Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Ok folks I started with 2006 granite with ami 370hp 13 sp fuller and 4.17 mack rears that I called the "boat anchor" when I first bought it. Hauling road construction materials, heavy equipment, and grain so loads vary from 70,000 to 85000 lbs. sluggish, no low end tourque, terrible fuel millage, and just tough to drive in the hills was a far cry from my old ch with a 400 or even my old r models with 350. So I went to work on here and learned how to make these trucks run. My first step was to take my 370 to 427, which I did in by having my local injector shop resize the injectors and then drove to local mack dealership to have it set to 427. Results...better definitely than before and was somewhat ok with how it ran so I ran it all season that way. This fall I decided to go a little further and do the conversion that macktechnician has done on here. I however started in reverse order to see what would happen. I started by leaving everything alone and putting the full 5'' exhaust system on and noticed no real difference other than it sounded a lot better with the flow threw muffler. Next I installed the etech manifold and the s 400 turbo and noticed a little bit of pick up but not much at all. also boost went from 32lbs to 30lbs when doing so. Finally I installed the injectors from mike at k and s. The truck is now a completely different truck. Low end tourque and lug is back where its supposed to be, power is awesome when you need it but the thing that I find most impressive about it is just how easy the engine has to work now obviously less pedal and less work to drive. Less shifting. As far as millage goes it definitely didn't go down any doing some of the same runs as before but that's hard to tell this time of year with winter time fuel and heavier loads. An amazing, relatively inexpensive(I figure I had $2000 in parts, I got a turbo dirt cheap) creation that anyone that knows anything about trucks can do in there own shop. Mach technician has done a great job of listing part numbers, pictures, and information on this topic. with out this a lot of us would be still unhappy campers and cussing mack every day! thanks again!
  3. kscarbel2

    Ford to run DAKAR 2019 with two 4x4 Cargo trucks

    Video - https://www.facebook.com/FordTrucksInternational/videos/ford-trucks-dakar-2019/168502653830105/
  4. logtruckman

    My new ride .

    Alot of drivers will beat the shit out of a mack and then say its junk so the boss will buy them something "cooler" . With a bigger hood
  5. kscarbel2

    CL713 steering box

    My understanding is, and it appears evident, Volvo doesn't want to supply parts for trucks over 15 years old. Are you working with Nextran?
  6. RowdyRebel

    More Suburban "fun"...

    Don't know. All I know for sure at this point is that it's an electric choke and the stumble went from a mild hiccup to a major issue after it sat for 3 or 4 weeks, and that it's less of an issue once it's up to temp. Tried running a tank with the cheaper Berryman B12 fuel system cleaner...probably should've used the more expensive Seafoam...but a few tanks of fresh gas later, it's still doing it.
  7. Braking requirements changed significantly in 2009, resulting in the major introduction of European disc brakes in the US market, as well as larger drum configurations. https://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/44/8/4 https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/fmvss/121_Stopping_Distance_FR.pdf https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/42362-air-disc-brakes-the-next-stage/?tab=comments#comment-308910
  8. kscarbel2

    "BMT Investors" Bulletin Board

    Reuters / December 18, 2018 Truck maker Navistar International Corp on Tuesday reported a 39.3 percent rise in quarterly profit, driven by robust demand for its trucks. Net income attributable to the company rose to $188 million in the fourth quarter ended Oct. 31, from $135 million a year earlier. Earnings per share rose to $1.89 from $1.36 cents per share. The results surpassed Wall Street expectations. The average estimate of six analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was for earnings of $1.68 per share. Revenue rose 28 percent to $3.32 billion from $2.6 billion. Navistar also raised its fiscal 2019 delivery forecast of Class 6-8 trucks and buses in the United States and Canada to between 395,000 units and 425,000 units, from the 385,000 units to 415,000 units range it forecast earlier. "2018 was a very strong year for the industry, and a breakout year for Navistar," said Troy Clarke, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer. "We were the only truck OEM to grow Class 8 share during the year. With the industry's newest product line-up, superior quality and a strong focus on customer uptime, we expect to gain market share in 2019 for the third year in a row."
  9. Today
  10. Phase 1

    Pictures of the Week

    Moxie truck.
  11. More HP same brake size for 60+ plus years .Bigger accidents Insurance company cutting back fleets to 65-mph ?
  12. Mack Technician

    Pictures of the Week

    It’s easy to be critical so I’m going to take it easy. Kids mouth breathing. Mouth’ers don’t taste well. You can only taste while your exhaling....humans can’t taste while inhaling. He did his best with what’s he’s got, but I’m taking the BMT interpretations as purely delicious. Gonna be on my game to make sure this precious necture doesnt freeze and blow up in my mailbox. Can’t be seen next to the highway scooping slush from the mailbox and licking my paws like a barn cat.
  13. Bullheaded

    My new ride .

