kscarbel

My friend, the salaries of US workers employed at North American Volvo/Mack and Freightliner plants falls under Net Expenses. What I'm saying is the Net Profits head out of the country to Stuttgart, Germany and Gothenburg, Sweden. I completely agree that Navistar has been labor unfriendly in recent years. Paccar on the other hand, has never moved U.S. production out of the country (there's a lot to be said for Paccar's ethics and values). Paccar does have a plant in Mexico, however it's purpose is to meet the demands of the Mexican market (The very low volume Peterbilt 320 COE refuse chassis is produced there because it's unique design wouldn't fit in with existing production at Peterbilt's Denton, Texas plant).

No my friend, "kscarbel" was not "just telling us to run out and buy a new international". And, I also see new trucks (and cars) on the road every day - from all brands. What I actually said was: "I haven't been a big Navistar fan in recent years (the idiodic EGR direction), but they and Paccar (Kenworth and Peterbilt) are in fact the only American-owned truckmakers left (plus Oshkosh in the specialty truck field)." For the time being, this is the simple fact (Volkwagen's just announced interest in Navistar might result in Paccar becoming the country's last American-owned U.S. truckmaker) I also stated the obvious that few U.S. economists would disagree with: "Given the economy in 2013 and 2014 is probably going to be turbulent (before recovering in 2015), it would be wise for American truck operators to invest in trucks produced by American companies for a while, keeping U.S. money in the U.S. in support of our country's best interest." When you purchase a Daimler-owned Freightliner, the profits head out of the country to Stuttgart, Germany. And when you purchase a U.S. Volvo or Mack-branded Volvo, the profits head out of the country to Gothenburg, Sweden. Now, if you want to go out of your way to support the German and Swedish economies rather than our own U.S. economy, you certainly have the freedom to do so. But remember, we care more about the well being of the U.S. economy than the Germans and Swedes do. They watch their back, and we watch ours.

And then there was only one.......... Paccar to be America's last U.S. truckmaker FRANKFURT (Reuters) -- Volkswagen is in the early stages of examining whether to take a stake in U.S. truck and engine maker Navistar International to close the gap to rival Daimler, the Financial Times Deutschland reported on Sunday. Entering the U.S. market via Navistar would help Volkswagen better compete with Daimler Trucks, the world's largest commercial vehicle maker, which owns the U.S. truck brand Freightliner. Navistar reported a second-quarter loss on Thursday, hit by a hefty charge for warranty costs related to engines built in 2010 and 2011, sending its shares down as much as 28 percent to their lowest since late 2008. Volkswagen controls Swedish truckmaker Scania, which does not have a substantial presence in the United States, as well as Germany's MAN, which is mainly active in Europe as well as Brazil and other emerging market economies. The U.S. heavy truck market is largely split up between Daimler's Freightliner, Volvo with its Mack brand, Navistar's International, and Paccar's Kenworth and Peterbilt trucks. Note: The statement "Volvo with its Mack brand" couldn't be more accurate. There is no more Mack Trucks. It's just a Volvo brand name on a North American market Volvo chassis.

"The cabs in europe are so different than the ones in north america that could not possibly be modified without costing as much as a new cab altogether," says MackLegacy Actually, the U.S. market Volvo VN conventional cab is based on the global market Volvo NH conventional, which shares commonality with the global market Volvo FH cabover. In addition, Paccar's Kenworth and Peterbilt product lines are both offering "full width" cabs (equivalent to European cabovers). So speaking of the upcoming global cab platform, there will be commonality. "Thinking conventionals here would be able to share a cab with cabovers (in) europe is foolish to consider," says MackLegacy Someone obviously isn't a "legacy" Mack person, otherwise they wouldn't make such a ridiculous statement. The original Freightliner Business Class conventional (1991-2001) utilized a COE cab from the Mercedes-Benz model LN. The stunning Freightliner Argosy II COE shares the same cab as the Century Class, Columbia and Coronado (the Argosy variant is 305mm wider). The Mack MS Mid-Liner COE shared the same cab used on the Mack CS Mid-Liner conventional, and Renault’s C, CBH, CLM, CLR and GBC series conventional cab models. The DAF XT conventional is based on the DAF XF105. Scania's T-Series utililzed the company's Bertone-designed 4-Series COE cab. The global market Volvo NH conventional was based on the FH/FM COE cab. The NH was full-width like the FH COE, while the North American market VN was a narrowed variant. And of course the impressive Iveco "Powerstar" conventional utilizes the Stralis COE cab. Foolish to think that conventionals could share cabs with cabovers? Hmm. Perhaps the issue is that you don't have a clue what you are talking about. The news about the new Volvo/Renault/Mack global cab reported in the Swedish business daily Dagens Industri is factual. But of course, Volvo is not ready yet to officially announce it. If you dissolve Mack too quickly (what little is left), it would bring a quick end to what little Mack brand loyalty is left (Mack has become a truck sold on price, not Mack engineering).

