just another example of the epa running rough shot on corp. America! we need to get rid of big government, and get power back to the people. I agree that at one time the epa was a neede organization, but they have gotten to big and powerfull, ostly from the prgessive types in gov. that can't seem to make enough rules and reg. that have no effect on themselves, or just egnore them anyway, taxes, laws, ethics ect. ect. back in the day when thee was no epa, there were way to many companies,and poluters, but now that there is a handle on the situation, we need to tune it down and let the market go, or there will be none left!

The last American owned semi truck company is probably going to be bought out. Cat makes rebasged internationals now. Sad really. Ford should get into the class 8 category again. Ram wants too but is Italian now/owned by fiat. GM can't focus on any more truck lines and care more about China then America.

First off the best heavy truck manufacturer here in the U.S., PACCAR (Kenworth and Peterbilt) is still 100% U.S. owned. As for Navistar: Navistar gambled that medium and heavy truck buyers would be willing to put up with worse fuel economy in order not to have to use urea. Sounded good on paper, but in reality International's advanced EGR system not only gave poor fuel economy, but had a lot of driveability and reliability issues as well. To make matters even worse, the system really didn't pass EPA standards. The last few years International was getting around the new EPA emissions requirements with credits they earned in the past. The EPA has come down hard on International, and now it looks like they have no choice but abandon their advanced ERG system. Sounds a lot like what happened to Caterpillar, doesn't it? Navistar's stock price has been hammered the last few days as a result. Navistar is looking like an attractive take-over target for another truck manufacturer.

Big Bob I will agree that PACCAR, is the best American heavy truck manu. but the only parts they make on the truck is the cab! and chassis! other than that all they do is assemble the different components, and the design and enginering of said truck, mostly from parts and components from othe manu. Cat, Cummins, Rockwell, Eaton, ect. ect. But whatever they do manu. you can be sure you will pay dearly for it, but you will get what you paid for! the cabns are assembled just like aircraft, and last a long time on the awfull roads out there, and there HD off road type vehicles are also top of the line. To bad they don't make a pick-up huh?

I sense some apprehension and worry again by NA.

In Australia, NA trucks, Mack, Kenworth etc have the real heavy end of the market sown up. But on the east coast the smaller 34 wheelers (B Doubles) the Euro and Japanese trucks have made significant inroads over the past 25 years.

Adding VW to the list is good all round as it allow more competition. German engineering is good. All the NA manufacturers have to do is deliver competitive forward control trucks that most of the world uses (especially the Eurozone and Asia) and they could and would sell if the right attitude is in place.

Your pickup market is similar. We would love to see all of your vehicles here in Australia.

I sense some apprehension and worry again by NA.

In Australia, NA trucks, Mack, Kenworth etc have the real heavy end of the market sown up. But on the east coast the smaller 34 wheelers (B Doubles) the Euro and Japanese trucks have made significant inroads over the past 25 years.

Adding VW to the list is good all round as it allow more competition. German engineering is good. All the NA manufacturers have to do is deliver competitive forward control trucks that most of the world uses (especially the Eurozone and Asia) and they could and would sell if the right attitude is in place.

Your pickup market is similar. We would love to see all of your vehicles here in Australia.

If VW's trucks are as reliable as their cars--I don't think the competition have much to worry about.

Bar none, the biggest POS lemon I have ever owned was a brand new 2000 Passat 1.8T, 5-spd manual, that I bought for my wife.

Not only was it unreliable, parts were expensive, and it was a pain to work on.

It had stuff go wrong with it that I didn't have happen on old beaters I have owned.

I can see VW going after a weakened truck company like CornBinder. VW plans on being #1 in global sales by 2018 and is well ahead of schedule on meeting that goal in 2016.
They have money,and tons of it. Navistar will need a wealthy partner (more likely master) to fix their problems. They were rumored to be the US assembly company for Mahindra's laughable pickup trucks.
We are seeing this sort of thing everyday. The big get bigger and the small and weak just get canabilized by these global corporations. Resistance is futile.................

@Dav. Scania and MAN have nothing whatsoever to do with VW. They are two very separate companies and bitter rivals in the market.

