bbigrig

Dump that Mack tranny. I have had to pull out my T2180 out twice in the last 4 years for the same range syncro issues. I love Mack and most of its products, but that transmission in high shifting usage seems to show its design is lacking. That transmission seems to last longer in highway applications where its in the same gear for most of the day. When you start putting it in heavy shift cycle usage the smaller heavily used components like the range syncros don't hold up. I had little or no issues with that trans till it started doing regional work. The gears and the rest of that gearbox hold up well hauling 120,000 gross. I wish they could have improved the range side of the Mack gearboxes. Most of the guys here swear by the Mack gearbox. Some are to proud to admit it could have been designed better with repair and replacement costs taken into consideration. The Transmission rebuilders up here don't even want a Mack trans for a core......they do more change overs to Fuller and none from Fuller to Mack. My Fuller's which is all I order in my newer trucks have there issues too. But nowhere near as costly to repair or replace.

Sodrel a long time Mack customer in Ohio I believe, has been using 6x2 with liftable pushers for years hauling U.S. Mail. I have loads I could use that set up for and see the value in it. The set up has good and bad things about it operating in the snow up here. The biggest problem I have come across is the loss of axle rating on having to use smaller tires on the pusher lift. (smaller tires here means lower axle carrying capability on the lift)

V-Mac I 1990-late1994 E7 up to 400hp V-Mac II 1994-late1997 E7 up to 454hp V-Mac III 1997-late2002 E-Tech up to 487hp V-Mac IIII 2002-2007 ASET up to 487hp I think these are pretty close but can differ on build date and model year etc.

If it isn't an input from a wonky TPS, its most likely the rack actuator solenoid in the rear housing of your injection pump.

That piece of crap half shack is for store deliveries. Twin 53's do the warehouse to warehouse movements in Ontario. Wal-Mart cubes out before it grosses out on store deliveries. Dead issue. 49,500kg's (108,000lbs) are allowed on tridem (3 axle trailer bogie) axles at 72" spread here in Ontario already

Do some research on when the truck was unveiled......those write ups were the reason for most of the changes to the units since there roll out. The companies that do the most business with Wal-Mart are the ones that don't seem to be taking part in the testing. (most likely due to very little in the rate increase dept.) The ones that are involved are the hungry companies putting drivers in the trucks at very little rate increases then the drivers in non test trucks. The nature of Wal-Mart's deliveries in Ontario are drop and switches at the stores and between warehouses. The test unit set up and lack of test units in use make it difficult to move the freight efficiently without the delay of loading and unloading as a complete unit. Imagine the truck and trailer would have to sit and be loaded and unloaded as a unit, how would Wal-Mart justify an investment like this truck sitting idle for more then 4 hours per day. Canadian dock workers are some of the slowest in the world. Wal-Mart is famous for not wanting to pay waiting time in Canada. As you were stating in another thread earlier in the month, like in Europe where truck and trailer would remain as a unit isn't cost effective in the current freight delivery models used. Add up all the time a power unit is sitting being loaded and unloaded over a year. The delay time cost far outways the extra freight hauled percentage. The test trailer is specific to the tractor which makes it useless to any other road tractor due to its kingpin setting. Unless the industry in Canada is going to adopt to the changes that have been introduced on these Wal-Mart units it will be another epic fail. The LCV or double 53' trailers are much more versatile as they can be hauled together to a destination and broken down to deliver. Those units can be hauled anywhere in North America as single units and linked together without having to have a special tractor to haul them. Time will tell.

That truck is a joke..... I see it all the time........hauling 53' trailers. Not the special 60' None of the Wal-mart stores here in Canada are set up to unload the trailer or dromedary box. Most Wal-mart's are in very tight shopping centers in Ontario, Canada that have issues getting access to a daycab truck and 53' trailer on a good day. The truck itself has caused quite a stir up here as it was billed as environment friendly, only to find out it has a pre-2002 emissions Series 60 for power. The trucking press up here tore this idea apart. The Freightliner Argosy is a Glider kit which Canada as of Jan 1 2014, no longer allows to be built up without the current model years emission systems equipped on the glider kit. (2014 glider must have 2014 emissions on its powerplant) DAMMIT! The company that hauls most of the loads for Wal-Mart in Ontario (Trans- Logistics) a Mostly Mack fleet, are using 53' doubles on the longer intraprovincial hauls anyways. Most of this idea was the trailer manufacturing company and the trucking company IFS sponsoring the idea. (IFS operated the truck not Wal-Mart) The Major carrier Trans- logistics didn't seem to take part. I do recall Freightliner trying this idea with a longer trailer years ago based on the Argosy chassis with a sleeper. It too was using a 60' trailer. May have been with Scneider National??? The truck was kind of orange. A strong user of tractors with drome boxes up here is Manitoulan Transport. They did purchase some Argosy Glider kits before the new glider rules deadline. They also bought the FL112 (the newer DD13 powered conventional not sure of exact model #) They decided to stay with the conventional/drom box trucks and apply for special MTO permits. We here in Ontario are just waiting for this idea to fade away like many others.

Will be there.

cool

Sounds like a filter minder but....... If it looks like an air line (1/4 nylon) it could be your truck is equipped with an air cylinder on the inside of the air cylinder that controls an inside/outside air selector gate. Most Macks in Canada were ordered with this option and the upper dash panel would have had an air switch on it. It is a gate that either selects to suck in air from the normal outside "hat" or "snorkel" we are all familiar with or it sucked air from a short large hose that sucked from under the hood. It may not be an inside outside air system but thought I would throw that in just in case.