Summarizing this to also include Europe, the new Volvo/Mack cab for North America will also be shared with Volvo and Renault heavy truck models in Europe and the global market. The North American variation of the new Volvo global cab will be modified for use in a conventional truck configuration. My friends, this upcoming new cab terminates the last remnants of the Mack truck (optional legacy Mack transmissions and axles do not constitute a Mack truck). What Volvo has done, reduce a powerhouse American truck brand down to a mere shell of its former self, literally a Mack logo on what amounts to being a North American Volvo, should be a crime. No veteran Mack employee will argue differently.

Lancaster Preferred Partners (LPP) filed as an LLC on October 29, 2004, taking over the former Dana plant in Lancaster. It's interesting that there is absolutely no mention by Dana or the industry media about the transaction. LPP filed as a Foreign Limited Liability Company in Pennsylvania with a qualification to also do business in Virginia (i.e. serve Volvo New River Valley). A Foreign Limited Liability Company is an LLC operating in a different state from the state where the LLC was organized. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the Virginia unit of Mexico's Metalsa is one of the "partners". Lancaster Preferred Partners is an extremely mysterious company that goes to great lengths to keep itself off the radar.

Dana Corporation Announces Expiration of Supply Agreements with Mack Trucks, Inc. TOLEDO, Ohio, June 12, 2002 / -- Dana Corporation announced today that it has been informed by Mack Trucks, Inc., a part of the Volvo Group, that the truckmaker does not plan to extend its current agreements for supply of chassis assemblies and groomed axles for Mack's on-highway and vocational trucks. The current chassis assembly agreement with Dana expires at the end of 2003, and the axle agreements expire in May 2004." We are disappointed by this change of direction by Mack," said Nick Cole, president of Dana's Heavy Vehicle Technologies and Systems Group. "For more than 15 years, Dana has provided the highest caliber of service to Mack -- as we will continue to do in the future." Cole said Dana generated revenue of $293 million in 2001 from the sale of the chassis assemblies and groomed axles to Mack. Approximately $120 million of these sales consisted of Dana-manufactured components, and the balance was purchased parts, assembly, and other related fees. He said that Dana continues to secure new business that is expected to exceed this loss and is aggressively pursuing further opportunities for its facilities in Lancaster, Pa., and Lugoff, S.C (that had been supplying Mack Macungie and Winnsboro). "Mack Trucks appreciates the products and services that Dana has provided for more than 15 years. This is a difficult decision due to tough market conditions and restructuring needs, and is not a reflection on the people of Dana, who have delivered quality chassis systems," said Carlos Hungria, Mack's vice president of purchasing. These Dana-Mack contract relationships date back to the mid-1980s, when Dana began supplying fully assembled chassis to Mack's Macungie, Pa., and Winnsboro, S.C., plants. By effectively reducing Mack's supply base from 500 separate component suppliers to just one, Dana was able to reduce the truckmaker's administrative workload with regard to logistics, purchasing, and quality control. Mack Trucks, Inc., and its parent company, Renault V.I., were acquired by AB Volvo in December 2000.

The official company blurb: Lancaster Preferred Partners, LLC, based in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, provides manufacturing and sequenced just-in-time delivery of Class 8 truck sub-assemblies including axles and chassis. We assemble, sequence, and just-in-time deliver complex customized orders for Mack Trucks allowing them to reduce costs. However it seems they help their customers to reduce costs at the expense of their employees, the new part-time employee fad. ______________________________________ 7/14/2010 (Lancaster New Era / Sunday News) Employees at Lancaster Preferred Partners, which assembles axles and chassis for heavy trucks at 2919 Old Tree Drive, began picketing Wednesday morning over what they label unfair labor practices. About 60 employees went on strike while 130 workers continued to assemble truck parts, the company said in a release. The 60 strikers, part of about 80 full-time workers at the plant, said they are being discriminated against in a "systematic attempt to eliminate full-time employees." Many of those still working at the plant are part-timers, they said. The workers said the company fires full-time employees for production errors, but part-timers go undisciplined and are even rehired after fights or drug use. "The meat and potato of the matter is they're suspending full-time people, firing full-time people, and temp people do the same mistakes and get no discipline," said an employee. The full-time staff said they believe the company's aim is to force them out to make room for cheaper part-time labor. "We want to work. We don't want to stand out here. At the same time, I don't want to feel like I have a target on me when I come to work," said one employee. Employees said they have been working without a contract since the plant voted to join the United Auto Workers in 2007. Workers said they want a contract that will act as a "rule book" for the company, so everyone is treated fairly.

Speaking of European market Volvo FMs and FHs, and Renault Premiums and Magnums, it's unimaginable that anyone could possibly have trouble telling them apart. The two Volvos, clearly different, loosely share a common cab structure. The Renault Premium and Magnum each have unique cab designs which are unmistakeable. I stand corrected about chassis sourcing. When Mack on-highway trucks were being built along side Volvo trucks at Volvo's New River Valley plant, the frames were sourced from Metalsa in Roanoke. Metalsa continues to supply New River Valley, as well as Freightliner plants in North Carolina (Cleveland, High Point and Mount Holly). In 2002, when only Mack vocational trucks were produced at Macungie, Dana sold their Parish Frame Division to Lancaster Preferred Partners (LPP), who continued that business of supplying Macungie with chassis modules. Now of course, Mack on-highway truck production has been transferred back to Macungie (since being produced at Mack's former Winnsboro, SC plant and the current Volvo New River Valley, VA plant). The new universal Volvo-Mack cab will be a conventional. I personally prefer cabovers for their superior visibility, serviceability and other advantages, but current US truck weight laws and U.S. long-haul driver preference for conventionals has regrettably taken over-the-road cabover models off the menu. Freightliner still produces the Argosy cabover in Cleveland, North Carolina for export, but now only in right-hand drive configuration for South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. The all-new Argosy II is extremely impressive. Navistar still produces the 9800i cabover, in both left- and right-hand drive, but has moved production to Brazil. It's arguable dated, but updates have kept it a high performer.