@Big Al from OZ. More mixed , Kenworth or more correctly Australian Kenworth with its own models and more than 50 % difference to the US Kenworth. Volvo (which includes Mack) is 2nd on the most bought Heavy truck make in Australia.(Volvo does not offer Cummins here) Mack uses a lot of Volvo/Renault truck parts.(it does Offer Cummins engines) It is now building its own engine based on the Volvo block. Worse performing Truck makes are Freightliner, Navistar and CAT trucks in that order.

Generally this whole sorry mess with Navistar is it's own making. Not only are they having/had disputes with Ford, Volvo, Daimler and the EPA their Co-operative agreement with CAT as regards the NC2 operation seems to be coming unglued. This financial year they lost roughly US $500 million on their Truck and engine operations.
What company in their right mind would have approved these two monstrosities?
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/CG/20101016/ISSUE01/310169991/AR/0/AR-310169991.jpg&maxw=368&q=100

http://gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2008/02/International%20Lonestar.jpg

Navistar have good products in the Military field , but unfortunately a "near enough is good enough" mentality for other things.
A Management change would be the best thing for the Company. I have seen a capable company go sadly downhill over the years.

@sandman Europeans call PACCAR an "assembler". I think the criticism has hurt and it is in the process of becoming ", vertically integrated" with the DAF developed PACCAR engine being pushed as their main engine. I believe Cummins could also come on board in the development of the engine. Cummins is increasingly being left out by the increasing Vertical integration strategies, of Volvo and Freightliner. Although Volvo in the US uses Cummins engines, that is not the case outside NA.

@ Mark Williams I cannot see the Amarok cming into play here, as VW is only interested in the over the road and some off road activities for heavy trucks and tractors.

@Robert Ryan

Isn't UD part of the Renault/Nissan Group now?

And VW do build a heavy truck in South America. I noticed they came with an assortment of engine combinations, including Cummins. One of the engine manufacturers MVM or W makes a 4.2 diesel they fit to the Brazilian F-250s. VW even have their own 12-13 litre diesel. It could be a adaptation of one of VWs marine diesels, don't know.

@Robert Ryan - I haven't seen too many Lonestar rigs. The ones I did see had huge bull bars on the front. They do have "a nice personality" ;).
I do not think VW will try the Amarok in NA as of yet. The market for small trucks is still too soft. The price premium puts it too close to full sized trucks and we have seen that fact has been suicidal for the small truck market.
VW is looking like it may make all of the same mistakes that GMC made - try to be #1 but with too many fingers in too many pies. Their aging CEO Martin Winterkorn is a brilliant man but experts say that succession planning has been lacking and things may fall apart when he finally steps down.

@Lou,
UD Trucks are owned by Volvo. Volvo has applied the heat to the Japanese management and with the Condor have produced a Truck with European power and torque. Interestingly the UD very heavy Truck(over 350hp) is the best selling HDT truck in New Zealand. They do have Australian trucks European Trucks US Kenworth and Peterbuilt, plus some Asian model variants .

@Big Al from OZ. VW sold that Truck division to MAN, who now use a variant of their engine in the Constellation.Prior to that thy used Cummins. This Truck was also sold in South Africa, but do not know if that is the case now.
http://dayerses.com/data_images/posts/volkswagen-constellation/volkswagen-constellation-06.jpg

They also race them in Brazil.
http://www.autoinfection.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/volkswagen-constellation-2.jpg
http://dayerses.com/data_images/posts/volkswagen-constellation/volkswagen-constellation-06.jpg

@Lou,
"try to be #1 but with too many fingers in too many pies"?
It worked for 80 straight years. I wouldn't call it a bad strategy.

Scania does sell marine and some industrial engines in the US. It has just started supplying TEREX with engines for it's Mine Trucks.
http://blogdocaminhoneiro.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/terex-articulated-truck-images.jpg

MAN did the design work for the latest Navistar 13 Litre engine. Not the EPA compliance though.

@Big Al, the MWM 4.2 in the Brazilian F250 was replaced by a Cummins 3.9 with common rail injection

Just had a quick look at trucks on Wikipedia and what going on.

