The days of using a generic spec for all fleet applications are over.
While I am not sure that a one-size-fits-all approach to spec’ing was ever a good idea, today that approach can spell disaster. It not only can result in operational inefficiencies but also it can have a profound effect on preventive maintenance and total cost of operation (TCO).
A truck that is not spec’d properly for its duty cycle or application is likely to cost more to maintain than an optimally “designed for use” spec’d vehicle. While I subscribe to standardization where possible, we need to weigh the costs and make experienced fact-based decisions.
All too often components like batteries and alternators are overlooked or spec’d improperly.
The selection among “starting,” “all purpose,” or “high reserve capacity” batteries coupled with the correct alternator can save a fleet thousands of dollars. Or, conversely, cost the fleet thousands of dollars if the spec is not appropriate for the application. The right spec combination can extend the life of a set of batteries for a year or more. Of course, the upfront investment in those batteries might save a few bucks, but it is likely that the fleet will have to replace the batteries less often — saving one or two sets of batteries over the life of the vehicle and avoiding road calls for trucks that won’t start.
The same logic can be applied to tires, engines, transmissions, air dryers, compressors, fan hubs, fifth wheels, axle ratios and other components.
TCO savings begin during the spec’ing process, when you look at the specific purpose of a truck and spec it in manner that is most appropriate for that purpose.
