bbigrig

Yes...about 60lbft coming out on the hold downs is about right.

Using worn swedge tools, improper torque procedures, using stretched hold down bolts, not sucking oil out of the injector hold down bolt bores, techs in a rush, oh....and just a poor design that really has yet to be updated. 60series had a similar combustion gas to fuel system issue so meh.... Job security

Usually find failures to do with procedures and tooling on the replacement side. From new, Most needing to be done at least once in 600k miles. We've had OEM (Mack/Volvo) reman heads with failed /poorly installed cups.

Same with my Samsung S6. It's an older phone. I was able to post any pictures up until about 1 year ago. Something has changed with the site. Not your phones. So many stories and tech info I can't post because there is a picture to go along with it. Maybe has something to do with the hosting costs?

Was it the PPG CH they had for a little while?

I think the MRU one is purple.

As part of the deal to take over Mack, Volvo was forced to get rid of the Autocar brand which only carried the low entry cabover at the time. Something to do with competing with the MR at the time. They would have tied most of the market up selling those 2 brands of low cab over entry. I think i read it was the competition bureau that made the call to give the blessing for the merger/purchase.

I work at a dealer that sells and service to more then half of the mixer companies in Ontario. Mack Canada has built a relationship with most of the big Concrete companies since the late 60s. There is a long history of scratching backs there. Trucks are sold to these customers usually by E.O. ( Executive Office) sales reps with almost zero profits to the delivering dealer. It's a package deal. If it wasn't for the bend over backwards, almost at cost shop labor rates and parts, pickup and delivery of units to be worked on, extra warranty and policy on just about everything.....blah blah....dont kid yourself. The smaller mixer companies are turning to mostly Paccar now. You will always notice a handful of T880s or Petes in a big mixer fleet just to keep Mack honest. To bad i can't post pictures on here anymore. Our shop is usually over 50% Granite mixers any given day.

The basics of the emissions havnt changed much since the roll out of SCR (as one example) in 2010. A few more sensors added and some programming. Mack/Volvo then changed the way it is packaged on the frame and introduced a new version of the engine for 2017. In most cases, the longer a product is on the market the more bugs get worked out. In the years the first version of SCR ran, problems were being poorly addressed. Right up to the newer 2017 updates emission systems still had many of the same roll out problems. My vantage point is on the dealer side. I totally understand customer dissatisfaction these days. Don't blame it on emission changes when companies like Volvo are fighting to keep glider kits and the like from being sold. It's a nice little racket getting to sell bigger warranties and huge repair bills on poorly thought out emission systems being mounted on today's VolMacks.

It's a bigger deal then you realize. Even long time Mack salesman are complaining they are losing long time customers they have had since the 80s. Price and reliability issues that long time customers never had to deal with are hurting sales. Reliability should be getting better the longer the product runs.

Bad SCR cans. Low grade catalyst material from New. Get your dealer to run the CBRs for these codes. Very common right now.

In Ontario when it comes to big fleets and big numbers, its the brand relationship with the customers not the model. Mack still has a large foot hold in the cement industry as an example with the Granite. The "factory" twin steer option has helped it out pace other vendors. 95% of the Macks we repair at the dealer are Granites. Mack has lost a fair bit of market share to KW primarily here in Ontario. It directly relates to the reliability issues with the (Volvo)MP/D series engines, electronics and after treatment issues. Granites are also quite pricy here. Although Granites power train is Volvo, its ironic that the VHD is almost non existent in the vocational market here. Surprisingly most new T800 and 880 customers are former Mack Granite customers and are going as far as specing Paccar power for mixer and most dump and ordering Cummins for tractor or heavy dump application.

That one was for Trimac going to Western Canada. They still use a lot of Tri Drives here in Canada. Lots of Granites and Anthems Tri Drives. We can't use in cab control lift axles any more without being hit by carrying capacity downgrades.

The older western stars Dufferin uses here in Ontario are Simard set ups.