As I said before, all Mack, Volvo and Freightliner frames are produced by the Mexican company Metalsa in Roanoke, Virginia (184 Vista Drive). There was never any negative customer feedback to Dana producing Mack chassis (frames) because Dana was a proven American supplier to Mack Trucks for decades. But for obvious reasons, Volvo and Freightliner don't like to publicize that their truck frames are now produced by a Mexican company. Not at all good for business. Usted entiende Señor? That's the sound of dollars flowing out of the U.S. economy and down to Mexico. MAN has absolutely no control over Navistar. Navistar CEO Dan Ustian will gladly tell you that they have a license agreement to produce U.S. market-adapted MAN 10.5L D20 and 12.4L D26 engines in the United States at its Huntsville, Alabama plant. They pay MAN a license fee. That's all. MAN, majority owned by Volkswagen, is not a Navistar stockholder (In fact, Navistar has a rocky relationship with the Germans). Paccar bought DAF. As a result, the European truckmaker DAF is now an American-owned company. Pure and simple. it was a brilliant expansion decision by a solid American company that has achieved 73 consecutive years of net profit. As the website clearly states, "DAF Trucks N.V. is a PACCAR company". Perhaps you should contact Paccar CEO Mark Pigott and allow him to confirm for you that Paccar (including DAF) is an American company.

Given that Paccar and Navistar are incorporated in the United States of America, their corporate officers would be very surprised to hear your view that they are not U.S. companies. However Volvo Group is indeed a Swedish company, and Daimler AG is a German company.

The CH cab has been in been in production for almost 26 years. It's on the way out. Really, to keep Mack competitive, it should have been replaced at year 20. Anyway, you'll be hearing about the new Volvo/mack cab in the next 12-18 months. It's a done deal (This is more info that Volvo doesn't particularly want you to know). Unlike the CH cab, their is an argument to produce the new cab in-house at Volvo. It is amazing that the Mack brand was allowed to have a new Mack style component in the form of the CRD 150/150 rear carriers. Now if the Mack brand was allowed to have its own independent engineers and R&D Center once again to design pedigreed Mack engines, Mack AMT triple countershaft ES300 Maxitorque transmissions, Mack frames and new Mack cabs (to replace the outdated CH and MR cabs), we could all wake up tomorrow and get back to business. Maybe Warren Buffett, who has no sympathy for the Swedes, will have his Berkshire Hathaway buy Mack back and make it a proud American institution once again.

Mack frames were always designed/engineered by Mack Trucks. And yes, frame assembly from the 1980s was performed by Dana Spicer's Heavy Systems Assembly Division in Lancaster, PA. Dana claimed they could do it cheaper than Mack (the jobs stayed in Pennsylvania). (Dana Spicer's Parish division in Reading produced Mack springs for decades) Now, all Mack, Volvo and Freightliner frames are produced by the Mexican company Metalsa in Roanoke, Virginia. Volvo (and Freightliner) doesn't particularly want you to know that though. With the beginning of the R-model, Mack began contracting out the assembly of R cabs to Sheller-Globe. They were produced in Norwalk, Ohio and shipped in on specially contructed rail cars to Allentown. It was an arrangement that worked very well. Mack did continue produce the F-model, CF, Cruise-Liner and Ultra-Liner cabs in-house. Sheller-Globe purchased Motor Panels of the UK and then put the Norwalk Mack cab plant under its new Motor Panels division. Then that division was sold in 1989 to UK-based CH Industrials, which was sold in 1991 to UK-based Mayflower Vehicle Systems, which was sold in 2005 to CVG (Commercial Vehicle Group, which has acquired Bostrom and National seating). Thus the CVG cab plant in King's Mountain, NC which produces all Mack cabs (originally located there to supply the now closed Winnsboro, South Carolina Mack plant) inefficiently ships Mack cabs all the way from King's Mountain to Macungie every day by truck (the same ineffiency as having Volvo HQ in Greensboro while the Mack plant is 400 miles away in Macungie) The Mack MB cab was a odd exception, produced in Ohio by Orrville Metal Specialty Company (which also produced cabs for a great many other truckmakers including Diamond-T, Autocar, International, Dodge, GMC, Ford and Euclid). I never took issue with certain Mack Trucks-designed components being out-sourced when a supplier (e.g. Dana - spring assemblies) was in a better position to produce that product. However I do have a very serious problem with a Volvo designed truck being branded as a Mack. Wait until the new Volvo/Mack cab is introduced. Then perhaps you'll grasp that the very sad reality that there is no more Mack Trucks. It's just a North American Volvo with the Mack logo (e.g. Chevrolet/GMC). What Volvo has done to this global icon should be a crime. For those interested, here's some background on Dana Spicer. 1904: Clarence Spicer manufactures universal joints in Plainfield, N.J., for customers including makers of Buick, Wayne, Mack, Olds and Stevens-Duryea vehicles. 1905: Neff E. Parish and John E. Sullivan leave Carpenter Steel Co. to found Parish Manufacturing Co., which produces heat-treated steel automobile frames and chrome-nickel-steel specialties. 1914: Charles Dana invests in and joins Spicer Manufacturing Co. 1916: Dana becomes president and treasurer. 1919: Parish is acquired by what is now named Spicer Manufacturing Co., later known as Dana Corp., and renamed Parish Pressed Steel Co. 1946: Spicer Manufacturing is renamed Dana Corp. 1971: Dana Corp. changes the name of its truck-frame manufacturing operation to Parish Frame Division of Dana Corp.

