Freightliner M916A1 small fuel tank - why? (still present in 8.0)

I was convinced it had a 200L fuel tank because you had to stick to the real truck's specs since it's a licensed truck, but I looked it up and the real truck actualy has a 100 gallon (378L) fuel tank. So...why did it get such a small tank in the game?

While ANK MK38 and Azov 5319 also have a 200L fuel tanks, in their case it acts as a tradeoff for their exceptional offroad performance - I suspect. Meanwhile M916A1 trades fuel capacity for what? The only thing that puts it slightly above average is the Always On diff-lock, but then again we have trucks like Tayga whitch not only have that, but also Always On AWD and 51' TMHS mud tires, yet it has a 330L fuel tank.
Lack of clear advantages is one thing, but it also has quite a few handicaps such as

  • Very limited frame addons choice. It can only use low saddle, high saddle and 3.7 loading crane. Also, unlike most trucks in Offroad class it can't have a crane and a saddle installed at the same time.

  • It can't use Stepdeck Semi-Trailer because it colides with the winch box thingy behind the cab. Even Sideboard Semi-Trailer colides with the winch, but not as badly - can still turn.

  • It cant use Fuel Carrier Semi-Trailer at all.

  • Combination of high center of gravity, stiff suspension and fairly narrow track width makes it rather tippy.

  • Special Offroad gearbox - in theory this should be nice since you get Offroad gearbox straight away. However it makes you unable to use Highrange gearbox which is what most people use, since it allows you to be faster with little price to pay. Also, this truck is a Level 17 unlock so you most likely already have Offroad gearbox unlocked by that time. Esentialy all it does is, it takes away ability to chose gearbox type yourself.

  • It's the second slowest offroad truck in the game: https://i.redd.it/d2dnkwan6vc51.jpg

Honestly I think even giving it the 378L fuel tank wouldn't be an overkill, this truck really needs something to stand out and that could be it. I've spent hundreds of hours playing coop and I rarely see anyone anyone using this truck, which is a shame since it's a dope military vehicle.
You spent money to get the Freightliner license to be able to put this truck in the game and then you draw it pointless with the halved fuel tank. What gives?

last edited by Amynue

It would be great if the winch / tool box on the back of the cab had some repair points. Not a ton just some to justify its existence.

Fuel tank still very tiny in PTS 7.3

If Saber makes this change then it better be across the board. That includes ALL vehicles that were published with fuel amounts that are different then they actually got. Bend the rules for one then you must bend for all.

I'd prefer some "specialities" for the US trucks with strong winch and a unique "really long" cable. Give it a power winch noone else has. Its original is a damn tank hauler, automatic gearbox with a lot of torque for the wheels (power of engine is always converted to torque at wheels) and a really strong "stock" winch. Round about 50 Tons of pulling force. It could easily pull the truck up vertically.

And I agree, that the M916 has really few "pros" and a lot of "cons". Fuel is one of these. A really bouncy suspension, easy tip over.... and I personally still like the truck, because its not a simple one.

Edit: I think the game really doesnt need a whole bunch of "can do anything, fast, no tip over risk, traction like a tank..." like the Early game vehicles as Tayga and Voron 43/53.

You could give the US Tank hauler replicas (Derry Longhorns, M916) a really long and strong Winch "stock". For what the hell has it the big hydraulic driven drum on its frame installed? You might consider giving the US Heavy Dutys access to a wrecker addon. Crane, Winch, spare parts and a nice fuel tank. Maybe you nerf the Vorons and Taygas by restricting their fuel or increase their fuel consumption (thats ridiculous low for that power) and maybe even access to certain frame upgrades. You may think of giving some less capable trucks (or "more balanced ones") as the Step 300 or Zikz the full choice. Maybe some fun upgrades to even smaller ones like the new DLCs....

So you have never the "this one can do it all" truck, but you have always a choice and a certain "how to make it work" thinking behind it.

last edited by JTT

@CanuckRunner said in Freightliner M916A1 small fuel tank - why? (still present in 7.3):

If Saber makes this change then it better be across the board. That includes ALL vehicles that were published with fuel amounts that are different then they actually got.

I don't know if you even read anything in this thread, but it seems you didn't comprehend most of it, since the only thing you deducted from it is me saying they have to give it a 100 gallon tank to match the real truck's fuel capacity - which is absolutely not what I said.

Let me spell it out for you. In Snowrunner fuel tank capacity is used as a way of balancing vehicles, hence why it doesn't match the real specs.
The problem that we are trying to solve here is that M916A1 was given a 200L fuel tank, yet it doesn't have any advantages which would justify such harsh treatment. On top of that it also has a few distinct handicaps (listed in my first post), which make decision behind giving it a small fuel tank even more mysterious.
My suggestion was to simply buff the fuel tank capacity, since it's a "one minute fix" for them. How much they would buff it is up to them, but I think even if they gave it a 400L tank, I don't think people would abondon their Taygas and start using M916A1 instead, since it would still be inferior to Tayga in many different aspects.

I also wouldn't mind if they decided to buff the M916A1 in some other way that would justify keeping the 200L tank. Unlike you, both @smokefish17 and @JTT posted some interesting buff suggestions that are worth considering. Their suggestions would require more work to implement than a simple fuel buff, but it's up to Saber how they want to do it.

Bend the rules for one then you must bend for all.

Very cool rule, okay? How about this one:
Don't post if you have nothing valuable to contribute.

last edited by Amynue

I am perfectly capable of reading and comprehension. A buff is a change. You can label a "1-minute fix" however you want (substitute, improvement, alteration, adjustment, variation, etc.).

