David

I have a 87 superliner coming in with about a 60", high top sleeper that I will probably be selling if anyone is interested.

The gooseneck on non-ground bearing has some type of a wrist action design that when actuated applies presure on the fifth wheel and on the deck about 2 feet back from the front end of the beams. This raises the deck and the rear of the gooseneck. After unlocking the "rests" the deck can be lowered to the ground. The real nice part of this system is the ability to raise the deck for additional ground clearance. Works well for crossing RR tracks. Look at talbertmfg.com for some pictures and a drawing of their 2 piece design. There is also the mechanical detachable with no hydraulics. Hope this helps. David On the Talbert site there is also a program for determinating the horsepower required to pull a load. Have fun!

Thad, So what your saying is that any given tire has the same revs per mile regardless of air presure or load? The same if it's mounted, aired up and not on the truck. The same if it's mounted, aired, and on a loaded truck? What if it's flat and squished down to, let's say 2 inchs from the rim? Do you think that would maintain the same revs per mile when the rolling radius has gone from 21 inchs to 14?

Looks great! Is that a CL bumper? Did you change the mounting and tow hooks?

Amen

For truck specs use the center of the trunion. For bridge formula caculations use the center of the rear axle.

Had this problem once. Turned out to be a hole in a metal fuel line on the suction side. Look where ever the line may be rubbing against something.

Just thinking about this and being able to post the question tells us you have your act together. Best of luck to ya. I wouldn't want to be 15 again.

Thad, It's strange how we both said the same thing at the exact same time!

This is why autos are becoming so popular, inspite of the cost.

Does your dump truck have plumbing for trailer brakes?

You can get the rev's per mile for different tire sizes from a Mack tech manual or the tire manufactures. For 11r22.5 my book shows 499. Consider this: You want 1500 rpm at the engine and 499 rpm at the wheels (that's one mile in one minute or 60 mph). The ratio of these two numbers is your final drive ratio. In this case it's 3.006 (1500 divided by 499). Your final drive ratio is also your trans high ratio times your rear end ratio. In this case it could be a direct trans (1.00 to 1) and a 3.00 to 1 rear. Or with 5.02 rears and a .6 to 1 overdrive (Mack T200, 5,6,7 or 8 sp), you will have a final drive ratio of 3.012 (.6 X 5.02). So we have (1500/499/5.02=.5988) The .6 overdrive is real close! PS: Tim, It's real hard to determine the revs per mile by measuring the tire because it does not take into consideration the change in the radius when weight is applied to the tire. If the radius is changed from 21 to 20, the revs per mile now becomes 504. I guess that's why the manual shows 499. I will look up other tire sizes if anyone needs them. Good Luck, David

The Mack T2050, T2060, T2070, and T2080 have an overdrive of .6 to 1.

The only problem with autos is the price. They add about 10k to the price of a new truck. Some companies like them because of the quality of the drivers available today.

If you attach your flaps with nylon zip ties (the big thick ones that heating and ac contractors use), they will break before the flap tears. Keep extras in the truck and you can reinstall in the field.

An aftercooler will give you about 50 hp.

I did this once with a R model when the clutch cable broke.

The last few model years of Brockway they used the R model cab. But, they had their own dash. Easy to tell from the front by the 2 pc windshield. The old Brockways had 3 pc.

Trent, You could cruise to truck shows at 70 mph and only be turning about 1600 rpm. A T2050 is an easy find. I have 2 I can't give away. They only weigh 468 lbs. and don't bring much for scrap.

Trent, I agree. We had a local brick manufacturer with 4.17 rears in pit trucks. They were always tearing up ring and pinions. After switching to 4.42 and 4.64 rears there problems disapeared. Of course they would be slow as hell on the road, but they never went out of the pit. You can have the best of both worlds ( slow rears and good road speed) with a fast transmission. When making a comparisson, if you multiply the high gear ratio of the trans by the rear ratio you get a final drive ratio. So you can see how you can reduce the rear end speed, increase the trans speed and keep the same top end speed with acceptable rpm's. In the 70's we saw a lot of 6 sp directs (1.00 to 1) and 4.17 rears. Thats a final drive ratio of 4.17 (1.00 X 4.17). With the T2090, 9sp (.71 overdrive) you can run 5.73 rears and be slightly faster (.71 X 5.73=4.07) than the direct with 4.17's. The 9 speeds I have (or have had) came with 5.02, 4.64 or 4.42 rears. That's final drives of 3.56, 3.29 and 3.14 respectively and never any rear problems with on /off road use. The Mack T200 5, 6, 7 and 8 speeds are even faster transmissions (overdrive ratio of .6 to 1) That means the engine turns 6 tenths of 1 rev for each full turn of the driveshaft or another way of looking at it is the driveshaft is turning 167% faster than the engine. I think these are the fastest transmissions on the market. You can run 5.73 rears and still have a final drive ratio of 3.44. Now you know why I'm looking at putting a T2050 behind a 2 stick direct. I don't know the ratios of the quad boxes but they were posted on another website at on time. I'll see if I can find that list.

Mack's theory is slow rears and fast transmissions. This allows for lighter drive shafts and longer life from the rears.

Who works in the truck business and gives themself the name " I Hate Trucks"?

I'm thinking of adding a third stick to a 6 sp 2 stick. I have a couple of the 6 speeds and a couple of the 2050's laying around and you can't give any of them away. With the 2050 left in 4th (direct) the 6 sp would shift like the 2050 wasn't there. Then with the 6 sp in high, you shift the 2050 from 4th into overdrive. A very fast overdrive(.6 to 1). It sure would get you home faster.

Has anyone ever installed a yoke on the front of a transmission (like say a T2050) and installed it as an auxiliary?