Are some of the newer models of trucks introduced over the last few years not as good as their predessesors. For some reason I prefer driving the 4 series Scania to the R series. I like the old dashboard with front drawer and the front overhead bunk layout on the Topline amongst other things. I confess I haven’t driven any top of the range models on the 4 or R series. On paper though, the R series seems to wins hands down, with lower floor, better lighting and storage etc, though they haven’t made many friends with the bottom bunk layout. Given all the improvements, I would still choose the 4 series. Now I know some of you will say the 3 series was better etc etc, but I’m talking fairly recently. So are you all happy with your new wheels, or do you miss your old set ■■?
I will avoid R series for as long as possible, love the 4 series ( well thats what mrs B says!) always wished that i’d had a 3 series.
Daf 95 was a good truck, 105 is a great truck (not sure about the roof lights)
FH version 1 was a ■■■■ good motor thru and thru, i like the version2’s but build quality not as great.
Just my thoughts and opinions.
I think I preferred the DAF 2800 / 3600 to a 95, but what is “Better”
Non adjustable steering column, 30 inch steel pipe to change 16 gears, 20 inch steering wheel, narrow mirrors, factory fitted airleaks. 
against, blindspots,ridiculous electronic dashboard, even more ridiculous gearshift, useless bulky wraparound dash, nodding dog cab suspension.
I will take the DK please 
That DAF brings back a few memories Wheel Nut. The main one that springs to mind is James Hemphill of Polmadie Road in Glasgow.
Andy smg:
That DAF brings back a few memories Wheel Nut. The main one that springs to mind is James Hemphill of Polmadie Road in Glasgow.
My first experience of cleaning a tanker was in Hemphills. Me and a James Hemphill driver used to tip regularly in Forfar and I ran back with him to clean out at Polmadie. that was about 1978/9
I agree about the Scania. The old topline used its space better than the new R series. With the bottom bunk against the wall and the passenger seat too theyre was lots of space for nights out-unlike the Globetrotters.
From the bottom of the doors up Volvos are ■■■■■■ A total overhaul is badly needed.
Still cant beat an Actros thou
The new MP3 
ellies dad:
Still cant beat an Actros thou
I absolutely hate the Actros 
any model, any year, IMO the driving position is the worst of any truck, the seat had only one adjustment, the steering whel is to low, and even with the seats pushed as far back as it will go the pedals still seem under my thigh muscles (i’m only 5,11’).
Why did the invent that gearbox it’s so bloody slow it’s quicker to change gear in a 1930’s manual foden
The suspention always seem softer than that of the trailer, which means every single time you go into a corner the worst truck ever designed feel like it’s going to tip over from te front, that’s is it actually negotiates the corner in the first place.
And last but no means least, the horn sounds like it’s was stolen from a morris minor, totally gross
gonna be personal preference.
never had a mega space actros, but would like too try the new un.
happy with a super space cab though.
I loved the 3300, easy to repair and comfortable to me it was ahead of its time.
willie_mac:
I loved the 3300, easy to repair and comfortable to me it was ahead of its time.
Totally agree. Drove a 3600 space cab for a couple of years and and in terms of comfort it was the best but not that good on the hills . . . even worse over the Alps
[quote="Mikejk
[/quote]
I absolutely hate the Actros any model, any year, IMO the driving position is the worst of any truck, the seat had only one adjustment, the steering whel is to low, and even with the seats pushed as far back as it will go the pedals still seem under my thigh muscles (i’m only 5,11’).
Why did the invent that gearbox it’s so bloody slow it’s quicker to change gear in a 1930’s manual foden
The suspention always seem softer than that of the trailer, which means every single time you go into a corner the worst truck ever designed feel like it’s going to tip over from te front, that’s is it actually negotiates the corner in the first place.
And last but no means least, the horn sounds like it’s was stolen from a morris minor, totally gross
[/quote]
I dunno where to start with that bud! If you hate em that much then avoid em like the plague 
I compare my 1846 to an fm globetrotter-fh 380-topline 144-scania 143-man tga-axor-and 124,400 scania. Have to say the merc is up there.
