kscarbel2

Billy, Westport developed a natural gas technology called HPDI (high pressure direct injection) with which power loss is virtually eliminated.

Based on my university history studies, the civil war wasn't just about slavery. The southern aristocracy felt that Washington had grown distant. A "disconnect" had formed between the aristocracy of the north and south (recall it was the aristocracy of 1776 that formed the country). Firmly believing their views were no longer being weighed, the southern states seceded. Now let's bear in mind, from 1776 to 1861, we're only talking 85 years since the country was formed. Anyway, as Paul would say, it was another time and place, with different attitudes. I myself take issue with people today who apply year 2017 standards to events that occurred in distant history, and make attempts to cleanse history (ie. vandals destroying a statue of Robert E. Lee). One can't help but wonder if the vandals now plan to destroy every statue of slave owners Patrick Henry ("Give me liberty or give me death"), Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe and Andrew Jackson? And then, they need to get all those history books rewritten in the public schools. * Had Virginia not split apart, it would easily be the largest state on the east coast.

Is the U.S. in a state of anarchy? How are so many people now above the rule of law? Why are the Durham police not present arresting these blatant vandals ??? I try to respect all views, but people have no right to destroy public statues. There was a war, and from it we have statues of respected individuals from both sides. It's history........get over it. .

Fiat Chrysler has Chinese suitors Larry Vellequette, Automotive News Europe / August 14, 2017 DETROIT — For more than two years, FCA has been FSBO -- that's For Sale By Owner — with no serious offers. Not anymore. Representatives of a well-known Chinese automaker made at least one offer this month to buy Fiat Chrysler Automobiles at a small premium over its market value, Automotive News Europe sister publication Automotive News has learned. The offer was rejected for not being enough, a source said. Meanwhile, other sources independently identified executives from other large Chinese automakers conducting their own due diligence on a potential purchase of FCA, including meeting last week with representatives of U.S. retail groups about a potential acquisition. A source said FCA executives have traveled to China to meet with Great Wall Motor. And Chinese delegations were seen last week at FCA's headquarters in Auburn Hills, Michigan. Chinese companies are under government pressure to expand outside China by acquiring foreign companies. FCA may be a perfect target, given that CEO Sergio Marchionne has focused on streamlining the automaker's operations to make it enticing to a buyer, making bold moves such as exiting small cars and sedans and revamping the company's manufacturing footprint. It's unclear which Chinese automaker or automakers are pursuing FCA. Different sources have pointed to involvement by different ones -- Dongfeng Motor, Great Wall, Zhejiang Geely Holding Group or FCA's current joint venture partner in China, Guangzhou Automobile Group. But it is also unclear which company or companies are likely to follow through or succeed. FCA isn't talking, nor are any of the four Chinese automakers. But if a sale proceeds, the quintessentially American Jeep brand -- once owned by the Germans and most recently by the Italians/Dutch -- may soon be owned by the Chinese. According to one source, any sale likely would involve FCA's highly profitable Jeep and Ram brands, as well as Chrysler, Dodge and Fiat, but would exclude Maserati and Alfa Romeo. Those two brands would be spun off, as was Ferrari, to maximize returns for Exor, the holding company controlled by the Agnelli family, which owns a controlling interest in FCA, the source said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Why, after two years on the block, is FCA apparently drawing interest from at least one potential Chinese buyer now? The answer: FCA's global network and product -- specifically Jeep and Ram -- fit the requirements the Chinese government has set for attractive acquisitions. Quality gap Chinese automakers have openly dreamed of cracking lucrative North America for a decade, spending millions to display their vehicles at high-profile U.S. auto shows. Early efforts showed that Chinese automakers had a long way to go before they were ready to compete here. But in more recent years -- through knowledge and expertise gained via joint ventures with the world's largest and most successful automakers -- Chinese companies have closed the quality gap. And the automakers feel like they finally have closed that gap enough to start selling their products in the U.S., said Michael Dunne, president of Dunne Automotive, a Hong Kong investment advisory company and an expert on the Chinese auto industry. They also are under pressure from the government to expand beyond China, Dunne said. A government directive dubbed China Outbound pushes Chinese businesses to acquire international assets from their industries and operate them "to make their mark," much as Zhejiang Geely has done since acquiring Volvo in 2010. Bloomberg reported last week that Chinese companies plan to spend $1.5 trillion acquiring overseas companies over the next decade -- a 70 percent increase from current levels. "Right now, Chinese automakers enjoy the full support of the leadership in Beijing to go and make it happen," Dunne said. "That's something brand new, and it's really picked up since 2015." Along with Volvo, Dunne pointed to Italian tire maker Pirelli and German robotics giant Kuka as Chinese acquisitions supported by the China Outbound policy. Interest has been growing for some time. In May 2016, FCA hosted a high-level delegation from China at its North American headquarters, which included Hu Chunhua, a member of the Communist Party's Politburo and secretary of the party's Guangdong Provincial Committee. Also in attendance were Cui Tiankai, China's ambassador to the U.S., and Zhang Fangyou, chairman of Guangzhou Automobile Group. "The interest is real, no question," Dunne said. "The complications are on the political side: What would this mean for a Chinese company to acquire an American automaker, no matter where its corporate headquarters is based?" Turnkey operation For a Chinese automaker that dreams of making a splash in North America, Europe and Latin America, FCA presents as close to a turnkey operation as exists. Globally, FCA has 162 manufacturing operations -- assembly, component, stamping and machining plants -- and another 87 r&d centers. In North America, FCA has a network of about 2,600 U.S. dealerships, as well as extensive distribution networks in Canada and Mexico. And unlike other, larger publicly owned automakers with similar global footprints, Marchionne and his bosses at Exor have made one thing clear: Write a big enough check, and the keys to FCA are yours. When it became apparent in late 2015 that FCA's attempts to merge with General Motors had been rejected and any effort to tie up with Volkswagen was shut down because of that automaker's then-blooming diesel emissions scandal, Marchionne began focusing attention inward, looking at why his company had not been more attractive to potential partners. In early 2016, he began implementing radical changes to make FCA more appealing, especially to an Asian automaker, but also to Volkswagen. First, FCA shocked the industry by ending production of its compact and midsize sedans in the U.S., the Dodge Dart and Chrysler 200. The cars had been among the first fruits of bankrupt Chrysler's 2009 marriage to Fiat S.p.A., but both had disappointing sales. At the same time, Marchionne expanded development for his two cash cows, Jeep and Ram. He retooled plants from unibody construction back to body-on-frame to expand production of the Ram 1500 and Jeep Wrangler, and he announced that, after years of consumer clamoring, Jeep would again build a pickup and would soon build big luxury Jeeps to compete with Land Rover. Product development plans laid out in 2014 -- to vastly expand the Chrysler lineup, for example -- were scrapped. FCA's North American product line would go where the money was: pickups, SUVs and the minivan. Stretch goals The transformation, which will be largely complete by 2018, will mean FCA showrooms will resemble those of a decade ago when gasoline prices spiked: full of SUVs, crossovers, minivans and pickups and devoid of anything smaller or more fuel-efficient. The transformation has helped FCA's quarterly financials, and Marchionne says the automaker is on track to achieve in 2018 what had been widely considered pie-in-the-sky goals laid out in 2014. FCA has also looked hard at shedding holdings not directly related to automaking as a way to free trapped value for shareholders. That could include separation from parts maker Magneti Marelli, casting specialist Teksid and automation provider Comau. On a conference call with analysts last month, Marchionne laid out the strategy. "In order to be fair to our shareholders, we need to make sure that we deliver as much value out of this venture as we can," he said. The prospect of selling FCA to a Chinese automaker has been on Marchionne's mind for awhile. In August 2015, months after he began his quest to merge or partner with another global automaker with his "Confessions of a Capital Junkie" presentation, and while he was launching his soon-to-be-rebuffed bid to merge with GM, the FCA CEO told Automotive News that he had closely studied potential tie-ups with numerous Asian automakers. His conclusion: None of the Asian automakers was looking for partners. He was asked: Anyone in Asia? "I don't think Asia is partner-able," he said. "No, you can be acquired by the Asians. I think China will buy you."