Imagine trying to flow chart who is doing what and where would be like trying to flowchart government departments and agencies and what they are responsible for!

This will take some time.

@Robert Ryan
Quote "Scania and MAN have nothing whatsoever to do with VW. They are two very separate companies and bitter rivals in the market."

Have a look here:
http://www.scania.com/scania-group/corporate-governance/ownership/

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international-business/volkswagen-acquires-majority-of-man-works-towards-tie-up-with-scania/articleshow/9099232.cms

I would say that Volkswagen, Scania and MAN have a lot to do with each other.

http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/content/en/brands_and_products.html

@TDI - it doesn't matter how many you sell if you can't make money selling them. GMC is ranked 20th for corporate profits. They made 9.2 billion in 2011.
In contrast Ford is ranked 5th for corporate profits at 20.2 billion.
GMC has the dubious distinction of holding 3 of the top 15 worse record losses for a corporation or should I say old GMC (The GMC that defaulted on 100 billion).
I was repeating what most experts were saying about VW. Even Toyota has been accused of GMC like business mistakes in relation to their sluggish top down corporate structure.
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/fortune/1205/gallery.500-most-profitable.fortune/index.html

If it worked for 70 years (not 80) then why did they fail so miserably?
Weak products, rebadge manufacturing, poor quality, poor response to change, poor financial practices, sluggish top heavy management, we are to big to fail attitude, we are number 1 forever attitude........
need I go on?

VW ownes a share of both MAN and Scania. VW has been trying to get the two companies to merge, just like Carl Ichan is trying to get Navistar to merge with Oshkosh. Not sure if a MAN/Scania merger is a good idea, but I think a Navistar/Oshkosh merger is a bad idea, except of course it would make Ichan a bit richer.

@KV No VW does not have much to do with the operation of either Scania or MAN,only now as a major shareholder. MAN has tried to take over Scania on a few occasions, as a result relations are pretty cold between the two.

@Big Bob it will be same sort of relationship as you see with Daimler and it s: Mercedes Trucks, Freightliner and Mitsubishi Fuso except the "sharing" between Scania and MAN will have to be much more Diplomatic!!

@Big Bob Oshkosh and Navistar merger!!! Agreed Very BAD IDEA.

@Robert Ryan:

VW owns most of MAN (as in controlling stake, owner, bog boss hogg). The reason they sold VW trucks in South America to MAN is to balance the books internally and create a clearer heavy trucks division. VW owns a lot of Scania, and so does MAN. Add to that the fact that the major shareholders of Scania agree to the merger / takeover for synergy reasons and it becomes obvious they are in bed with each other. Scania is to expensive and cannot sustain developing their own lorries for much longer.

@Everyone Else: Scania is the de-facto choice for owner drivers and smaller firms who like their trucks a bit better (read: the way Mack once built them before they were owned by Volvo). They have 700+ hp V8 engines and sound absolutely superb. MAN have a great history to, being the first to install the Diesel engine if I am not mistaken. They built decent lorries and have good technology. I would not mind seeing the Lonestar with a V8 - 700bhp engine...

With regards to Paccar being an assembler only: rubbish... This is why they bought DAF, because DAF do built all their own parts and they now assemble the MX engine (100% in-house design) and use the DAF cab-over cab on smaller US models. It is very harsh to call them assemblers, as the Peterbuilt / Kenworth lorries are proper icons and deserve a lot more credit then that!

@UK- Diesel -Driver. Agree Scania is "Volvo on Steroids' and a impressive and very profitable truck manufacturer.
A 730hp, 2500lb ft of torque. Scania V8 powered B-triple.
http://www.commercialmotor.com/Media/Default/BlogPost/Thumbnail/Tripleuntitled-1.JPG.