Mr. Logtruckmam, you can't compare today with yesterday. If Mack Trucks had been allowed to "continue" their own independent chassis design (frame) development, the Mack frame today would be equal (or more than likely superior) to the Volvo frames that Mack trucks use today, called the Cornerstone (vocational) and Advantage (highway) chassis. The situation here is a last generation Mack chassis was replaced with a new generation Volvo chassis, rather than a new generation Mack chassis. The strength of the Mack frame was legendary. Speaking of Mack vocational frames or advanced MH/RWI frames (Ultra-Liner/Super-Liner), they at any point in time had an earned reputation for durability and longevity that was the envy of Mack's competitors.

Mr. 220 Cummins, I'm sure you mean well. A VERY small percentage of Mack production is for export. You may have observed KD shipments for Venezuela or Australia. Go to Europe, the Middle East or Africa and tell me how many Mack trucks you see today. And note Mack's declining market share in Australia and New Zealand compared to 10 years ago. Question answered. Yes those Mid-Liners (and Managers) were built by Renault. And they were great medium trucks. Mack had not produced medium trucks for many years so it was a superb joint decision by Mack and Renault executives to diversify the Mack portfolio with these medium trucks. As I already said, it is extremely significant to realize that unlike Volvo, Renault understood the value of the Mack brand. Renault got involved with Mack when the company was just days away from bankruptcy (only Mack people know that). Renault could have pulled a Volvo and began dismantling the Mack truck and replacing it with Renault components. But instead, Renault invested "heavily" in Mack and brought the company back to greatness. Renault realized the incredible capabilities of the Mack company, including its cutting edge engineering (Kudos to Mack engineers in Allentown and Hagerstown). It wasn't an alliance. Renault owned Mack. But with Renault's Elios Pascual acting as Mack's president (he was an outstanding and respected leader at Mack), the company got back on its feet and ran with the ball. Volvo, on the other hand, has gutted the company down to nothing. Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. This should be a crime. That's my opinion, and you'll have a hard time locating a Mack employee that feels otherwise. If one thinks that Mack trucks now share only "some" components with Volvo's North American product range, its only because your not in a position to know. I can park a Volvo and Mack tractor side-by-side, and the only difference is the cab and hood. It's disgusting what Volvo has done. Some have mentioned products that we now believe should have come on to the scene in the 1995 to 2000 period. Every company's management goes thru cycles of highs and lows, unfortunately (something to do with us being human). I believe that Mack hit a down cycle when company president Elios Pascual (1990-1995) was replaced by Pierre Jocou (1995-1996) and Michel Gigou (1996-2001). The company lost its direction. If Volvo had put the great Mack Trucks back on its feet with investment and the freedom to continue independent development, rather than dismantling Mack Trucks (the company and its product) like the loser in a leveraged buyout, we'd have a much more positive story today. Ask any veteran Mack parts or service man what they think of Mack now (the parts people love how Volvo has replaced Mack part numbers with new meaningless Volvo global part numbers - sarcasm). Ask them if Mack's factory parts and service representatives get fired for disagreeing with Volvo? By all means please ask if veteran Mack people get fired for telling the Swedes they are screwing up Mack? Maybe you'll believe them.

German-owned Freightliner producing trucks in Mexico for the U.S. market, and the proceeds head straight out of the country to Stuttgart. Just like your U.S. dollars flowing to Sweden every time you buy a U.S. Volvo or Mack-branded Volvo. Do you think the Swedes or Germans care about the U.S. economy. They watch their back, and we watch ours. I haven't been a big Navistar fan in recent years (the idiodic EGR direction), but they and Paccar (Kenworth and Peterbilt) are in fact the only American-owned truckmakers left (plus Oshkosh in the specialty truck field). Given the economy in 2013 and 2014 is probably going to be turbulent (before recovering in 2015), it would be wise for American truck operators to invest in trucks produced by American companies for a while, keeping U.S. money in the U.S. in support of our country's best interest.

