chu613

Porch Pup
  • Content count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About chu613

  • Rank
    Old Iron Expert

Previous Fields

  • Make
    MACK
  • Model
    CHU613
  • Year
    2012

Recent Profile Visitors

496 profile views
  1. CHU 2017

    Yes it is redesigned. It's a 3 piece hood now. I don't know if it's a stronger hood though. I don't think they had any problems with the old design. That and new LED headlights will be the highlights of the new CH although the hood it's in production right now.
  2. I've seen them around while growing up back home. Didn't think much of them until Roman and Dac Romanian trucks started to be equipped with Steyr engines in the 90'. Drivers really liked those engines I see Canadian army still using some around here.
  3. That is a actually a Renault cab on that Ford truck. Renault Major
  4. Scania launches the Chefline - meals on wheels

    Wow.. they're getting there. And when you think that North American trucks have twice or more room than European ones.
  5. We used to pull 63.5 tons with 12L 460hp Macks up here in Alberta. Right now I do the same thing with MP8. From 63.5 to 75 tons you are looking at just over 10 tons difference. 600 hp isn't necessary let alone 700. There's a difference between need and want.
  6. The hood looks like it's a 3 piece . Used to be one. If they did this I assume they want to keep this hood which makes me wonder what's going to happen with the new Volvo based Mack. The Volvo cab is wider as far as I know so how you gonna fit this hood that you just redesigned? Interesting things in the pipe A Mack salesman told me that in September they will go to see the new Mack. He said that it's going to be a big surprise for the industry and that the truck will be 1000 times nicer than Volvo
  7. New Mack GU713 Dump Trucks

    Beautiful truck indeed. i always liked the axle forward Granite. I wish they would have adopted the hood and headlights for CHU
  8. Another way to tell the difference between a CX with ASET engine and Mack frame and a CXN with ASET engine and Volvo frame is the routing of the pipe that connects the turbo and the inter cooler. On the CX the pipe would go down outside the frame rail and connect into the inter cooler. On the CXN it would have a more traditional way. Pretty much horizontally from turbo to inter cooler
  9. BBIGRIG I'm pretty sure it was a bit different Mack Vision was initially a CX and it went as a CX until 2006 when the Volvo frame was introduced and when CX became CXN. CH was always available but not in a set back axle. CH also became CHN when Volvo frame was introduced. Unfortunately I've never came across a CH axle forward with ASET engine and Mack frame, but I've seen CHNs with Volvo frame a bunch. Look no further than CHN Rawhide The earlier CX was a disappointment. I drove some in late 2004 to mid 2005. Pulling super B trains the temperature under hood would get so high that windshield washer fluid would boil in its reservoir. This was happening during hot summer days when pulling long grades or big hills. Because of high temperatures under hood lots of components were failing like fan hubs, belts, hoses,wires,etc. That's when Volvo frame came into play in 2006. Wider in the front it allowed the engine to be dropped in between the rails and create more air flow, reducing under hood temperature. With some other improvements, updates the CXN and CHN were way better trucks. The first Mack I bought was a 2004 CX and I remember clearly the engine sitting high on top of frame. The EGR cooler was above the frame but it was there. Looking at a CXN the EGR cooler is way down and you can notice the space between the top of engine and air filter housing. It's a clear sign that engine was dropped but the first Mack trucks with ASET engine were built on the Mack chassis
  10. Beautiful truck. I sure miss them Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. It's hard for me to accept that this kind of trucks are still build and sold. I can't understand why someone would choose this over a Scania, Mercedes, Volvo etc. The North American truck manufacturing and design is decades behind Europe's Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  12. Well.... I'm not angry or upset. Canada and Australia are somehow exceptions when it comes to day by day on road transportation. Most of the world trucks run 11-13L engines with an average of 450 hp pulling mostly one trailer and here they pull super b trailers since the 70'. They used to do it with 350hp engines back in the day. I just don't believe any of the propaganda this truck makers are trying to do. I know enough to not get fooled. With the exception of engines nothing has changed in North America. Everyone is still buying driveline components from the same manufacturers. Trucks are still the same. Couples of years ago my dealer approached me to write a so called success story about me for the Bulldog magazine. They somehow wanted to point the fuel economy of the Mp8 engines. I told them that they can't do that as long as my truck was getting between 4-4,5 mpg pulling that kind of weight. I told them that what I get isn't called fuel economy but fuel consumption . I said: you've got the wrong guy. They'll try and make up all this storyline about this and that and how good our trucks are and how strong they are but the reality is different. They're all pretty much the same. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  13. This truck has pretty much all the heavy specs. What's missing is a even bigger front axle which isn't going to do me any good, considering that I can get the job done with a 12000 and a double or triple frame. When we're talking double or triple frame, we're talking severe duty. I've seen a ton of trucks with double frame here I'm no stranger to heavy duty. This is what we do here. I've seen Prostar tractors with the same specs I've mentioned pulling 9-10 axles trailers with 50-60 tons machinery on them. Heavy duty is heavy duty and I've seen enough of it so I can have an idea what it is. So that so called CAT truck is nothing but a heavy spec Prostar that I've seen tons of them around here with "maybe " a double frame and a bigger stronger suspension. It may be Neway So.... Really what's so heavy duty about those Australian Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. I see heavy spec trucks every day. Everyone I know in the trucking industry drives one.I drive one for that matter and I'm doing it for 11 years. Western Canada it's full of heavy spec trucks. We pull heavy, 140000 pounds and more. You don't do that with a truck with 10 speed and 40000 pounds rear ends. I'm not trying to offend anyone here but when i hear US drivers saying that 80000 pounds is heavy, it makes me laugh. I've never pulled a single tandem trailer in the last 11 years. The gross weight for super b trailers is 63500kg on 8 axles. I had times when I grossed between 72-73000kg during night when scales are closed ( I get paid by the ton). I do that with a 2012 Mack CHU with a 13L - 505hp engine. When most of the trucks run a 12000 pounds front end I run a 14600 even though a 12000 will do. For rear ends I run 46000 Meritor with 4 way locks. The drive line and u joints are made by Spicer and there are the biggest and strongest you can get for a on road tractor. The clutch is heavy duty 2 disc plates made by Eaton Trany is 18 speed Eaton Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. All on hwy engines after 2003-2004 will have EGR with the exception of CAT