Bloomberg / August 15, 2017 The idea was nothing short of revolutionary: Convert the nation's millions of trucks, buses and other commercial vehicles to run on natural gas instead of gasoline and diesel. Back in 2008, the proposal by energy magnate T. Boone Pickens had some appeal. U.S. oil production was plunging, and the world's biggest fuel-consuming country was becoming ever more dependent on foreign crude. Oil jumped to a record near $150 a barrel, while natural gasoline was comparatively cheap. Pickens co-founded Clean Energy Fuels Corp. to profit from the switch. The maker of natural gas filling stations was once valued at about $1.8 billion. But there was a different kind of revolution. New drilling techniques led to a boom in oil supplies from the U.S., and electric cars gained traction. Tesla Inc., which had yet to deliver its first electric car a decade ago, now has 455,000 reservations for its Model 3 -- almost 20 times the number of natural-gas vehicles on U.S. roads as of 2015. Shares of Clean Energy Fuels are down 90 percent from a 2012 peak, and the company concedes that natural gas may only be a niche market as a transportation fuel. "I'm not sure America is set up" for widespread use of passenger natural gas vehicles given all the infrastructure needed to get supplies to customers, Andrew Littlefair, Clean Energy Fuels' chief executive officer, said by phone. "There are a lot of reasons it would make sense to look at that again, but I don't know that I'm ready to say that's going to happen." Pickens, who made his first fortune as an oil wildcatter five decades ago, had high hopes for natural gas because he believed crude supplies were peaking. In op-eds, media interviews and meetings with politicians including then-President Barack Obama, Pickens said the nation's heavy-duty trucks and fleet vehicles should run on natural gas. The U.S. could reduce its reliance on oil imports and use more wind and solar power, he said. Pickens, 89, wasn't able to comment, according to Jay Rosser, a spokesman for BP Capital, the energy hedge fund Pickens founded. Shale boom By 2011, U.S. oil output began to surge with the shale boom. Three years later, prices for crude, diesel and gasoline were tumbling. While natural gas has become a staple for domestic power plants, supplanting coal, the prospect for cheaper alternatives made it less attractive as a vehicle fuel. In April, the most recent month for data from the Department of Energy, liquefied natural gas sold for $2.52 per diesel-gallon-equivalent, compared with $2.55 for diesel. That's hardly a bargain, considering Pavel Molchanov, an analyst at Raymond James Financial Inc., estimates that trucks that run on LNG cost about $30,000 to $50,000 more than a comparable diesel rig. Even though natural gas has remained cheap -- trading at $2.97 per million British thermal units in New York on Tuesday -- using it to fuel vehicles is "not something that has taken off," said Salim Morsy, an analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance in New York. "Gasoline and diesel are undoubtedly the cheapest in total cost of ownership, but as technology improves and batteries get cheaper," the number of electric cars will at least double. The number of plug-in autos in the U.S. almost tripled between 2008 and 2015, government data show. Tesla, the company founded by billionaire Elon Musk, has introduced three models since 2012, and other manufacturers are jumping into the market. Volvo has said all its new cars from 2019 will be hybrid or all-electric, and BMW AG is developing a self-driving electric to replace the 7 series as the company's flagship in 2021. Natural gas vehicles have seen their share of the auto market shrink. Chesapeake Energy Corp., one of biggest U.S. gas producers, eliminated the team working on natural-gas vehicles in 2013. Honda Motor Co. discontinued a natural-gas-fueled model of its popular Civic sedan in 2015. Last year, with oil locked in a prolonged price slump, Pickens sold about 4 million shares of Newport Beach, Calif.-based Clean Energy Fuels, which operates more than 500 natural gas filling stations across the country. While the company has declined in value, Tesla traded at a record high in June. Still, Littlefair sees opportunities for growth, especially in the fleets of vehicles owned by municipal governments trying to reduce tail-pipe emissions and operating costs. Dallas Area Rapid Transit, which uses 537 buses and 123 shuttles that run on natural gas, this month extended its operation and maintenance contract with Clean Energy Fuels. California cities including Los Angeles and Fresno also have contracts with the company. Clean Energy Fuels is also seeking a way to expand its reach by using natural gas extracted from landfills and farms to supply filling stations. Few stations While companies including AT&T Inc. and Ryder System Inc. use natural gas in trucks that make short trips and return to the same depot each day, limited infrastructure has prevented wider use. There are 1,828 natural-gas filling stations in the U.S., compared with almost seventy times as many conventional gas stations and around 38 times as many non-residential plug-in stations and charging outlets for electric vehicles, government and industry data show. It can cost $1.8 million to build a filling station that supplies compressed natural gas, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Electric vehicles, in contrast, can be plugged into a home outlet. "The infrastructure would be costly" for widespread use of natural gas vehicles, said Lee Klaskow, a senior analyst for transportation and logistics at Bloomberg Intelligence. "You would have to have some huge cost savings."