Yes, a customer here in Toronto had the Red interior in an MH. It was ordered as a Canadian show truck with a E9-450 with the roof fairing. It was used on the front lawn for the grand Re-opening of the Toronto Mack Branch then at the Bi-annual Canadian truck show in Toronto. It was then sold to a man by the name of Reg Webb I believe and ran it into the mid 2000's It was the classiest interior I have yet to see in a Mack. Made my Rawhide interior look dated. I was saying that I have only ever seen the level 4 Red in Superdogs. I have never seen the Red in any other R-series cabs

I loved the red but only ever seen it come in the Superliner II's

Unfortunately no. The Old double frame outer rail had eroded down to nothing and split with our beautiful Canadian climate. We worked that truck hard over the years hauling 120,000lbs gross to tandem van in its final days about a year and a half ago. We welded it a few times just to keep it operational for one of our drivers that refused to part with it. As much as I wanted to keep the truck and slide some new rails in, running and maintaining multiple trucks would have put that old girl out in the field for a long time. I had many offers to take the truck off my hands over the years. A gentleman from Florida who owns a heavy equipment sales company took it and wanted to make it into a float tractor after replacing the frame rail. I figured better someone making into a usable R-dog again then leaving it to rust till I found the time for it again. It went to a good home. We are currently about to splurge on some older Mack Iron again. So i'm sure some R series cabs will be back in the fold within a few months. To add to your before collection Alex.......Fergus Truck show year 2000 and something....... Looks better now.

Great Job Alex. Looks like it could be an Alumi-Bunk sleeper Alumi-Bunk was the most common bunk mounted on Eastern Ontario sold trucks from Mack Canada. Able Body was I believe more common on the US trucks of that vintage. Mik-Mak from Northern Ontario is another common one but wasn't as popular with the Eastern Canadian Mack dealers. I had an Alumi-Bunk on the '85 R-dog.

Same....Investigated that truck months ago. Its hardly a parts truck. Its only worth what the running power train is worth. (E9 and 12 speed) One of the sales guys there use to work at London Branch Mack and thinks he's got a real Gem there. Won't budge on the price. I was also very disappointed. The RW has been for sale for over 6 months now and they have only put it on truck paper recently because no one is coming close to what they want for it. They figure some exporter will grab it. The Ex Mack salesman buys a lot of Macks and exports them because he knows certain countries love paying top dollar for them. (tatrotrucksales.com)

I'm hearing that a Mack/Volvo shared cab (similar to PACCAR) is within a year of being released. I can't imagine the crap that is going to hit the fan on BMT when that happens.

Like stated before by Keg1, check the tank vent and or check to see if your cross over line has collapsed internally. Most likely your CL sucks and returns from 1 tank. It will balance the tanks through the cross over line at the front end of the factory tanks. If the line is plugged, collapsed, or a valve at the base of the tank is faulty it wont balance. Good luck.

I know an CL643 was a Detroit. I also know of 1 RW643 built in Oakville as a test truck. The 60 series was never available in the MH (as far as I know???) which made me think that it would be a 92 series Detroit. If MH's were ever built with 2 strokes? I've seen the MH653 with CATs up here. Very few Cummins powered MH's up here even though I know they exist.

I have always seen the 2 dictate what country the truck was built in. 2M2 is the start of the Serial numbers of my Oakville built trucks. 1M1 is the start of the Serial numbers of any of my US built Macks. Didn't realize the 2 can also mean glider?

What did the MH643's have for power?? Silver 92 series Detroits???

Is it just me, or is the VIN on the MH is wrong? 2H......

If you could sub in all of the V-Mac III (E-Tech) stuff (Engine, Harness, ECU and VECU,) into the 2005 and afford it why not??? It would do a lot better then an ASET on the pocket book down the road. Everything for ASET and E-Tech are basically placed or run in the same areas. The 2005 would be on Volvo frame rails and the '99 on CH rails. So keep the 2005 mounts. The engine fan set up is also slightly different so you may have to swap some stuff over if I remember correctly. It would be costly depending of coarse if you were doing it yourself etc. I can say off of the top of my head the interfaces such as dash cluster etc would be the same "keystone" interior parts. You would run into some harness local issues where pin locations at interfaces would be different. If you have the time and money you can make it work, but its far from plug and play swap overs as mentioned by Staxx. That and the fact that if your rig ever got pulled over by a DOT that knows their emission stuff, you would be screwed with the wrong engine (Non EGR) for the wrong year of truck with 2005 emission regs. Could cost you $$$ but that is more dependant on your area of operation and the DOT's smarts. If I missed anything let me know.....Almost Anything is possible with time and money.

I found a picture of what the 460xt door badging looks like on one of my older trucks. As you and I are both in North Country and 95% of the year share the same climate you can run straight or Synthetic. All of your gear train will be well worn in and no matter what oil you use, its not going to reverse or slow the wear that exists. When it comes to well worn trannies and Diffs that have hauled Canadian max. gross weight loads, the thicker oil will actually quiet things down slightly. Neat rig. Good luck.

For the amount of running you describe, find some more CH's of the same vintage you already have and refurbish them. You cant beat the E7 engines. Stay away from anything between 2003-07(ASET Engines) I have brand new and older Macks. The 80's and 90's Macks seem to do the best. Unless you are putting on ALOT of km's, the older ones will have a lot less downtime and a smaller upfront investment. Age of the trucks will become less important the more you see how their reliability puts money back in your pocket. My 2013's have had some downtime that I will never recoup. I was happy that I could pull my driver from the 2013 for warranty injector cup repairs and throw him into a '99 without an issue.