VW totally owns Scania and has just got a majority holding in MAN. VW wants to beat Daimler as the largest Truck maker on the planet and is using Scania and now a possible takeover of Navistar to achieve that.
Scania's shareholders were not in a financial position to say no to VW. MAN found itself a takeover target rather than the other way around as VW gradually acquired it's shares.
Both companies Scania/MAN have realized to expand in difficult financial times they need to rationalize some operations and require VW's deep reserves of cash to give them an advantage.
As far as PACCAR being an "Assembler" . I agreed with sandman 4 x4 comments. As I said PACCAR is using DAF's engine to start a vertical integration strategy to get away from the 'assembler" tag.. What it does "In house" from there will be interesting.

image again
http://www.commercialmotor.com/Media/Default/BlogPost/Thumbnail/Tripleuntitled-1.JPG

at one time Mack was a totaly intergrated truck made in America, at one time (before Renault) they were a nice small co. in Penn. that built the best truck on or off the road, bar none, maybe not the best looking or most comfy, but best! I know of many many trucks with over 1M miles on them some with 2M! they did make everything on the truck other than tires, that is it! you could literaly by a Mack truck that was 99% built by Mack truck! and they are still one of the only heavy truck manu. that engineer, design and build there own engine, at one time like I said they built there own trans. axles, brake parts, even the air compressor! air lines coolant lines, no one can say that! I have pers. drove over 1M miles on an assortment of R, U, RM,RD, Superliner, Maxidyne, Mack trucks! but my favored model was the good old 5spd. Econ-dyne 300hp 2 stack Mack with the window in the back! That was a true American truck drivers truck! I was asigned one new in 1995 and drove the hell out of it for 8 yrs. and put over 1M miles on it personaly! and the only things that had to be replaced were the brake shoes, hoses belts wipers, tires, bulbs, assorted small items, but not even the clutch, tranny. it did need an in chassis overhaul, and the biggest thing other than that was the injection pump went out, but overall that truck was a runner, and still is! it is used on local daily runs, at one time, when i was new, I was running from Providence RI, to Allentown PA every day 5 days a week, hauling scrap metals to Reading PA and Beer back from AllentownPA both heavy loads, at least 75-79K GVW! and I almost never had to go lower than 4th gear on any of the hills in a 5spd! along that route, granted that is not in the mountains, but we do have some pretty big mole hill around here. I havent been driving now for some yrs. med ret. but I've drivin from Tucson to Tukumcary from Hatchapy to Omaha I've drivin every kind of rig that ever been made.........I even drove the back roads so I couln't get weighed....

I guess its just me but I would rather see Navistar die than to see VW take it over. I have fond memories of the old Internation Harvester and of the Scout, Travelall, and their pickup trucks. My granddad's 63 IH was the best truck he ever had (built like a tank). They at one time owned the large truck market and the farm equipment market. VWs have a reputation of being overpriced and unreliable. VW years ago had a good reputation with the Beetle being affordable, dependable, and easy to work on. I would rather have a Tacoma, Frontier, Equator, Colorado, Canyon, or any one of the big 3s large trucks over an Amarok. The only truck I would take an Amarok or VW truck over would be a Mahindra.

@Lou what you said about GM and VW also applied to International Harvester as well. IH went down hill rapidly in the late 70s and early 80s. This could happen to Ford as well if their management gets off track and gets the big head. Toyota has been showing these signs as well. It is not too late for Toyota or even GM but the more time goes by and nothing is changed then the more likely there will be a rapid decline. Ford is doing well now but they need to learn from the others failures and to avoid the same mistakes.

@Robert Ryan

You're right about Volvo, up here in the NT the 3 1/2 trailer fuel tankers have Volvo prime movers. I think BP have them. Though I don't see any other Euro or Japanese Brands up here pulling roadtrains.

Big Al from OZ: that must be some sight to see! I have only seen a couple of pictures, but I'm sure they do no justice compared to in the 3D ! maybee PUT could do a story on them, and someone could put up a link for a vidio of one!

@sandman4x4

Here is a link to some roadtrain photos.

Overtaking is fun. But these are encountered all the time up here. And they drive at about 60mph. I overtook one tonight I started from 100kph and by the time I reached the back trailer I was at 140kph and by the front of the truck 170kph (over 105mph). And that's with a mid size 3.2 litre turbo diesel Mazda 4x4 pickup similar to the T6 global ranger.

http://outbacktowing.tripod.com/

@Jeff S - you are very correct. Success breeds complacency and that is always bad news. I've encountered the "we do it this way because we've always done it this way" mentality too many times in my life. At a corporate level it turns into what has happened to most failed large companies or governments or empires - they die and drag a large number of "innocents" with them.

