Dieselman350 Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 I have a 2001 CL713 quad axle dump truck with a E7 460 and 18 speed it pulls pretty good grossing 70000# but I would like to add a pup wondering how u guys think it would pull grossing over 100000# and would it stay cool or just be to hard on truck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted July 30, 2022 Share Posted July 30, 2022 IDK the shape of your CL, but I've seen plenty of them in New York do it . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtymilkman Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Not a problem as long as maintenance has been done. I have a 2001 460 cl with over a million miles and it pulls crazy good. Stage 2 injectors helps a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullheaded Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 I hauled 140,000 gross every day with my old 2000 CH with an E7 460, 18 speed, and if I remember correctly 4.11 gears. (46,000 pound Eaton's) And we're all hills up here. I also scaled the second heaviest load of hog fuel into our local flakeboard mill at 167,551 pounds gross. I couldn't pass the 475 Cat's in our fleet but I could just about stay with them. So I would say you shouldn't have a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dieselman350 Posted July 31, 2022 Author Share Posted July 31, 2022 Thanks for the info I appreciate the responses I been getting it back up to snuff on maintenance I bought it it 1 year ago its my first Mack and has made me want another one lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 I don't have any real knowledge on how to properly spec. out a truck for specific jobs and work loads, but what i can tell you is that where I came from in Maine, Many guys who didnt have superliners for logging, construction, and moving oversized loads, had CL's.. 460 HP and 460 XT'x, 18 speed tranny/ 4:14 and 4:42 rears.. camel back rears, #44+ lbs. The CL replaced the RW. Those were big shoes to fill... I say the CL did it!! Of course this is my opinion, Jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 CL frame was the same as the RW for the most part, except the set back axle part. I sometimes wondered why they never made an axle forward CL 🤔 Mack was on their kick then that if it was over 400 HP it had to have 200 series carriers E7s and E9s in the beginning then Cummins and E Techs were the popular power. Don't see many in service anymore, but they were pretty good trucks. Never quite had the appeal of the Superliner though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 I have repaired CL's with 92/93 rears.. We were Taught that you had to have 200 series carriers for the high torque applications, as well as the 2130/2180 tranny.. the difference in the rears was the spur shaft housing.. now if i'm wrong,??? teach me... jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 IDK about wrong, but the carrier was bigger and the ratios were off a few tenths of a turn from 92/93s .....oh, and if you were lucky enough to have one with the cam and wedges instead of spiders ? in 1999 they were over five grand to get rebuilt (lol) I thought I remembered something about the HP dictating you had to have them. I had a '97 with a 454. Had to have them. My 2000 with the 460 ? 92/93s . And the one that was destroyed was in a cutoff I swapped into the truck in my avatar (E9) and that was destroyed when the guy got it stuck dumping in a sand mound . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 cam and peanuts was in the input housing/power divider... the bull gear houses the spiders/differential. they were the same.. the spur shaft housing in the 200 series, had partially enclosed assembly the required removal of the bull gear before removing the spurshaft and the housing, in the case that you had to do a top reduction repair. this required a full re-build/ re-check of all pre-loads and tooth patterns. yes, the 200 is tough, but in my opinion, the 92/93 was good enough... The driver broke the truck, not poor build quality.. jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 Trust me on this one....there was an option for cam and wedges instead of spiders. Maybe it was only the back rear, but they made it. I'd have to agree, 92/93 ? they had to be abused beyond God only knows what or worn out from years of use. And yes , that one that was grenaded was total driver stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 I think it's called (inter wheel power divider) as opposed to inter axle power divider 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted July 31, 2022 Share Posted July 31, 2022 On that rear end,,, I have no clue.. with all the rears I built, I never did build a full locker.. so on that, i'm out. sorry i dont have the knowledge, jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bullheaded Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 Speaking of Mack rears. I have heard lots of complaints about them and I have also seen some fail on local log trucks (mostly when only chaining up tires of one axle.) But we have some Western Star glider dump trucks in the mine that have 65,000 Mack rears on solid walking beams with 6.13 gears, running highly overloaded 24 hours a day 475/550 Cat powered and I have yet to see a single failure. Lots and lots of transmission's and driveshafts and yokes replaced but not one rear axle failure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtymilkman Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 The only issue I have ever had with Mack rears is the actual housing cracking. Supposedly that was fixed in the mid or later 2000's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted August 1, 2022 Share Posted August 1, 2022 speaking of Mack Banjo housing's.. This is one of my current job's. 2005 CXN-613.. I tried to find a housing at salvage and DEX, but, no luck.... Had to buy from Mack... $5200.00, and the axle for that side was $635.00.. Volvo is doing a great job at trying to destroy small trucking companies.. I should have the parts by friday.. Slow to ship these High dollar parts for some reason.. Jojo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
880joe Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 Is that mack rears on air ride? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 32 minutes ago, Joey Mack said: speaking of Mack Banjo housing's.. This is one of my current job's. 2005 CXN-613.. I tried to find a housing at salvage and DEX, but, no luck.... Had to buy from Mack... $5200.00, and the axle for that side was $635.00.. Volvo is doing a great job at trying to destroy small trucking companies.. I should have the parts by friday.. Slow to ship these High dollar parts for some reason.. Jojo I have one of those, like new. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 yes 880Joe,, Mark? its a front housing... How much do you want for it? jojo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 Front and back are the same with AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Mack Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 the rear one has ABS bores for the sensors.. no biggie, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark T Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 Front and back are the same with AL they make a bracket for the sensor. That welded on hole isn't a total necessity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtymilkman Posted August 2, 2022 Share Posted August 2, 2022 I was told they cracked because of the air ride. Because with air ride, your weight sits on top of the axle, with camelback, the weight is hanging from the axle. And they weren't reinforced correctly til around 2007. Not sure how true that is. 1 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.