Coalbucket

Look at the Gross Axle Weight Rating on your door pillar sticker. That's figured on the lowest rating for your axles or springs or tires, as built.

Stina, nice looking 140. The Scania 140 was the first Scania with a V-8, right? When was it first introduced?

How many E-9 was Mack selling in 2000 including Renault?

Look at that winch on picture number 12. Yes this was an oilfield truck and yes it's a 5-speed MaxiTorque with a Spicer 4-Speed auxilliary. The 4-speed is in there primarily for the "Power Tower", a top mounted PTO on the Spicer 4-spd behind the rear window that can run full horsepower. Specs I've seen, they are rated at input torque of 10,000 lb-ft, not very much when you look at peak engine torque times transmission ratio of the main box. But if you are careful with it you won't hurt it.

open this .pdf from the recent TMC meeting to see what major customers have to see about the new engines, especially UPS. GO MACK http://www.trucking.org/Federation/Councils/TMC/Documents/2012%20Annual%20Meeting%20and%20Exhibition%20Documents/TMC12A_TECH2.pdf

Keep in mind the DM came out in '63 or '64. That was way before the bridge formula law became a federal thing and came east. So the cab was mounted so far forward that it had only a 62" dimension from the front axle to the back of cab. Mack sold on that number, which made it way easier to load the front axle to 20,000 or 23,000. Compared to those little sissy dump trucks like a Ford LN-9000. Plus that cab is only 70" wide. So if it hadn't been offset, that engine tunnel would be centered and there wouldn't be any room.

I know that the first ones were Maxidyne and called ENDT(B)1005. The horsepower was 360 not 350.

Yeah well, I heard that the real problem was length (weight). The V-8 has two rods per throw where sixes have only one rod per throw and the cylinder heads were great for a V-8 but as sixes were a little longer than they needed to be. With three V-8 cylinder heads in a row it was about eight inches too long for the displacement. And the front end on that beast doesn't look very small either.

I would be concerned about the design of the front suspension. I could envision where if you drove off of a curb you could hang the first steer axle and overstress the second steer axle. The old DMM used to have the first steer on spring and the second steer on air. I think the Quebec conversions is all on spring.

The new Mack MP series engines use the Volvo base engine but the design and development of the EGR emissions system including turbocharger match, cam lift and timing, EGR valve and placement, EGR cooler, intake manifold, and mixer, ECU software design, performance testing, fuel economy testing, and durability testing was done in Hagerstown by the same Mack team of Hagerstown engineers that designed the last 100% Mack engine, the Mack AC-AI series which ran from 2002-2006.

The Ultra-Liner was the real name for the MH cabover with the plastic cab that came out in 1982. What was the Interstater??

OK, this is a test: What did the name Ultra-Liner refer to and when was it first used. What did the name Interstater refer to and when was it first used. The kids won't get this one.

The reason it is always the top shift that grinds is that it has more rpm to change. The output shaft is connected to the driveshaft. The faster you go the faster the mainshaft goes. Shifting at 2100 rpm from 11th to 12th, the input shaft changes rpm from 2100 to 1632 rpm or 468 rpm. 10th to 11th is 373 rpm. 9th to 10th is 298 rpm. That's also why you can make shifts from first over to second under on a TRQL2220 Quadraplex by moving both sticks at the same time, the gears are going around so slow they just clunk into place. At higher speeds you have to get just right or it scratches.

Rumors that Freightliner's recent 1000+ NC factory layoffs will be permanent due to new Mexican plant coming on line... not their first Mexico factory... plus PACCAR builds trucks for North America in Mexico... International builds trucks for North America in Mexico... Mercedes engines made in Brazil... Cummins building new plant in China... Gee, looks like Volvo is the only truck manufacturer who assembles all the trucks they sell in North America... plus all the engines they sell in North America... in United States plants. Plus they machine several major MP-7 and MP-8 parts including cams and crankshafts in Hagerstown... looks to me like it could have been much worse.

Also depends when The B61 introduced the 673 Thermodyne with direct injection which replaced the old END672 LaNova injection. I believe in 1955 the 673 was a 170, but by the end of '60s and into the ''70s it was a 180. Without a turbo, there was no way to ever go beyond that except overfueling. Cummins always had more cubes and had up to 250 hp unturbo'd so the 711 was introduced at 211 hp. 711 was said to run with a 250 Cummins when you turned the fuel, but it would shoot a foot of flame from the stack then. But the valves ran hot and they were known to drop a lot of valves. Bore & stroke of the 711 was 5x6 vs. 4.87x6 for the 672/3/5/6 and the E7 was 4.87x6.5 I think.

Here is a brochure of ROBSON Drive http://www.vbg.dk/dk/products/robsondrive/...20_brochure.pdf

Well urea is a fertilizer you see a whole lot on the farms. They make anhydrous ammonia from natural gas and then turn that into urea, mostly pelletized but also in solution. As far as smell, take a whiff of an '08 model with a dpf, there is no more diesel odor whatsoever, just air!

