Return Of The R Model?

[GearheadGrrrl]

If you read the posts here, it's obvious that there's a "feature set" very much in demand by Mack customers- durability, simplicity, drivability, and performance under the worst conditions. That "feature set" was present in spades in the R model, and explains why loyal owners stuck with the old model despite Mack's attempts to charm and bribe them into a CH.

So why not bring build a new R model? The E7 engine and classic cab are gone... but the Mayflower cab used on the CH took some styling cues from the R. While the next generation Mack conventional will probably use a Volvo cab, the Mayflower cab has been debugged, the tooling is paid for, and I'll bet Mayflower will be happy to keep welding 'em up forever at a reasonable price. Now one of the things we like about the R model was the low mount cab, so drop the Mayflower cab just about down on the frame (gotta keep the air ride!). That should give enough space under the hood for the MP7 engine, the lightweight choice that gives enough (405 horses) power for just about any dump truck. For a hood, start with the classic R hood, not that ugly thing that was dumped on the late RDs. Section it to fit the wider Mayflower cab, but don't touch that classic frontal aspect. Make it a 3 piece hood assembly, with set forward and set back front axle fender profiles with a common center section. Then trim this blast from the past with steel bumpers, an outside air cleaner with the tall intake option, genuine Hades fans in the cab and the swing open vent windows. And don't offer any fairings or plastic trim, covers, etc., with a steel front end as an option...

Would you buy one?

[kevin mccune]

Started in B's & DM's but grew to to love the R models-would love the chance to own a new R-model-Kevin

[mudslut28]

Id agree with most of that but I dont care for the mp7...very very gutless. I may be one of the few but I love the E7.

[HK Trucking]

I dont care for the mp7...very very gutless.

And also very very Volvo.

[bulldog man]

never experienced the MP7 & hear they are pretty much a Volvo motor But also what i hear of them anit good ill stick to a E6 & E7 Motor but the rest i would agree w/

later

[GearheadGrrrl]

Sorry, but the E7 won't pass 2007 and later emissions. The MP7 is about the same size and weight and has more power though.

[rick harper]

The new MP7 that I have drove had alot better low end torque and faster rpm climb than the E7 Aset engines. We have had only one in service without the DPF filter and it is doing a great job.

[rick harper]

We are suppose to get a new MP8-425HP in the next week or so. I'll drive it and give a report asap.

[storkmack]

I have been thinking about this topic for a long while, and thought about starting it up on here. I think that the granite should have been the new R model. Why do these trucks need names??? What is wrong with R or RS or RW. We know what they are, and it sounds a whole lot cooler than "pinacle". When they came out with the Granite it should have been called the RX, because it is the new R model. We hae several granites at work and they are GREAT trucks. We haven't any of the problems that we had with the Visions. Why are they putting those plastic fender flares on the new ones? Because that fender flare is a lot cheaper than a hood when a driver whacks it. I drove a MP7 and I was very pleased with it. It's throttle was very responsive and it the torqe felt like an old 2 valve. Is the engine like a Volvo? Yes, and thats not a bad thing. If we did not use technology to improve these trucks we would still be running GAS jobs. Thanks, Brad

[mudslut28]

Sorry, but the E7 won't pass 2007 and later emissions. The MP7 is about the same size and weight and has more power though.

You may be right on the emissions but as for the power thats strictly on paper....driveability is not as good either.

[GearheadGrrrl]

I went back over and took another "drive" of the webpages. The MP7 in the highest Maxidyne rating (405 HP)has about the same peak power at the old E7 had in the highest Maxidyne rating (370 HP). Both produce a peak of a bit over 400 HP at about 1800 RPM. Both provide over 90% of peak HP in a range of from 1300-2100 RPM. The MP7 seems to lose the odd handful of horses to the E7 at 1300 RPM, but the MP7 beats the E7 for low end torque- the MP7 has slighly more torque at 800 RPM than the E7 has at 1000 RPM. So it appears that Volvo has changed from rating engines at maximum governed speed on the E7 to rating them at peak power on the MP7. That little trick deceivingly makes the MP7 look 35 horses bigger. The outputs are actually pretty similar, but remember that the MP7 has to meet tougher 2007 emmissions standards.

It is also noteworthy that in a comparison with the pre-2004 E7 Maxidyne the MP7 might be the loser- those engines in the 690 series had peak torque at around 1000 RPM and a governed speed of 1800 RPM. Those engines were quite conservatively rated at 300 HP, but they pulled like a 350 if not a 400. Those low RPM Maxidynes might very well have more low speed torque than the new MP7. I suspect the 2004 emissions standards forced Mack to move the power curves on those engines to higher RPMs.

The whole industry is in the same boat here- I looked at the power curves of competitors 2007 engines and they've really narrowed. Virtually every manufacturer has been forced to set their governors up from 1800 to 2100 RPMs to maintain some vestige of the old engines performance. A lot of these engines just die below 1400 RPM, and Cat has even gone so far as to suggest matching their 2007 engines with a 13 speed transmission. I suspect we'll soon see a return of the A (close) ratio 10 speed Roadranger...