Lmackattack

2 valve engiens are very strong and good runners parts getting a little hit an miss lately. 4 valve engine just as good as the 2V and parts can be found easy Standard mack engines ran up to 2100RPM there were also "low rpm" engines that were set up to tach out at 1800 (governed RPM speed) some old macks (and many other older diesels)had a power curve that would allow the engine to spin faster yet use less fuel. if you were to be running at 1650 and it felt like it was a dog just split it into direct and it will be back up aroun 1800 and may pull better. I have found with maxidynes that they like higher RPM with a heavy load but will do just fine at 1650 on the flats 12 speed is a great transmission. you have every gear you will ever need. the od trans will give you that get home gear and still have a low low ratio to get started 4.17 rears are very good for the offroad. if you can snap one you likely did something wrong or they were just way over worn. thats my .02

I like it. looks like the cross between a RD800, CH with a R Cab.

my boss ownes one just because he can. He is around 80 years old and not a good driver. I fear for him and the others around him when he is in his not so "smart car"

Pete sound like you have some fast rear ends. Most Macks with a 6 spped had 4.17 for on/offroad and 3.87 for highway. sounds like you have something around 3.87s? the only down side with the 6 speed was shifting the higher gears in the hills. Great all around trans untill you want to keep your road speed up pulling a good hill. 1000 rpm is fine as long as the truck can still accel. most other engine MFG cant touch 1200 rpm and pull a grade. this is why old macks were always good in the low speed offroad market. Many times if im in the thick mud I will put the aux box in low. then shift the main 1-2-3 untill I have the road speed up. at that point I then shift the aux back into direct(leave the main alone)accel through direct 3rd. then make the last 2 shifts in direct 4-5 gives you a total of 6 forward speeds.

nice job larry... how do they like being beat by a station wagon that gets draged around by a 50 year old Mack! LOL

Lousing oil press when its warm is normal. 60-90 psi cold is good / 30psi idle is good. if you cant get the oil press up over 40 after its warm it may be worn out. On the other hand I have seen some trucks run around 25psi at hot idle and then as soon as you give it 100RPM it shoots up to 70psi. What is your hot idle and cold start psi? I think my truck needs bearings soon because it is only 60 psi cold and 40 going down the road. I can hit 45PSI if im @2100 but I still think its too low of oil press.

Hello. I Dont have any real info on those models as they were considered rare. If your looking for pics did you check http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/ they have a message board as well with links to truck modle builders

Yep I bought the same covers Brad. I think they were for an older pete with the standard StewartWarner sized gauges. Only my boost gauge needed a dab of silicone. donaldson had chrome air cleaners. I think they still make them. also turnsignal covers. LED replacement lights. round air horn covers, upgraded bullit Lights. Visors are all easy to find bolt on "flash"

I agree. I was hoping he would run one of these days but it looks like hes to smart!

not my goverment!

well when iI started back in 2000 I was in a 81 R model with a 285 and a 6 speed. air ride seat was the only comfort. camel back rears on rubber block cab. No AC but it did have PS. I thought I was a king driving the Ex Palumbo construction truck. then I moved up to a 87 R model that had an air ride cab.. OMG Im doing great. After i changed jobs over to racing I got spoiled. 97 IH with air ride, air ride cab, 550 HP 18 speed.. It was so niceto drive but it still dont feel like trucking to me. I like the AC but i like to feel the road a little. and feel what the truck is doing. when I bought My RS it had no PS and boy was that hell trying to get into places down town with the dump trailer. I was wore out at the end of a day. it now has PS and life is good might get a AC set up one day just so I can keep the windows down but not sweat my but off sitting at stop lights in a gloss black truck!

Yep.. Paccar got the foot in and they kept the new truck price fair. the only complaints I have really heard were from electrical troubles mainly on parts that KW did not build such as the engine. The trans or rears also seam to be holding up better than they could before? Im still a mack man but have to give credit where its due. Just look at the styling of a KW or Pete and its hard to say the new macks look as good. Lets face it. you dont nerd a sloped hood to improve MPG when the truck spends most of its life under 30MPH. Volvo just wont let the Mack team build a better truck?

news flash. bring the price down to what a heavy haul pete KW cost rename it to superliner or offer that name in a option level Put a sleeper on it fix that F&^%ing hood. it looks like a water slide. Oh wait Volvo is steering all of this..never mind. I have yet to see one around chicago. and we were always known to have large mack fleets..not so much anymore

I bet that cake tasted so good!!! At least the truth is out and people will now see how it really is working under Volvo. Good on you guys for standing up to what Volvo is doing to the mack work force and the name. I feel bad for anyone that has a passion for there job yet is expected to put blinders on and walk the plank. it seams that mack people are forced to walk blind hoping no one notices them. Its just sad watching one of the few great US companys fall into disparity. Good luck to all of you die hard mack people. you will not be forgotten!

