Extended replacement cycles for short-term capital expenditure savings often have the unintended consequence of resulting in greater long-term expenses.
A one-size-fits-all for approach getting replacement cycles right? That doesn’t exist. The good news? Fleets have options to customize the best strategy for their unique operation.
As vehicle technology continues to advance, experts suggest you build the truck that specifically benefits your organization, and revise those specs to keep up with the industry.
Big Data, tax law changes, new vehicle options, fuel prices, and more, are impacting fleets decisions about when to replace their trucks.
Extending replacements too long can result in added repair and maintenance costs but replacing a vehicle too soon can leave money on the table in terms of vehicle life.
The City of Houston’s severely aged refuse collection fleet has led to overflowing trash bins and significant technician overtime cost. The city is considering options to supplement its services.
Extending truck replacement cycling parameters beyond stated fleet policy is typically a short-term tactic used by senior management to solve a budgetary constraint; however, there are long-term fleet consequences to this strategy.
The more expensive the asset, the longer it is kept in service; however, the need for short-term cost savings prompts some fleets to even further extend cycling parameters and defer replacements.
The more expensive the asset, the longer it is kept in service; however, the need for short-term cost savings prompts some fleets to even further extend cycling parameters and defer replacements. But, what are the consequences?
The USPS could save as much as $1.9 billion by using modified, off-the-shelf mass-market vehicles and upgrading its fleet at least once in the next 20-25 years, according to a report from the organization Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE).