ThaddeusW

I have never had the oppertunity to drive a twin stick mack transmission and I was wondering how they are setup. For example I have herd that the basic setup is a 5 or 6 speed main and a hi-lo-reverse secondary. Is the hi-lo ment to split the gears? Also is there any online info on the different mack twin sticks and diagrams/pictures/instruction on the shift patterns? How does one shift progressivly through the gears?

I saw one mack on ebay that had a real weird shift pattern that loked like an incomplete H shift pattern like this :

gear - gear - gear

xxxx- gear - xxxx

(it was one of the two shift patterns and you could not really see the other pattern for the second stick)

Thanks!

I saw one in person just the other day at my local mack dealer. Eh its not 100% ugly but they could do a hell of a lot better. And the plastic? Why is everyone bent on putting plastic all over everything?

Hope you can read about this truck that is for sale soon, in case you cant here are the details;

610hp,18 speed, air susp,Voith retarder;cd player.

This truck was the last sleeper cab Mack Ultraliner ever built in the world, impecably serviced, nouthing spared, 800,000kms, NZD$130,000

Would suit your style Trent!

nigel;

←

Too bad the steering wheel is on the wrong side for us yanks otherwise its an awesome truck.

By the way, what's the going rate between the Kiwi dollar and American? $130,000NZD = ?

←

$90,500.13 US dollars. You can get up to date currency exchange rates at www.xe.com they even have a simple calc that lets you punch in the amount and it converts it for you.

I must say I even like the quantum! If you look at the quantum 8x4 pdf on the last page there is a 12 axle tandem dump train with a quantun 8x4 tractor pulling it and it looks sweet.

Hey Barry do you know of any place online where I can get some detailed info on the mack/renault freedom series? I am looking around for a box truck for the business here and herd they were pretty comfortable to drive.

I have been a fan of hankstruckpictures.com (My gallery) for a while now and I must say the Australians have the best looking rigs out there. The other day I was on Macks Australian website and wow I wish those models were availible here in the US! The Superliner and titan are 2 very awesome models and the newer superliner LT is what I call a real Mack. Too bad mack america did not go along with styles like this. And the naming on the trucks is great, I love how they kept the superliner name and the TITAN is definatly a fitting name for a Mack. Man I am so jealous of you Aussies

Have a look around their photo gallery.

the new engine will be a hybrid volvo/mack. called the mp7, mp8 and mp10. the mp7 will be a 11L & available from 325 to 405HP, the mp8 will be a 13L & available from 405hp to 485, the mp10 will be a 16L & from 485 and greater. this engine will be only available in the new fusion cab that is coming. the mp7 production will be 1st quarter of 2006, mp8 will be 3rd quarter of 2006 and the mp10 will be 2007. all of these engines will cooled egr.

←

Is it just me or is Mack replacing everything that is Mack with Volvo? If I wanted a Volvo engine and a Volvo looking cab I would go and buy a Volvo.

1984 anyone?

I will soon be adding all new lines,valves,chambers...everything

whats the best way to chouse the needed parts?

I was thinking that I could use my R model as a template and just copy that air set up to keep both my trucks the same setup???  I have looked at the bendix web site and that gives me a good clue. how have others done it??

Thanks

Trent

←

The Bendix site is a real goldmine of information on air brake systems and there components. The air brake hand book pdf's have allot of information on sizing up and selecting compressors and dryers as well as a bunch of diagrams. It gave me a much better idea about the brake system and its components just by surfing around on it.

And as for keeping the trucks the same It would be totally up to you. Maybe keeping them the same would benefit a mechanic but if you do all the work on your truck yourself you know what is where.

Happy plumbing!

Trent, the link isn't working for me...

←

I use Linux so unfortunatly I cant see the Microsoft encoded video on my regular PC . It works on my laptop though, I have Windows on it.

The video is Smokin though!

Question:

I was wondering what type of engine brake the E9 uses? Is it a compression release or an exhaust brake?

A little update:

I spoke to one of the owners today and got some more info. The owner is partners with his brother in law whoes father bought the truck new in he thinks 1944 for $18,000 out of the showroom. The truck was a dump with a shorter box then what is on there now. The box was removed and put on another Mack and the truck has been inside a garage for years. (thats why it looks so damn good.) Sadly the father in law died some yars back and the son built a wooden bed with flowers as a memorial on the truck. After they bought more trucks (all Macks!) The old girl was put on the street.