I'm betting it won't be equipped with hydraulic brakes. I'm not sure of this, its just a gut feeling. I'm thinking they are going to stick to class 7 only. Although popular in the 80s, the late 90s saw the faze out of the 200 midliner series as there was no advantage to customer or maintanance having front hydraulic brakes and rear air brakes. There is a class 6 and down market, I just think Mack is too high up in the cost per unit market to play in that very competitive class field of smaller trucks. I think this truck will be more geared to city delivery/LTL fleets where the idea of the CM baby 8 left off. I know the CM was a flop and the market tanked at the same time. It's a truck to fill the large un attended med/light duty gap in the Mack lineup since the late 90s. Wonder of it will be available as a tractor?

Volvo enjoys playing both sides of the North American market while using the exact same powertrain, engineering, production ( i.e. Hagerstown) head office....blah blah... On one side You have the customers that don't mind European influence on design and could care less if you call it Euro trash every time it pulls in for diesel at the flying J. The other side is the "Murica" customers that got to have a Dog on the hood, more chiseled body lines, smaller cabs and a little less in your face technology. All the while pulling in those US greenbacks from a wider customer base.... and don't forget marking up the pricing in the parts business.... They have no reason to sell.......

It's is going to be a class 7 truck. The Granite MHD is too heavy and too expensive for most class 7 market and some municipal fleets as examples. Back in the fall, A conventional test truck visited the ex test center for big wigs to have a look at under wraps. It's a Mack product, will not be Volvo branded from what I'm hearing. Probably a nice light frame with Cummins power (Not sure of what smaller then MP7 Volvo has to offer for this truck) There is a market for the baby 8....it was just not thought out, engineered and marketed properly. Freightliner, Paccar and Navistar have been doing well in the class 7 and below market. The class 7 cabover market is too small these days. Back in the 80s I believe Mack had over 50% of this market. It will probably resemble the AUS Metro-liner.

We've had some issues with the newer style fuel filter housings. A couple of strange diaphragm looking parts falling out with the removal of the fuel filter. Not related to this issue, we had a few cam lobes on the camshaft (which are now pressed on) turn out of time.

We have been playing with common rail engines for over a year now. We had them in the Volvos months before the Macks. Lots of pressure sensor failures under the valve cover. A few of the same harness and about half a dozen injector failures. A couple of the plunger injectors became quite noisy through the valve cover. Also issues with the AHI module that is now part of the fuel filter housing. All in All, Mickey mouse design and an engineering step backwards. Can't upload any pics of the tear downs I have in my phone. Wish the system was external with a high pressure pump.

Truth to that point, but fleets don't buy powertrains based on engine brake gains......id be surprised if you could come up with another ..

If you owned the E7PLN engine before the Etech...they wernt a great engine. Besides more torque that you paid for through fuel useage....someone name me something better about the Etech versus the E7PLN...

I was thinking the same thing. It's a nice heavy frame but....the Canadian one built as a dump had a 12 speed and 44s.

You have an E3220 in that 1997 MS300....on your engine plate does it have an engine model sequence like ... 06.22.06....or something like that. I will look it up on Monday.

Customer from Quebec Canada had one as well. His had spoke wheels with basically the same set up.

Here in Canada....you can almost pin the loss of fleet sales to the Mack Etech engine. Mack started to gain huge in fleet sales here with CH and E7PLN engines. Those fleets then renewed their acceptance of the Mack CH product but anything 1998 and up was Etech powered. The camshafts, plate oil coolers, sand in block castings, roller lifters, loss of fuel mileage and other inherent design issues were a disappointment to fleets that enjoyed the simplicity and reliability of the E7PLN. Sucked in a lot of fleets but lost a lot by the time of e tech. 1 fleet I worked at would buy 15-25 anually had to send 1 to 3 trucks a week out of 150 back to the dealer for warranty engine work for CHs built after 1998. This fleet hauled on avaerage 120,000gvw regularly on double framed 427hp 220wb CHs. The resale export market took a hit as well when PLN engines became scarce and Etechs were of no interest because electronic pumps couldn't be converted to mechanical. If we could get a line graph printed off, it would start in year 1.5 of post Etech roll out.