daveigou

At least you guys had pants on. Very commendable!

I couldn't have said what engines were in these until I read the other comments here, I would have guessed Mack wouldn't have engineered in an ASET engine for such a short run, but I see they had Power Leash engine brakes, which I think only started with the ASET engines. Need to do a little more digging on this.

It's not Gerhart's. I know where the stuff is, just not sure who the contact is. Best to reply through CL.

Awsome view through the windshield!!!!!

That Autocar is sweeeet!!!!

Nice CF for sale http://lancaster.craigslist.org/cto/2987846323.html

http://lancaster.craigslist.org/cto/3028553852.html

I don't know about you, but there aint nothing shabby about a frame rated for 380,000# GVW. In the past, the corrosion between double frame rails was the only thing that would kill a Mack, with the new generation frames, a double frame is no longer needed in most applications, but assuming your truck is going to be a long wheelbase straight truck with a loader, you can't get away without it. And for power, I don't know anything out there I would rather have than the Mack - Volvo engine.

I have to disagee with some of the remarks posted here. I think at the outset it was Volvo's intent to integrate the Mack product into Volvo. But I think they finally did get the message that Mack customers are some of the most brand-loyal customers in the world. I was sad to see the world headquarters close, but the fact is the square footage was no longer needed. The Volvo partnership has been very positive at a time when all US engine makers were scrambling to meet the newest EPA mandates, and I think the Volvo / Mack MP engine is one of the most respected in the market. The opening of the Mack Customer Center is one of the most impressive things accomplished by any truck manufacturer. As far as Volvo not getting the US market, have you looked at the market share gains for Volvo Construction Equipment? And the exspansion of the Shippensburg, Pa manufacturing facility? Pretty impressive. Now about the Mack vs Volvo chassis, the frame rails might be the same, but Mack crossmembers still retain Mack influence. The Volvo "I" shift / Mack "M" drive transmission is one of the hottest products out there. Automated mechanical transmissions will continue to gain market acceptance, because of the ease of operation, and the advantage in fuel economy. If you want a Mack manual transmission, or Mack dual reduction rears, you still need to buy a Mack. What will happen in the future, who knows? But for now, I like what I see.

An E7 built in 1999 should be an E-tech (unit injector pumps) (1998 my - 2003 my) engine and most likely did have "Renault" in about 1" high capital letters cast in the block.

Saw this comming up for sale in Ohio. Looks like a nice spec. http://www.ironplanet.com/for-sale/Trucks-Tractor-Mack-SuperLiner-T%2FA-Day-Cab-Ohio/385604?h=2-1%2CgotoPage

I don't think the AI engine went into any RD's. If your truck is a 2003, it should be an Etech. Have you had your truck back to a good Mack service department to get checked out? That's always the best place to start.

Let us know what the outcome is. I talked to Antrim Diesel in Chambersburg Pa, I know they re-worked some pumps for some local heavy haulers around here. Last time I talked to them they told me barrel plungers for one side of the (V type) pump were no longer available, and they didn't want to work on it.

We have a 1978 MB685FC for sale at Lititz, Pa, $8,500. If you are interested give me a call 717-626-8544 Dave

I think freightrain is right on the money. I think who ever did that knew what they were doing. Looks like a nice up-date to me. As far as the difference between maxidyne / econodyne, I just don't think its going to make much difference in a truck like that.

If the truck does not have any kind of a hand parking brake, I find it hard to believe it doesn't have spring brakes on at least one axle. I remember seeing the rear brake chambers on your truck, and I think you're right they only have one line, but I don't remember what's on the front drive axle. Sometimes the chambers are mounted up on the frame rails, and there are long rods back to the wheel ends on the front drive, and they may have spring sections in them for parking. But they would have two lines on each chamber.

Look to see if there is one air line or two to each chamber. I believe your truck may have old style "roto chambers" on it, which can be up-dated. If there is one line, no spring section, two lines, then you have spring appled parking brakes.

Not too shabby

Rudy, First, my guess is that the fuel system might need "bled out", try cracking an injector line to see if you're getting fuel or air, if it's not getting fuel, you need to keep cranking until you do. Then repeat that process on one or two more. I don't know if your truck has a primer pump or not, but if it does, use the primer pump to make sure you're getting fuel to the injector pump. To confirm if it is a 711 or not, look at the front timing cover, RH side. You can look in under the fender between the front tire and the frame rail, you will see the END711 stamped in the timing cover.

Should have been some version of an 8V-71

1999's are E-tech engines, it would be nice to know if they had camshafts and other up-dates, if they did, they should be good. The dealer should be able to confirm the miles on the engine ECM, and also tell you fuel mileage. For what you're doing you should be happy with a 350. With the 44k rears, I believe a double frame or at least a single 8MM (5/16") was mandatory, which is a plus if you're going to stretch it.

Looks good, looks like you're getting the chassis in good order. That truck definately is worth the time and effort, I assume you road tested that properly when you finished.

Roger has a Nelson Beam trailer with only four tires, I don't know the history. It must have been built for a very special purpose, because it is really short, and not all that heavy. The Rogers cable detachable Roger has is eight tires, and I believe it is a 100 ton trailer.

That's not exactly what I said. I Sold a Granite tri-axle dump truck with an AI 427 engine to a customer in Delaware. After about two weeks he called me up and told me not to take this personally, but his driver refuses to run it, and I just sold him the biggerst piece of s__t he ever bought. When I said AI low end performance was bad, it was really bad. Even though they were fairly reliable, alot of customers hated them. The AC's had reliability issues from the start, but by 2006 and 2007 they were doing much better. Yes, but the Etech (1998 -2003) got off to a bad start too. The problem there was camshaft failures, mostly caused by follower issues that started to skid on the camshaft and wiped it out. As a Mack salesman at the time, I could not wait for the MP (Volvo) engines to come to market. In the end of 2007 model year, Mack did a short run Of CTP's (Granites) and CXP's (Visons) with MP7engines, but without the DPF exhaust after-treatment systems. The top horsepower ratings were 395 and 405, the 395 being actually a higher torque rise than the 405 hp, and most customers turned their nose up at them because they were "not enough" horsepower. One fleet I sold six of the 395's to said they did better than their previous 427's. For being totally new, they did very well. If you happen across one of those in the used truck market, I would think they would be pretty desirable.

I enjoyed this little article for you horsepower junkies, I hope you enjoy it too.