David Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Check this out. www.themetalith.com/k50crashtesting.html Quote Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullfuel01 Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 tsss, I bet with some fiberglass the Mack still on the road... they didn't take an ugly ford or pete or kenworth... they're not able to reach that speed and would probably felt apart before hitting the wall or the engine would blow.... Quote Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5763 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaddeusW Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Dammit! does everyone who wants to destroy trucks have to use Macks? Go and relieve the dealers and scrap yards of all the freight shakers, IH's and fords they have. Leave the Macks alone. Quote -Thad What America needs is less bull and more Bulldog! Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5765 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superdog Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 They obviously wanted to use something that had a chance of damaging the barrier.How far thru do you think a Volvo would have made it,providing it ran long enough to reach 50 mph. Quote Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5766 Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK Trucking Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 Too bad they didn't use a Volvo, it's a shame to waste a Mack, when there's so many "brand X" p.o.s. trucks out there. BTW, the pencil pushers who wrote the story called it an "RM". Looks like a "DM" to me. Quote "If You Can't Shift It Smoothly, You Shouldn't Be Driving It" Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5769 Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsmartyn Posted May 15, 2006 Share Posted May 15, 2006 I'm with you guys, what a waste using a Mack for that test instead of some junk that isn't worth rebuilding. The least they could have done was to strap Zacarius Moussaoui on the nose of that Mack for their stupid test and they would have accomplished something positive. Bob Quote Ain't a Mack? Take it back! Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5770 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog man Posted May 17, 2006 Share Posted May 17, 2006 HK Your right it is a DM Model Not a RM (rm was butterfly hood ) sounded like a 237 or 300 Still it was a waste of a damn GOOD TRUCK why tear up a why not use a I.H. OR A Volvo or a FrieghtShaker some P.O.S. TRUCK DAMN was a good looking 78 model though be4 the wreck yall have a safeone bulldog Quote You Cant Fix Stupid. But You Can Numb It With A Sledgehammer. Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-5793 Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris88 Posted June 29, 2006 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Cool pics but what a shame. That was a nice truck and its just completely totaled. The engine and trans are deffinatly shot but I wonder if the rears are any good yet? Or maybe that driveshaft was like a harpoon and tore them apart too. Like everyone says why do they blowup and crash test macks and not freight liners or internationals. Oh well the pics are cool.Chris Quote Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-6315 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freightrain Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Reminds me of when Mythbusters blew up a Mack mixer. Why not something not worth anything?I guess this just proves a point that some people DON'T get. It takes a destruction test or alot of dynamite to destroy a Mack?....so that it CAN'T survive or be repair and reused. They want to use something that is tough enough to prove the durability of what they are testing. Anything else would fall apart before the test LOL! Quote Larry 1959 B61 Liv'n Large...................... Charter member of the "MACK PACK" Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-6579 Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThaddeusW Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Reminds me of when Mythbusters blew up a Mack mixer. Why not something not worth anything?I guess this just proves a point that some people DON'T get. It takes a destruction test or alot of dynamite to destroy a Mack?....so that it CAN'T survive or be repair and reused. They want to use something that is tough enough to prove the durability of what they are testing. Anything else would fall apart before the test LOL!LOL true, guess it was hard to find a non mack used mixer that could get itself to the blast site. Quote -Thad What America needs is less bull and more Bulldog! Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-6582 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speed Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 WELL-WHAT CAN I SAY-WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO PROVE HOW TOUGH YOUR WALL IS,YOU HAFTA USE THE TOUGHEST TRUCK THERE IS,OR YOUR CLAIM IS WORTHLESS. I HATE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN TO A GOOD MACK,BUT WHEN YOU CARE ENOUGH TO RUIN THE VERY BEST...Speed Quote "Remember-ANY Gun Control is Unconstitutional!"<!--sizeo:3--><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%"><!--/sizeo--><i><b>MACK-E Model Registry # 36</b></i><!--sizec--></span><!--/sizec--><a href="http://www.nvabatetravel.com/"target="_blank">http://www.nvabatetravel.com/</a> Link to comment https://www.bigmacktrucks.com/topic/1113-crash-test/#findComment-9465 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.