@sandman4x4 - I'd have to agree. At one time Mack was an incredible product. My dad loved them and was intensely loyal to them. His last one was an "R" model with a 237 hp Maxidyne engine. I believe it had the same transmission you described. 5 speeds on one stick. The other shifter had a low (used only with 1st gear), a high range and reverse. It was perfect for hauling gravel and asphalt because you could reverse at the same speed as foreward. He easily outperformed more powerful trucks on the same hauls and was ultra reliable. When he sold it a large company bought it, put a snow plow and sand spreader on it and used it another 10 years. I learned how to drive on that truck. My favorite as far as looks were the "B" model Macks.

@Lou
Your assumption about complacency is right on. If you read my comments you can see my disappointment with the vehicle industry, particularly NA. The big 3 used to lead the world. But as the market became more competitive the industry built a brick wall around itself. Protectionism for self interest, but this breeds inefficiencies and in the end the people of NA lose out because of inferior and outdated management and the UAW. Look at what these people are responsible for. Almost like Greece.

@Big Al from Oz - perfect post. There are many that want increased protectionism from "import" products. It never works in the intermediate or long term. People blame the "foreigners" for their current problems but those problems were generated from within. Toyota for example would never of dominated the NA car market if the "big 3" made competitive fuel efficient cars. They still haven't rebounded from thier '70's position of dominance and I do not think they ever will. They could make the same mistake with pickups if fuel prices continue to rise. They made the same mistake with large SUV's. Fuel prices shot up and they got caught with their pants around their ankles clutching their shins once again. You'd think they'd learn? they've had enough large crappy vehicle mistakes shoved up their butts.

International use to be such a great company. They had some of the best products, from motors, trucks, tractors etc.. Then they sold off the tractor business. Then they delivered an engine that was developed for school busses to Ford for their SD starting with the 6.0, yeah we know how that turned out... Internationals quality has went into the crapper in many respects. Most of their trucks are junk save maybe the long haul over the road units. Even though their trucks might not have the failure rates that the Fords with the International engines in them have its still not to great.

I don't lay all the blame at International though, most of it should be pointed at the EPA. ULSD fuel is crap, EGR and DPF systems kill fuel economy and with the latest scientific news now saying that its not diesel soot that casuses bad air but the emissions from direct injected gas motors that is doing it but you don't see the EPA trying to stop these motors do you?

Navistar is a disaster but could be a useful VW footprint in the US. Aside from that, big truck manufacturers are beginning a push toward natural gas and away from diesel.

oh mighty Big AL from OZ:: great pics. and kool link I will explore when I have more time. The Western Star Tractor in one of the pics. is nice, they are also made in Pens. I believe, and that is a Great American truck made totaly to order!

@sandman 4 X4 there is a push to go from B -doubles to B-triples for long trailer loads. Not quite Road trains as such, but with a load limit of 82 metric tonnes(180.000lbs). These will run mostly on tarred roads.
http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/10/02/1226156/485178-a-b-triple-truck.jpg

Than again they are a concern coming to a city. They will be 82 not 77 tonnes as in this illustration.
http://onlineopinion.com.au/images/article-images/AlanParker-btriple-110908.gif

More current ones.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3246/2791273867_db5f3d56bb.jpg

http://roadtransportscene.com/B%20Tripls.jpg

@Vulpine -
1990 F150 reg cab 8 ft box dimensions are as follows:
WB......... 133 (6 ft box = 116.8)
Length.... 213.3 (6 ft box = 194.1)
width.......79
height..... 71
weight....3,982 (6 ft box= 3769)
5.0 = 195 hp and 270 lb.ft.
mpg 15/19
max tow 7,500

