Red Horse

And plenty of power right?

Smart Ass! Just how old do you think I am???? I do have a soft spot those for those old slant back Penn Tanks with the manual pump up internals!

Boy have times changed. Whatever happened to....."No replacement for displacement." Imagine 165 cubic inches in a half ton pick up! Now as for the Ecoboost concept, I have a Taurus SHO. 365 HP and the thing is amazing-it will climb hills in 4th or 5th at about 1100 RPM. Push the gas a little harder, it holds the gear and accelerates. truly a low end torque machine. Just hope thay are not pushing the envelope too far. In any case, love to have that 2.7 in my 04 Ranger instead of the gas hog 4.0 V6!

thx Chuck- knew it was a 927-forgot about the Super 250 designation. CRS!

Matt You sure about 250? I thought it was a rare 927.

Bought my share of Heil DOT 306 tanks "back in the day"-along with Fruehaufs when a Fruehauf was a Fruehauf. Couldn't go wrong either way. Too bad they won't be built here---SOS!

I would make that .."Northeast". Just look at the ATHS issues from say Syracuse and Springfield national shows. Then again maybe were just "ingrained"

Matt- He said yes- Rack body dump

Beauty-Nice work-what are they going to put on it?

Looks like you got a good buy. Louisvilles were a great bang for the buck. What is plate? 27,500 lbs?? Great Rubber too

Wow-2013 so its not rust-just where did it break and what were they doing when it broke?

Was the "old man" Andy P?

Nice shot Matt. And guys, to those who question this trucks lineage, the owner lists it as a B-71 and for sure, hood dimensions -BBC look no different then my 56-B-61X. Now to further complicate in looking at "Mack Moderl B-1953-1966 Vol. 2 " by Thomas Warth, pg. 97 B-70T gas-appears std BBC, pg 98 70ST USN tandem-has extended hood. pg.99, B70ST std bbc pg. 101 B70-head on shot-appears std bbc pg. 102 B71T has extended hood-also no "Thermodyne or Diesel" hood script. this says to me, truck was built both ways-std BBC and with extended hood.

Either-actually I think Ford stopped using 3208's in mediums around 85 when they went to the Brazil Ford six. Not sure Allison was building 6spd auto back then for mediums.

How about this Rhode Island truck- Ron Rossi's 1955 B-71 Pictures don't do it justice.

Guys Any opinions on this. I was told if you have antique plates, you can't carry anything. I'm always hauling a Load of stone or loam for friends or family-I'm lucky if I get my fuel cost for doing this. So I have commercial plates on my 56 B. I'm paying around 1900 a year and that includes insurance on a 14' Peque skid steer trailer. I don't pull that with the Mack but rather with my Ranger if I'm moving my Z Trak mower. If I'm moving something heavier, I borrow a one ton. Any thoughts for a cheaper alternative? I'm in Mass. by the way.

Another one of those..............."if the track shifts north, blah blah. we shall see.

If not the actual truck, I would hope that some of their engineering experience will eventually show up at Avon Lake. I have been led to believe that the recently introduced 2016 650-750 is an interim vehicle designed to bridge the transfer from Bluediamond to in house. KSC will I'm sure have an opinion on this. Did you note the comment on the Turkish brass pressuring Bill Ford? tghat is a good thing as I believe Bill Ford was not a fan of the 98 decision to bail out of class 8. Also not the relationship with the Koc goes back to 1928. I think from time to time, old relationships have a value in a "family" business. Probably wishful thinking on my part but perhaps that is why I'm such a "Ford guy". Ford is something more than a corporate entity to some people. I can recall my old uncles talking about what "He" was going to do next- the "He" being Hank the Deuce (I'm not that old that they were referring to Henry!

Note this guy Roy's title PRESIDENT of Sales and Marketing. To me this says a lot about the Mack organization. Usually, sales and marketing is a key business unit that reports to a president. And typically this guy would have the title of VP or Senior VP or Executive VP. likewise there would be similar titles for the other functions that report to the President-like Engineering, Manufacturing, etc. Just a wild guess but I read this as Engineering, Product Development etc will be top down from "mother Volvo. And another point-this guy Roy is NOT a nuts and bolts truck guy-as I gather from KSC's posts.. If you asked him what a Unishift, "6-71", "220" or "534" was you would get a blank stare. A guy like this tends to concentrate in his "comfort zone"-don't bother me with technical stuff. Hmnn -kind of like the guy in the White House? -Great at "community organizing and entertaining the Hollywood crowd"-getting in the trench? No way.

The more I hear about this truck, the more I believe it is going to get its share of business on price- the in house engine and trans should allow them to be very aggressive with their pricing. A dealer friend of mine thinks the all Ford powertrain is a plus. He has nothing but confidence in the engine and trans plus as he sees it-"no more fingerpointing between Cummins and Allison evertyime there is an issue. Again, not thrilled with the idea of no choice but I can see their point where it will be an attractive alternative to some-in particular if price is right. Seems to me though this makes the thought of a tandem "F-800 doubtful. Agree with KSC-when are they going to bring that 9 liter Duratorque here???

I like the video-except maybe a few more "heavy" Mack footage instead of wimpy highway tractors? Like a big Granite-with spokes for us old Northeast guys-hooked to a lowboy that has a Cat 345 on it-okay make that a Volvo. As for the logo? Agree-is the dog taking a dump or is it a birth defect?

KS-You hit the nail on the head- I just posted this on the Ford "loyalist site: IMO, very disappointing. They stole a page from Henry's book-"Any color as long as its black". The press release says it all...."F-750 tractor for heavy towing"..Huh-who writes this stuff? Its a TRACTOR- it pulls trailers! But guess what, It won't be pulling any 27' pups that say..ABF, or Old Dominion or UPS or Coca Cola etc. etc. Rather it will pull Reginald's polo ponies, or tow Harry's camper trailer etc. Bottom line those who said this was nothing but a gift to the UAW for the last contract are probably correct. Are they bringing class 6 and 7 back to the US? Yes-contract paid in full. Will this half assed approach increase sales? Certainly not to the degree that it would have had they given buyers a reasonable choice-like a real truck diesel, a real choice of transmissions etc. Notice no mention of .."up to class 8? I guess that means the 37,000 lb option is dead- can't imagine a Power Stroke/Torqueshift combination at 37,000lbs getting out of warranty before it grenades all over the road. I'm sure a 6.7 Power Stroke/Torqueshift will satisfy some classes of trade. But I'm sure the marketers at Paccar, Navistar F'liner and even Hino are resting easy tonite SOS from Ford. Have to admit, the headlights are gorgeous! Headed to the barn to sit in my B-61X!

KS-Word is big announcement today, 5PM at the National Work Truck Show in Indiannapolis. Looking at the show website, of the truck mfgs., Ford's area looks like largest. I thought announcement would be today at ConExpo in Vegas-they have a good amount of floor space there too- we shall see at 5PM. some of my fellow Ford "followers" have suggested they in essence will just continue with the Navistar components but in their own plant -part of the UAW contract deal- while others say-no way-like Firestone, Navistar is on the "never again" list. Any opinion? By the way, Mack too has space at the Indy show-must be pushing the Cummins powered Granite.

After surfing Boston channels tonite, looks like Conn, RI, Mass so. shore/Cape Islands up to 5". Of Course they still hedge by saying 50 mile shift North could have big impact.

Well KSC, you usually have all the news. Todays Detroit News has piece saying Ford will announce on Friday details of return of class 6 and 7 production to US from Mexico (Bluediamond) Any bets on what that will be?