Popular Post nwfs600 Posted February 22, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted February 22, 2017 My partner and I test drove this truck today. He has been working with the salesman for a couple of weeks. It's financed if we are ready to pull the trigger. It has the 505E engine, Eaton 18spd, and Mack rears with lockers. We hope it will do 7 mpg. Our 389's get 5.5 mpg. Dealer support kind of worries me. We got a new Mack dealer in Saginaw, Michigan and I just don't know if they will give the service I would hope for. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody454 Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 579 supposed to get at least 1 mpg better than 389. Friend of mine runs a fuel hauling co...they are trading all their 389s for 579s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiserfrombud Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Without a ton of info there is no way to predict a truck will get x MPG. Even with a ton of info, 2 identical trucks running the same conditions will still vary from one another. IMHO however as much as I appreciate a CH if you are truly after fuel economy, you should be kicking tires on a CXU. The faster you like to run, the further from 7 mpg that square hood/bumper will put you as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted February 22, 2017 Share Posted February 22, 2017 Agreed- Unless you have a special need for a set forward axle, the axle back models will give better fuel economy almost every time. As for other specs, the MP8 445 HP rating is reckoned by many to give better MPG. Also, you might want to consider Mack's "Super Econodyne" low RPM ratings, but you might want to skip the Volvo Automated Manual Transmission they like to stick behind it. And as long as you've got financing, maybe shop dealer stock nationwide or even order a truck built to your spec... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 Hoods attract drivers. That CHU is quite reasonable. We haul van freight through the midwest but some drivers like otr so who knows. We are also looking at Peterbilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtymilkman Posted February 23, 2017 Share Posted February 23, 2017 I would not be afraid of that truck one bit. Buy it up and run it. Then you'll know FIRST HAND. All my experience with Mack service in MN has been good. Paccar around here not so good. It all depends on the dealer you go to. And I would think a new dealer would treat you excellent as they'd be looking for new customers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted February 23, 2017 Author Share Posted February 23, 2017 The new dealer thing is what scares me most. Mack or Volvo took the dealership away from Diesel Truck Sales of Saginaw, Michigan. They are my Freightliner/Ford dealer and were Mack forever. They also sold Ford so after that crap sandwich deal they got into the Freightliner/Sterling business. I guess because they weren't selling many units they lost the Mack franchise. Who's fault was it that they couldn't sell what Mack doesn't make? They sold one Titan. When Mack was Mack and Ford was Ford this place had more orange trucks and Michigan specials in the parking lot than you would believe. Does anyone have any experience with Interstate Trucksource out of Saginaw or Romulus, Michigan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bts-4120 Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 mpg is going to depend on what you pull with it. why the E file if your not doing a SE why not a C or Cplus doubt it be much mpg diffrenence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upsman Posted February 26, 2017 Share Posted February 26, 2017 Your right foot is a big factor in mpg. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted March 3, 2017 Author Share Posted March 3, 2017 Well, the Mack followed my partner home today. The Peterbilt dealer tried but just couldn't get close with a 2016 579. I drove the Mack and it isn't my 389. I like most of the truck except those high dollar seats that feel rickety. Total cost of ownership not just being less money to start with is what sold the Mack to us. The injector cups on the Mack or the egr cooler on the Peterbilt. Both are expensive and will happen. I'm a Cat guy so injector cups have just been a way of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiserfrombud Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 I have the "upgraded" Bostrom seats. They look awesome but are total and absolute junk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kscarbel2 Posted March 3, 2017 Share Posted March 3, 2017 If you want good quality seats that incorporate the latest technology, specify Sears seating. They are a Mack brand factory option. http://www.searsseating.com/product-category/truck-seats/ In a Paccar product, specify Grammer - http://www.gramag.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post nwfs600 Posted March 5, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted March 5, 2017 Everyone was clean so it was time for a picture. Next week the Mack will get pinstripes and decals. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted March 6, 2017 Author Share Posted March 6, 2017 Weighed the truck full of fuel today. It was 22,000. We were considering a CXU but not at that weight. Wiserfrombud what does your truck weigh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiserfrombud Posted March 6, 2017 Share Posted March 6, 2017 (edited) Ouch! Mine is 18, 400 lbs with the high rise condo, and Mack rears! They were heaviest of the options. A friend of mine has a 14 CH and it's well over 20,000 as well. I just saw that is full of fuel...I don't remember what the tractor is full of fuel by itself. I own my own reefer as well. Truck and trailer stuffed full of fuel (dual 142's) DEF and reefer tank full I weigh in 36,500 lbs. Edited March 6, 2017 by wiserfrombud 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted March 6, 2017 Author Share Posted March 6, 2017 That is reasonable. Thanks for the quick reply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nwfs600 Posted March 11, 2017 Author Share Posted March 11, 2017 First full week mileage was 6.6. Not too shabby for a new truck with a trainee at the wheel most of the time. The drivers seat has been whined about every phone call this week. I guess it is coming out to be replaced with his Admiral out of his Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiserfrombud Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I feel his pain.......literally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiserfrombud Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) On 3/11/2017 at 7:35 AM, nwfs600 said: First full week mileage was 6.6. Not too shabby for a new truck with a trainee at the wheel most of the time. The drivers seat has been whined about every phone call this week. I guess it is coming out to be replaced with his Admiral out of his Ford. 6.6 is a nice number out of a brand new CHU. That's a good start to a profitable truck. Keep in mind we still have a few weeks of winter fuel. I will be curious to see how it's doing in a few months. Edited March 16, 2017 by wiserfrombud Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jdiesel3406 Posted November 16, 2017 Share Posted November 16, 2017 Any updates to how the truck has been doing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.