Profit-rich trucks may catch break in Trump auto review Bloomberg / August 15, 2017 WASHINGTON -- A move under consideration by the Trump administration could ease tough fuel-efficiency standards set to take effect in 2021 on pickups, SUVs and other light trucks, the bulwark of U.S. auto industry sales and profits. For the 2021 model year, light trucks must average roughly 33 mpg to comply with the current standards, a gain of more than 6 percent from the 2020 model year according to estimates from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. That's triple the pace of any annual gain for trucks starting in the 2017 model year, the first year of the current standards, which were finalized in 2012. President Donald Trump hasn't proposed any changes to the standards yet. But in recent weeks, both NHTSA and the EPA signaled a new willingness to alter the rules earlier than originally planned. The EPA formally asked for public comment on whether its 2021 standards are appropriate and NHTSA said it may review the year in an upcoming rulemaking. "The domestic Big Three are the big winners, and Fiat Chrysler is arguably the most advantaged" if Trump freezes the standards, said Gopal Duleep, president of H-D Systems, a Washington, D.C.-based research company. General Motors, Ford Motor Co. and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) derive more than three-quarters of their U.S. sales from light trucks. Even Toyota Motor Corp., which has car and truck sales more closely balanced, would catch a break. For the 2016 model year, Toyota forecasts that its light truck fleet may fall nearly 9 percent below the government's fuel economy target, according to figures released by NHTSA. Any short-term regulatory relief could handcuff automakers if it allows them to fall behind in a global race to cut emissions with electric motors that either supplement or replace gasoline engines, said Duleep. But in the short run, automakers are likely to welcome any easing of the regulations, he said. Automakers have been preparing for the rules since they were announced in 2011, and analysts say they're unlikely to make significant changes even if Trump moved to weaken the rules. Instead, carmakers would see a huge increase in efficiency credits they could use to help them meet stiffer targets in later years, said Dave Cooke, senior vehicles analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group. "If their plans are in place and they receive additional credits, it just makes the later years' standards that much easier to meet," Cooke said. Fiat Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne may be bringing out new Ram pickup and Jeep models, but he's not ignoring electrification. He told investors in July that after 2022, half of his Maserati models will be battery powered. According to the agreement the Obama administration reached with automakers and announced in 2011, much of the efficiency increase -- particularly for trucks -- was to come after 2020 to give automakers time to comply. The delay was seen as a crucial factor in the decision by most automakers to endorse the plan. Ford's F-series pickups alone account for the majority of the company's North American profits. NHTSA also has said it will study freezing the standards after 2020 model year as a baseline scenario in an environmental review of pending fuel economy requirements for 2022-25. The deliberations come as part of a mid-term review included in the Obama administration's plan to boost fuel economy to a fleet average of more than 50 mpg by 2025. A freeze or cut after 2020 would make good on Trump's pledge to the CEOs of Detroit's automakers to slash environmental regulations that he made during his first days in office. It would come as GM is cutting shifts at its car assembly plants to avoid excessive inventories, Ford is reviving dormant truck nameplates such as the Bronco and the Ranger and as FCA has already killed its slow-selling Chrysler 200 sedan. But for now, automakers say they're simply welcoming Trump's reopening of the review after Obama sought to end parts of it during his last days in office, and are not backing a specific set of revisions. "Global automakers has only asked that the mid-term review be conducted in a transparent and deliberate process, based on the facts," said Lauren Boland, communications manager for the trade group, which includes Toyota and Honda Motor Co. The trade group has not asked to put the already-final 2021 rules under review. Nor has the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents GM, Ford, FCA and others, according to spokeswoman Gloria Bergquist. "Let the facts come in and let the evidence dictate a decision next spring that optimizes our nation's environmental and economic objectives, consistent with affordability," she said in an email. The EPA plans to determine whether the tailpipe standards for 2021 need to change by next April. That ruling could carry another risk for automakers: driving a wedge between California and Washington regulators, who've been coordinating their rules since 2011 to allow the companies to sell the same vehicles in all 50 states. California has already said it has no plans to change its 2025 emissions targets, which are followed by several other states that combined account for around 30 percent of U.S. auto sales. "It was very difficult to get a national standard in the first place," said Stephanie Brinley, senior automotive analyst at IHS Markit. "It's best for the country to have a common standard."

