ThaddeusW

Here in New York City we got abouut 3-4 inches of freezing rain, it wasnt snow but granular ice. Right now its a sheet of ice but earlyer today it was easy to move with a snow blower (best investment ever).

Thats the key word, simplicity. Not much to go wrong on an old engine now is there? Computers were non existent and we didn't need to have dealerships or expensive code analyzers. My 95 Tahoe which has a computer, needs a $250-300 code reader to read the codes off the obd1 port. The old 83' K5 blazer was easy to fix and diagnose the problem thanks to its simple carburated engine (also an engine bay with so much room you can easily sit on the grille and let your feet dangle inside).

It doesn't really sound like a bad governor. The unloader port of the compressor needs pressure to turn the compressor "off". So if you have no air in the system at all, the compressor should start to charge the tanks. Maybe the governor is indeed frozen and the air is trapped in the unloader line holding the unloader valve open preventing the compressor from charging the tanks. Unhook the line between the governor and the compressor and see if the air pressure builds (also see if there was indeed air trapped in the unloader line), or unbolt the governor from the compressor. Be warned that this will not cut the compressor out so you will have to shut the engine down before you over pressurize the system. If you unhook the unloader line and you still aren't getting any pressure also unhook the sender to the tanks and see if air is shooting out which would indicate a clogged line or bad check valve on the tank. if you get no air with both lines unhooked, you have a bad compressor.

You could have a bad ring or head seal in your compressor. They can and will pass oil, but how fast does the oil build up? If you drain your tanks every day and notice allot of oil then you have a problem. Might I also suggest a filter between the compressor and tank to try and catch oil before it makes it into the tanks.

Volvo I bet wont kill the Mack name like they did Autocar/White. Mack has a much bigger name and following. They will however, continue to eviscerate the trucks components. M-Ride is their way of testing the waters to see if they can kill camel back. It is lighter From the brochure I read a while back and will be offered on the MR and LE. If its a success and more owners want that setup them bam the bean counters axe camelback. Next is the cab, replaced with a Volvo cab, yea maybe safer and nice in its own way but it aint Mack. The axles might be spared, European axles are heavy because of their more lax weight laws, but they are strong. Then comes the maxitorque, I think the transmissions might be spared but time will tell with the push to go auto, Volvo has their own autos, Mack does not. Why automate the Mack when you got your own autos? After that gloomy scenario has taken place, we will see a slash across the grille, the final nail in the Mack coffin. Maybe the bulldogs on those trucks will have little rusty tears on them as they weep for a bygone era. Sad eh? I keep hoping this scenario doesn't play out, but it sure don't look good.

Ouch! Too bad he didnt secure his load properly. I DON'T THINK THIS IS REBUILDABLE Ha tell that to the buys down under. I have seen them rebuild wrecks worse then this. straiten/replace the rails, new cab and hood fix the drive line and put her back to work. The hood dont look too bad.

Ok I have a few nice ones that are from Australia and New Zealand. I think I got these from www.xtrucking.com. The interesting thing about these two is they are fitted with Renault planetary hub reduction axles.

LOL good one. I saw this one posted over at hanks and the conclusions were the landing gear looks to be down or he was on a grade and was a little heavy on the throttle.

Well one thing that we cant ignore is the fact that the older mack engines had allot of European influence. Hell the lanova engine was developed by (if my mind serves me correct) a guy from Germany.

I also wonder how it compares in the suspension weight itself. If it is lighter AND cheaper it could spell trouble for camelback. Plus the smoother ride provided by the rubber cushions could entice buyers too.

Since you have powersteering when turing right the problem sounds like the rotary valve in the steering gear box is bad. I am sure you can have it rebuilt cheaper then a used box.

