backtop

Auto Wal-Mart to Get Hybrid Big Rig
Brandon Hill (Blog) - May 22, 2007 10:00 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 121 comment(s) - last by christojojo.. on May 25 at 11:23 AM

Peterbilt Model 386 Hybrid
The Peterbilt Model 386 Hybrid will save an estimated $9,000 USD per year in fuel costs

We have hybrid cars, SUVs, pickups and school buses, so it makes sense that hybrid technology would start filtering into other areas of the automotive segment. Wal-Mart understands the benefits of hybrid technology and is adding a hybrid-diesel Class 8 truck to its stable of transport vehicles.

"The implementation of Hybrid trucks is an encouraging step towards environmental sustainability and the reduction of emissions throughout the industry," said The Pete Store President John Arscott. "Wal-Mart is proving to be a leader in this arena, and The Pete Store is pleased to play a part in such a landmark event within the transportation industry."

A single Peterbilt Model 386 Hybrid will join Wal-Mart's fleet of 230 existing diesel Peterbilts. The Model 306 Hybrid uses an Eaton Hybrid Power System. The hybrid system takes full advantage of regenerative braking and used a motor/generator to complement the existing diesel engine for improved performance. Also, under certain circumstances, the rig can travel solely on battery power. In addition; heating, air conditioning and the rig's electrical system can also be powered solely by batteries.

The Eaton Hybrid Power system is said to improve driving efficiency by five to seven percent -- an estimated $9,000 USD will be saved annually in fuel costs.

Wal-Mart will add more of the vehicles to its fleet in an effort to improve its overall fuel efficiency. "Wal-Mart is careful to consider the civic and environmental impact its operations have in the communities it serves around the world. We are continually looking for new, innovative ways to improve the fuel economy and reduce the emissions of our fleet,” said Tim Yatsko, Wal-Mart senior VP of Transportation.

“We currently operate the Peterbilt Model 386, and we anticipate that the hybrid version will help us move toward our goal to increase our fleet efficiency by 25 percent over the next few years."

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Rolling Back Emissions!
By UppityMatt on 5/22/2007 10:10:36 AM , Rating: 2
Cant say i really like Wal-Marts business practices in general, but its nice to see a company moving their transportation fleet to Hybrids.




RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By hlper on 5/22/2007 10:36:32 AM , Rating: 5
Yes, but they are only adding one to their fleet.

Warning, rant imminent. Because they are so concerned that people will see them as the heartless corporation they are, they constantly strive to bring us these sound bites to give us a warm fuzzy feeling about their practices. This is why Walmart donates something like $300 million to charity each year, but the families of the Walmart clan have over $100 billion in assets. And, they can't even provide health insurance.

I really am sorry for the rant, but I think consumers need to hold Walmart more accountable, and ignore the publicity stunts. I for one, have not shopped at Walmart in more than 10 years and I encourage everyone to do the same.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Lonyo on 5/22/2007 10:43:33 AM , Rating: 5
Better to add one than scrap their existing fleet of 230 rigs and instead get 230 new hybrid rigs, which would be much more harmful to the environment.

Why replace everything when most of the stuff is still working? Seems like buying 1 now and testing it, then adding more when they need them is a better plan than buying loads now and then having trucks which are unused.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By therealnickdanger on 5/22/2007 10:51:22 AM , Rating: 3
Agreed. Also, Wal-Mart claims that this truck will save $9,000 in fuel costs, but how much more does this Peterbilt (not Peterbuilt, BTW) tractor cost than a diesel model? I'm going to guess that it costs a hell of a lot more than $9,000.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Screwballl on 5/22/2007 11:29:46 AM , Rating: 2
So for example a regular diesel truck would cost the company $60K whereas the hybrid cost them $100K... so much for $9K savings... that would mean 4 years of the savings go towards the truck as is but as many truck drivers know, maintenance for these trucks go up exponentially at around the 5 year mark for long haul rigs. Plus as this is hybrid instead of standard diesel, you can figure repairs and maintenance will cost 4-8 times as much....
So much for $$ savings....
Now the environment? The pollution is still being spewed in the air 99% of the time, especially under load. If they have managed to add any usable power then I may have to sign up for alteration of my big block Chevy 454 work truck.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Soviet Robot on 5/22/2007 4:03:06 PM , Rating: 5
$60k for a rig? Yeah right, a 20 year old used one maybe.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By judasmachine on 5/23/2007 2:22:55 AM , Rating: 2
walmart has the money to spend a 'few' thousand dollars more a rig, especially for the good press it will get them. i agree that they should only buy one, test it, then add as needed. However I think the environment is worth a few extra bucks. Good going wally world. (that's something i don't say too often.)


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By PrinceGaz on 5/24/2007 5:05:09 AM , Rating: 2
From the article
quote:
an estimated $9,000 USD will be saved annually in fuel costs

So they'll save a lot more than $9,000 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle, unless the vehicle only lasts for one year (which I very much doubt).