The market hates uncertainty, and now the uncertainty revolving around this issue has been removed. It's over and done with, so the market is back to buying NAV stock for the reasons justifying it's current value. Just a blip in the big picture.

Call Watts Mack with the 1QHA number off your line sheet or front axle. They might still have or can order them. The return spring is probably a 58AX55.

This is all about Dan Ustian, the former head who was fired way back in 2012. https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/44620-ex-navistar-ceo-ustian-faces-sec-suit-over-emissions-disclosures-misleading-investors/?tab=comments#comment-329265 Ustian tried to take the EGR solution too far, further than MAN did (the source of the engines). It wasn't possibly, reliably, with the EGR technology of the time. There is no relationship, whatsoever, with what transpired in 2010 and today's Navistar.

Navistar Ordered to Pay Milan $30.8 Million in Connection With Flawed Engines Transport Topics / August 14, 2017 A civil jury has awarded a Tennessee trucking company more than $30 million in civil damages for fraud and violation of the state’s consumer protection act in connection with the sale of 243 Navistar International Prostars with Maxxforce engines. The 12-member jury’s unanimous decision upheld allegations that Navistar Inc. failed to disclose to Milan Supply Chain Solutions that it sold the International heavy duty trucks and 13-liter exhaust gas recirculation engines in 2011 and 2012 with “serious known defects in the engine and its components,” Milan said in an Aug. 14 statement. The jury said that the Milan, Tenn.-based motor carrier is entitled to $10.8 million in actual damages and $20 million in punitive damages. In its lawsuit filed in Jackson, Tenn., Milan alleged that Navistar, while touting the quality of its testing program, knew that the trucks had serious flaws and sold the trucks “knowing that the customers would end up becoming the de facto test fleet for Navistar’s new 2010 year model engine,” Milan said. The Maxxforce engine in question was Navistar’s advanced EGR sold between 2010 and 2012. Milan is a logistics company and owner of a commercial trucking fleet that hauls refrigerated and dry van commodities across 48 states. Milan said after it purchased the tractors it experienced numerous breakdowns, specifically with the EGR system EGR coolers and EGR valves. “We’re disappointed in the jury’s verdict and are evaluating our options to challenge it,” Lyndi McMillan, Navistar’s external communications manager, said in a written statement. “We have successfully defended similar claims regarding our MaxxForce 13 engines in several other jurisdictions, including dismissal of claims of fraud in courts in Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama and Illinois.” McMillan said Navistar tested the MaxxForce 13 engine consistent with industry standards. “They were tested for 12 million miles prior to launch under rigorous conditions, in tests cells and on the road,” McMillan said. “At the time of the product launch, we were confident, based on this testing, that the product would perform. All products undergo continuous improvement throughout their life cycle. When some parts unexpectedly failed, we fixed them under warranty for our customers, including Milan Supply. We’ve invested a significant amount of resources standing behind our products and supporting our customers.” In court documents, the truck maker said it conducted millions of miles of road testing with no serious issue or defects in design, components or materials. But when Navistar could not obtain EPA approval for the Maxxforce engine after the expiration of its emissions credits, Navistar switched emission-control technologies using the same selective catalytic reduction technology as its competitors. During the trial, Milan said its attorneys offered evidence and solicited testimony from current and former Navistar executives who said that prior to the launch of the trucks the truck maker had not completed field testing. However, Jack Allen, Navistar’s former president of truck operations, testified in the two-week trial that in his opinion it was “normal business practice” for companies to not disclose to customers in advance of a sale information about known defects in the products or to disclose to customers that they were buying a product that had not been fully validated or tested by the manufacturer, Milan’s lead trial attorney, Clay Miller of Dallas law firm of Miller Weisbrod, told Transport Topics. “Their attitude during the whole trial was arrogance,” Miller said. “They just don’t think they have to stand up and do right by the customer.” But McMillan said, “Navistar strongly disagrees with plaintiff counsel’s characterizations of Navistar’s conduct. Navistar has and will continue to defend our products, our reputation in the market and the integrity of our employees.”

Jury awards trucking company $30 million in Navistar engine case Neil Abt, Fleet Owner / August 14, 2017 Tennessee case involves older EGR engines A Tennessee jury awarded a trucking company more than $30 million in a case involving Navistar’s older generation of trucks and engines. On Aug. 10, the jury in Jackson found Navistar violated the Tennessee Consumer Practice Act, and provided Milan Supply Chain Solutions $10.8 million in actual damages and $20 million in punitive damages. The trucking company sued after purchasing 243 Navistar 2011 and 2012 International Prostars with Maxxforce engines. Navistar said it was “disappointed in the jury's verdict and are evaluating our options to challenge it." Milan accused Navistar of failing to disclose that the Maxxforce 13 liter engine had defects. The engine used exhaust gas recirculation to meet federal emissions standards. However, Navistar later abandoned that technology after it failed to meet regulations. “It appeared the jury’s punitive damage verdict was a message to Navistar that it is not acceptable for the company to cover up important defects in the engines and the engines’ testing program in order to make a sale,” said Clay Miller of the Dallas law firm Miller Weisbrod, lead trial attorney for Milan. The law firm said the jury heard evidence that Milan had lost over $35,000 per truck on trade-in values over the last several years. In an e-mailed statement to Fleet Owner, Navistar defended its actions. “We have successfully defended similar claims regarding our MaxxForce 13 engines in several other jurisdictions, including dismissal of claims of fraud in courts in Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, and Illinois. “Navistar tested the MaxxForce 13 engine consistent with industry standards. They were tested for 12 million miles prior to launch under rigorous conditions, in tests cells and on the road. At the time of the product launch, we were confident, based on this testing, that the product would perform. All products undergo continuous improvement throughout their lifecycle. When some parts unexpectedly failed, we fixed them under warranty for our customers, including Milan Supply. We’ve invested a significant amount of resources standing behind our products and supporting our customers.” .

