bbigrig

1 hour ago, glitchwrks said:

Apparently filters are one thing that the Mack parts guys do still carry for the Midliners, or there's a Mack cross to something newer. They put actual Mack filters on mine at the truck shop.

The Midliner pre freedom models use both oil and fuel filters that were used on other Mack engine models such as E6 and E7PLN (before 1998 engines)

If I remember correctly, they were used right up until the cancellation of the CS and MS models and the intro of the freedom. 

The Freedom models take filters that are specific to the Freedom line of trucks and engines. Basically rebadged Renault speced filters

Just got our 5th P20EE in the last 2 weeks. All 2018 trucks with the stand up SCR unit mounted behind the cab.

$7K to replace the SCR unit up here. The E case was 1 small paragraph description of the results of the testing.

The E case response was 1 sentence...replace the SCR cat. 

Must be a bad batch. 

6 hours ago, Mackpro said:

The MP engine really makes me appreciate the ETECH family of engines on how simple they were. Right now I'm overhauling a MP7 with 176,000 miles on it . My buddy in the next bay is overhauling a ASET . We started at the same time and he's going back together with his and I just got the head off on mine. They are a very time consuming to strip down or do major repairs to. 

I use to call E-techs "E junks" when comparing them to the E7 PLN engines. I'm now eating my words comparing MP to Etech...cant win.

3 hours ago, RobM626 said:

I was at the world of concrete show out in Vegas this past January. Mack was there and had some beautiful trucks as part of the show. On of the representatives was there telling me about the common rail MP  saying how good it is bla bla bla. All I can think of in my head is “this engine wasn’t really designed for it”. It really is a shame a company that has had such a long/strong history of building tough products can be held down like this. 

My question is how do you guys think the common rail mp8 stands against say the Cummins x15. I understand one is a 13 liter and one is a 15 liter so obviously there’s going to be a power difference. But as far as design and reliability go?

That's an easy one....in comparison to the Bosch fuel system used by Cummins, this Delphi "wanna be" common rail I think will be a bit of a let down.  It's more difficult to work on, more difficult to diagnose, full of issues that came with the last engine design and still more expensive to repair in both labor and parts then the Bosch/Cummins common rail.

The fact that the plunger injectors are pulling double duty now not only injecting into the cylinder as usual,  3 of them are also responsible for building up rail fuel pressure when not firing into a cylinder shows they are doing double the work...(for those that are scratching their head on this comment Macks YouTube channel has a video that may help on the fuel system) instead of a pump that in some cases has a high and low pressure pump on an external to valve cover pump or a high pressure pump with an electric lift pump feed from the tank.

I was hoping this engine was a bridge engine (a band aid fuel system on an old engine before a better design is released) I'm told by Volvo engineer people it's not...

Cummins however took a step backwards with the release of the X15's new exhaust after treatment set up. Like the medium duty engines Cummins builds, it's going to be fuel dosing in cylinder only and doing away with the 7th injector after the turbo. It's bad for the cylinders and has wiped out many a ISL and ISB over the years where high idle time is part of the engines duty cycle.

I wish these engines would get more simple with every release. Sadly, They are not.

We have replaces a few SCR assemblies on that code as well. E case made the calls on those. Also had one that was an output nox sensor that would be about 75 ppm drift from the other sensor on cool down. Should be 40ppm or less

Only seeing this issue on the 2018s so far.

On 6/6/2018 at 5:29 PM, fjh said:

compression in the fuel usually! 

I'm wondering if like Detroit on the 60series we should start installing  a thick o ring between the injector tip body and the injector cup to slow down the combustion gas infiltration to the fuel system.

19 hours ago, fjh said:

Well that’s predictable ! We haven’t had a lick of problems so far however we only got a few running here so far! Nice heads up thou !

all low kms so far!

Also, keep an eye out for low power/chugging, low fuel pressure or codes for fuel restriction.

We have had 2 with a fuel "flapper" check valve in the intake of the primary fuel water seperator filter in the housing that goes for a crap.

Apparently if you put a Donaldson primary water separator filter on that was made for the none common rail engines it may cause this valve to be damaged. The common rail engines have no Donaldson primary fuel filter crossover available.

The Flapper valve is serviceable separately from the fuel filter housing assembly.

We have also had a couple of the new AHI moduals that are part of the fuel filter housing go for a crap already 

22 hours ago, 1965 said:

 

2 hours ago, 1965 said:

That’s just pitiful. How many miles was on the truck?

Which one?.....lol.  We have had several all under 1 year old. A few team driven so between 60,000 And 250,000kms.

Nothing has changed. Same issues.

It's a crappy Delphi , more difficult to diagnose, warmed over Volvo crap wanna-be common rail set up....

Volvo started rolling them out in early 2018 models. Mack was 8 months behind i believe. We see more Volvos then Macks here. Started seeing some issue on a few 6 months in.Got to love the new mile long injector trim/cal codes when replacing them.

Don t worry, we are already seeing issues with them in both the injector and injector cup failure departments.

Nothing but making things more complicated has been improved with this setup.

14 hours ago, Neo said:

are the oil and fuel filters universal for the ms200 ms250 ms300 and cs models..... even the mack manager and mack freedom

Oil and fuel universal on all Midliners.

Freedom uses different fuel filters

Anyone know where I can find a decent CS (conventional) Mack Midliner Cab?

Preferably older the 1992 so it already will have the brown interior.

Any vintage will do worst case. 

Thanks.

On 5/1/2018 at 8:31 AM, JohnBoy61 said:

Have a Peter Built sleeper narrowed 15 inches to match the older truck cabs no cutout  new skins / hinges   sleeper in primer asking 2500.00

No thanks.