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By hlper on 5/22/2007 11:47:37 AM , Rating: 2
Your point is well taken, it would be a waste to scrap an entire fleet. However, I still the addition of one truck as a publicity stunt like so many other Walmart ploys, but maybe time will prove this skeptic wrong.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Oregonian2 on 5/22/2007 3:33:44 PM , Rating: 2
Did Walmart file a press release about this or did they just take delivery and the truck industry just reported it (which is what the link'ed report looks like)?

Can't Walmart do anything without being a publicity stunt? Maybe they should only do things that look bad to the press in order to avoid such thoughts about them! Heavens, doing something that looks "good", what horrible thing can Walmart do next?


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Martin Blank on 5/22/2007 12:00:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Better to add one than scrap their existing fleet of 230 rigs and instead get 230 new hybrid rigs, which would be much more harmful to the environment.

That's a little melodramatic, don't you think? They wouldn't scrap the existing fleet. Look around at the semis on the road, and you'll see that they do last a while, and there's a lucrative market in used semi tractors. WalMart would sell the existing fleet to someone else, who would happily repaint them and hook them to different trailers.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 12:48:49 PM , Rating: 2
> " and there's a lucrative market in used semi tractors"

If they sell that semi to someone else, its still on the road burning fuel. Total savings = 0. Less than zero actually, as Wal-Mart would buy a new hybrid to replace it, so there'd actually be more rigs on the road as a result. And if the buyer retired one of their own rigs after the purchase, then you're right back to scrapping a rig, as if Wal-Mart had done it directly.

Wal-Mart is doing the right thing. Replacing the entire fleet for a miniscule fuel savings would be far worse for then environment than what they're doing.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By rudy on 5/22/2007 2:41:42 PM , Rating: 2
What if they replaced their even older even less efficient trucks with newer but not hybrid walmart trucks?


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 2:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
Same principle. If you're only seeing a 5% efficiency increase, then it doesn't make sense to trash the vehicle unless its already close to the end of its service life.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By rudy on 5/23/2007 1:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
The point is adding new trucks does not mean there will be more trucks on the road their can be a chain reaction. I buy a 2007 prius and sell you my 2000 taurus, you sell your 1994 bonneville to a guy who scraps his 1988 olds 88 at the junk yard. A very old less efficient car ended its life everyone got used car money to supplement the purchase of their newer car and things "progressed". There are many times given the depreciation of new products it is better to replace and fetch a higher used pricetag then to bother with servicing an aging vehicle. This is especially true of large companies.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By FITCamaro on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 12:50:25 PM , Rating: 4
where do people get this crap? Employee donations are not counted in Wal-Mart's corporate donation total. And no employee is ever "required" to make a donation to get benefits.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By imaheadcase on 5/22/2007 1:01:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
where do people get this crap? Employee donations are not counted in Wal-Mart's corporate donation total. And no employee is ever "required" to make a donation to get benefits.


They type walmart in google and take everything as fact from "joe retards walmart site" . rofl.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 3:03:38 PM , Rating: 1
Actually I get it from my mom who is a regional pharmacy manager with Walmart.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By imaheadcase on 5/22/2007 12:57:53 PM , Rating: 3
I work at walmart, so many LIES in these thread I'm not even going to start to correct them.

I will correct the ONE lie that is here, WALMART DOES PROVIDE INSURANCE. They offer THREE types on insurance for that matter.

They also Pay very well if its not your first job, they pay ABOVE min wage if it is your first job, they offer tons of benefits (I saved $142 off a HDTV I bought, I still can't find it cheaper online), good investments, profit sharing, paid breaks, HOUR long lunches, take your job with you if you move, etc.

Call me crazy but that sounds pretty good for someone just looking for a basic job.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By hubajube on 5/22/2007 1:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Call me crazy but that sounds pretty good for someone just looking for a basic job.
Haven't you heard? Walmart is the new Nazi Germany.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 3:11:43 PM , Rating: 1
What you forget to mention is that it takes a year to get full health benefits, 6 months to get half benefits, a year before you get vacation time, overpriced insurance compared to other corporations, bonuses only once every two years, and a complete ineptitude when it comes to designing software. Their testing process is "Here's the new version.....oh it doesn't work? It did on my machine. We'll fix it in a week..."

The lady who wrote all of Walmart's software was only making about as much as I do($57.5K) when she was offered another job making a significantly more. Did Walmart even try to keep her since she designed all their software and knew how it worked? No.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 4:27:18 PM , Rating: 5
> "it takes a year to get full health benefits, 6 months to get half benefits, a year before you get vacation time.."

That's pretty much industry standard for such jobs. And having to wait a year for benefits to kick in is a far cry from your earlier nonsense about "having to donate to charity to get benefits".

> "The lady who wrote all of Walmart's software was only making about as much as I do..."

Rofl, like one person "wrote all of Walmart's software". Can't you be accurate on at least one thing?