    Manual or M-Drive?
  14. Bullheaded

    My new ride .

    Good to finally hear a good review of a new truck. Any emissions system issues? They are a good looking truck. Do you run stateside too? Looks like you have more than 5 axles and a tighter spread on your live bottom. Or is it just the camera angle? I guess I ain't right either because I wish I had my 2005 Cat powered International back, LOL.
  15. 41chevy

    More Suburban "fun"...

    Does the vacuum choke pull off work and is it adjusted to specs? That is a big issue with QJ's
  16. 41chevy

    Pictures of the Week

    Boys been livin in the attic too long. Moxie is supposed to be kind of flat, probably gives the same review to milk. It's pure heaven to me...
  17. 2000CL713

    CL713 steering box

    i havent called anymore else today other then mack and thats what they told me and give me those numbers. was at work all day. i guess i will call Sheppard and see what they can do for me. my only issues is i cant have the truck down. thanks again for all the help guys. really sucks the dealer offers no help for these older trucks anymore for many parts. just getting a simple exhaust part nowadays has turned into a huge ordeal since the dealer has no idea what your talking about or have people working for them that never even seen a CL and there systems dont have part numbers for this old of a truck or no longer making parts. i have both these steering boxes and rebuilt one more axle and replace my exhaust and my truck will be set. i have replaced/rebuilt/upgraded every other part i could other wise from front to back on this truck.
  18. 41chevy

    Pictures of the Week

    No return item is really necessary, consider it a good Mack award.
  19. 761 Brock

    My new ride .

