Thanks for the insight! I had suspected overhead but not realized weight savings were prioritized in the design. I suppose overhead does not make that much of a difference once development and invest for tooling is written off.
So how does the 757 compare to the A32x in weight and fuel consumption? Propably apples and oranges because of size and range differences.
Did the 767 see the same optimization for weight? AFAIR, it does not compare favorably even to early A330.
I don't recall that weight was as big a concern during the 767 development relative to the 757, although I couldn't say why that was the case. I do know that when I was working the 757 (late 1990's) we worked several changes that resulted in heavier parts but with much lower manufacturing costs. It's probably worth noting that neither the 757 or 767 were envisioned to morph into the longer range aircraft they eventually became - in the case of the 767 it went from 320,000 lbs at EIS to over 400k less than ten years later (helped considerably by the upgraded engines that came along in 1988).
It's not really fair to compare the 767 with the A330 - the A330 came along over 10 years after the 767 and hence the more direct 767 comparisons would be with the A310 and A300-600.