Heavy Duty Trucking / August 14, 2017 Navistar Inc. disputes allegations that it didn’t thoroughly test its MaxxForce EGR engines – allegations that surfaced in a lawsuit where a jury last week awarded $30.8 million in damages – including testimony about the engine program by former executive Jim Hebe that the company "did not test s**t". The Tennessee jury found that Navistar committed fraud and violated the Tennessee Consumer Practice Act in connection with the sale of 243 Navistar International ProStars with MaxxForce engines to Milan Supply Chain Solutions. It awarded $10.8 million in actual damages and $20 million in punitive damages. Tennessee-based Milan alleged that Navistar misled them, saying the truck maker failed to disclose that the MaxxForce 13L engine, which used exhaust gas recirculation to meet 2010 emissions standards rather than the selective catalytic reduction being used by other truck and engine makers, was launched with “serious known defects.” Milan also alleged that Navistar, while touting the quality of its testing program, knew that the testing had serious flaws, was incomplete at launch, and put the trucks into customers’ hands knowing that the customers would end up becoming the de facto test fleet for Navistar’s new 2010 year model engine. In a statement, Navistar said it is disappointed in the jury’s verdict and is evaluating its options to challenge it, noting it has successfully defended similar claims in several jurisdictions, including dismissal of claims of fraud in courts in Texas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, and Illinois. “Navistar tested the MaxxForce 13 engine consistent with industry standards,” the company said in a statement. “They were tested for 12 million miles prior to launch under rigorous conditions, in test cells and on the road. At the time of the product launch, we were confident, based on this testing, that the product would perform. All products undergo continuous improvement throughout their lifecycle. When some parts unexpectedly failed, we fixed them under warranty for our customers, including Milan Supply. We've invested a significant amount of resources standing behind our products and supporting our customers.” Indeed, those warranty claims have dogged Navistar, being a key factor in many quarters of disappointing financial results. EGR vs. SCR Milan purchased the MaxxForce-powered ProStars in 2011 and 2012. The MaxxForce engine used Navistar’s go-it-alone strategy of “advanced exhaust gas recirculation” to meet EPA 2010 emissions regulations, which it used hoping to avoid the use of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) adopted by other truck and engine makers. However, Navistar was never able to get EPA approval for the MaxxForce engine after the expiration of its emissions credits, at which point it switched emissions-control technologies to SCR. Since that time, Navistar has overhauled its management team and product lineup, moving to engines supplied by Cummins and a new Navistar A26 engine just going into production developed based on proven engine technology from new partner Volkswagen. What would eventually turn out to be an ill-fated decision by Navistar to use Advanced EGR instead of SCR led to numerous quality problems with the engine, which resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars of warranty costs to Navistar and losses on the resale market for trucking companies like Milan. During the trial, numerous executives testified either live or by deposition, including the aforementioned comment from Jim Hebe, former senior vice president of North American sales, who said Navistar never tested the final version of the engine before selling it to customers. In an email to current CEO Troy Clarke, Navistar’s current Senior Vice President of Engineering Dennis Mooney quoted former Vice President of Quality Tom Cellitti (who was in charge of testing the Maxxforce engine) as saying over and over again prior to the launch to customers, “we have no field testing,” because the company only tested engineering development trucks rather than validation trucks. In the same email, according to plaintiff’s attorneys, Mooney admitted that customers ended up uncovering problems that Navistar would have uncovered with the Maxxforce had it been able to do more testing. In another email exchange between Mooney and Clarke revealed at the trial, Mooney said the management had told the board of directors in 2013 that the “physics of the EGR strategy is (sic) not sound.” None of these things were ever revealed to the public prior to trial, according to attorneys. The jury also heard evidence that Navistar knew when it launched the engine that critical engine components had serious quality problems and a shortened life span. For instance, the EGR cooler allegedly had a life span of less than 20% of the design requirement based upon testing done before the sale of the engines to the public, according to the attorneys. While the attorneys for the plaintiffs charged that none of this information was disclosed to customers, Jack Allen, the former chief operating officer and president of truck operations, testified for Navistar that in his opinion it was “normal business practice” for companies to not disclose to customers in advance of a sale about known defects in the products or to disclose to customers that they were buying a product that had not been fully validated or tested by the manufacturer. “The jury seemed shocked to hear this testimony about the corporate culture and philosophy of Navistar from one of the company’s top executives,” said Clay Miller of the Dallas law firm Miller Weisbrod, lead trial attorney for Milan, referring to Allen's testimony. Miller said he believed this played a key factor in the punitive award. Milan and its attorneys also criticized Navistar, saying the company refused to work with the fleet to address issues and instead went the litigation route. Navistar said it “strongly disagrees with plaintiff counsel's characterizations of Navistar's conduct. Navistar has and will continue to defend our products, our reputation in the market, and the integrity of our employees.” .

You might want to mention the "6MF" part number cast on the inner side.

Shocking..............call your lawyer ! It was a Mack corporate authorized dealer that failed to "properly" repair your Mack truck. The dealer used genuine Mack brand parts. Mack brand corporate is deeply involved in your whole affair and can not wash their hands of it. (The former Mack Trucks would not have handled the phone call in such a manner, but that's another story.)

But what are the odds that a failure occurs on the day it's surveilling this event. It was reported to be hovering low, one assumes for a purpose, prior to the failure.

Volvo didn't want to spend the money to meet "US" emissions, because sales volume was low. However, Volvo will spend the money for the D16 (aka MP10) to meet Euro-7, because sales volume is high AND their global customer base demands this engine option. The technology is available to meet the new emissions, the newly revised Scania V8 a case in point.

Paul, it sounds like the state police helicopter was shot down. Don't you think? It was intentionally hovering over a neighborhood, typically a surveillance action, and suddenly it spun out and crashed. The public was blocked from the scene............they don't want a rash of copy-cat incidences around the country.

What Mack location are you working with in Alabama? What's the name of your Mack salesman?

David Hollis, Overdrive / August 11, 2017 More than 125 vintage Mack trucks, along with parts and memorabilia, will be on the auction block August 19 in Henniker, New Hampshire. Ryan Auction Sales, which is overseeing the event, will hold a preview Aug. 18 at the auction site, 1492 Old Concord Road in Henniker, northwest of Manchester. Stacy Libby, general manager of Ryan Auction Sales, said 100 or so of the trucks going up for bid come from one man’s collection. Libby said Jeff Remillard has been collecting trucks — Macks, Autocars, Brockways and Whites — since he was 8 years old and feels it is time to “thin the herd” and let his 12-year-old son start restoring trucks of his own. The auction is an absolute auction. There are no minimum prices and no reserves. Among the noteworthy Bulldogs going on the block are: 1961 B 424-X, of which Mack only produced 14, and the one up for sale carries serial number #1 1936 Mack AK documented by Mack as the last one of its kind built, 1939 Mack CJ, one of just 799 made 1936 EB Mack, one of 134 produced two 1965 Mack B47s, which had a total production of 437 units 1958 B 426 cement mixer, one of 221 produced 1971 Mack U 600 dump truck, used in the John Travolta movie, A Civil Action two 1945 Mack LJs, which were produced for a railroad company during World War II, when production was geared mostly toward military vehicles Photo gallery - http://www.overdriveonline.com/more-than-125-vintage-mack-trucks-up-for-auction-aug-19/

