GearheadGrrrl

Sorry, but the E7 won't pass 2007 and later emissions. The MP7 is about the same size and weight and has more power though.

If you read the posts here, it's obvious that there's a "feature set" very much in demand by Mack customers- durability, simplicity, drivability, and performance under the worst conditions. That "feature set" was present in spades in the R model, and explains why loyal owners stuck with the old model despite Mack's attempts to charm and bribe them into a CH. So why not bring build a new R model? The E7 engine and classic cab are gone... but the Mayflower cab used on the CH took some styling cues from the R. While the next generation Mack conventional will probably use a Volvo cab, the Mayflower cab has been debugged, the tooling is paid for, and I'll bet Mayflower will be happy to keep welding 'em up forever at a reasonable price. Now one of the things we like about the R model was the low mount cab, so drop the Mayflower cab just about down on the frame (gotta keep the air ride!). That should give enough space under the hood for the MP7 engine, the lightweight choice that gives enough (405 horses) power for just about any dump truck. For a hood, start with the classic R hood, not that ugly thing that was dumped on the late RDs. Section it to fit the wider Mayflower cab, but don't touch that classic frontal aspect. Make it a 3 piece hood assembly, with set forward and set back front axle fender profiles with a common center section. Then trim this blast from the past with steel bumpers, an outside air cleaner with the tall intake option, genuine Hades fans in the cab and the swing open vent windows. And don't offer any fairings or plastic trim, covers, etc., with a steel front end as an option... Would you buy one?

Again, Mack/Volvo needs to understand their customers... Mack's core customer is a small construction business with between 1 and 10 trucks, mostly with dump boxes. In construction it's hard to put on a lot of miles due to weather, lack of work, etc.. Combine that with Mack durability and it's not unusual for a customer to keep their new Mack for 20 years or more. If the owner of a 10 year old RD600 can't get parts for it, you can guarentee that his next new truck won't have a bulldog on the hood!

"our" industrial base?... IR has HQ in Bermuda! Given IR's exporting of jobs in the Bobcat division from North Dakota to China, I wish Volvo would buy Bobcat too. Say what you will about Volvo, but they haven't been exporting jobs to China.

What's the oldest working (hauling loads and not just driven to events) Mack? I'm sure there's some Bs still working, but are there some working older Macks out there?

Advance-United had at least one prototype CH running around in the late '80s/

An R686 would have come with a 300 Maxidyne, not a 350.

I just looked at my Volvo stock (VOLV) and realized I'd make enough already today to pay for a nice steak dinner. But I think I'll pass on all that colestoral! In the 6 years or so since the merger, Volvo stock has quadrupled- if you'd put $100,000 into VOLV instead of a new Mack back in 2001, you'd have made $50,000 a year sittin' on your butt. Of course, I'd have sold of a few shares to buy an old mack so I'd have an interesting place to park my butt! Volvo knows how to do mergers- while the brands now share a lot of parts for economies of scale, the brands still pretty much maintain their individual personalities. Compare this with the mess that is DCX, where Mercedes late last friday publicly threatened divorce. The MoPar lineup is screwed up enough, with minivans on tippy toes being flaunted as SUVs and a subcompact with a rear drive axle tacked on posing as a Jeep. In fact, they're offering so many "jeep" models now that the market will soon forget what a real Jeep was. And that's just the car and light truck bizness... Freightshaker/Wasted Star/Sterling years after the merger is still building 5 different conventional cabs and 3 different cabovers! I suspect after the news of the divorce hit friday, their was a lot of sweatin' on Swan Island, Freighliner's HQ...

The picture was taken at my local Mack dealer in Roseville (suburb of St.Paul), and their lot is always full of MRs on their way to Schwing's nearby U.S. plant.

UPS may have painted them that color for "yard use". For years UPS painted "yard use only" trucks yellow, but I've seen a few painted white. You tend to see these at outlying service centers where the need a yard tractor to move trailers around, and I'm told a few MHs are still doing those duties. Here at the Minneapolis Hub all the cabovers are gone, thought they have plenty of the 241xxx series from the early 1990s. St.Paul hub had a couple Navistar cabovers left from the early 90s, and Isanti service center has one. The LN9000s and Navistar 7000s that were UPSs first conventionals are all gone.

My understanding is that tractors are to be stripped of any useful parts and destroyed too. I've never actually seen this done, nor do I think I could stand the sight of seeing even a million mile plus Mack cut up.

IIRC, UPS's latest purchase was Navistar's with the aluminum cab (268xxx series?), and before that Sterlings (267xxx series?). Before that came a big purchase of Visions. Hopefully UPS will come back to Mack, but the Pinnacle, like the Vision and CH before it, seem too generic- when Macks come with Eaton gearboxes, the customers start to wonder if their worth anymore than a Ford in disquise or a 'Binder.

To make things even more confusing, there's former Emery Air trucks running around with UPS logos as well as former Emery Air trucks running around with Postal Service logos. First, Emery got a contract from the Postal Service to process and haul bulk mail. Emery then complained they weren't making their guarenteed profit and took the Postal Service to court. Emery won and the Postal Service had to buy all the assets that Emery used in the contract- thus the Emery trucks with Postal Service logos. More recently, UPS bought the remaining remains of Emery and renamed it "UPS Cartage" or something like that.