    nice looking rig, Bad Dog!!
  20. Me hanging on one back a few years ago......not quite the same color,but in the neighborhood ! Your's looks GREAT! Al
  21. Jim Park, Today's Trucking / December 13, 2018 TORONTO, Ontario — Big is a relative concept when talking about truck engines. Within the span of my career in the industry, “big” has crept upward from 350 hp back in the early 1980s to 600 hp today. The first trucks I drove in the late 1970s and early 1980s were sub-300 hp models like the Mack ENDT-676 I learned on — it generated 285 hp and a dizzying 1,080 lb-ft of torque — and the “Shiny 290s” I drove at Liquid Cargo Lines. We hauled three- and four-axle tankers with those Cummins NTC 290 engines. Some of the senior drivers at the company had 350-hp engines, but other than bragging rights, there wasn’t much difference between the two. There were bigger engines around at the time, like Caterpillar’s 3408, which was actually a marine and industrial engine. Some owner-operators managed to shoehorn those V8s under their hoods and went down the road with up to 800 horsepower under foot — at little more than two or three miles per US gallon. Mack’s E9 V8 engine was also around at the time, officially cranking out up to 500 hp, but there are accounts of some of these putting 650 hp or more to the wheels … after a few adjustments. Driving back then on hilly Interstate 81 between Syracuse, N.Y., and Scranton, Penn., I spent a lot of time behind a 290 staring at the four-way flashers of other guys with their 290s and 318s. The big dogs with their 500- and 600-hp Cats and Macks would roar by out in the hammer lane, leaving us under clouds of black smoke, wishing we had a little more juice. Wishing we had a little more and actually needing a little more are two different things. It would be hard to argue than any 40-ton American load needs 600 hp. You can build a better case for Canadian trucks that weigh 55,000 kg and more. The debate over big power has been raging for years. Do big engines burn more fuel? Is 600 hp and 2,050 lb-ft more efficient or productive than 500 hp and 1850 lb-ft? Do big engines improve productivity? Are they necessary? We have asked numerous engineers these questions over the years, and the consensus seems to be that the laws of physics demand a certain amount of power to move a certain load at a certain speed. Cruising along a flat section of road at 100 km/h will require X horsepower, let’s say 200, but it’s probably less with today’s advanced aerodynamics. If you travel at 110 km/h you might need 225 horsepower. At 90 km/h, you’ll need only 175. It doesn’t matter how big the engine is, it will still produce only what’s needed to maintain the desired speed. If you increase the weight, you’ll need more power to maintain that speed. If you’re pulling a hill, you’ll need more power to keep the truck moving at that speed. At some point, after dialing in several variables, you run up against the limits of the engine’s ability to maintain road speed on a hill. That’s when the 450s and 500s start losing ground to the 600s. You only pay for the extra power when you use it. Maintaining 100 km/h on a hill with 600 hp will require more fuel than a 450 that can maintain only 80 km/h. Engine power in the real world So much for physics. In the real world, if you have the power, you’ll use it, and yes, fuel economy will suffer. On the other hand, underpowered trucks are frustrating to drive, and might even be dangerous if they impede the flow of traffic. “Try running Hwy. 138 between Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré and Sept-Isles on Quebec’s “Cote du Nord” with a B-train and a 475 engine,” observes Pierre Aubin, owner of L’Express du Midi, Delson Transport, and Transport Audet, of Ste-Catharine, Que. “You’ll be crying.” All of Aubin’s highway trucks are 600 hp and 2,050 lb-ft Cummins X15s, and he make no apologies for his choice of powertrain. “If it wasn’t working for me, I wouldn’t be doing it,” he says emphatically. “We haul heavy loads here in Quebec and you need that power. Do we need 600/2,050 in the U.S.? Of course not, but for equipment utilization, I’m not going to buy two separate fleets of trucks, one for Canada and another for the States.” Next, consider his business case. Overall, his spec’ – a Kenworth W900L with 86-inch studio sleeper, 600/2,050 X15, Eaton 18-speed manual transmission. and generally beefed up frame, crossmembers, driveline, for the heavy work — costs him about $25,000 more up front than a more “typical” spec’. But he claims that comes back two-fold on resale. “I have people calling me from all over Canada wanting to buy my used trucks,” he says. “I never have any problems getting my price because they know the trucks will last 20 years. And drivers love them, which is pretty important today.” In the same vein, Rod Olyowsky, operations manager of Regina-based heavy-hauler Cara Dawn Transport, runs a fleet of 30 heavy-haul trucks, mostly tri-drives, powered by Cummins X15 600/2,050 engines. While about half the work the company does is in the 50-ton range, the rest of it involves big loads, 100- and 150-ton loads into mine sites. For that work, big power is an absolute necessity. “We don’t even worry about weight or fuel economy,” he says. “This business is the polar opposite of the freight business. They fret about things like that, we buy the trucks we need to do a job.” Like Aubin, Cara Dawn could maintain a fleet of lighter trucks for the less-demanding jobs, but it’s hard to make that work on paper. Olyowsky says fuel costs are always a concern, so the company focuses on things they can manage, like idle reduction. “There’s no point worrying about fuel efficiency when you’re pulling 200,000 lb.,” he says. “We can attack that in other ways.” Added truck revenue Meanwhile, at Winnipeg-based Paul’s Hauling, the engine spec’ is very important for a different reason. That company hauls petroleum products in B-trains, and every liter in the tank is money in the bank. They run 13-liter Mack and Detroit engines at 505/1,850 rather than the 600/2,050 Cummins engines because of the weight savings. “We load to gross and every 100 lb. is worth so much in revenue at the end of the year,” says maintenance director Trent Siemens. “Every pound counts. We’d be giving up 400-500 lb. on every load with the bigger engines.” Over the past few years, the company has upped the ratings on its 13-liter engines, going from 485 to 505 hp on some models. Later this year they’ll take delivery of a few Peterbilts with MX13 engines at 510/1,850. That said, Pauls’ spec’ now includes 70-inch sleepers, fridges, and other amenities that drivers crave, and everyone knows how difficult it is to find drivers. “We do consult our drivers on future truck spec’s, and of course they’d love an 550 X15. But they understand the weight issues,” Siemens says. “Given a choice between the bigger sleeper and a bigger engine, they’ll take the sleeper every time.” On the owner-operator front, has anyone ever met one who didn’t want more power? That may not be a fair assessment, but sensible ones will match their equipment to the job, like former highwaySTAR of the Year Rene Robert. He recently spec’d a new Peterbilt 587 for a job hauling magnesium chloride in B-train tanks around Manitoba and Western Canada. His spec’ included a 605/2,050 X15 and an UltraShift MXP automated 18-speed. “There wasn’t much to talk about when I bought the truck. I knew I needed the 605/1,850,” he says. “I have been hauling trains for years and I know what works. I still have a 20-year-old Freightliner with a Cat C15 550 engine. It worked well for me all those years on trains and it’s still in good enough shape to keep and put a driver on. That work is hard on an engine, so you need a big block that will stay together.” He says all things being equal, the fuel economy on the truck is decent, 4.5 mpg (52.3 L/100 km) at 62,500 kg, and the truck does the job well. “I’m not sure what advantage there would be in spec’ing something smaller, even an X15 at 550/1,850. I’d always be wishing I had ordered the bigger one.” Engine Spec'ing Philosophies Thankfully, there are many different philosophies on how best to spec’ a truck and run a trucking company. Some are steeped in the full-aero fuel economy mindset, while others see trucks strictly as a means to an end and will buy whichever model and powertrain makes the most money. Somewhere in all that is the need to match the spec’ to the job. And if the job requires 600 hp, so be it. If a 700-hp engine were available, they’d probably eschew the 600 and buy the bigger one. “Not many fleets spec’ trucks the way I do, and believe me, they should be free to spec’ their trucks anyway they want,” says Aubin. “But I have been doing it this way for 38 years. If it’s the wrong way then I should have gone bankrupt a long time ago.” The line separating big engines from the others is blurring. When you can get more than 500 hp and 1,850 lb-ft from a 13-liter block, there’s not much space between those and the big-block engines delivering 100 additional horses and 200 extra pound-feet. All the newer 13-liter engines on the market now deliver Super-B pulling power, and a surprising number of fleets are successfully using them in just such applications. But as some are fond of saying, “there’s no replacement for displacement.” Currently only two engines deliver the extra power heavy-haulers need, the Performance variant of Cummins’ X15 and Detroit’s DD16. Once you exceed 62,500 kg, as most heavy-haulers do, the need for the addition torque and horsepower is legitimate. It’s no longer a luxury like it might be for the Texas bull-haulers who just like the left lane. Here’s a list of some of the big power options currently available: Engine Disp. HP Torque Dry weight (lb./kg) Cummins X15 Perf 15.0L 485 – 605 1,650 – 2,050 3,152 / 1,430 Cummins X15 Econ 15.0L 400 – 500 1,450 – 1,850 3,152 / 1,430 Detroit DD16 15.6L 500 – 600 1,850 – 2,050 2,837 / 1,287 Detroit DD15 14.8L 400 – 505 1,250 – 1,750 2,718 / 1,233 Detroit DD13 12.8L 350 – 505 1,250 – 1,850 2,487 / 1,128 Mack MP8 13.0L 425 – 505 1,560 – 1,860 2,597 / 1,177 Volvo D13 12.8L 375 – 500 1,450 – 1,850 2,605 / 1,182 Paccar MX13 12.9L 405 – 510 1,450 – 1,850 2,600 / 1,179
  22. RowdyRebel