M-ride is Volvos T-ride suspension, they just changed the first letter in the name to try to fool us. Its similar to camelback in the sense that its a center point parabolic spring suspension, though its a 6 rod setup. It is a 2 stage type so the springs have rubber cushions on them to make the ride smoother when unloaded. Its similar to the tuf-track from Freightliner. The only thing I don't know yet is if its available with Mack axles or just Rockwell/Dana-Spicer axles. Here is a pic, you can see the cushion between the springs and the axle:

(almost)Everyone knows how much I love F models. Well I found this one on truckpaper and man 12500 sounds steep. If it was one zero less id give it some serious thought. Ok now im confused the air filter box on the side I think was used for Cummins engines, and in 1973 what Engine could it be to have a duplex? Or is it a mislabeled 2 stick 6 speed? I wish there was an engine code guide! http://www.truckpaper.com/listings/detail....B4F4FCF6C7935C3

http://www.etrucker.com/apps/news/article.asp?id=57763 Interesting how it will feature the MP8 engine at its maximum power of 485HP! If I recall the MR never had an engine over 400HP.

Believe it or not truckpaper.com has great high rez pictures on some of their listings. I have many saved from that site alone. here is a link to get started

Here is one on truck paper with an NTC 400 http://www.truckpaper.com/listings/detail....B4F4FCF6C7935C3 Here is my favorite picture of a superliner with twin air cleaners: If I ever owned a superliner it would have to look like this!

The last resort I can think of is the Kenworth C500K which will use the DAF XF cab. I am sure it will cost a kings randsom but it would be isteresting to see an American XF with 46 rears on Air glide.

Great video! Gotta love Motorhead. I would love to get an old 60's tandem R tractor with a 673 and 2 stick. Id paint it green and orange with the diamond plate fenders and an air starter. Just add the bullbar, long Aussie cut stacks with a snorkel on the air filter and your set! Those Sun visors down there sure add a nice tough too. ITS ALIVE! Watch you back Max! Coming through! Fear this!

If the truck is built to Euro standards it should be very safe. The trucks front A pillars have to take a hit from a 1000kg weight that is plowed into the windshield area of the truck at high speed. The standard was defined by Sweden I believe with the help of Volvo and Scania. Supposedly the Argosy met those standards.

Dont forget enclosed car haulers. I always wondered why cabovers died such a bad death. After then length laws changed people dropped the cabovers like hot potatoes. In Australia they use cabovers not only for the length sensitive B trains but also everything else including dumps and mixers. In Europe the opposite happened when Scania stopped the T series which was Europe's last conventional truck. Europes strict length laws killed conventionals and here in North America relaxed length laws killed the cabover. but Australia where they have massive road trains and B double and triples seem to be split between the use of cabovers and conventionals. I would rather a cabover for city work any day, better vision and easier turning.