2012 F150 Reg cab 8ft box
WB........ 144.5 (6.5 box - 125.9)
Length....231.7 (6.5 box - 213.2)
width......78.9
height.....75.9
weight.....4,764 6.5 box - 4,791)
width......78.9
5.0 = 360hp/380 ib.ft.
mpg 17/21
Max tow = 11,300

2012 Tacoma reg cab 6ft box (no 8ft. box)
WB.......109.6
length...190.6
width....72.2
height...65.7
weight..3,315
2.7 I-4 = 159 hp/180 lb.ft
mpg 21/25
max tow = 3,500

In most dimensions the 1990 truck isn't much smaller than the 2012 truck. Length and weight being the biggest differences. If you stripped out all of the airbags, and all of the other electronic safety features and convieniences, I bet the 2012 truck would be close to the 1990 truck in weight. The performance difference between the 2 is nothing short of astounding with the added benefit of a much safer truck and a few mpg more efficient.
The 1/2 ton is bigger than the Tacoma (especially in length), but obliterates it in every performance category. I can see why small trucks are a dying breed.

@Lou,
You would be going nowhere with that 4 Litre V6 Petrol engine.

@Robert Ryan - I had a Ranger with 4.0. I was never inpressed with it. It wasn't all that powerful and wasn't fuel efficient. I liked the 2.8 litre V6 in my "84 Ranger. It wasn't powerful but it was fun to drive and got excellent mpg. IIRC it was based on the Euro spec V6.

Western Star was a Canadian outfit, started by the old White Motor Company back in '67 in British Columbia. I think after Freightliner bought them out, they moved production to the old Freightliner plant in Portland.

When GMC was building heavy trucks, they came close to being integrated. If you ordered a 9500, General, or Astro 95 with a Detroit Diesel and Allison automatic, just about the whole truck other than the brakes and axles was goint by GM.

I think VW (and Daimler) is a little nuts for wanting to be in the heavy truck business. GM, Ford, and even Chrysler found out years ago that the heavy truck business is just about totally unrelated to passenger car/light truck. It is very difficult to be profitable in heavy trucks unless that is all you do. Vovo even gave upn passenger cars to focus on heavy trucks. I wouldn't be surprised to see Daimler eventually get out of the truck business, and Fiat may be looking to sell their truck operation, Iveco. I think VW is on an ego trip, though Navistar really needs to be bought out by someone soon.

@Lou

I fear for your light pickups ie F-150, 1500 GM/Chev and Rams. They are built like mid-size trucks with a lot of automobile parts ie, engines, drivetrains etc.

The rest of the world has caught up and moved forward and you guys will get our "light trucks" eventually, not that they are bad, they are actually damn good.

HDs are a different story as they are significantly different from an engineering view. They have real truck engines with drivetrains to match. But the Transit, Fiat Ducato, Sprinters, Iveco brands can have vehicles to replace much of what they do. And these things are more economical to run in comparison.

@sandman--I have heard similiar stories to yours about Mach trucks. I know of a grain farmer who bought an old Mach rig 12 years ago that had over a million miles at the time and he is still driving it with just routine maintenance and no major repairs. You still see some the classic Machs from the 50s and 60s still running. I have heard several stories similiar to yours about the old Machs.

@Lou--I could not agree with you more. That is why I am not so brand loyal as others. I like Ford but I am not totally loyal to them because just like any other corporation they can take advantage of customer loyalty and get the big head and think that their loyal customers will buy anything. Competition keeps most of these corporations in check. In the late 70s and some of the early 80s the Big 3 North American auto manufacturers put out some real junk. Consumers started to leave the Big 3 and buy Japanese vehicles in significant numbers. It took a Chrysler bankruptcy and GM and Ford losing a significant portion of their markets to change. I do agree that the same thing can happen in the light truck market especially if fuel prices start to climb. This happened with Maytag appliances which use to make the best appliances money could buy and the Maytag appliance repairman portrayed in the commercials was closer to fact than fiction. Maytag started to produce junk and were forced to sell to Whirlpool who at one time had an excellent reputation but has a not so stellar reputation now.

