Jump to content

Thoughts on the Mack CH613


Recommended Posts

Looking at very clean low mileage CH613 with mechanical E7, Fuller trans, and Mack rears on Camelback. I've never drove or been around a Ch, just thought I'd ask for any thoughts or opinions on the model;  short-comings, misgivings, strong points etc. It has the set back axle and is a day cab. Thanks in advance.

  • Like 1

Fun is what they fine you for!

My name is Bob Buckman sir,. . . and I hate truckers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the CH series I've seen are single frame and relatively light weight. Was around one CL and it was a double rail truck and orginally an E9 powered unit. We repowered it to and E7-427, or 454, (don't remember) several years ago.

Dog.jpg.487f03da076af0150d2376dbd16843ed.jpgPlodding along with no job nor practical application for my existence, but still trying to fix what's broke.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have driven a lot of heavy spec CL's but here is my old 2000 CH. It was double frame, 14,000 front, 46,000 Eaton rears on Mack air leaf. E7 460 with an Eaton 18 speed.

One of the smoothest riding and best handling trucks I have ever driven. Also the best factory headlights I ever had. Never even had a need to use the extra 100W auxiliary lights.

It just inspired confidence driving it. No matter if it was white outs or freezing rain, it never did anything that made you feel uneasy.

That truck sure worked good. Used to haul bark and logs with it. It was like a bulldozer. I had the temp sensors ripped right off the diff pots and it never got stuck. I can't explain it, but that truck just worked better than most I have had.

 

The downfall.....the E7 full of casting sand and electronics gremlins. When it decided to run though it pulled good. I ran with guys that had same loads and trailers and they had Series 60 500's and 475 Cat's. Yes they could pass me on the hills, but I could keep them in sight.

ch.jpg

ch1.jpg

ch2.jpg

ch3.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bullheaded said:

I have driven a lot of heavy spec CL's but here is my old 2000 CH. It was double frame, 14,000 front, 46,000 Eaton rears on Mack air leaf. E7 460 with an Eaton 18 speed.

One of the smoothest riding and best handling trucks I have ever driven. Also the best factory headlights I ever had. Never even had a need to use the extra 100W auxiliary lights.

It just inspired confidence driving it. No matter if it was white outs or freezing rain, it never did anything that made you feel uneasy.

That truck sure worked good. Used to haul bark and logs with it. It was like a bulldozer. I had the temp sensors ripped right off the diff pots and it never got stuck. I can't explain it, but that truck just worked better than most I have had.

 

The downfall.....the E7 full of casting sand and electronics gremlins. When it decided to run though it pulled good. I ran with guys that had same loads and trailers and they had Series 60 500's and 475 Cat's. Yes they could pass me on the hills, but I could keep them in sight.

ch.jpg

ch1.jpg

ch2.jpg

ch3.jpg

sharp looking truck.

 

Fun is what they fine you for!

My name is Bob Buckman sir,. . . and I hate truckers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Outbehindthebarn. You said you are looking at one with a mechanical  E7........I never ran the mechanical E7 (only mechanical E6 and E9's) but I did drive a CL with the first electronic 400 E7. I know it ran good and was problem free. And it would pull almost as good as the 460. They didn't seem to have all the electronic malfunctions the later versions of VMAC electronics had.

What year is the one you are looking at? Do all know the specs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoeH said:

I have a mechanical e7-350, 1995. Almost 20,000 hours and the engine hasn't needed a thing yet.

You don't suppose being a mechanical engine has anything to do with it?😁😁    terry:MackLogo:

Edited by terry
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/31/2019 at 8:36 PM, Bullheaded said:

I have driven a lot of heavy spec CL's but here is my old 2000 CH. It was double frame, 14,000 front, 46,000 Eaton rears on Mack air leaf. E7 460 with an Eaton 18 speed.

One of the smoothest riding and best handling trucks I have ever driven. Also the best factory headlights I ever had. Never even had a need to use the extra 100W auxiliary lights.

It just inspired confidence driving it. No matter if it was white outs or freezing rain, it never did anything that made you feel uneasy.

That truck sure worked good. Used to haul bark and logs with it. It was like a bulldozer. I had the temp sensors ripped right off the diff pots and it never got stuck. I can't explain it, but that truck just worked better than most I have had.

 

The downfall.....the E7 full of casting sand and electronics gremlins. When it decided to run though it pulled good. I ran with guys that had same loads and trailers and they had Series 60 500's and 475 Cat's. Yes they could pass me on the hills, but I could keep them in sight.

ch.jpg

ch1.jpg

ch2.jpg

ch3.jpg

Yea i agree about the smoothest and best handling truck I've been in. FL classic, 379, t800, crapcadia....all don't compare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be an extremely reliable truck. Won’t be the torque monster feel of a 475 Cat but it will be consistently reliable, easily serviceable and will drive very nicely.  The EM7’s felt more powerful than the E6’s which were kind of slushy in the CH’s.   The mid to late 90’s CH models are excellent money makers and don’t exhaust a driver.  The only real downfalls were that the cabs tended to rust around the rear windows and underside corners if they ran in salt and weren’t cleaned much.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, convoyduel said:

That would be an extremely reliable truck. Won’t be the torque monster feel of a 475 Cat but it will be consistently reliable, easily serviceable and will drive very nicely.  The EM7’s felt more powerful than the E6’s which were kind of slushy in the CH’s.   The mid to late 90’s CH models are excellent money makers and don’t exhaust a driver.  The only real downfalls were that the cabs tended to rust around the rear windows and underside corners if they ran in salt and weren’t cleaned much.  

This one is a 1990. Was there some change (other than the VMAC) that occurred in the mid-90's?

 

Fun is what they fine you for!

My name is Bob Buckman sir,. . . and I hate truckers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/16/2020 at 8:31 AM, convoyduel said:

That would be an extremely reliable truck. Won’t be the torque monster feel of a 475 Cat but it will be consistently reliable, easily serviceable and will drive very nicely.  The EM7’s felt more powerful than the E6’s which were kind of slushy in the CH’s.   The mid to late 90’s CH models are excellent money makers and don’t exhaust a driver.  The only real downfalls were that the cabs tended to rust around the rear windows and underside corners if they ran in salt and weren’t cleaned much.  

And along the back of the sleeper sill. We had to fab a new one for the 93 when we got it. Really the only spot that was cancer. Last summer we blasted the frame from sleeper back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...