Interesting how we all have similar feelings about the R models. I first drove an R model back in the 70s, and it was love at first drive. Everything is in the right place, and the design is simple and elegant. For example, the R is the only conventional I've ever driven where you could see where the right front fender ended- Mack even put a turn signal lollipop there to mark the spot. In comparison, the CH seems too high up and the cab is too wide to reach across for whatever... The R feels like a Mack, while the CH feels too much like a generic Navistar/Freightshaker/Sterling/etc., especially if it has an Eaton gearbox. It says something that multiple owners are storing away R models for the future. I'm still kicking myself for not buying one of the last of the RDs or RBs while you could get them. The late 90s RBs I was interested in sold before I even had a chance to look at them. Or the R models with sleepers I've seen built up from gliders... Wonder if there's any new R model glider kits left?

Back in '78 I spent a day driving a RS685LST pulling a 32 foot end dump hauling sludge from the sewage treatment plant to a farm field. They gave us about 5 minutes training for the job, consisting pretty much of how to engage the PTO and make the dump box go up. Sure enough, first trip I had the load stick. Not knowing any better I tried some creative slamming on of brakes, etc. out in the field to try to loosen the load, having no idea how close I was to laying the whole rig on it's side. Fortunately some dump truckers guardian angel was watching over me and the load came lose and the rig stayed rubber side down.

I think you're right- this must be a late 2006 build with the MP engine and 2004 emmissions compliance and the old front grill. The yard they were parked in was pretty busy so I didn't have the pleasure of looking over the trucks in detail, just had time to oogle the axles and a verify the MP engine and Mack transmission and tridem drive axles. BTW, were the triple steering axles factory fitted by Mack?

You'd think that Volvo would figure out that those ol' R models aren't going to go away anytime soon. Even here in the rust belt I see 1980s and earlier R models working every day. I have a couple early 1980s BMW motorcycles, and have no trouble getting parts for them- BMW figured out that parts are very profitable and has even putting some NLA parts back into production.

Some times I wonder if our memories have gotten foggy over the years, and I last drove an R model about '77. None the less, I can still see that climbing into that low mount R cab was a lot easier than the mountain climbing required to mount a CH. Also, scales don't age like we do, and the CHs are a lot heavier than the Rs- IIRC, the RL686LST weighted a bit less tha 12,000 pounds dry! It'd be hard to get a current Mack tandem tractor down to within 2000 pounds of that. None the less, I like the modern features like cruise control and ABS- Bobtailing on ice and snow with an old R model would be a white knuckle event compared to the new trucks. But I was drooling recently over some late '90s RD tractors in Truck Paper- the classic cab with modern safety and convenience features would be a winner!

Who says modern Macks are wimpy? If the photo comes through, please note a new MR with 3 steering axles in front and a trio of Mack driving axles in back. Under the cab is the new MP engine, and it and the new particulate filter are quite unobstructive. It looks like the cab hasn't had to be raised at all to accomodate the new motor, and it sticks out the back even less than the E7 did. This one and the others in the background are probaly headed for the concrete pumper manufacturer Schwing, located a few miles away.

Note that thought the governor shuts it off at 2500 RPM, the power curve is still rising steeply... This thing could have dominated truck racing! Is the V8 tooling still around?

Awesome truck- I don't think Volvo has anything that could compete with it.

One of the selling points for Macks integral sleepers was how they could easily be removed for conversion to a day cab. I note that Mack no longer mentions that attribute- can the current Mack sleeper be easily removed or is it a permanent part of the cab like Volvo's?

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that Volvo is making a fatal error if they turn Mack into a "badge engineered" Volvo. When they sold of the car division, Volvo pretty much lost control of the Volvo brand. Granted, Volvo has a long and honorable history, attested to by those 2,000,000+ mile 1960s Volvo cars still running around. But when people think of Mack today they think of the boxy badge engineered Fords, VWs, and Mitsubushi that Ford is now pimping off. Given a chance, and pretty likely given their current financial state, Volvo cars will end up being another Mercury division. That's not the kind of brand you want on a premium truck. Mack is a billion dollar brand. Literally, they could quit building trucks entirely and make billions just peddling Mack clothing, etc.. Heck, they could end of looking like a Harley dealership. The Mack brand has worldwide equity that the Volvo brand can't match, and Volvo controls the Mack brand. Thusly trying to build up the Volvo brand is a lost cause, and Volvo management should let Volvo trucks be cheap and cheerful mass produced integral sleepers and day cabs that do battle in the price wars with International, Sterling, and Freightliner. Heck, maybe they should even rename it White, the standard color of big fleets that buy on low bid and specify white paint so they only have to change the decals after their next Wall Street merger/acquistition/divestiture. Mack should be a premium truck in every sense of the word, built to be the best and never built down to a price. Mack should have a full model line, including over the road trucks as well as conventionals and cabovers. In every measure, Mack should put Kenworthless, Peterbull, and Wasted Star to shame. Macks should be custom built to the customer's taste, not the fantasies of some Swedish engineers. And should push come to shove, the Volvo brand should disappear and Mack survive.

Looks like the only thing that could beat the ol' dog was that Freightskaker cabover, and it looked to be running an Allison.

Full year figures aren't in yet, but it looks like Mack slightly outsold Volvo in the U.S. market last year. Perhaps Volvo should take a few lessons from Mack instead of trying to slowly euthanise the bulldog?