> "...and a complete ineptitude when it comes to designing software. "

Maybe thats why they fired the lady you mentioned above, eh? Corporations don't design software...the people who WORK for those corporations do.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By FITCamaro on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Hoser McMoose on 5/22/2007 5:33:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I didn't say all benefits. I said certain benefits. Such as a dress down day on Friday. You shouldn't have to give money for something like that.

I don't know about the specifics, but that isn't entirely abnormal, many companies have little incentives like this for donating. In my last company we had a similar deal where employees donated to breast cancer research and were allowed to wear jeans for the day. Another let them get a free hamburger lunch of they brought in a can of food for the Food Bank.

Nothing particularly wrong with either of these are they were fully optional and it's not like we were really missing out if we DIDN'T participate. Ok, maybe I wouldn't have been allowed to wear jeans one extra day of the month, it's hardly going to kill me!

There are some valid complaints against Walmart, but this isn't one of them.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By mezman on 5/23/2007 3:34:11 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
But the team on their POS systems is very small according to my mom who has to bitch at them on a monthly basis for breaking shit because they don't test anything.


Well, who are we to not take Joe Forumposter's statements about what his mom says at face value?

I once met a guy at a bar who said he was the nephew of the head of a consulting company that had one of Walmart's suppliers as a client and he said that Walmart is cool and your mom sucks.

Now who are we to believe??


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By dever on 5/22/2007 4:46:06 PM , Rating: 2
FITCamaro, your rants about the corporation's business practices being inherently evil, smack of a lust for communism.

But when you switch to saying that the biggest, and one of the most profitable, companies in the world is inept in it's business practices, it smacks of utter foolishness.

When a corporation has over a million employees there will be plenty of anecdotes about dumb decisions. It's statistically impossible for all of its employees to make good decisions all of the time when you're that big.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By FITCamaro on 5/22/07, Rating: 0
RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By SmokeRngs on 5/22/2007 6:18:12 PM , Rating: 2
Let's see. Walmart is the biggest employer in the United States (and pays higher than minimum wage) outside of government. Yeah, that hurts the economy.

Why would you care if a Walmart store opened in an area and then went out of business because it didn't have enough customers? From the way you speak about Walmart, I'd think you would be jumping for joy since it means they lost money and there are not fewer jobs in the area.

If Walmart is so terrible for everyone in the world, then how are they popular, profitable and have a huge customer base? Walmart is around because people like it and they buy things from there. If no one in an area wanted Walmart in their area, they wouldn't have one. You can't keep a store open that doesn't sell anything.

I don't want to hear about all the poor mom and pop shops going out of business. If they can't compete, that's too bad for them. They don't have to compete on price alone. There are such things as service and product selection.

There was a local grocery store I shopped at for a long time. The prices were higher on almost everything compared to the Walmart SuperCenter in town and yet I continued to shop there for my groceries. It was closer, more convenient and the employees were generally nicer. It also helped that I used to work at the place. However, they closed the store because a newer "Super" version of it opened up a couple of miles away. It was larger, had more selection and they would actually have sales and/or lower prices that the older store didn't have. I refuse to do my shopping there because I can't stand the employees (both stores were open at the same time for about 7 years or so). So, they lost my business as the cheaper prices at Walmart were a much better incentive for many of my groceries.

Walmart cannot survive in an area that does not want it. It's as simple as that. If people choose the lower prices of Walmart over the other stores in the area, that tells me the other stores were not doing what they could to keep their customers. In a case like that, it sounds like the people didn't have a choice; they were just stuck with the local stores. Walmart then gave them a choice.

Walmart is by no means perfect. There are many products they carry I will not touch. In some cases, the product is made too cheaply for me to consider and I will buy a higher quality version of the product at a higher price elsewhere. I refuse to buy any beef from Walmart. It's pure garbage compared to what I'm accustomed to (as I was raised on cow that I could have gone and fed as it grew up before it became my hamburger and steak) and not very good compared to most grocery stores in town.

Personally, I don't think you're naive. Your statements imply blindness or forced ignorance.


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Oregonian2 on 5/22/2007 3:36:05 PM , Rating: 2
Your strategy is to try and lower their revenues as much as possible so that when they're losing sufficient money, they'll decide to increase their costs in response?

P.S. - I don't shop there either, but it's just that they mostly sell cheap junk cheap. I like quality stuff cheap (like Costco, for instance). :-0


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By iNGEN on 5/23/2007 3:23:22 PM , Rating: 2
I find it difficult to qualify, but does anyone else get the feeling the "greatness" of Walmart died with Sam Walton? Seems Walmart is just left with "bigness".


RE: Rolling Back Emissions!
By Hoser McMoose on 5/22/2007 6:11:22 PM , Rating: 2
There are a few things that Walmart does for which they can really be commended, and one of them is some aims at reducing the environmental impact of their stores (at least in some slightly superficial ways).

The biggest thing that they do to help out is geothermal heating and cooling systems. Most new Walmart locations, at least in this neck of the woods (Canada) use large geothermal setups underneath their parking lots to provide heating and cooling. Given the HUGE size of their stores this is a significant energy savings.