    More Suburban "fun"...

    Got the new line on there, bled it, and it stops nice & straight with no pulling to either side...just like it's supposed to. Now I just have to work on the stumble. If the engine is cold and you put it in gear, it stalls. If you mash the throttle (whether it's warmed up or not) it really struggles between 1500 and 2000 RPM (which sucks, because 1600 is about where the torque converter starts turning the wheels if you're pointed up hill). Not sure if it's a carburetor/fuel ratio issue or if I need to replace the ignition wires or tinker with the timing some more. Probably wouldn't hurt to pick up a new set of wires...these are a little on the ragged side. Picked up a book to read up on all of the little nuances and adjustments on the Quadrajet, and I really need to get a wide band O2 sensor and an air/fuel ratio gauge to go with it...then I can see exactly where it needs to be tweaked and which direction to tweak it. If the guy who's numbers were on my door most of the year ever pays me what he owes me (or even part of it), I'll probably go ahead and get that. Until then, I'll just have to deal with what I've got...
  23. JoeH

    presure in coolent tank

    Are you overfilling it? When the engine is cold, it gets filled to the cold line. It expands when it heats up, so if you put too much in when it's cold it'll push it out the over fill tube. Blown head gasket can put air into the water jacket and cause this too... Thought I'd start with the easy stuff though.
  24. Hurley88E9