Actually, since Volvo bought Renault (who had owned Mack) in 2000 and invested in the Mack 300 transmission series which came out in 2002, the sales of Mack transmissions are way up. The T310 is taking the place of many of the Eaton 10-speeds formerly sold behind the MaxiCruise and Econdyne engines in highway chassis. Just check out the dealerships.

SHEESH, c'mon, kiddies, at least do some research, go on amazon and buy a copy of one of Montville's books.and try to be historically accurate before you rant. For one Mack has been using Cummins since before WWII and used Cummins, Cat, and Detroit in a big way through the 70's, 80's, and 90's, not just for Mack Western, but also for Allentown produced trucks, for two they have never made an automatic so no wonder that all MR's LE's and a huge number of Granites have Allisons, and for three they have been heavy on Eaton and Rockwell rears and trans since they appointed Ralph Reins as PRESIDENT in 1989 and he was from ROCKWELL and that was way before Volvo, that was even before Renault took over 100% ownership.

The federal limit can only be mandated to roads with federal money. Interstates, mainly. Most states nationwide also apply the bridge formula to their state roads. But Pennsylvania chose to keep their old, non-bridge formula law on state roads. According to bridge formula you need 51 feet between first and last axles to get 80,000 pounds. That means something like a 40 foot trailer which itself is pretty heavy so the tare is up and you can't put all that much more coal in it than a regular coalbucket anyway. Plus Pennsylvania being a colder state, you get a lot of times the coal freezes to one side or another and when you go to dump with a long trailer like that and it gets that high and some coal hangs up, over she goes on her side, even the frameless dump types. So a regular coalbucket dump truck just works better all around. It was 1980 when harrisburg passed 80,000 pounds, two years before the national requirement for it. And when they first passed it, after years pf lobbying by PMTA, they had decided to go with it on all the roads. Then they found out that that limited all the coal trucks to 55,000 pounds (because of their length) and take a look at all the PennDOT triaxle dumps (tandem rear axle plus a 20,000 pusher) that harrisburg owns, why, they'll be limited to 55,000 too, so in just ten more days they had amended the law to where all state roads went back to 73280 on 4 axles. The bridge formula quad axle truck is something like 57,000 with two light pushers that can't be lifted legally so they have to steer which means single tires which is OK because you can't put too much on them anyway. Good for gravel in North carolina but I wouldn't put one in a mine. So what the salesman meant when he said "it is but drivers just can't get the weight out of them" was that in Pennsylvania you can load up that 20k pusher and lift it when you need to turn so it is just a more productive truck for the product and the geography and the state law. Back to Kentucky and your picture , why pussyfoot around with a pucher axle when you can run 130,000 on a Mack SX with only three axles? Oh, yeah, we're not allowed to be that heavy on the axles anymore. (at least not on public roads)

Thad as far as I know PA has always been 72,380 on 4 axles. At least since about 1970, before that it was 60,000 on three axles. Now you take Eastern Kentucky (Prestonsburg, Hazard, etc) and to some extent Tennessee and WV coal country, that is where the Mack 23,000 pound steer and 80,000 pound bogie became famous. If you could see the coal, peaked at the top, it was probably scaling around 120,000-130,000 on three axles. More recently KY went to tractors and with three axle trailers it was up around 170,000 until around 2004 when they really started cracking down. The new governor is from the western part of the state and he is not so supportive of the coal. Now most are more like 120,000 with the tractor trailers. You still see lots of RD800 straight trucks 's running even though the market for new fell off with the weight enforcement. Mack has probly hauled more coal than the next five brands added together.

"73" was used for the 8v-71. There was a lot of R773ST made by Allentown and they were mostly for Roadway. And RL's and RS's in Hayward that used the engine, then the RW Superliner which came out in about 1975. Somebody who can look it up. please do. Now the 8v-71 went to the 8v-71T (1978?) and that wasn't known for holding up very well. Then the engine was punched to 92 cubic inches per hole and that was a worse engine. I don't know whether the 8v-92T used the number "73" or not, I suspect not. Glider kits especially back then you used the VIN of the repaired vehicle, that's a state law thing and it too may have changed. I know you can buy new Freightliner glider kit trucks today with pre-emission ReCon N14's and register them as new trucks, at least in some states. Detroit had over 40% of market share in 1971 and fell to 4% by the time the Series 60 came out. Then Roger Penske bought them and restored their penetration.

Winnsboro plant with CH started up producing in somthing like 1988.

Point One Volvo has no interest in an engine with 18" pushrods. Lets face it our engine was originally from the 1930's and the new emission technologies need a modern platform. Point Two that everybody forgets, White Motor Inc who owned Autocar and Western Star went bankrupt all by themselves. White over-invested in NRV and Road Boss II and Road Commander II and Expeditor all at the same time. Then they lost Freightliner's revenue and then filed Chapter 11. They continued operations in bankruptcy but sold poor quality trucks with no parts backup. The courts gave Western Star to the Canadians and Volvo bought a broken company with a product line with a tarnished image and a broken dealer network. Point Three they are building all their trucks and all their engines for North America as well as all Mack trucks and Mack engines in the United States. You can't say that for International, Freightliner, or even PACCAR.

check this out http://www.forceprotection.net/news/video....video=discovery .