They are also one of North America's largest purchases of non-polluting electricity for their stores. In BC and Ontario they have signed deals to purchase electricity exclusively from non-polluting (most run-of-the-river hydro and wind power) sources for several of their stores.

Now, mind you, this doesn't necessarily make up for the fact that they have ENORMOUS stores with gigantic parking lots, or that they use tons of electricity for lighting even when the store is closed. Nor does it touch on the fact that damn near everything they sell is shipped halfway around the earth before it reaches our stores (though that is not a rarity for most stores these days). They also sell plenty of products that either directly or indirectly have pretty negative impacts on the environment.

So in the end it's tough to call them a really "environmentally friendly" company, but at least they're making SOME efforts.


Solar Power.
By Warder45 on 5/22/2007 10:53:11 AM , Rating: 3
I wonder if you could get any useful energy by slapping solar cells on the top of the container. Charge up some batteries while waiting in X major southern city traffic?




RE: Solar Power.
By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 11:39:46 AM , Rating: 1
Actually thats a pretty damn good idea. The only problem is keeping them clean.


RE: Solar Power.
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 12:52:21 PM , Rating: 1
Its a pretty damn BAD idea. The tiny amount of energy you'd get would be more than counteracted by the additional weight of the cells themselves. You'd wind up burning more fuel than you'd save.


RE: Solar Power.
By Tsuwamono on 5/22/2007 1:40:56 PM , Rating: 2
they dont weigh that much you know.. A neighbor of mine installed them on his house and they are very light weight.. i carried one up the ladder by myself.

It was maybe 80 pounds for one the size of me


RE: Solar Power.
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 1:51:47 PM , Rating: 3
> "It was maybe 80 pounds for one the size of me "

That's just for one cell. To mount on a car or truck, you'd need several of those, plus addl. wiring, voltage converters, and a little stronger mounting solution than you need for a house. Lets say 1500 lbs total to cover the entire top of a tractor-trailer. At noon on a clear day, that system would gather more energy than its extra weight required to move around...but the rest of the time, you'd be using more fuel than you saved.


RE: Solar Power.
By Chernobyl68 on 5/22/2007 2:54:24 PM , Rating: 2
a lot of big rig "van" trailers have transluscent ceilings for interior lighting during the day. solar cell would reduce this, but I agree it might be interesting. if they were flush with the top, that's a lot of sloar cells (50'x8' approx.)


RE: Solar Power.
By Hoser McMoose on 5/22/2007 5:59:09 PM , Rating: 2
You would get some power, but probably not enough to be worthwhile.

The top of a transport truck is roughly 37m^2. In the southern US you get a total annual average of around 250W/m^2 of solar energy hitting the ground, so 9,250W worth of solar energy hitting the top of the truck. At 20% efficient solar panels that works out to 1.85kW, or about 44.4kWh/day on average (more on a sunny summer days, less on cloudy winter days, etc.). Actually probably a little bit less since they'll be moving and therefore going in and out of shade from time to time. Maybe 30-40kWh/day is a better estimate.

To a (very) rough estimate this would translate to a savings of about 3-4 gallons worth of diesel fuel per day. Actually, in reality it would probably be closer to 0 since you would have a few extra hundred pounds worth of solar panels to drag around all day. The extra weight alone would probably mostly negate any fuel savings, and any hit to aerodynamics could easily put you in the hole.


The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By TimberJon on 5/22/2007 12:29:36 PM , Rating: 4
The point here is that Wal-Mart is pushing towards or trying to pioneer, being a GREEN company. Not so much that they save fuel and that they use mostly a hybrid fleet (later). Theyre trying to put solar panels on the roofs of their stores, so that they can run lighting and other things on solely their own generated power. Of course, they will still be hooked up to the city for things like air conditioning, and emergency power services and whatever. But I bet those lights up at the top of the ceiling dont sip juice. They probably chug power. So thats an eco-friendly move. Hybrid semi fleet, and I think I read something here about them either rating the products in terms of recyclability, or the consumer doing the rating, then displaying the rating or something like that.

Its all about being green. To change negative or neutral views to positive ones. To make us not Hate walmart, but say things like.. "one must give credit where credit is due"

As for the part on annual savings... I bet the maintenance will strike their budget a little.




RE: The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By hubajube on 5/22/2007 1:46:02 PM , Rating: 1
If the point is not gas or money savings, what's the point? Just "being green"? WTF does that mean? Oh yeah! Save the planet!!! We're killing it everyday exponentially! We'll wake up one morning and everything will be destroyed! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!


RE: The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 2:01:52 PM , Rating: 1
> "what's the point? Just "being green"? "

Yep. Its the new religion. Science doesn't matter, nor does real results. Just as long as you subscribe to the faith that humans are evil, and we should feel guilty for our success.


RE: The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By TheGreek on 5/22/2007 4:54:10 PM , Rating: 1
Why don't you ask a kid with asthma if he agrees with your definition of of success?