The guy I talked to said it pains him to see the rig on the street and would like it see it sold or put back to work. He said most likey the brother in law would not sell it and if he did it would be for quite a sum of money. I game him my number and will wait and see what happens. I understand if he does not sell but if he does I want it! I still dont know the running condition (the guy was rather emotional himself so I did not want to push the issue) but I will meet up with him again soon.

I have a 1988 Mack engine tune-up specifications manaual, the torque on the E9-500 is 1660 @ 1300 RPM, the 400 is 1325 @ 1300 RPM, the 450 is 1495 @ 1300 RPM, operating RPM range is 1300-1900, i did not know you could lug them down that low, i dont know if the later 500hp had any more torque or not.            Ron

←

Hmmmm....

After a little math The I found that the ratio fo torque to horse power for the E9 was about 3.32:1. That means that the 610 HP Australian E9 would output about 2025 ft/lbs at 1300 RPM. And as for why the E9 was discontinued I think it was because of Volvo. Just before Volvo bought out Renault/Mack Mack started there Mack power program to provide their engines for marine and industrial applications. After Volvo purcahed them they shutdown the Mack Power division because it would compeat with there own engine production. Renault even used Mack engines as well because for a while the Renault Magnum came with the Mack E-tech engine and the E9. The new 2005 Magnum model was replaced with an angine based on the Volvo D12 block. I think Volvo wants to kill the Mack engine line and replace it with there own. That or I am paranoid .

wonderful pictures! That B model makes me dizzy with all the accessories, what a ride! The Cat V8 is also very nicely setup. The Autocar with the setback axle has a nice interior as well as one of the Petes.

At last , someone has heard of the Volvo engine, the latest one in the fleet has been on the road a month and is just starting to free up,trouble is , that it is not running at full 44 tonnes yet, fuel figures look good so far , but as a comparison to the c15 Cat in the kenworth doing the same sort of work , and its currently rated at 470hp, the cat is using quite a lot more fuel.

As for the e95oo, well it just keeps on keeping on.

nigel

←

At first I realised an engine that powerful existed because on the roadranger website. Eaton had an 18speed that comes with the ability to handle 2250 ft/lbs of torque(Link). I was wondering what engine could do that so I went on google to do a search and found it. Here is the link to there page for Volvo North America Volvo VT 880. The 16 liter monster only comes in the VT 880 which is strictly an over the road tractor, no vocational offerings.

This reminds me, who here has the actual specks for the E9? At 500HP it would be nice to know the peak torque at which RPM, bore/stroke, governed RPMs, weight dry etc. If anyone has the numbers for the E9 500 HP or the Australian 610 HP please put them up to give a better idea of what she can do.

WOW! Beautiful B you have there. Cant wait to see the chrome on black!

I have just taken some more pictures of the truck. Since it is parked on the street I walked up to it and opend it up like I owned it . Well the transmission is probably a 6 speed maybe even a 5 but for such a heavy truck of that year? The interior is in good shape with little or no rust. It has a double frame, PTO w/hyd tank on the passanger side and camelback suspension. The Engine is a mack turbo engine of some sort possibly not the original. I have no clue as to what the engine model is but in the pics there are 2 numbers as follows:

Just below the upper radiator hose where it meets the coolant manifold - 439Gb3101

On the larger part of the coolant manifold - 1076C47066 (the last 3 or 4 digits I am not shure of, too little light and cant tell from the pics.)

Engine:

Plate:

Interior:

Model LFSW

Chassis # LF2D2327D

The name plate has only the model and chassis number. The horse power and GVW/GCW is blank.

Oh and I was right the dump body is held on by chains bolted to the frame using makeshift brackets. Not even on there strait.

Thaddeus

Any of the 673s or earlier would be fine for her, I reckon, although wouldn't know if a 673 would fit, I guess it would (never seen an L in the flesh!).  I can't remember what the Ls usually had (am I right in thinking some had Lanovas) but one of the guys here will tell you (and me!).