Suedehead:
willie_mac:
I loved the 3300, easy to repair and comfortable to me it was ahead of its time.Totally agree. Drove a 3600 space cab for a couple of years and and in terms of comfort it was the best but not that good on the hills . . . even worse over the Alps
My DAFS were the best trucks I have driven. I had a 3300 4x2 and then got a 2800 FTG, both ATi with the single bed.
There is a nice picture on that Scummers thread on here
To reverse it a bit. Although the DAF 85 was a good truck, the CF was loads better.
and the 3 series Scania was the best. Everything after is just downhill
Oldest truck ive driven would be a late 1990’s truck so not much experience.
But do find the new trucks espec Automatics seem to want the ECU to decide how fast you are going to go etc…
Driving a MAN TGA Auto round about East Kilbride at 8am even with an empty trailer your limping onto the roundabouts, same with the Volvo FM 440, on auto it crawls from a stand still. The older trucks ive driven seem to have been designed getting as much power out as possible and leaving it up to the driver.
Apart from solenoid problems the 4 series (12 speed) gearbox was one of the best ever made. The man comfortshift beats it thou-great the way you can abuse the drivline with the clutch pedal and then say"but its an auto" if anything goes wrong,it usually does go wrong with man.
The new Actros MP3 is a sweet looking tool i must obmit. I would not mind having one for a week or two 
I found this item whilst trawling the net, thought it fitted this post quite nicely.
Daf Trucks says that in 1977, a typical maximum capacity truck, running at 32 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 20.5 tonnes on a 320 km journey used 130 litres of diesel and put out 16.7 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including a statutory 45-minute break, the journey took six hours and ten minutes. In 2007, a maximum capacity truck running at 44 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 29.5 tonnes on the same journey used 103 litres of diesel and emitted 9.2 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including the same statutory break, the journey took four hours and 15 minutes. In summary, the 2007 truck used 21% less diesel, carried 30% more payload, emitted 21% less CO2, meaning a CO2/t/km saving of 45% The truck emitted 96% less particulates and 87% less NOX. It was also 33% quicker although working within a lower maximum speed limit. The modern truck also produced one-twelfth of the noise of the older model.
Wheel Nut:
I found this item whilst trawling the net, thought it fitted this post quite nicely.Daf Trucks says that in 1977, a typical maximum capacity truck, running at 32 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 20.5 tonnes on a 320 km journey used 130 litres of diesel and put out 16.7 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including a statutory 45-minute break, the journey took six hours and ten minutes. In 2007, a maximum capacity truck running at 44 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 29.5 tonnes on the same journey used 103 litres of diesel and emitted 9.2 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including the same statutory break, the journey took four hours and 15 minutes. In summary, the 2007 truck used 21% less diesel, carried 30% more payload, emitted 21% less CO2, meaning a CO2/t/km saving of 45% The truck emitted 96% less particulates and 87% less NOX. It was also 33% quicker although working within a lower maximum speed limit. The modern truck also produced one-twelfth of the noise of the older model.
Makes you wonder what trucks will be capable of 20 years from now eh !!
I prefer the old F12/F16 to the FH12/FH16 any day
Wheel Nut:
I found this item whilst trawling the net, thought it fitted this post quite nicely.Daf Trucks says that in 1977, a typical maximum capacity truck, running at 32 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 20.5 tonnes on a 320 km journey used 130 litres of diesel and put out 16.7 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including a statutory 45-minute break, the journey took six hours and ten minutes. In 2007, a maximum capacity truck running at 44 tonnes gross, carrying a payload of 29.5 tonnes on the same journey used 103 litres of diesel and emitted 9.2 kg of CO2 per tonne of payload. Including the same statutory break, the journey took four hours and 15 minutes. In summary, the 2007 truck used 21% less diesel, carried 30% more payload, emitted 21% less CO2, meaning a CO2/t/km saving of 45% The truck emitted 96% less particulates and 87% less NOX. It was also 33% quicker although working within a lower maximum speed limit. The modern truck also produced one-twelfth of the noise of the older model.
Aye! But I could do Aust services in 1986 in 4 and a half hours, before the M42 was finished, going through Walsall 2 lane M5 etc, and now I can just a say make Strensham 