It's not that humans are evil, it's that they are oblivious, like you, and arrogant about it as well.


RE: The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By TheGreek on 5/23/07, Rating: 0
RE: The point is not GAS savings or MONEY savings
By porkpie on 5/23/2007 11:43:25 AM , Rating: 2
> "Asthma rates are on the rise everywhere."

But not because of air quality, which has improved every year for the past 30. In any case, asthma isn't even caused by air pollution. Extremely high smog levels can trigger an attack, but it doesn't cause the disease itself. So your point is...pointless.

Trying to claim today's environmental movement is all about better air for little Johnnie is totally off base. It's a religion, which worships "mother earth" in its wild, state, and believes that anything man does is unnatural and harmful.


By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 4:17:44 PM , Rating: 2
"Extremely high smog levels can trigger an attack, but it doesn't cause the disease itself. So your point is...pointless."

I doubt it would be pointless to a kid that has fewer attacks because of cleaner air. Get the point? Or will you dance around it some more?


Spelling correction...
By Cerberus81 on 5/22/2007 11:24:04 AM , Rating: 6
The company is actually "Peterbilt", not "Peterbuilt".

http://www.peterbilt.com/




Seems like a stunt
By Comdrpopnfresh on 5/22/2007 1:23:02 PM , Rating: 2
Hybrids are only good for improved city performance. Delivery trucks spend majority of their time on the highway. The only way this may be useful is for idling. Most trucks that have to carry temperature sensitive goods must run continuous while stopped at rests and truck stops.
The article did mention that the hybrid system was a true hybrid (prius and others are not technically hybrids, but energy recovery- the definition of a hybrid is two things working together, which it seems this trucks powertrain achieves).




RE: Seems like a stunt
By Spyvie on 5/22/2007 1:46:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Hybrids are only good for improved city performance. Delivery trucks spend majority of their time on the highway.


My thoughts exactly


RE: Seems like a stunt
By namechamps on 5/22/2007 8:52:20 PM , Rating: 2
Hybrids do gain some benefits on Highway also just not as much as city driving. Highlander Limited gets 19/24 the Highlander Hybrid gets 32/27. That being said I think replacing all the buses in the US will result in a greater net benefit then all big rigs.


gimmick
By Shadowmaster625 on 5/22/2007 10:58:45 AM , Rating: 2
The trouble with gimmicks like these is that they don't add up to any real savings. Good PR yes, but efficient? No. The production costs of the hybrid systems might save $9000 in fuel costs, but one must subtract the actual cost of the new equipment, in terms of petro-dollars. (The dollar that's saved on the road is often a dollar that is spent running some machine somewhere to produce the product that saves you the dollar on the road...) No doubt there will still be a cost savings, but it will not be $9000. I'd guess that after 5 years they will see that the real costs savings, after adding in maintenance, will not meet expectations. and that is unfortunate, because if they committed more than just one vehicle to this they might be able to get a better sampling of how well this strategy might actually work for them. But just one vehicle? For such a large company? It's a joke. It's better they do nothing than to do this.




RE: gimmick
By theapparition on 5/22/2007 1:46:34 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with your points. The point is that there are ongoing costs, and initial costs. Somepoint, the Return-on-Investment (ROI) becomes positive. My guess (just a guess) is about 4-5years, which is acceptable on capital equipment. Rest assured one thing, it must be profitable in the long term, otherwise Wal-Mart wouln't be doing it.

The biggest point I'd like to make, though, is that they want a 25% reduction of fuel costs, yet each one of these only reduces fuel costs by 5-7% per rig. That is, if they replace all of them, they will only cumulatively save 5-7%. Where is the other 18-20% coming from?


Good job Walmart!
By kelmerp on 5/22/2007 10:24:15 AM , Rating: 3
I usually don't have anything good to say about Walmart. I tend to find the stores somewhat depressing, but you have to give credit where credit is due, and this is definately a move in the positive direction.




Good news...
By Zeatrix on 5/22/2007 10:34:47 AM , Rating: 3
... despite this might only be Wal-Mart trying to save money long term. It's a win-win none the less.




Dude, where is the matrix?
By jarman on 5/22/2007 10:24:57 AM , Rating: 2
After seeing Prime's picture in the upper left corner, I assumed that the new trucks were being powered off of the matrix fuel cell. What a let down! If it could destroy Unicron, I'd bet you'd get 10,000,000,000,000 miles out of that thing!




Batteries pose environmental hazard
By SpatulaCity on 5/22/2007 10:44:34 AM , Rating: 1
I know Hybrids are supposed to be our savior and all when it comes to reducing pollution, but does anyone else think that the production and eventual disposal of these massive batteries is helping the planet any more than than the reduction in air pollution?




By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 11:38:39 AM , Rating: 1
I'm glad someone agrees with me.


Peterbuilt Model 386
By ADDAvenger on 5/22/2007 11:04:40 AM , Rating: 2
This is just early technology, just you wait until we have some 486's!