The problem is you complain about some aspects of the game and make suggestions that would improve your overall experience without considerations for the balance that several vehicles uniquely provide. The M916 is a very short wheel base heavy hauler. The IRL vehicle doesn't have the physical space to accommodate a crane and saddle. Due to its size it can struggle with certain types of trailers already as you mentioned. I can't agree with your assessment of how tippy or unstable the truck is because I don't drive it like a banshee off-road.

Would a increase to its fuel capacity be nice? Yes
Would that make me use the truck more? No

The main reason you don't see people using this truck isn't because of its fuel capacity, but of its steering. Perhaps you should engage with the community more and you'll learn the real quarrels players have with this truck. @smokefish17 posted another common complaint that you cant use the rear cab winch.

Bend the rules for one then you must bend for all.

Very cool rule, okay? How about this one:
Don't post if you have nothing valuable to contribute.

What a concept. As far as valuable contributions - Any complaint, comment and/or concern is a valuable contribution if it pertains to the game. So is keeping a balance.

But when it comes to fuel suggestions, yeah I'm going to rain on this parade because there are a few vehicles that don't have their advertised in-game capacity OR their fuel capacity changed post launch to further alter balance. Two examples of this are the TwinSteer and Khan Marshall. Again if you engaged the community you would see what remarks have been shared regarding those observations. Some from three months ago.

I have nothing against making improvements in the game, but if done so, then it needs to be applicable across the board to maintain the balance.

You might enjoy this vehicle mod that addresses some of your wants - https://snowrunner.mod.io/freightliner-m916a3

last edited by CanuckRunner

... as long as you are not playing on PS4/XBOX.

@CanuckRunner said in Freightliner M916A1 small fuel tank - why? (still present in 7.3):

The problem is you complain about some aspects of the game and make suggestions that would improve your overall experience without considerations for the balance that several vehicles uniquely provide.

What does M916A1 uniquely provide? Honestly I don't care if it gets buffed or not - that's up to Saber, I'm just super curious as to what was the thought process behind giving it such a smll fuel tank - hence the title.

The main reason you don't see people using this truck isn't because of its fuel capacity, but of its steering. Perhaps you should engage with the community more and you'll learn the real quarrels players have with this truck.

I'm aware of the steering bug that took them way too long to fix, considered it was just a typo in the XML file. This has been fixed in PTS 7.2, but I don't think it will make people start using this truck. I'm playing with mouse/keyboard and this bug never was much of a problem to me, I was always able to steer truck just fine. Guess we'll see when this fix goes live.

I just ralized I forgot about another handicap of this truck - Special Offroad gearbox. I'll add that to the first post...

last edited by Amynue

Honestly, I LIKE the offroad gearbox. I do not have a single truck, where I find the freeways being so good that I use that aside from "speed contest" messing around. I do switch pretty ofen my gears....

Having the choice of low and low plus to high makes your life so much more easy, the "high or die" as well as "Auto does it all" is not really mine....

last edited by JTT

@JTT Personaly I just test each truck with both gearboxes and see what works best for me. Just to give a few examples of trucks that in my opionion work better with Offroad gearbox - both Derry Longhorn trucks - they are just too weak, it's hard to get them into High gear and after that it's hard to keep them going without stalling on first obstacle. They also can't really take advantage of higher gear count since they run out of juice around 6th gear. Another example would be Zikz. Does it go fast with Highrange gearbox? Yes. Do you want it to go fast? Hell no - it's only a matter of time when you roll this thing when you try going fast. Also since it's a 4x4 truck it gets stuck a lot and those extra Low gears may help with that.
I imagine M916A1 would work well with Highrange gearbox, but that's the problem - I can only imagine, since I will never get a chance to find out...

last edited by Amynue

In my opinion the "Derry Longhorns" are a bad example. Because they are in the game stupidly weak "heavy trucks". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshkosh_M1070 and the M911...

To make things even worse - these Oshkosh originals have an automatic transmission as gearbox. Power is "torque times angular speed". Simple physics. But "full throttle" on these hydraulic gearboxes imply, that these theoretically have "infinite torque" at the wheels when starting to move. Practically its only limited by the max-pressure in the auto-gearboxes hydraulics. Compare "Manual gearboxes" - these will cook their clutch even in low gears when you need a lot of torque and the wheels refuse to move. Fuel efficiency of this setup with an auto gearbox plus Low/high Gearset is typically "pretty low", but the pulling power of these is brutally high.

Some other trucks also have this combination of a 4-5 Speed automatic gearbox plus a low and high (and reverse) range set of "manual gears".

But back to the games M916 - this is pretty nimble and has a nice top speed. Considering its trackwidth, I doubt that a higher speed makes any sense. You will just tip it even more easy.

last edited by JTT

@JTT
The gearbox in the game has only the maximum angular velocity variable and no gear ratio. This setting makes the gearbox logic extremely simple and cannot reproduce the difference between a hydraulic automatic gearbox and a general gearbox. In some other games, such as American Truck Simulator, the two types of gearboxes are very different.

And whats the physical problem?

Power is torque times angular speed. A low gear has a low angular speed at the wheels, thus a lot of torque...

I guess it's in the game only because they needed it for the cover art.

Even Derry Longhorn 4520 is faster than this thing. Nice.
https://i.redd.it/d2dnkwan6vc51.jpg

@blackjack00

So you make the "gear changes" at the motor with modifying its two variables - angular and engine torque. There must be a power term (torque at a given angular speed) implemented, otherwise the physics (different pull power at same speed) cant be solved. From the maths behind it - its not exactly a "difficult issue". Feed the current speed and gear back to the gearbox and get the "currently available torque" from it. Simple as shit. And it would stop the nonsense, that you are at a hill shifting from L+ to L- and see still no sign of a wheelspin.

last edited by JTT