Thats how it is around here Herb.. Once the R models were noted to be on the the way out lots of fleets went cheep and looked to FL or looked at petes. The E teck engines did not help the cause either!!! I hate to say it but I think Pete took full advantage of the situation and used all there powers to get there foot in the eastern off road door when they had the opertunity.. Petes have come along way in the last 10 years with the options they have for off road use. I dont remember them being this strong in the eastern off road market when I started driving trucks just a short 10 years ago. Its difficult now because I see lots of drivers that dont want to drive an Rmodel. Than again there are not many drivers out there anymore. !

some of the early UPS CH macks just had a handel where the dog was to be. Roadway did simmilar on the R models. It was back when Mack would do what the coustomers wanted weather it made sence to most or just to the company that had the check book out and ready to write a check for millions. I think the mack name will always live on but its product developments will be doomed. not becasue of the shared engines, or offering off bree parts,HQ moving etc.. thats all sad but I feel that it has more to do with the fact that Vulva will not listen to the mack employees and owners that have been building and driving them them for the last 20-30 years. Vulva keeps pushing there junk onto the mack frame regardless of what we say we want . They listen to no one and build trucks that suits the needs of simple fleets and upper vulva managment. Rarely do I see anymore a mack or Volva that is very HD or has some one off options. I also dont see many classic looking macks onthe road that are owned by Owner operators. If Pete and KW can meet the needs of millions of O/O Mack can too. In my opinion Paccar has given the over the road truckers what they want for years. Options on HP/Engines/body styles etc... I see mack (lously)holding its own in on/off road markets but highway is lacking options. But why wast everyones time it looks as Vulva will just keep F%$King it up for us. I just feel sorry to all the true Employees that know what mack once stood for. they have to go to work and watch the dog die more every day.

who wants to go steal the dog and give it back to its rightfull owners.

it will all bolt on to your 237. your turbo clocking may need to be addressed to fit the charge cooler but that is easy to adjust. if you have the stock B model trans go easy on it as the 285 is almost double the torque output. If it has a maxitorque 5-6 speed drive it like you stole it.

facts 1st... this is a Mack Fourm.. it is obvious that the views here are going to be totaly biased towards mack 2nd.. you are correct you have the right to reply and hold your views. 3rd... If history shows truth you will see that Volvo did away with other companys to advance itself in the market. Call it buisness or greed but that is a fact. 4th ... it is also true that Volvo has introduced some drivetrain componets and forced buyers to use off breed parts when they should have been options. yada yada yada... Its not hard to see that Volvo is doing what ever they can to force there way in and let mack live by luck or just die out. look at the Mack dealerships with the "new" volvo names out front, look at the drive train, look at the lack of options on a mack but are found on a volvo. anyone that has known about macks history will tell you that somthing is just not right here.. Do you see Pete not letting KW use "x" sleeper? or "X" suspention? they share options and do great. there owners love them. I dont see Volvo doing the same with mack. I would love to know who the designers are. How long they have worked at mack and what they know about them. In the US the avg O/O wants a long hood big power truck that has some class. I see 1 mack that fit this but its way over priced. Fleets want a plane truck that does the job. this is all that mack has in the market yet Volvo is taking all the good mack parts out of them.. why is the question? that would go aganist the whole reason for specing a tuff truck with all mack parts.. The titan was a great idea but as said who thought that a monster of a truck would be fine with no sleeper otion? was it a kid just out of school.? sound like a rookie mistake? I could point you to 5 diffent people here that could tell Volvo how to properly option or spec a truck but it just wont happen.Volvo wont listen and they will just contine to think they know what I want in a truck.

hit the add reply (not the fast reply) button now scroll down and see the box that says attachments. to the right it will say "browse" click on that and find your pic on your computer and click on it,,,,then hit "up load" Hope that helps? Trent

welcome aboard but first we will need to see your passport...(i.e...pictures of your truck) you will like it here Trent

rob if I recall my RS700L build sheet called the truck weight to be at 15,005. not sure if that was with a 5th wheel,sleeper, installed and with fluids (wet)? 16,200 for a 6 wheeler...thats pretty light considering most Eastern mack R modles set up for dump tractors were around 17,000 just as a tractor... I have added a PTO, LH stack, power steering,fenders,tool box to it that all added about 400 lbs. when I weighed the tractor it had 1/2 a tank of fuel..about 65 gallons and 50 gallons of Hyd oil. My frineds B81 is around 24,000lbs just as a tractor but it has a wench, V8, 65k rears etc.... it all adds up!!!

yes my RS700 weighs in at 15,700-16,000 just as a tractor. I would think 20,000 would be a closer weight all depending on his set up and size of the dump box

and always asking for a radio check because they thought it was not working LOL!!!

This brings back some memories...If I recall many had a wierd under the hood air cleaner. no jump seats, and like mentioned the LH dashpanel had 2 or 3 gauges.. thats it.. the RH had none or was used for 1 gauge that was not found on the LH side. very bare R models indeed. I liked the old overnight R models with the cab side flares and roof mounted air foil thingy.. Trent