On 3/29/2018 at 10:10 AM, Oso2 said:

How do they stay afloat? By making very good trucks. Once people get over blind brand loyalty they find that the Volvo has a lot of user-friendly features as well as excellent driver-friendly ergonomics (i.e. when you're slip seating different sized drivers can hop in and get comfortable within a few minutes). The engines are very good and the automated transmission (if you go that route) is the best in the industry. The trucks are very maneuverable and the interiors are very comfortable. Interior quality is far better than a Kenworth t800.

I've driven for a number of Volvo and mixed fleets and all the drivers I ever met liked the truck; obviously I'm one of them. Oh - and I've driven old Volvos that have been driven hard and put away wet - they're tough trucks that hang together. And for those reasons I see a lot of them on the roads.

I also like Macks, but they feel a lot like a Volvo anyway.

You may not know this oso2...you like me being of the Canadian denomination will see a lot more Volvos in use and on the road in our daily lives. Volvos market share is much higher here in Canada then in the US but it is on a steady rise in the states. For the others, working at a Volvo/Mack dealer, it's easily a 10 Volvos for every 1 Mack sold on the new truck side. Both makes have the same issues as they are basically using the same power trains. For the Macks that are sold it's 90% Granites.  What's sad is at least if you buy a Volvo Mack product you know you will have the same issues that were there since 2008. Lol.  Not much has really changed.  Very few powertrain improvements. When it comes to the I shift and it's ugly brother, we usually have 5 out on the floor at a time at around 800,000kms. They arnt that great considering we wouldn't be pulling Fullers at half of that rate.

You won't see a Cummins X15 in any Mack unless they lengthen the hood and move the cab back on all models. It don't fit...bottom line.

Yep....its on its way here today or tomorrow. A total give away. 

I worked on a fleet of 15 Midliners. They were good truck when speced correctly. We only made the mistake of ordering 1 200 series. The rest 300 series without issue. 

I wouldn't have an issue picking up a used one. This CM422 is all cosmetic so far.  Runs well.

42 minutes ago, Vladislav said:

Quite interesting.

Indeed there were EM7s so EM6-4V should be as the predecessors too.

On a side note were any DMM's assembled at Oakwille?

DMMEX was actually engineered by Mack Canada Oakville and i would guess over 90% DMMEX units were built in Oakville Assembly. I remember standing in between the steer tires as a kid at the plant in awe.

4 hours ago, Vladislav said:

But they all were Econodines not Maxidynes. I'm not 100% sure though there were 4V EM9 Maxidynes for example.

E6 4V variations below. 

In 1988 they switched from offering 2V engines for Maxidyne engines to 4V engines. In Mack Sales literature it was rebadged as "Maxidyne Plus"

The only one that kept 2V Maxidynes were DMMs because until 1992 they were built without chassis mounted charge air coolers. In 1992 they switched to EM7 engines with the new DMM hood design.

2 hours ago, sodly said:

Interesting.  I was thinking the E6-350 didn't come in Maxidyne flavor but wasn't sure.  Yes, this emblem had studs through the hood.  Wonder if someone just changed out the Econodyne emblem for a Maxidyne one.  The whole thing just didn't seem right to me for some reason.  

So can anyone tell if this engine is an Econodyne version or not?  Refresh my memory.... Econodyne had a lower RPM range than the standard engines?  

The engine in the picture is an Econodyne not a Maxidyne. You could order an RW with a Maxidyne engine which I have seen before. It could go either way, engine hood name swapped or powertrain in truck. Best to get the VIN number and look up the spec at the dealer.  The Econodyne had a lower torque rise percentage for on highway useage. The Maxidyne had a high torque rise percentage and was more suited for vocational off road use.  Maxidyne were usually speced with 5, 6 or 7vspeed transmissions while Econodyne engines normally had multi speed transmissions of 9 gears and up. 

On 4/30/2018 at 10:15 PM, sodly said:

I looked at an RW2 the other day with an E6-350 engine and a Maxitorque 9 speed.  This was a supposedly-unmolested, original 300k mile truck.  On the drivers side of the hood it had a Maxidyne emblem.  The passenger side was not drilled for an additional emblem.  I didn't think Mack put 9 speeds behind Maxidyne engines.  True?  See engine tag photo.  Something didn't seem quite right to me.  Perhaps the hood has been changed?

By the way, did they put the Maxidyne and Econodyne emblems on both sides of the RW2 hood.... or only the drivers side?  Thanks!

That engine is an Econodyne E6350 if it's a 4valve head. For it to be a Maxidyne it would read EM6.... I believe the 4 valve 350 was not available in Maxidyne config. Lower the 350hp ratings such as 300 were available as Maxidyne in E64V ratings.

My 1988 has a factory installed Econodyne label with studs under the Mack script on the driver side only which was common for RWs.  Same for Maxidyne if your truck was powered as such. 

We had full air CS250s in the 90s. 

I believe full air for 250s became standard in the early 90s.

Planetary hubs on rears were standard on 300 series.

200 series had air rear brakes and hyd front with light axles

250 had air front and rear brakes with mid weight axles

300 had air front and rear brakes with heavier axles.

From what I recall in the 90s models for both MS and CS midliners

The ISX will not fit due to the short hood on an Anthem/pinnacle the MP series barely fits into the doghouse carved into the cab firewall. The ISX engine is wider and longer then an MP. The Volvo hood is longer to accommodate the vendor engine. Granite has the same issue. 

With a little help I've found a Mik Mak off an R dog....cool

He speced that Pinnacle wrong from day 1.

The guy is a quack and blames everyone and everything for going wrong. 

Unfortunately, it's like watching a train wreck...so I check in once and a while to see how many more poor choices he has made.