Volvo purchased the Mack brand, as they did White and GMC, to remove another competitor. True, they tried a different tact with Mack. Perhaps they were forced to, since their vocational truck sales in the U.S. are terrible and tractor sales remain modest. Volvo has done well in construction machinery, but that's another deal altogether, unrelated to their lack of success in American's heavy truck market. If I want a Volvo truck, then I'll head to a Volvo truck franchise. But if I want a Mack Truck, it is because I desire a pedigreed Mack designed product. I don't want a Volvo chassis. I don't want a Volvo engine and Volvo transmission. People will say that Mack did their own software tweaking but that's nonsense. There is no Mack. Hagerstown is a Volvo facility. You can only say that Volvo gave the Volvo-branded version and the Mack-branded version slightly different programming. Big deal - it's still a Volvo drivetrain thru and thru. From the 1950's to 2000, Mack was totally unique in the U.S. truck market in that Mack became the country's last vertically integrated heavy truck manufacturer. When under good management, Mack soared with cutting edge products that were sold world worldwide. The Volvo global plan: Except for few countries, Volvo doesn't want Mack to be a global brand. Volvo only "allows" Mack into a handful of countries where Volvo has no success (e.g. Venezuela, Ecuador). But, for example, you won't see a Mack in Brazil (South America's most profitable market) because Volvo doesn't want Mack there. Mack used to be HUGE all over the Middle East. Huge and profitable deals for construction trucks. The Macks became legendary there for their robust engineering (as they had in the U.S.). No European brand heavy truck ever rivaled the reliabilty and durability of the Mack truck, because Mack continually used higher testing standards than the European truckmakers. Any former Mack engineer "in the know" will tell you that Volvo's testing in Greensboro, North Carolina pales in comparison to what Mack demanded at the Mack Trucks Engineering, Development and Test Center in Allentown. This world class facility, logically nearby the Macungie plant where all Mack trucks are produced, was closed by Volvo. All its functions were relocated to an inferior Volvo facility, some 400 miles away from the Macungie plant, at Greensboro, North Carolina. Apparently, Volvo sees no need for R&D and production to ideally work closely together nearby in adjacent facilities to refine product design, quality and performance (in "Mack speak", that's called "Pedigreed Performance"). Mack of course was a major player of course in off-highway trucks and fire apparatus. As they say, respect and trust must be earned, and Mack certainly earned its tier one reputation in off-highway trucks and fire apparatus. Volvo of course didn't kill these products (that occurred in 1980 and 1990 respectively). After the long-time superb leadership at these two Mack business units retired, their replacements were as bad as their predecessors had been good, and sales subsequently fell. But here's a thought. If Volvo was truly aware of the value of the Mack brand, Volvo would by now have taken advantage of the strength of Mack's former leadership position in these two profitable business sectors.

I never saw a Renault (RVI) logo on an E-7. Could you possibly be thinking of the later ASET engines? The contrast between Renault's excellent management of Mack and the sad state of affairs today at Mack under Volvo ownership is staggering. Renault realized the incredible value of Mack, and had foresight that paid off with solid profitability. Mack flourished under Renault with revolutionary new products such as the MH Ultra-Liner, a breakthrough in technology and design featuring cutting edge chassis design and a cab with safety cage and fireproof Maxi-Glas composite construction. Volvo has demonstrated again and again since 2001 that they are completely oblivious to the very meaning of Mack Trucks and the immense value this company represents when it is allowed to flourish in its own right. I had no problem with Volvo reducing White and GMC to nothing, because those two brands realistically were already nothing. But Mack Trucks is a totally different situation entirely. The strength of the Mack brand, its incredible employees, and the company's legendary engineering is immeasurable. It is nothing less than amazing how ignorant Volvo Group's business strategy is relating to Mack Trucks. Volvo is not adept at selling outside of Western Europe and their track record in country markets like China and the US is a good example. In fact, Volvo has a history of deep spending that brought little or no results. Volvo spent millions on an ill-planned and fruitless 6-year journey in China. Volvo signed a 50-50 joint venture with China National Heavy Truck Corp. (CNHTC) in March 2004 and proclaimed they'd produce 2,500 units in 2005 and 10,000 units in 2008. But Volvo didn't do their homework and learn the unique metrics of the world’s largest truck market, and has since dissolved that relationship after building only 1,000 (CKD) trucks total, which were all sold at a loss. Volvo's track record in the US market speaks for itself. They've been in the U.S. market 38 years, since they introduced the F86(US) in 1974. The fact they've accomplished so little in that long time period supports my view that Volvo doesn't understand the US market. They've tried many avenues over the years and yet have never been able to get their U.S. market into gear. The F86US cab-over was a flop, as was the underpowered 253hp N10(US) conventional. They tried a new tact buying the assets of White and forming Volvo White Truck Corp. in 1981. Still making no headway (or profit), Volvo purchased General Motor's heavy truck division in 1987 to form the WHITEGMC brand as Volvo GM Heavy Truck and continue their unprofitable trek forward. Volvo for years followed the failed money-losing strategy of buying market share, selling to the fleets at a loss and committing to unrealistic buy-back amounts (you couldn't give away a used Volvo White truck because its was a cheap throwaway truck as a Mack has become today under Volvo). And finally in one more attempt to establish itself in the US market, Volvo exchanged 15% of their shares for 100% of the shares of Renault Vehicles Industries, taking control of Renault's heavy truck division which included Mack Trucks. Observe how Volvo has purchased three competitors in the US market and yet has benefited so little. Volvo remains clueless of the unique and invaluable asset they now hold in Mack. The closure of Mack headquarters in Allentown, transferring all functions to Volvo Truck Headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina, is a mortal wound to the Mack brand. Mack is now no more than a nameplate on a low-end disposable US-market Volvo truck. Volvo has step-by-step destroyed the very soul that deservedly made Mack Trucks great. Any remark to the contrary is a distortion of the fact. If Volvo Group followed Renault’s example and placed Mack under competent and independent management, Mack Trucks could benefit Volvo Group far more than a decapitated Mack brand which now is no more than a Mack emblem on a disposable low-quality truck built around Volvo components. Mack customers are alienated by this product and the sales figures reflect this reality better than Volvo's Mack marketing hype. Simply speaking, most Mack customers want to purchase a "real" Mack truck, with genuine Mack components that incorporate the engineering that Mack Trucks is legendary for. Based on Volvo's poor track record in the U.S. market, it would be prudent for Volvo to reconsider their strategy for Mack Trucks before the brand's recovery potential is forever lost. After twelve demoralizing years for both customers and employees in a net-negative spiral that has achieved no mentionable results, admitting their error by relocating Mack World Headquarters back to Allentown, Pennsylvania would be a critical first move towards getting the Mack Truck organization back on track and in the right direction. Mack Trucks, unlike any other truckmaker throughout U.S. history, has a soul. Mack is not a brand. Mack is a legend. Mack is a family, of employees and customers. For customers, Mack is a feeling. For Mack employees everywhere, Mack is a way of life. Nobody ever said "built like a Freightliner, or International". No other U.S. truck brand ever became a household word.