I do not wish any corporation bad luck because of all the jobs that they provide. I think complacency and getting the big head is a reaccurring theme throughout history. The United States is going through this as well. And yes as many of the readers have commented that GM is still doing this with their light trucks. A little more investment in product development and a little more quality in interior, exterior, and powertrain. Hopefully GM will come out with a better truck when the new model comes out in a few years if not then this story is repeated. The NA manufacturers let Toyota take the NA market. People are going to buy the best product for their money. Enough said this has been one of the better posts and for once I have learned much more from the comments instead of just reading rehashes of all the bashes.

there was one company I worked for in the 80's that gave all there trucks a nicname on the hood, the oldest was named second time around (because the odo had gone round back to 0) and they regiser to one million miles, by the time the 00's came around they had three trucks that were named second time II, III, and the oldest (the 1st) was named third timer! the only thig that was a fight with them was rust in the cab! it was so bad the owner spent untold $$$ trying to keep the orignal cab together, he ended up having to exchange a cab from a Mack in the fleet that get this< was built with a Detriot Diesel!! it was on it's third inline re-build when he pulled the plug on that old dog and just swaped cabs!

@Big Bob Western Star were originally purchased by the Australian Distributors of Western Star in Australia. The Company was floated on the Toronto Stock Exchange and Mercedes bought it. Still the same unique arrngement exists in Australia, Western Star is not part of Daimler Asia/Oceania. Freightliner and Fuso are. Same company now sells MAN part of the VW stable.
Big Bob,, VW/Daimler and Volvo are making a fortune in Heavy Trucks, No way they are getting out of the business. More likely to see Ford drop the F150 and pickups than anything like that happening. Volvo sold their car division because it would near impossible to compete wuth BMW, Audi, Mercedes etc.

Remember when the US companies used to buy out the foreign ones?

The time has come to place restrictions on the EPA. It's come to a point where naturally occurring gases are now being labeled as 'greenhouse' gases and they're clamping down needlessly on manufacturing in this country to permit the portrayal of a hoax (climate change/warming) upon the people. This is all for what? For the people working the strings of the politicians to financially benefit at our expense.... Keep electing these retards(no offense to those who are really medically classified as such [damned PC crap]) and we're not going to have any American owned businesses or be able to buy our own products.... which will likely all be 'green' garbage to begin with.

Hey Sandman4x4, the phrase is “running rough shod” not “rough shot”. Given the NUMEROUS grammatical and typographic errors in your response (really, it’s one paragraph. You can’t take the time to proofread it?), there’s a reason government can’t be "turned over to the people”. Had we turned over the government to you, the Constitution would be unreadable.

Have a look at what VW builds in South America. They are building big trucks, just not what North Americans are used too.

http://www.autobild.de/bilder/bilder-vw-up-gegen-vw-constellation-titan-3487203.html

Sorry link didn't copy the first time.

A few corrections are in order.

First, Paccar (Kenworth, Peterbilt and DAF) and Navistar are US-owned companies. CAT builds vocational (service/construction trucks) in a joint venture with Navistar. Oshkosh is also US-owned. Volvo Trucks, Mack Trucks, and UD/Nissan Diesel are part of the Renault/Nissan group.

Second, VW Group chairman Martin Winterkorn doesn't have much to say in reference to which company VW buys. He may make suggestions, but the final decision belongs solely to Advisory Board chairman/big bossman/grand poobah Ferdinand Piech.

Third, VW already owns Scania and MAN, as well as building big trucks under the VW brand.

That said, buying another big truck company, particularly one in the US, may be a bit of a stretch. After completing recent purchases of MAN and Ducati, I don't see VW buying another company of any type right now. Paccar is too big to swallow, Navistar won't budge, and Oshkosh is out of the question, since Oshkosh (and Navistar, for that matter) builds vehicles designed for the US military, and government regulations frown on that activity. (And that is why AMC had to spin off AM General when Renault took control in the '80's.) Besides, I would suggest VW clean up its legal mess with Suzuki before doing anything else.

At this point, if VW does go after anything else, it would probably be construction/farm equipment, for which the primary targets are JCB, Terex or probably CAT (which might present its own problems because I doubt Navistar would be too eager to share its truck technology with Volkswagen).