Btw, once you find out the chassis number, send it off to the Mack Museum and they will tell you when she was originally built and what she originally had in her.  They are brilliant and do the work for free so be sure to give them a donation for their excellent efforts!

Cheers

Andy 

←

Would this be a 673? MAck 673 in an M54

Just curious on what year your GMC is?

←

1988

It is a ride truck. It has the original 1964 half moon swing ride body on it. The original Chassis was an IH R-something model that fell appart due to neglect by my uncle. If I had the chance I would swap the GMC for a B-6-something. A B model with the old ride on it would be a sure hit at truck shows (especially with the kids!)

The Cat C-16 put out 2050 ft/lbs of torque.The new C-15 625 HP I think puts out less torque,but I have not paid that much attention.My work truck is a 2000 Peterbilt 4 axle tractor with a C-15 550 Hp,18-speed,3.70's in a 46,000 air trac,Hooked to a 35'Mate tri-axle trailer,Does a good job hauling 45 to 50 ton loads.                      Tim Green

←

Yea the new 625 HP c15 Cats have 2050 ft/lbs. The Volvo 625HP 16liter can put out 2250 ft/lbs, quite a bit of power if you ask me. As for todays engines, Mack vs. Cat is very close. But Mack has nothing to compeat with the C15 today which is kinda sad (Mack today is sad enough as it is under Volvo). The Cummins ISX tops out at 565HP at 1850ft/lbs offerd in the CL. After the new emissions laws went into effect Cat discontinued the C16 and cummins did the same with there signature 600. Cat managed to get 625HP and 2050ft/lbs using there new acert technology. Maybe Cummins could reintroduce the signature 600.

Hi mate

There'll be other guys on here that'll answer your request more precisely as they know a heck of a lot more than me.

My 2 cents though is that she almost looks like a tractor that has had the dump body tacked on later.  That's probably a pretty obvious answer that you've no doubt worked out for yourself.

With regards to putting more modern engines in to a Mack like that (I reckon she's an LJ of some sort, late 40s, early 50s), ultimately, I don't think anyone would begrudge you for getting another old Mack back on the road.  It sure would be a lovely thing to see barrelling down the highway!  It will depend on your budget and your skills.  Sure, it'd be great to keep the original engine and trans but if they prove uneconomical to repair....there are plenty of B Models getting around with 300 Coolpowers and more modern engines (and you should be able to find exact replacements for whatever it's got in there, if that's what you want to do).  The cool thing about trucks, Macks in particular, is that they just keep working so they are bound to wear out engines.  I've come across hardly any unrestored old Macks that are still 100% original but it is always a pleasure to see an old Mack, modified/updated or whatever.

All the best with trying to buy her.  She looks a cracker.  Btw, I'm 28 and there are a few guys on here in their 20s so don't worry about being a "youngster"!  It's never too early to own an old Mack!

Cheers and good luck!

Andy

←

As soon as I have time I will try to aproach the owner with an offer. And yea I thought it was a tractor too. You can even see in the front picture the dump box isnt even strait. In the full size side view I can see a chain passed over the dump subframe to the truck frame to hold it on. I wish the frame was able to hold that dump box but the heck with it. I would put a 5th wheel on it. As for the engine/trans I will see. I am not into gassers (have a GMC 6000 gas and it stinks) and if it is gas then I would rather a diesel, Mack diesel that is. What Mack diesel would be a good fit? The older the better all mechanical no electronics.

Hello all!

My name is Thaddeus and I am from New York City. I am only 24 but I have been in love with the trucks especially older macks as far back as I can remember!

Hi all,

I have just found this L model tucked away near by and I was wondering exactly what model it is. The owner bought it to restore but so far it has been sitting there for about a year. It looks to be in good condition and if he is willing to sell it I might buy it. The only thing is what engine and transmission could be in that beast? One worker told me that the engine is shot and might need replacing alltogether. Which brings me to my next question; what do you guys think about classic macks with modern engines and transmissions? Some people say it detracts from the classic appeal of the truck and some say its the looks that count not what is under the hood. Is it worth it to replace/restore the original engine/tranny or go with a more modern setup? I would love to spend my spare time fixing this old dog.

Oh and does the dump box look to long? I dont even think it was ment to be on that short a wheel base.