AP Explains: How Robert E. Lee went from hero to racist icon Russell Contreras, Associated Press / August 13, 2017 Confederate Army Gen. Robert E. Lee was vilified during the Civil War only to become a heroic symbol of the South's "Lost Cause" - and eventually a racist icon. His transformation, at the center of the recent violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, reflects the changing moods in the United States around race, mythology and national reconciliation, historians say. Lee monuments, memorials and schools in his name erected at the turn of the 20th Century are now facing scrutiny amid a demographically changing nation. But who was Robert E. Lee beyond the myth? Why are there memorials in his honor in the first place? THE SOLDIER A son of American Revolutionary War hero Henry "Light-Horse Harry" Lee, Robert E. Lee graduated second in his class at West Point and distinguished himself in various battles during the U.S.-Mexico War. As tensions heated around southern secession, Lee's former mentor, Gen. Winfield Scott, offered him a post to lead the Union's forces against the South. Lee declined, citing his reservations about fighting against his home state of Virginia. Lee accepted a leadership role in the Confederate forces although he had little experience leading troops. He struggled but eventually became a general in the Confederate Army, winning battles largely because of incompetent Union Gen. George McClellan. He would win other important battles against other Union's generals, but he was often stalled. He was famously defeated at Gettysburg by Union Maj. Gen. George Meade. Historians say Lee's massed infantry assault across a wide plain was a gross miscalculation in the era of artillery and rifle fire. A few weeks after becoming the general in chief of the armies of the Confederate states, Lee surrendered to Union Gen. Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House in Virginia on April 9, 1865. THE SLAVE OWNER A career army officer, Lee didn't have much wealth, but he inherited a few slaves from his mother. Still, Lee married into one of the wealthiest slave-holding families in Virginia - the Custis family of Arlington and descendants of Martha Washington. When Lee's father-in-law died, he took leave from the U.S. Army to run the struggling estate and met resistance from slaves expecting to be freed. Documents show Lee was a cruel figure with his slaves and encouraged his overseers to severely beat slaves captured after trying to escape. One slave said Lee was one of the meanest men she had ever met. In a 1856 letter, Lee wrote that slavery is "a moral & political evil." But Lee also wrote in the same letter that God would be the one responsible for emancipation and blacks were better off in the U.S. than Africa. THE LOST CAUSE ICON After the Civil War, Lee resisted efforts to build Confederate monuments in his honor and instead wanted the nation to move on from the Civil War. After his death, Southerners adopted "The Lost Cause" revisionist narrative about the Civil War and placed Lee as its central figure. The Lost Cause argued the South knew it was fighting a losing war and decided to fight it anyway on principle. It also tried to argue that the war was not about slavery but high constitutional ideals. As The Lost Cause narrative grew in popularity, proponents pushed to memorialize Lee, ignoring his deficiencies as a general and his role as a slave owner. Lee monuments went up in the 1920s just as the Ku Klux Klan was experiencing a resurgence and new Jim Crow segregation laws were adopted. The Robert E. Lee statue in Charlottesville, Virginia, went up in 1924. A year later, the U.S. Congress voted to use federal funds to restore the Lee mansion in the Arlington National Cemetery. The U.S. Mint issued a coin in his honor, and Lee has been on five postage stamps. No other Union figure besides President Abraham Lincoln has similar honors. A NEW MEMORY A generation after the civil rights movement, black and Latino residents began pressuring elected officials to dismantle Lee and other Confederate memorials in places like New Orleans, Houston and South Carolina. The removals partly were based on violent acts committed white supremacists using Confederate imagery and historians questioning the legitimacy of The Lost Cause. A Gen. Robert E. Lee statue was removed from Lee Circle in New Orleans as the last of four monuments to Confederate-era figures to be removed under a 2015 City Council vote. The Houston Independent School District also voted in 2016 to rename Robert E. Lee High School, a school with a large Latino population, as Margaret Long Wisdom High School. Earlier this year, the Charlottesville, Virginia, City Council voted to remove its Lee statue from a city park, sparking a lawsuit from opponents of the move. The debate also drew opposition from white supremacists and neo-Nazis who revered Lee and the Confederacy. The opposition resulted in rallies to defend Lee statues this weekend that resulted in at least three deaths. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Statue at the Center of Charlottesville’s Storm The New York Times / August 13, 2017 Since white nationalists marched Friday in Charlottesville, Va., the quiet college town has seen a nighttime brawl lit up by torches and smartphones, and worse violence that left one person dead and dozens injured. At the center of the chaos is a statue memorializing Robert E. Lee. It depicts the Confederacy’s top general, larger than life, astride a horse, both green with oxidation. The white nationalists were in Charlottesville to protest the city’s plan to remove that statue, and counterdemonstrators were there to oppose them. The statue — begun by Henry Merwin Shrady, a New York sculptor, and finished after his death by an Italian, Leo Lentelli — had stood in the city since 1924. But over the past couple of years some residents and city officials, along with organizations like the N.A.A.C.P., had called for it to come down. One local official made a similar suggestion as early as 2012 and quickly discovered that emotions surrounding the issue run deep. ‘Ugly stuff bubbled up’ It was during the Virginia Festival of the Book, a series of readings and events held every year in AlbemarleCounty, which includes Charlottesville. At