    E9 Fuel In Oil

    Just to follow up, I had the injection nozzles rebuilt at Columbus diesel supply. They asked if i wanted to go with a low flow nozzle, they said it would make more power but i decided to just keep them factory. The injection nozzles were extremely dirty and all of the orings were deteriorated. I was hoping it would run a little better, the power seems the same, but there is less white/grey smoke, more than likely due to poorly atomized fuel. There really wasn't much white/grey smoke in the first place but i do think it cleaned up. After driving it a few times and checking the oil level it seems to be fixed. Thanks for the advice everyone.
  25. A little I’ve a month ago I moved into this 2016 Pinnacle . I love it ! Next best thing to my Superliner . It came up for grabs the beginning of last month at work when the guy that drove it and abused it for the last year wanted out of it because he wanted the 2006 International instead ? Go figure The guy ain’t right . So I went in the office and asked the boss if I could have it surprisingly he said yes ! I’m getting it cleaned up a little more all the time . I love the truck I pull s great not as good as my E9 I have at home but I’m still very pleased with its performance as I’m grossed out T between 115, to 132,000 lbs all the time . It does an excellent job .
  26. kscarbel2

    Ford Market News

    Limited run of suicide-door Lincoln Continentals coming next summer Michael Martinez, Automotive News / December 17, 2018 DETROIT — Nine months after promising dealers it would bring back suicide doors on its Continental sedan, Lincoln on Monday confirmed the vehicles will be in showrooms next summer as part of a very limited run for the nameplate's 80th anniversary. The 2019 "Continental Coach Door Edition" will have a wheelbase 6 inches longer than the standard sedan to accommodate the same type of rear-hinged doors that were first offered on the vehicle in 1961. It's an effort by executives to leverage the brand's glory years and spark interest in a vehicle whose U.S. sales have fallen dramatically since re-entering the market only a little more than two years ago. Lincoln said it would make just 80 suicide-door Continentals for the 2019 model year. It will also make a "limited" number of 2020 model year vehicles, although it declined to provide a number. Lincoln plans to sell the suicide-door models for more than $100,000 each, but specific pricing wasn't announced. The base model starts at $47,140 ($46,145 plus $995 destination and delivery). "This Lincoln Continental echoes a design that captured the hearts of car enthusiasts around the world," Joy Falotico, Lincoln Motor Co. president, said in a statement. "It's something bespoke or unique only Lincoln can offer in a thoroughly modern way." Coach doors, also known as suicide doors, date back to many pre-World War II vehicles. Lincoln was considering them as recently as 2007, Automotive News reported at the time. It was a source of tension among designers then. Conventional rear doors won out during the process because they were deemed more feasible for a production vehicle. Now, though, designers say the doors help show off the vehicle's lush interior, which will include a pass-through console features a stowable tray table with a tablet holder and wireless charging pad. "People appreciate elegance and glamor," Lincoln's design director, David Woodhouse, said in a statement. "And they want the easiest way to get in and out of a vehicle. These doors answer to both." The vehicle will be powered by a 3.0-liter twin-turbocharged V-6 engine and will be available only in a high-end Black Label trim. Continental sales have plummeted 30 percent this year through November, and its U.S. future may be in doubt, although it continues to be a hot seller in China. Lincoln produces the vehicle alongside the Ford Mustang in Flat Rock, Mich., where it plans to eliminate one of two daily shifts in the spring. Photo gallery - https://www.autonews.com/gallery/cars-concepts/lincoln-continental-suicide-doors .
  27. 70mackMB

    Pictures of the Week

    41 and Mack Tech l found this review on Moxie close to being correct but it's not done by a true Moxie connoisseur! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xVrFKryATdk .....Hippy
  1. Load more activity

Welcome to BMT!

...The world's best antique, classic & modern Mack Truck support forum! Founded in 2000, BigMackTrucks.com is the place to go for everything related to Mack Trucks!


BigMackTrucks.com is owned and operated by Watt's Truck Center, New Alexandria, PA. This forum and it's contents are not affiliated with Mack Trucks, Inc. or Volvo Trucks North America.