When you say that "Volvo has there hands in Mack", I really want you to realize that there is no more Mack. Ask your "Mack" district service representative for his e-mail and it will be a john.smith@volvo.com. My friend, it's all Volvo now. The only "Mack" is the logo on the truck. If I wanted a Volvo truck, then I'd buy a Volvo. However, if I want a Mack, sell me a pedigreed Mack product. Don't insult my intelligence by attempting to sell me a Volvo chassis with a Mack logo on it. I don't mind that Paccar is using the DAF engine because Paccar bought DAF (in 1996 for a small US$543 million when DAF was nearly bankrupt). It was a brilliant move, demonstrating that at least one of America's two truckmakers has what it takes to play ball on the global stage. Clearly, DAF is owned by the Americans, so I'm fine with their engine. Engines for U.S. market Paccar trucks (Kenworth and Peterbilt) are produced at a new state-of-the-art plant in Mississippi. When you buy a Paccar engine equipped Kenworth or Peterbilt, your money is staying in America. But when you buy a Swedish Mack or a German Freightliner, your dollars are on their way to Europe. Not good in these economically troubled times for our country.

The 26 year old Mack-designed cab (and hood) are all that is left from the former Mack Truck Company. Yes, Mack transmissions and axles are still available, but most highway Macks are built with Eaton transmissions, and Meritor or Dana/Spicer rear axles. Only the construction trucks still get some Mack transmissions and axles. So with a Volvo chassis, Volvo engine, Volvo I-Shift transmission (rebadged as mDrive) and vendor axles, it's hardly a Mack truck anymore. It is a North American Volvo with a Mack badge. A new cab is coming and it will be shared with Volvo-badged North American product. So as I said, Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. It should be a crime. Have you noticed how Mack parts prices have doubled or tripled since Volvo took over in 2000? That was no accident. They decided $6.00 for a belt was too cheap, that they could get away with asking $20 (more dollars flowing out of the U.S.to Sweden). I'm not a Navistar fan, but realistically Paccar (Kenworth and Peterbilt) and Navistar are the only American-owned truckmakers left. If you are a "buy American" person that wants the money to stay in country, you might want to think about that. Rob mentioned Mack's in-house engineering. Sadly, there is no such thing anymore. For example, the former Mack Trucks powertrain plant in Hagerstown, Maryland is now Volvo Powertrain North America. Volvo terminated any further pedigreed Mack engine, transmission and axle development. Mack hasn't introduced a new transmission in years. Mack wanted build AMT versions of the Mack transmissions (knowing Mack's triple countershaft design was far more rugged that Volvo's single countershaft I-Shift), but Volvo rejected any talk of that. And there is no design department in Allentown anymore (Mack's Allentown headquarters was closed by Volvo, with all functions taken over by Volvo headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina).