On a more serious note, I know electric's main strength is high torque, hopefully this will mean semis won't be so ridiculously slow to accellerate, though I really have no idea how effective it is since semis are already made for torque anyway.




By Chaca on 5/22/2007 2:17:56 PM , Rating: 2
They should have used a technology that has been successfully used on locomotives, submarines, ships, etc. for more than 70 years -- diesel-electric. It is more reliable, eliminates the need for a transmission, eliminates much of the noise associated with high-revving and is powered directly by electric traction motors which have more torque and can be used more efficiently for regenerative braking. I am disappointed in Peterbilt. I hope Sterling does it right the first time.




Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By Beenthere on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By michal1980 on 5/22/2007 10:27:09 AM , Rating: 4
its nice to know you have new material... rich getting richer, poor getting poor.

does that ever change?

america is about makeing a buck, you want them to go broke or something?

Do you make money? if so, why so much? maybe you can have less?

Walmart is the top shark of the retail world, saving americans money. working at walmart should not be a goal people have in genral. Being a checkout person should not allow you to support a family.

and if the costs of doing business is cheaper else where then in america, then why would a company do work here? seems dumb to me.

Analogy: If I pay 400 bucks for internet service from company A, but can go to company D and pay 20 bucks getting the same thing, why would I not want to save 380 bucks?

same goes for walmart, if shirt a made in usa costs them 10 bucks, but shirt b made in china costs a dollar, which would you Buy?


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By Zeatrix on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
By darkpaw on 5/22/2007 11:08:09 AM , Rating: 5
Heh, that $100 shirt is likely made in the same sweat shop next to my $15 one.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 11:24:33 AM , Rating: 2
Then you're an idiot who cares way too much about what other people think of you.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By themadmilkman on 5/22/2007 11:38:38 AM , Rating: 5
You're an idiot who has never tried on expensive clothing.

See? Anyone can make gross generalizations that demean another person.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By FITCamaro on 5/22/2007 11:55:28 AM , Rating: 1
I have. And then I look at a shirt for $30-40 that's just as comfortable and looks just as nice but doesn't have an expensive sounding name on it.

Explain to me how Tommy Hilfiger (or however its spelled) jeans are any better than Levi's?

No. I'm not into fashion. I buy nice clothes that are comfortable and I think look good on me. If people want to judge me because I'm wearing a $30 shirt instead of a $100, fine. I come from a lower middle class family that struggled to get by. I really don't give a shit about spending $1000s of dollars on clothes just to please others. I went to private school with plenty of pricks like that.

I don't shop at Walmart or any other store like them for clothes. But I don't shop at Ambercrombie & Rich either. JC Penny, Dillards, and a few other places are fine.

The only clothes I'll even think about spending a lot of money on are those I wear to an interview.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 12:54:55 PM , Rating: 4
> "Explain to me how Tommy Hilfiger (or however its spelled) jeans are any better than Levi's?"

Explain to me how Levis are any better than $10 no-name brands? Anyone buying any clothes other than basic grey overalls is fashion-conscious. You're just as bad as everyone else, you just draw the line at a different point.


By Ardan on 5/22/2007 1:26:59 PM , Rating: 2
Good point :)


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By hubajube on 5/22/2007 1:41:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Explain to me how Levis are any better than $10 no-name brands?
There's a quite a bit of difference between the two. And I've put in a few years of wearing the super cheap shit and you get what you pay for in that case. I only wore cheap ass shit at one time (K-mart, Walmart, etc.) and it doesn't last as long nor is it as comfortable as more expensive, better produced clothing. Especially shoes. Good God there's a ton of difference between $10 Walmart shoes and Timberland's! The materials are better, the fit is better, they last MUCH longer and are WAY more comfortable. Some expensive brands are not much different but others are on a different planet.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 1:58:46 PM , Rating: 2
> "God there's a ton of difference between $10 Walmart shoes and Timberland's! "

Timberlands are expensive because they're made well, from quality materials, not because they're a fashion brand. On the other hand, my wife has bought $300 pairs of shoes that started to fall apart after two or three wearings, whereas I still have a pair of cheap shoes I bought over ten years ago.

Its even worse for clothing than shoes. My wife once bought an evening gown for $3000. It was almost the cheapest one in that store, where prices went up to $20K. Do those gowns "fit better and last longer" than a $20 pair of denim coveralls"? Not on your life.


By hubajube on 5/22/2007 2:44:44 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Timberlands are expensive because they're made well, from quality materials, not because they're a fashion brand.
Actually they ARE a fashion brand and them being more expensive because of the better materials was my point. It was inferred by another poster that more expensive clothing is basically a waste of money because the pricier clothing is no different than Walmart shit. My point is that's not entirely true. Quality costs money and you're going to pay more for better clothing. I used to wear Dockers pants to work but had to replace them every 6 months because of extreme fading and fraying of the pants legs. I switched to Timberland and I can go 1.5 to 2 years before I need another pair.


By CrystalBay on 5/22/2007 3:51:00 PM , Rating: 1
Tommy Bahama FTW...


