Why Dramis Surface Haulers Belong in the “Small‑Truck Economics” Conversation for Open‑Quarry Operations

Open‑pit and quarry haulage decisions are often framed as a binary choice: big mining trucks for scale or smaller vocational trucks for flexibility.

But the latest economic modeling suggests the real lever isn’t only truck size — it’show effectively you convert capital into productive utilization, cycle time, and cost per tonne.

A recent study by Whittle Consulting (with Pronto) compared a “conventional” mid‑size haulage fleet (≈100‑tonne class rigid trucks) with a “small vocational truck” model (≈40‑tonne payload), both with and without autonomy.

The punchline is simple:

• Autonomy increased life‑of‑mine NPV by 23% when applied to the “medium truck” (≈100t) case.
• The autonomous small‑truck case increased NPV by 31% vs. the manned medium‑truck baseline, and by 7% vs. autonomous medium trucks.
• In the modeled haul network, the study found no large difference in congestion/queuing behavior between the small and medium equipment sets (i.e., small fleets can work if orchestrated well).

Consult the full study via the link at the bottom of the article.

So where does Dramis fit in that discussion?

Dramis: A “Small‑Truck Model” That’s Not Actually Small

The study’s “small truck” reference point is a vocational 40‑tonne payload truck. The Dramis spec shows a 55‑tonne metric payload (and up to 60 tonnes for some configurations), with a 28 m³ body.

In other words, Dramis sits between the study’s two truck archetypes:

• Study “small”: vocational rigid truck, ~40t payload
• Study “medium”: heavy rigid mining truck, ~100t payload
• Dramis: surface hauler / vocational‑derived platform, 55t payload, 28 m³ body

That “middle ground” is exactly where many quarries operate best—because it can combine:

• Lower capital/maintenance logic of vocational platforms (the study calls out lower capex and maintenance as core benefits of vocational trucks)
• Meaningfully higher payload per trip than a 40‑tonne class, improving tonne‑per‑cycle economics.

Why the Study’s Findings Make Dramis a Serious Contender

The Whittle/Pronto study identifies three practical drivers behind the outperformance of smaller vocational fleets (especially when automated):

1) Cycle time is a bigger lever than people think

The study explicitly attributes shorter cycle times in small‑truck cases to higher haul speeds (especially uphill loaded). Even in manned mode, they modeled a meaningful loaded‑uphill speed advantage: 15 km/h vs. 11 km/h for medium trucks.

Dramis is designed for speed and traction in harsh terrain, with an indicated maximum speed of 70 km/h loaded and 80 km/h empty (spec sheet). Now, max speed isn’t the same as “average haul speed” in a quarry—grade, rolling resistance, curves, and speed limits matter—but it does signal that Dramis is engineered to sustain higher road speeds than traditional mining trucks in many quarry applications.

What this means for a quarry manager: If your operation is cycle‑time‑constrained (distance, grade, traffic control, dump/spot delays), then a truck with better speed/traction characteristics can often unlock more tonnes moved without scaling fleet size dramatically.

2) Cost per tonne is an outcome of utilization + labor + fleet sizing

The study’s economic conclusions are clear:

• Manned small trucks lost value versus manned medium trucks mainly due to higher headcount requirements (more trucks + more operators).
• Autonomy “fixes” that by cutting headcount close to the medium baseline, allowing the small‑truck model’s capex + maintenance + speed advantages to show through.

Dramis’ specifications positions the truck as “more productive, more economical” with a focus on “cost per tonne,” and reports average fuel consumption of 15–20 L/hour over >10,000 operating hours at ~60‑tonne loading.

This is directionally aligned with the study’s argument that operating cost structure(fuel/maintenance/capex) is where vocational‑style trucks compete.

3) The “congestion penalty” for more trucks is not always real

A common objection to “smaller truck fleets” is congestion—more units, more interactions, more queueing. The study specifically tested this and found that in their modeled pit/road network, congestion and queuing differences were not significant, and the small‑equipment cases even showed lower wait fractions, primarily due to faster haul speeds.

For many quarries with:

• shorter haul roads,
• limited loading points,
• and tightly managed dump locations.

This is an important validation: fleet size increases don’t automatically ruin productivity—especially if the trucks are quick and the system is orchestrated.

Where Dramis Fits in the Study’s “Parameter Space”…

Think of the study as mapping two axes:

Truck size class

• vocational 40t payload (“small”)
• rigid 100t payload (“medium”)

Control system

• manned
• autonomous

Dramis slots into the “small vocational” philosophy (mass‑market/vocational DNA, faster haul potential, scalability), but with a higher payload (55t and up to 60t in some applications) than the 40t benchmark.

That means Dramis could be viewed as:

→ A “swarm‑economics” truck with a larger bite per cycle—reducing the number of units needed for a target tonnage, while still capturing the vocational truck advantages highlighted in the Whittle/Pronto study.

A Practical Quarry Lens: “Tonnes per Hour per Truck”

To translate this into something operators can use, apply a simple yardstick:

• Tonnes/hour per truck = Payload (t) x Cycles/hour
• Cycles/hour depends on: haul distance, grade, average speeds (loaded/empty), dump/spot times, loading time, and queuning.

• Study small truck payload: 40t
• Dramis payload: 55t

Even if Dramis ran the same cycles/hour as the 40t case (big “if”), the payload uplift alone implies:

• 55t/40t = 1.375 → 37.5% more tonnes per cycle

That’s why Dramis belongs in the same discussion: it’s aligned with the small‑truck model, but can reduce “swarm size” for the same moved tonnage.

(Important: real performance requires your site haul profile—distance/grade/speeds/loading/dumping—to compute actual cycles/hour.)

Best‑Fit Use Cases in Open‑Quarry Operations

Based on the study’s logic (cycle time + utilization + cost structure) and Dramis’ specs, Dramis surface haulers are most compelling when:

• Haul distances are short‑to‑moderate and cycle time dominates unit cost.
• You want high payload without committing to ultra‑class mining trucks, especially where procurement or maintenance ecosystems favor vocational components. (Study notes small vocational trucks can have lower capex/maintenance structure.)
• You run multiple faces or variable production, and you value fleet scalability (the study highlights fleet scalability and shorter lead times as a qualitative advantage of small vocational trucks).
• You’re exploring automation now or later—because the study is explicit that autonomy is the unlock for small‑truck economics in high‑labor‑cost environments.

The “Worth Considering” Argument

The Whittle/Pronto study shows that autonomy + smaller vocational trucks can materially increase mine value, with a modeled 31% NPV uplift versus a conventional manned medium‑truck fleet.

Dramis sits in the same operating philosophy as the “small vocational” case, but at 55 tonnes payload and with design cues aimed at high speed, traction, and cost per tonne performance.

If your quarry strategy is to maximize material moved per dollar—especially under labor constraints—Dramis surface haulers deserve a hard look as a bridge between vocational flexibility and higher‑payload economics.

*https://pronto.ai/pronto-and-whittle-consulting-unveil-landmark-study/