Maxidyne

Ever looked inside your computer? You'll find many if not most of the parts marked "made in China" and the whole computer was probably assembled in China. Even if you hand built computers in the U.S. you could not build one without Chinese parts. But a computer is just dead weight without software, and that's where we lead the world- The Chinese would have difficulty making their computers do much of anything without our Microsoft and Apple software. So yes, we and China are great engines of prosperity that are yoked together.

Slowing down China slows us down, we're that inter dependent.

What does slowing another country's economy accomplish? Better to make our own economy stronger!

Wars aren't won by proving manhood, they're won by smart thinking. The world is so interdependent that nobody can really win a war, and China could defeat us without firing a shot. And those Oshkoshes... Great military truck for desert warfare but too big for old cities. And if those Oshkoshes die in combat they're really dead- Our military is so dependent on Oshkosh and other vendors to service their high tech systems that they can't do much repairs beyond tire changes themselves.

Actually, I pretty much agree with you- The early electronic engines had enough advantages like easier cold starting, cruise control, and diagnostics to make up for the added complexity.

Looking at the cab colors, might this Cruiseliner have been built for Haliburton?

I noticed that too, perhaps it's the short sleeper 76" (1.9 meter) cab?

I'm not sure about the 2006s, but for the earlier USPS fleet purchases Mack put together a custom service manual.

The Postal Service had a whole fleet of them in Cargo straight trucks. Rated at barely 200 HP, they were slow but very reliable, and a good cold weather starter for a mechanical engine.

A lot of the rural counties pull pup trailers with their plow trucks during the construction season. Here in Minnesota they can run at up to 90,000 pounds with a 3 axle pup behind a tandem truck, so 11-13 liter engines with 400 or more horsepower makes sense.

That's quite a find- The 2006 Post Office purchase was mostly CX conventionals, but I'd heard rumors there were a few MR cabovers too. Yours is one the best MR tractors ever built, with the modern electronic Allison transmission instead of the crude old valves and fluid controlled transmission. The aerodynamics are awful so it'll get lousy highway mileage, but for maneuvering it tight places it's hard to beat- Even with 53' trailers we could get into some very tight docks with those MRs!

If you're interested in historical correctness, 5th wheels have changed little over the years- You could put on a new one and nobody would know the difference,

Inline 6, IIRC originally a tractor engine.

No emissions back then and the mack powertrain was just about unbreakable, but flat tires and burnt out lights were pretty much a daily event back then!

Tax laws can be ridiculously arbitrary- Buy a 33,000 pound GVW plus truck that can handle the load and you get hit with a tax, overload an under 33,000 truck and all you have to worry about is the scales. At the other end of the truck spectrum, I've been shopping for a new vehicle to use in my small scale farming operation- I'd like a 2200 pound payload between truck and trailer so I can buy bulk supplies by the ton, and at least a 2000 pound trailer tow rating so I can haul my tractor to jobs, and a 3500 pound rating would be even better. The Transit Connect van will will do the job nicely, though I'd have to put some of the heavier implements in the van to meet the little van's 2000 pound tow rating. Heck, the Ford Escape SUV even has a 3500 pound tow rating and gets mid 20s MPG. But to get the accelerated "179" expense deduction I have to buy at least a Ranger long bed or a big Transit to get a GVW rating over 6000 pounds, even though I don't need that much truck!

A lot of the choices between classes 4-8 are driven by DOT and IRS regulations- Stay under 33,000 and you don't have to pay FET, stay under 26,000 and the driver doesn't need a CDL, stay under 19,500 and you can tow a trailer without the IRS calling the truck a "tractor" and demanding FET. Farther down the weight classes if you stay over 6000 pounds and buy a pickup with a 6' or longer bed, cargo van, or mini-bus for your business you can take a 179 accelerated tax write off.

One of the Freightliner dealers in their 2020 bid to MN DOT offered the M2 6x4 chassis with a Cummins B7 base engine rated at 250HP and 660 Torque!

Daimler and Navistar's pricing in this sector is ruthless, they will actually quote a stripped down tandem with a B series, bench seats, and barely enough of everything else to get it slowly down the road. Volvo should have got serious if they wanted to play in that low ball league or stayed out.

You're right, after they killed off the Focus for North America Fusion sales swelled to around 200k a year, now they're down closer to 100k but sales of most every vehicle are down. Sales of a $20k-30k car may not sound very profitable, but when the tooling is already paid for and the car sells itself with no advertising costs, why kill it?

Product placement... BTW, has anyone else noticed how jealously Ford guards trademarks they haven't used in decades- Heck, the toy tractor makers even have to license Ford tractor models 30 years after Ford sold off the tractor business! Is Ford going to bring back the "iconic" 8N and Louisville? Heck, this "icon" strategy might not be a bad thing, until it bankrupts Ford!

On the highway, maybe yes. But how about pulling up out of a pit or basement excavation?

What's the steepest grade it''ll have to climb and will it go off road?

The Bronco as an icon survived pretty much into the 21st century in the minds of a few thousand enthusiasts who preserved them and sentimental old gearheads like me that knew that it was a better vehicle than the Jeep CJ or Scout. In trying to build a viably large following for the minor icon that was the Bronco, Ford media has embelished the truth and made it up when that wasn't sufficient to lead the millennials to believe that Ford invented "overlanding" vehicles in the 60s. Apparently Ford media has conveniently forgotten Land Rover which they used to own and well as the Nissan Patrol and Toyota Land Cruiser that predated the Bronco. Maybe next time Ford decides to revive an icon they'll pick something other than a dead horse that they themselves dispatched decades ago...

Depends a lot on what weight the truck will operate at and where it's going.

But seriously, one has to question Ford's "Icon" marketing strategy- The original Bronco was dropped because it never sold over around 25k units a year, only once has a Bronco sold over 100k units and that was in the late 70s. Ford's other "Icon", the Mustang, hasn't sold over 100k a year in the last decade. 100k vehicles a year is generally the break even point for anything selling for less that luxury car prices, a lot of those Mustangs sell for under $30k, and even if Ford can hold Bronco prices close to list most will sell for $30-40k. The only way Ford can pay back the billion dollar investment in the Bronco is to sell that 100k plus vehicles a year, the whole market for this class of vehicles is 250k vehicles in a good year and FCA's Wrangler pretty much owns it. Wrangler customers are notoriously brand loyal, good luck peeling off 50k a year, and any Bronco sales beyond that will just cannibalize other Ford products. And Ford killed off the Fusion that sold over 100K a year without even trying for this?