Jump to content


Puppy Poster
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by dexter860

  1. Just bought another truck , 2014 small sleeper Mack with mp7 an M drive , still  have my 95 small sleeper with E7 350 and 4:17 rears , it is getting 6.7 to 6.8 pulling a flatbed mainly in Ohio . I'm hoping this new truck gets better mpg but bobtailing home empty the gauge seemed to move more than I expected. Is it reasonable to expect to outperform the 95 on fuel economy, or not? If this thing burns more fuel it will probably  be finding another home. The 95 has been a very economical truck to operate.

  2. Ecm went out of my 95 Ch 613 , E7 350, borrowed an ecm from shop to get home , found a place in Texas that "thinks" they can repair mine , but most places have never seemed to work on these older ecms. Mine only has one big box on passenger side under glove box , we took the one out of our 96 and it has the big box and a smaller box that says Bosch on it , and they have different connections, so that didn't work. Can't find any used ones anywhere my part # is 12MS54M5, the one I'm using is 12MS54M7. I find alot of the ones with the number ending in M7 but no M5, I wonder what the difference is , the one I'm using now is an M7 , it seems ok but my speed is off and truck seems to surge a little more at idle, I think mine is a vmac 2 , but not sure , can I swap a box out of a 427 , into a 350? Dealer says new one is nla.

  3.  I don't know how much longer I can hold my 95 CH together, can frame rails are rusting out under sleeping, bottom of sleeper is about shot too, rest of truck is decent. Looking at a 2000  vision with the 427 in it, little disappointed in condition, no rust though, just a lot of minor issues. The engine also surges when sitting at an idle. Truck has a little over 700k on it. How's this engine compare to mine? Didn't seem to have much more power, but was bobtailing.95 has the E7 350.

  4. I'm getting bored pulling flatbed all the time, I know nothing about specing dump trailers, we grain farm also and have straight trucks to haul grain. I was thinking about buying a dump trailer to haul grain, and maybe I could get some side business also, I'd have to put a wet line on my CH, it has 4:17 rears so I think I'd be good coming out of the field, 9 speed. Frame trailer, frameless? 39ft , or 34 ft tri axle. So many different specs Wondering why they are speced the way they are, thanks.

  5. My truck is 95 E7 350, 4:17 rears , I run probably 50℅ two lanes and the rest interstate, run 55 on 2 lanes and about 62 on highway. At 62 I think I'm around 1600 rpm, I have a scan gauge that measures mpg, it's not 100% accurate so I still calculate every tank fill. The rpms don't bother my truck that much , the main thing I found is boost , if I can keep boost low, regardless of rpm I can get good fuel economy, of course this is an older engine, may not relate to MP 8s . I'm still hoping I can get this thing to avg over 7. You would think it's only 11.9 litre engine, and I'm lightweight, maybe possible.

  6. He has a radio show, he's big on fuel economy, talks about rolling resistance, aerodynamics, slowing down to 55, etc. I enjoy  listening to him, I guess it's all common sense though really, he brings in guest from Pittsburgh power, I've listened off and on for years and only heard them mention Mack one time. He said he did accounting at one time for drivers and noticed Macks in the late 90s to early 2000s got excellent mpg, he actually called drivers thinking they were losing some fuel receipts, but all they really promote is 12.7 Detroit for fuel economy as the best, seems like Cummins second. Pittsburgh power won't even work on a Mack or Volvo engine.

  7. Running a 95 CH 613 , E 7 350 pulling flatbed , OH, KY , WV, IN. 30 day avg 6.57 mpg, but just discovered I have a leaking charge air cooler. I have been running loaded about 85% of time, when loaded miles drop to about 50℅ usually about 46k on the deck. I was averaging 7.1, hope new charge air cooler helps, hasn't had overhead ran in years, I only run about 60 mph.

  8. May need a turbo but not sure, looking around the internet, I don't know what part# my turbo is. 95 E7 350. The ones I have seen have a flange on the outlet going into charge air cooler,mines straight pipe rubber hose slips over.cant find a # , just says Mack on it.


  9. Blew a manifold gasket last week, ran until Friday evening, tore it apart this weekend got it back together and running, was letting it idle and checking injectors for leaks and heard a quick "clunk" almost sounded like something went through the engine! I test drove it and when under hard boost turbo makes a little bit of a squeel , so now I'm starting to wonder if something fell into the manifold I didn't know about and went through the turbo. I wonder if so how long will it hold together? I don't see how a bolt or tap could have gotten in there without me knowing, of course I was in a hurry trying to get it back together.

  10. I know this isn't really Mack related, but was wondering about this engine. We have 2 CH Macks 95 and 96, I posted earlier about the rust issues I'm having, anyways we bought these trucks from a local fleet that always ran Macks since the 40s' , in mid 2000s they started having a lot of problems with Mack emission engines. They then quit Mack in 06 and have went to Freightshaker unfortunately, I called them to see if they had any used Macks left for sale sitting in the bushes somewhere but they said no more Macks left, but they have some 07 CL 112 Freightliners with MBE 4000 engine in them, the trucks are lightweight small sleepers like our Macks and reasonably priced, but wondered about that engine, and I bet a lot harder to work on than our Macks. Would a Mack engine of the same year be as dependable? Is the Mercedes better on fuel than Mack? We are getting mid 6s with the old E7 350s pulling flatbeds , about 60 mph. Im trying to be a die-hard Mack man but options are limited as well as dealers, we have one fair dealer that doesn't mind helping trying to keep them running.

  • Create New...