Yes, the E-7 should have been larger. And the E-9 should have been evolved into a modern V-8 that could meet ongoing emissions standards (as Scania has proven can be done with their Euro-6 compliant 500 to 730 hp V-8 engine). Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. This should be a crime. The Mack truck today is nothing more than a Mack nameplate on a North American Volvo truck. If Mack had been a so-so truck in the US and globally (e.g. GMC, Ford, White), I would have no firm ground to stand on. But Mack in fact was a world leader. Mack's cutting edge design achievements from rubber-insulated suspensions on the AC Buldog to the Maxi-Glas cab of the MH Ultra-Liner continually put the world on notice that Mack Trucks was at the forefront of heavy truck development. Constantly introducing breakthoughs in technology and design, Renault understood the power of the spirit and pride within Mack Trucks and its employees that, I feel, remains unmatched. Mack is now the butt of jokes at the other US truckmakers. The competitor they once respected (and feared) is gone. They'll be the first to tell you that there is no Mack Trucks anymore. They can't thank Volvo enough for taking Mack Trucks off the playing table. Look at any new Mack truck. Do you feel the quality of design and assembly is still representative of the former Mack Truck Company? I think not. The Mack-badged Volvo-engineered truck is a cheap disposable truck (what we used to call Freightliners when Mack Trucks was still in business).

You are 100 percent correct. The performance of the internal EGR verson of the ASET engines was terrible. However there isn't a car or truck manufacturer on earth that hasn't had low points in terms of product. For example, another low point for Mack was the premature introduction of the mack T200 transmissions in the 1980s. I blame the gutless ASET AI engines on the Mack management at the time of its development. It gave Mack a huge black eye. R&D told management it wasn't ready for production yet, but management decided to gamble and rush it into production anyway. The transmission, once fully developed, of course performed exceptionally well and was worthy of the Mack name. A company at any moment is only as good as it's leadership at the time (look at the way Roger Smith blindly ran GM into the ground). From the time Renault's brilliant Elios Pascual took over as Mack CEO from the incompetent Ralph Reins (1989-1990), Mack began climbing back on top and was performing very well by 1995. However in 1996, Renault installed a new president and CEO at Mack, Michel Gigou, who I believe didn't understand Mack or the North American truck industry. Under his tenure at Mack, the pathetic ASET AI engines were being developed and therefore a flatly blame him for launching what turned out to be the worst Mack engines in the company's history (outside of the ENDT711). (Interestingly, Gigou became President of Volvo North America after Volvo purchased Mack in 2000 - Hmmm) With high quality management supporting Mack's legendary leadership position in engine technology, I have no doubt that Mack could have offered competitive engine product to meet EPA2002, EPA2004, EPA2007 and today's EPA2010. Some Mack trivia, did you know that Mack wanted to develop AMT versions of the Mack T300 triple-counter shaft transmissions, but Volvo refused to allow the project? We now know, because Volvo wanted to use their weaker single countershaft design (even ZF uses a double countershaft design for their AMTs).

Volvo doesn't care at all about what the Mack name represents to us. Within the thought process of the Volvo Swedes, the Mack name might as well not exist. The only reason the Mack name is still around at all, on paper, is because Volvo frankly would fall on their face in North American if they tried to merge the brand 100% under Volvo. But behind the scenes, there is no Mack Trucks anymore (ask any dealer - they'll tell you). Truck and component production is all under the Volvo name. The alleged Mack headquarters is located now within Volvo's North American headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina. The reality is, the United States only has two heavy truckmakers left, that being Paccar and Navistar. The Germans own Freightliner/Western Star and the Swedes own Mack. If you want to support American companies and keep U.S. money in the U.S., you might want to think about that. Volvo engines, transmissions and chassis? Low-end build quality (not the Mack truck of 15 years ago). New Volvo global part numbers on Mack parts that have no meaning (Mack numbers brilliantly told Mack parts people for decades what the part was). I could go on and on. At least Renault understood the value of the Mack brand when they had it and nourished the company back to greatness. Volvo, on the other hand, has gutted the company down to nothing (they sell a few Mack transmissions and Mack rears from time to time). Volvo remains clueless that Mack Trucks is the most unique truck brand in America (to know one or more arrogant Volvo Swede and experience their demeanor is to understand why). Over the decades that Mack engineers were designing legendary world class drivetrains, Volvo's components did not even compare. If Mack Trucks still existed and had been allowed to continue with component, cab and chassis design, the "pedigreed" Mack product would be superior to Volvo (ask any customer with a Volvo VHD). Volvo’s track record in the US market is humiliating. Volvo has been in the US market for some 38 years (they unsuccessfully introduced the F86US in 1974). The fact that Volvo has realistically accomplished so little in almost 4 decades speaks volumes about the company’s inability to understand the US market.

