuse or extreme conditions.

That, plus to handle more power, the engine might have to be made out of more expensive stuff.

This looks like a set that's simular to a Power Commander as used on bikes. It's a piggyback system that changes nothing on the ECU, just changes the data from the sensors somewhat to trick the ECU into believing the circumstances are different from what they actually are, so it alters things like fuel injection, turbo pressure/wastegate actuation and/or airintake.

Lean translates to hot and these trucks dont get much air at their speeds this is a big NO

And new Volvo and new Renault.

NO, ITS terrible not being able high RPM a it like going uphill

@@idontknow2rhhfhf Don’t need more than 1700rpm in trucks like this, any more and you’re just making noise and wasting diesel.

@@Jellan I had one r560 before and that was one thirsty truck and no torque or horsepower under 1600 rpm. the ng580 is much more powerful in low rpm AND alot cheaper on the fuel

It'll be metric gallons so 4.54l.

Is the Pope Catholic??

Did you even get the truck matched to your logistics needs? The V8 is mostly a image thing, not the most efficient

get a load of this guy ^

@@madars1997 haha someone drops my wages to try and augment my behavior not going to end well. He should have just said give the guy a bonus if he meets targets.

@@juliogonzo2718 Facts. Bonus $$$ for low fuel consumption is a good idea.

Adjust the earnings? There not much there to adjust. Do u think we should drive truck for free or what 😂

@@nigelleahy406 some pompous office dwellers feel we should be paying them for the privilege of driving the truck. It's easy to spot what companies these are, you can sometimes see their trucks attempting to excavate the ditch