I wouldn't call it wrong. Dont sleep on those Europeans, they have some very impressive and tough trucks. They may look like plastic jokes but they can hold their own to any north American truck any day. Their axles alone are built twice as heavy as ours due to their less stringent weight laws. Ever see those planetary axles? They come in capacities of 70k and sit on 6 rod spring suspension. Defiantly tough. Their transmissions have single counter shafts , fully synchronized and can handle the full torque of the engine, some of which are stronger then ours (Scania V8 @ 620HP 2150ft/lbs, Volvo I6 660HP 2250ft/lbs). Cabs ride like butter using full 4 point air suspension. Might sound more like a car to some of you guys, but represents their progressive way of life. Ok enough of that. Now gearheadgirrrl id say give it more of an Aussie Superliner look in terms of the grille with a more square-ish hood. The Superliner name would fit just fine, would be nice of it to make a comeback (and successful too if done right). As for the Volvo cab (not the FH, but the domestic VH/VN/VT cab) am not keen on that idea, would be nice if they could design their own. But the safety and structural strength of the Volvo cab is a great thing (they after all, helped define the European truck crash standards.) They would have to loose that damn ugly dash board though (I dont like the new Mack dashboard either.). I agree about the axles though, but those planetary axles weigh twice as much as standard north American axles of the same capacity. Standard air disc brakes all around for highway tractors and on road trucks, better stopping power and damn easier to change pads than shoes, plus they resist fade. Now what would be really cool is if they automated the Mack tranny to compete with the ZF, Allison and pathetic Eaton autos. Use a proper hydraulic shift mechanism not the lame 2 servo joke. Also as an interesting note; ZF offers in Europe two very interesting transmissions. The first is the TC series which is a 12 speed automated manual with no clutch but instead a torque converter. It shifts smooth like an allison but drives more like an auomated manual (used for heavy loads where drive line shock is a problem). The next device isnt a transmission but a unit called the WSK. Its a torque converter that bolts to your engine and has a standard clutch type manual or automated manual mounted behind it. Now it has a built in retarder, and has a "one way" design, so if you use the engine brake its like there is no converter so you get the full effect of the engine brake (you can even pull start the truck too). And I am not too sure but you can flip a switch to "turn off" the converter putting it in constant lockup. Cool eh? Would be nice for heay loads and off road work, certainly save wear on the clutch, as you let the converter do the slipping. Oh an my favorite Euro invention is a hydrostatic driven front axle from MAN. At speeds up to 15 MPH it provides you with a front driven axle using a pump unit mounted to the output shaft of the tranny. Two hydraulic lines run to each of the wheel ends where the hub houses the motor and planetary gears. The best thing? No raised front end as their are no axle shafts or differential. Also no heavy transfer case or drive shaft, its lighter. Not a true replacement for a 6x6 but good for those job sites where a a 6x6 would be handy but most of the time is spent on road (mixers, dumps, even wreckers).

There is a big market for the 13 liter engines heck even International is ready to debut their MAN based MAXXForce 12 and 13 engines. They can spit out about 530hp and I think close to 1850ft/lbs so that fits allot of markets. Paccar devloped the MX engine with DAF, before that they used slightly modified/rebadged Cummins engines. here is an excerpt of the MX engine from DAF's site: "The new 12.9-litre PACCAR MX engine, developed and manufactured at DAF Trucks in Eindhoven, will first be available with power outputs of between 410 hp (300 kW) and 510 hp (375 kW), with massive torques of between 2000Nm (1475ft/lbs) and 2500Nm (1843ft/lbs) . At a later stage a 560 hp/410 kW engine will be available." That 560HP engine sounds like it might put out 2000+ foot pounds! And a genuine jake brake is standard. I don't think that owner operators would mind a light weight yet powerful engine in their trucks (in fact I think they would jump at the opportunity provided Paccar can prove it reliable). Like I said before the Europeans are ahead of us, but its not so bad that they help us, as long as they don't screw with our trucks.

Blasphemy! j/k Thats a pretty strong statement considering the "down under" Macks are the same thing as the Macks we have here. Their other specialized models are built by Mack to tackle the toughest requirements for hauling up to 220 tons off road. The Quantum is kinda silly but its their to fill the need for a short tractor for B train operation.

Ah I see. So the CH lives on as an axle froward model. Also will the Vision name be discontinued in favor of the Pinnacle name? Another question is why the new small and offset Mack lettering? Is the large lettering still available? My biggest question is the rumor of the Volvo cab replacing the Mack cab once the Mayflower contract expires true?

Seriously, Kenworth and Western Star both offer oild field trucks with twin steer and tandem/tridem 70k SISU planetary axles. Heck Fabco Automotive the North American distributor for SISU axles, offers a 105K tridrive axle arrangement. Volvo has planetary axles and big engines that mack could offer to the oil field companies. Twin steer Granite MP8/10 engine with an 18 speed, eaton brownie, and Volvo or SISU planetary axles in tridrive and you would have a winning combination. Heck Mack Australia has a Renault planetary axle option for the Titan, tridrive option too: (I think this beast is E9 powered, 200 metric tonne (220 imperial) GCW ) All the good stuff is down under!