I've submitted what I felt was an interesting question several times to Mack's "Talking SCR", asking why Mack doesn't offer an EPA2010 SCR V8 engine, never get a response. I thought that I'd share it here. To Mack's "Talking SCR": When I mentioned my intrigue that Scania planned to reach reaching Euro-6 (extremely close to EPA2010) using ultra high pressure injection in excess of 2400bar with EGR/SCR and a VGT, but without the need of a DPF, you in fairness hesitated to call Scania's Euro-6 developments a success with over 3 years before its commercial launch (Euro-6 begins in 2013). My thoughts were about Scania being able to reach that emissions level without requiring a DPF, amounting to a significant savings in the purchase price of the truck, weight savings and simplification of the truck design. I learned recently that Scania is currently test running new Euro-6 ready 5 and 6-cylinder inline and V8 engines – heavily modified, but derived from its current Euro-5 models – in Sweden for its recently-launched new R-series trucks. In addition to testing in engine test bays and endurance rigs – the latter designed to prove compliance with the requirement for 700,000 km (435,000 miles) and 7 years within Euro-6 specifications, pre-production Euro-6 engines are also being used to power some of the company's own Transport Laboratory mixed brand haulage fleet, which tests developments while hauling major truck components from its Södertälje factory in Sweden to the Zwolle production plant in the Netherlands – with tractor units racking up 340,000km (211,000 miles) per year. For Euro-6, Scania has employed several major enhancements. For example, unlike the current Euro-5 V8, which uses SCR alone to control engine-out NOx, the new Euro-6 engine uses a combination of SCR, EGR and a closed diesel particulate filter to meet the stringent Euro-6 PM requirements. It also features a single variable geometry turbocharger and XPI (high pressure, digitally-controlled, multiple injection common rail fuel injection jointly developed by Scania and Cummins). Scania's Euro-6 V8 also takes advantage of technology developed for the new 730hp Euro-5 SCR V8. For example, cylinder combustion pressures have been raised from 165bar on the earlier 15.6-liter V8 to 200bar on the new 16.4-liter engine – necessitating a change to compacted graphite iron in the cylinder block. Also, the XPI technology now takes injection pressures up to 2,400bar, and Scania has developed multiple variations for its injection profiles, based on an HCCI (homogenous charge compression ignition). With Scania's apparent success in reaching Euro-6 with 6-cylinder inline and V8 engines, I'd very much like to know why Mack doesn't offer a ClearTech SCR-equipped EPA2010 V-8 engine? Mack Truck's legendary V-8 powerplants have been a long-time signature Mack product. Wouldn't an SCR/EGR/particulate filter combination (or SCR/EGR/DPF) combination) allow Mack to offer an EPA2010 V-8 engine? I'm a Mack man thru-and-thru, but given the positive experience I had with Scania-powered Mack R-487Ps, I've kept an eye on Scania, who recently launched a new V8 range with 500, 560, 620 and 730 horsepower ratings, with max. torque up to 2,581 ft.lb (3,500 N.m), that are designed to meet Euro-6 EEV standards (enhanced environmentally-friendly vehicle), which is very close to EPA2010. S Scania's V-8 developments catch my attention because Mack Truck's legendary E-9 V-8 had a very loyal customer following (actually still has), not unlike Scania's 16.4-liter V-8, Mercedes-Benz's 15.9-liter V-8 and MAN's 16.2-liter V-8 engines sold today. Although the V-8 might be called a niche market, Scania, Benz and MAN have continued to profitably meet customer demand for V-8 powertrains while also meeting evolving emissions standards. Scania's new V-8 reaches Euro-6 and I'm confident that Benz and MAN will as well. Why doesn't Mack take advantage of its decades of V-8 engineering expertise and introduce a "pedigreed" Mack-designed EPA-2010 V-8 engine? If stricter EPA emissions standards indeed killed Mack's E-9 V-8, how have Scania, Benz and MAN been continually able to upgrade their V-8 engines to meet tightening emissions standards? I'm extremely confident that Mack customer demand for a pedigreed V-8 powerplant both in the North American market and Australia would be very favorable. In the U.S. market, Mack would be the envy of the competition, having the market all to themselves.

The news of Scania's new Euro-6 ready V-8 engines raises another question for Mack customers. Why isn't Mack offering an EPA2010 V-8 powerplant, a long-time signature Mack product? Surely a combination of SCR and EGR with a DPF would allow Mack to offer an EPA2010 V-8 engine. Given the positive experience I had with Mack/Scania E4-210 powered R487Ps, I've kept an eye on Scania. Scania has launched a new range of V-8 engines in 500, 560, 620 and 730 horsepower ratings, with max. torque up to 2,581 ft.lb (3,500 N.m), that are designed to meet Euro-6 (close to EPA2010) EEV standards (enhanced environmentally-friendly vehicle). Scania is using a revised version of their XPI common rail injection system with higher pressures, with 3 supply pumps (Scania's 9- and 13-liter engines use 2 pumps). Note: XPI (Xtra-High Pressure Injection) is jointly developed and manufactured by Scania and Cummins. Scania's V-8 developments catch my attention because Mack Truck's legendary E-9 V-8 had a very loyal customer following (actually still has), not unlike Scania's 16.4-liter V-8, Mercedes-Benz's 15.9-liter V-8 and MAN's 16.2-liter V-8 engines sold today. Although the V-8 might be called a niche market, Scania, Benz and MAN have continued to profitably meet customer demand for V-8 powerplants while also meeting evolving emissions standards. Scania's new V-8 reaches Euro-6 and I'm confident that Benz and MAN will as well. Why doesn't Mack take advantage of its decades of V-8 engineering expertise and introduce a "pedigreed" Mack-designed EPA-2010 V-8 engine? I was told that stricter EPA emissions standards killed Mack's E-9 V-8, and yet, Scania, Benz and MAN have continually been able to upgrade their V-8 engines to meet tightening emissions standards. Why does Mack refuse to invest forward? Certainly Mack customer demand for a pedigreed V-8 powerplant both in the North American market and Australia would be very favorable. In the U.S. market, Mack would be the envy of the competition, having the market all to themselves.