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By rippleyaliens on 5/22/2007 10:53:17 AM , Rating: 1
Well to answer some of your thoughts..
Here is the blatent truth.. The US is headed downhill rapidly.
I understand the prospect, of cheaper made in china syndrone. BUT.. Walmarts, Fords, GM's, etc.. Are comming to a fact that will hit harder than life..
Rich people dont shop at walmarts, drive Fords, GM's and such.
Walmart is visited by poor people at a 95% ratio to rich. IE, in this country 5% of the population HAve more money than combined 95% of the rest of the country.
Sure you can get something made cheaper overseas, but soon, it will come to a point, that the people in this country cannot afford to even go to walmart. It may not effect you directly, but it soon will.
Walmart cant give health insurance, yet the family name has >100 BILLION dollars? When you send low pay jobs overseas, that takes away from the economy. IE the people in this country, cannot even buy from the stores they work at. and that is a bad thing.

If you look back, just 10 years ago, Gas cost less than $1.
a new car could be purchased for under 10k and the cost ofc a nice house was well under 100k. $50,000 a year, was BIG money then,,
Now we fast forward to today, in which gas cost >3.5 a gallon, a Cheap house in the Ghetto, is hitting $200-300k ( i live in detroit, as i knowww).. and 50k barely is survivable..
Walmart is a huge scam, as well as the mejers, and the costco's..
It is a good deal in a way, but at the expense of squeezing every other company out.. IN DETROIT, seriously, there are no grocery stores within the city limits.. and Detroit is a pretty sizable city. Walmarts, and the mejers..
Yah, it is cut throat, but they are cutting out a ton of people just to make a few bucks. AND
The mentality of the managers at said walmarts are even worse. THey treat employees like it is a Privilage to work at wallyworld.. HUHH???

So as it sits, with your mentality, that it is ok for companies to off shore production. Well look at the car industry.. Going down the tiolet.. Tech industry, going to india and china? What industries do you think are left? Walmart survives by the poor people in this country.. not by the rich people. Soon, when the recession hits, it will be a eye opener for the walmarts of the world.. And you my friend, whether you like it or not, will be effected as well..


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 11:14:57 AM , Rating: 3
> "When you send low pay jobs overseas, that takes away from the economy..."

No, it means your workforce remains primarily in high-paying jobs...which is GOOD for the economy and the country. I don't want millions of Americans working in sweatshops making t-shirts. I want them working in jobs which require a little more training and education.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By FITCamaro on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By xuimod on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 9:35:10 AM , Rating: 2
I see delusions of adequacy.


By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 5:04:30 PM , Rating: 2
But high paying jobs are also leaving the country and in bigger numbers.


By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 5:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Here is the blatent truth.. The US is headed downhill rapidly.


Unfortunately I can't buy American many times because already there is no American. There are zero American parts in my pc, not even the instructions or the boxes. On many TVs it's impossible to find out where it's made, even when you email the company. Frankly people don't want to know where their Maytag washer is made, or any other brand. Of course the only people who think outsourcing works are the managers that fired everybody else. Porkpie thinks we could all end up being managers for all the corporations of the world. Like the world really needs that many managers. H1-B Hillary thinks like that as well. I say we outsource politicians and CEOs, then see what the current group says about the matter.

Of course for people to get further in life than a cash register at WalMart they have to have the inspiration or desire to do so. Now if you live in an economic climate that has you convinced you're going nowhere then that's probably where you will end up. And what created that climate? The thousands of people who lose their jobs daily regardless of their level of education?


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By rnnh on 5/22/2007 11:08:49 AM , Rating: 2
"Walmart is the top shark of the retail world"

Walmart is the top of US retail. It has failed in most other markets.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By FITCamaro on 5/22/07, Rating: -1
By jtesoro on 5/22/2007 12:18:50 PM , Rating: 3
Walmart the joke of the retail world? They're #1 in the Fortune 500. "Pathetic" profit margin of 5%? Whatever. They got $11B in profits.

Good joke.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By Ardan on 5/22/2007 1:49:40 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you completely! I will never shop at walmart for many reasons, some of which was listed by other posters. I am also happy to say that in my corner of the world, Wal-Mart has been constantly trying to build in the city but twice now they've been denied :D. They aren't going to try again, either. Definitely don't need that cancer in our neighborhood, and the feeling was shared by others in the city at public meetings on the matter, though I think the city never really would've wanted that store anyways.

I also hate it when people ignore facts about wal-mart that you can lookup and see. I mean, sure, they have health insurance but individuals have a $1000 deductible to meet and less than half the workers can get that insurance. We have some wal-mart customers at the pharmacy I work for and they always get nailed with hidden charges, some having copays that didn't appear to go towards the deductible (we have to call the insurance company to raise hell about it each time, too). Sounds like a real winner to me :P :P.

I also don't agree with other people i've talked to in regards to their sales, too: just because they make a lot of sales doesn't mean they're a great company, just that they sell a lot. Some have justified to me things as "well, they are a Fortune 500 company" or that they have billions in sales. Doesn't mean they're a good company :). No, you people will not be changing my mind on that either so don't even try to :-).