a talk given by the author and historian Edward Ayers, a Charlottesville city councilor, Kristin Szakos, asked about the city’s Confederate monuments. She wondered whether the city should discuss removing them. People around her gasped. “You would have thought I had asked if it was O.K. to torture puppies,” she recalled during a 2013 conversation on BackStory, a podcast supported by the Virginia Foundation for the Humanities. The response to her comment was heated, and swift. Ms. Szakos said she received threats via phone and email. “I felt like I had put a stick in the ground, and kind of ugly stuff bubbled up from it,” she said. It was a local turning point, helped along by national events. Ms. Szakos’s comment came about a month after the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, 17, in Florida. The trial and eventual acquittal of the man who shot him, George Zimmerman, helped fan the flames of the Black Lives Matter protests, which erupted into full force in 2014 following the police shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown in Ferguson, Mo. By 2015, debates about Confederate flags and monuments were heating up in Southern states including South Carolina, Texas and Louisiana. Those who favored removal saw the symbols as monuments to white supremacy, but their opponents accused them of trying to erase history. In Charlottesville that year, someone spray-painted “Black Lives Matter” on the foundation of the Lee statue. City workers cleaned it quickly, leaving only a faint outline. Buildup to a vote By 2016, Wes Bellamy, another Charlottesville city councilor and the city’s vice mayor, had become a champion of efforts to remove Confederate monuments. At a news conference in front of the Lee statue in March of that year, he said the City Council would appoint a commission to discuss the issue. “When I see the multitude of people here who are so passionate about correcting something that they feel should have been done a long time ago, I am encouraged,” he said to the crowd of residents in front of him. Some clapped. Others shouted, accusing Mr. Bellamy of sowing division. That same month, Zyahna Bryant, a high school student, petitioned the City Council asking for the Lee statue to be removed. “My peers and I feel strongly about the removal of the statue because it makes us feel uncomfortable and it is very offensive,” she wrote in the petition, which collected hundreds of signatures. The City Council established its special commission in May 2016. Later that year, it issued a report suggesting that the city could either relocate the Lee statue or transform it with the “inclusion of new accurate historical information.” The addition of historical context might have been welcomed by some defenders of the statues. One group, Friends of C’Ville Monuments, said on its website that statues could be improved “by adding more informative, better detailed explanations of the history of the statues and what they can teach us.” But in February, the City Council voted to remove the statue from the park. Opponents of the move sued in March, arguing that the city did not have the authority to do so under state law. That court case is continuing, and the statue has remained in place. It was the focal point for a gathering held in May by the white nationalist Richard Spencer, who was among the demonstrators in Charlottesville this weekend. In June, the City Council gave Lee Park a new name — EmancipationPark. ‘Unite the Right’ The rally that descended into violence Saturday was organized by Jason Kessler, a relative newcomer to the white nationalist scene who is well known in Charlottesville, where he has fought against the city’s status as a sanctuary city for immigrants. A self-described “journalist, activist and author,” Mr. Kessler also waged a monthslong online media campaign against Mr. Bellamy, whom he depicted as anti-white. More recently, Mr. Kessler became involved in the fight against renaming Lee Park — one reason for the “Unite the Right” rally this weekend. The rally was by far Mr. Kessler’s largest undertaking yet. Last week, he won an injunction in federal court against the city, which had voted to revoke a permit for the rally. “This is my First Amendment right,” Mr. Kessler said of the rally during a news conference on Thursday. “This is the right of every American to be able to peaceably assemble and speak their mind free of intimidation. That’s why I decided to do it.” With the lawsuit over the Lee statue still unresolved, it remains unclear what will become of it. The violence this weekend was one of the bloodiest fights over the campaigns across the South to remove Confederate monuments, and the statue remains a lightning rod in Charlottesville. Mr. Spencer, for his part, has promised to return. .

You cleaned up the metal shavings ??? Did you photograph the "evidence" beforehand?

For heaven's sakes, don't any of these people have a life........something better to do? Three lives senselessly and prematurely snuffed out. Why not head down to the Outer Banks with your family for some fishing, take them down to Virginia Beach, head over to West Virginia and canoe the Greenbrier river, or get on with restoring your prized classic car or truck? All lives matter........white, black, purple, pink and other. If/when our sun dies, a nuclear mushroom appears on the horizon, or an overdue meteor hits the earth with such force that.................., all this is going to immediately fade into insignificance. Cultural decay and declining standards of behavior in our beloved United States. . . . .

In choosing a truck, it is so important to choose a strong dealer as well. It's all about the owner, the distributor. His "attitude", good or bad, spreads throughout the dealer. After the US truck makers (Mack, International, ect.) got away from factory-owned branches, Scania went the opposite direction to as to offer a consistent customer experience. Today, most Scania sales and service locations are owned directly by Scania. You can promise so much more when you're in control. But that's only half the story. You have to genuinely care about the customer, which Scania does. "Real" silicone coolant hoses from good manufacturers like Flexfab are good, Silicone-appearing fake coolant hoses are junk.