rainyday128

Consider that Paccar's Pete and KW are doing quite well building trucks out of other company's parts.

Paccar to build $400M engine-making plant

Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle) - 9:45 AM PST Wednesday

Paccar Inc. said it plans to build a $400 million plant in the Southeast United States to build engines for its Kenworth and Peterbilt trucks.

Construction on the 400,000-square-foot facility will begin later this year and should be completed in 2009, officials at the Bellevue-based truck maker (NASDAQ: PCAR) said in a statement. They didn't specify exactly where the plant would be built but said they're working with "several states."

"Offering a Paccar powertrain to our North American customers will provide additional choices in their vehicle specifications," said Jim Cardillo, executive vice president, in a statement.

Paccar now equips its Kenworth and Peterbilt trucks with engines made by either Cummins Inc. of Columbus, Ind., (NYSE: CMI) or Caterpillar Inc. of Peoria, Ill. (NYSE: CAT)

Volvo's bean counters are part of the problem too- if you look at Volvo's offerings in international markets they offer very few options, and the truck is pretty much a take it or leave it option.

That philosophy won't cut it with Mack's traditional customers. Consider, for example, a serious oilfield service truck- the spec would call for twin steering axles of at lest 20,000 pounds each, tridem drive axles rated for at least 75,000 pounds total, a wheel base of over 300 inches, a full power take off for the winches, AND a sleeper cab. Mack currently offers nothing like that in the US, but Kenworthless and Wasted Star can fill the bill.

Maybe I missed something. Before Volvo, what Mack model was the twin steer, tridem, 300" wb sleeper winch truck that they sold to all their traditional oilfield customers?

Mack's previous owners -- Renault, Wheelabrator Frye, and before that the Signal companies - mainly milked Mack for its cash flow and never invested much into it. Volvo is investing more money into Mack facilities and Mack product than all the ones before did put together. What's the problem with that?

Where is the Mack Museum these days?

I drove past the building in Macungie on Rt. 100 Sunday and got a shock -- it's not the museum any more. I thought Mack owned that building. It had such a neat look for a truck Museum. Never was inside it however...

Ain't NOTHIN like the sound of a Mack V-8 with straight pipes.

Will someone please post a soundbite of a decent ENDT865 or ENDT1005?

I can tell you I just bought another truck to haul coal in and it had to be a Mack and it had to be pre-98.

I miss your point. Why do you avoid 1999 Macks. That was before Volvo had anything to do with Mack. Why don't you just avoid Advantage chassis and MP7 engines?

here are a coupla others

Inline's

END672 4 7/8 x 6, 672 CID, Lanova Injection (indirect), 150 HP

END673 4 7/8 x 6, direct injection (15% improvement in fuel econ), 170 HP

END673E 180 HP ~1968

END711, 5 x 6, 707 CID, 211 HP, LATE '60'S

ENDT673 672 CID, First Turbodiesel in US, 1955 225 HP

ENDT673C 250 HP included piston cooling nozzles, oil cooler

ENDT675 237 Maxidyne, first high torque rise (5-speed) 906 TQ, still 672 CID, 1966

ENDT676 '300 Series Maxidyne' 285 HP, world's first air to air intercooled diesel, 1973

(engine mounted intercooler using tip rurbine fan)

ETAZ673 315 HP Econodyne (conventional torque rise)

E6-350 350 HP Dual stage intercooling, water to air plus air to air, conventional torque rise

.....

V-8's

END864 5 x 5 1/2 864 CID, single plunger pump, 255 HP, 1962

ENDD864 fleet motor derated

ENDT864 300 HP twin turbo

ENDT865 5 1/4 x 5, 866 CID, 8 plunger pump, V-8 Maxidyne (high torque rise),

all new motor with revised bore & stroke, 325HP@2400, single turbo, 1970

ENDT866 866 CID, 375 HP @ 2200, Thermodyne, (conventional torque rise), 1971

ENDT1005 5 3/8 x 5 1/2, 998 CID, 1976, 360 Maxidyne

E-9 450 Maxidyne 998 CID, radiator mounted air to air, 1980

.....

Reminded me of a thing 30 years ago. Saw a letter a guy had written in for a service manual or any help at all with what he believed to be a very rare Mack 1935 pickup. Of course that was several years before the short lived "Mack Junior". Mack's response was, "sorry but that isn't a Mack and we believe it has been mis-represented to you. As nearly as we can tell, that is a 1935 Dodge with a Mack bulldog ornament on the hood"

How did Mack engines (whichever series ) compare with 855 cummins or KT cummins and 1693 or 3406 CAT's in terms of reliability?

The KT is not one of Cummins' proudest moments. Mack sold a lot more E9's and over a lot more years despite only being available in just one make.

And which you think was the best Mack engine ever built both in terms of performance and longevity/reliability

Hagerstown built its millionth engine in 2002. probly the most popular one of those was the ENDT675. I have seen it gross as much as 130,000 lbs. OK not very fast but that little engine would pull. If you look at all the mixers and dumps that were built with it you can say, "this is the engine that built America."

OK the grille has been turned inside out.

The mirrors are European (convex) certainly not Delbar.

But what's the deal with the rear axle? (note axle shaft)

Is that a cast housing 44,000 tandem that's been singled out (turned into 4x2)?

One thing I did do over the past couple years that amazed me was cut through the 12" I beam on my tandem duel tag trailer right to the vertical just like it was cut with shears. ...With the single Mack frame, jack knifing it on back roads to turn around. The Mack frame doesn't have the slightest scratch.

Yah, I've seen RD's dump a 30 ton load of coal where the load froze to one side causing the truck to upset to the point where the bed was laying flat on its side on the ground and the front axle still had both tires still on the ground. Pull it back over on it's wheels with the dozer and drive it home, unbent.

Compare that to a GMC Brigadier I saw buckle his frame by just spreading gravel on a turn and forgot to lift the pusher axle, that one was a write-off.

Yes mack did offer integrated sleepers in the 50's and 60's on the B models. There may have been an offering on the earlier A models also. Autocar White and international also had these versions back then. White reintroduced the integral sleeper in the early 80's right before Volvo bought them out and then dropped the brand name like a hot rock.

Volvo had no intention to drop the White name until well into negotions with General Motors about their 1988 75/25 joint venture, when GM said the name "GMC" had to stay and thus the name "WHITEGMC" the dumbest name for any truck in history. How all the suits could sit around a table and come up with this I don't know.

In Volvo's credit, while White Motor Corp had some engineers build prototypes of the intergral sleeper, the first since the B-Model and the first with a wide cab, there marketing department never bought off on it. But Volvo took the White Road Boss II in 1981, put a decent hood on it, and focused on the Intergral Sleeper concept. There sales shot up. Then the Extended Sleeper in 1987. Nobody else ever had anything like it with a wide cab and long sleeper in one big cabin. Air springs under the bunk. Now everybody has copied it. Then the WHITEGMC thing came along.