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 2:00:38 PM , Rating: 2
> "Wal-Mart has been constantly trying to build in the city but twice now they've been denied :D."

So much for being a free country, eh? I'm flabbergasted that you're actually proud of such a thing.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By hubajube on 5/22/2007 3:29:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So much for being a free country, eh?
It's called freedom of choice. If the residents of that city don't want Walmarts they have a right to protest them or prevent them from being built.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/22/2007 4:35:59 PM , Rating: 4
> "It's called freedom of choice"

Incorrect. What if the residents of the city didn't want blacks to live there? What if they didn't want anything but red and white houses? What if they didn't want people to drive anything but pickup trucks? What you're advocating is mob rule...just because 51% of the people in a town agree to ban something doesn't make it right.

If you own land, you should be able to do with it what you wish, subject only to zoning requirements designed to ensure you don't interfere with other people's enjoyment of their property.

If the people REALLY didn't want a WalMart there, all they'd have to do is refuse to shop at it. But the reality is, a few elitists in this town (many of who probably own shops which would be in competition with WalMart) managed to prevent everyone ELSE from exercising their own freedom of choice.

A sad day. And even sadder that you're proud of it.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By TheGreek on 5/22/2007 5:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
"Incorrect. What if the residents of the city didn't want blacks to live there? "

He didn't say anything about breaking the law, where did that come from?

"If you own land, you should be able to do with it what you wish, subject only to zoning requirements designed to ensure you don't interfere with other people's enjoyment of their property."

Which says nothing more than for land owners like your self ignorance is bliss. This is typical of how the definition of "freedom" is bent all around strictly for one's profit. You choose to view freedom as being able to disregard responsibility. Real freedom is anything but.

Look at the people who ride Harleys. They make all kinds of useless noise that lowers the quality of life for eveyone in earshot. That's your typical American attitude, use all your freedoms and the hell with what happens to the next guy.

"What you're advocating is mob rule"

I have news for you, you make not like mob rule as you call it, but smart people don't want or like the ramifications of living with selfish stupid oblibvious people either. They just don't get it, and they never will. Go find your self an island, the rest of us will work as a community.

Time to stop being a simpleton.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By porkpie on 5/23/2007 11:49:21 AM , Rating: 2
> "He didn't say anything about breaking the law, where did that come from?"

Where did your statement come from? If the country votes to allow race-baced bans, then it isn't breaking the law. It IS the law. And its still immoral.

The US was never based on democracy, e.g. mob rule. That's why we have the Bill of Rights. The rights of the majority never need protecting...they simply vote whatever they wish. But in the US, certain rights are protected (or should be) no matter how many people want to vote to take them away.

Get it now?

> "Look at the people who ride Harleys. They make all kinds of useless noise "

Not sure where "Harleys" come into a discussion on land use rights, but if you bothered to read my post, you'd see I specifically excluded cases where your use of property prevents others from the free enjoyment of their own. Noise pollution is pretty well covered in that, which makes your point...pointless.

> "Time to stop being a simpleton. "

Time to stop being a Socialist. See, I too can make meaningless ad-hominem generalizations.


By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 4:29:24 PM , Rating: 2
"Where did your statement come from? If the country votes to allow race-baced bans, then it isn't breaking the law. "

We already have federal laws that would not allow that. It doesn't get much more pointless than that.

"But in the US, certain rights are protected (or should be) no matter how many people want to vote to take them away.

Get it now?"

Yes that includes being protected for both lobbyist corporations that have laws catered to them as well as not having to put up with self absorbed simpletons who want to do whatever they want whenever they want in total disregard of any responsibility.

You will note that your definition of "not doing any harm to others" ends the moment it inconveniences you or your profit making. That's why your kind simply goes blank when science proves that your actions do in fact harm others. The only science you accept is that which bolsters your self absorbtion.

"Time to stop being a Socialist. "
Same old non-sense. According to Webster everyone that lives on a commune is a communist. Yawn. Try thinking up something instead of repeating what you read elsewhere.

"See, I too can make meaningless ad-hominem generalizations.
And you do.


RE: Thankfully this rig is NOT made in China
By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 9:58:01 AM , Rating: 2
"just because 51% of the people in a town agree to ban something doesn't make it right."

And what's that got to do with the US? Here the only laws passed are not by the mob, but by whatever company has the most money and effort to lobby the law through the system. That's corporations practicing their version of freedom, the freedom to monetary profit, and nothing else.

Oh and I am curious, when what you want is in agreement with the 51% do you still call them the mob or does that then become a "freedom"?


By TheGreek on 5/23/2007 4:32:14 PM , Rating: 2
Still waiting for the "enlightened" response.


By TheGreek on 5/24/2007 4:37:00 PM , Rating: 2
Here's what thinking people think of WalMarts "freedom"

http://www.walmartmovie.com/reviews.php