2011 Cxu613 Mack

[DMHshop]

I am a construction asphalt company and am looking into buying the Mack CXU613 truck to replace our 1999 378 Peterbuilt end dump. Has anyone had any issues with the new California emissions and the urea system.

I am comparing it to the Peterbuilt with the same specs. Peterbuilts ISX 15 425ST Cummins motor.

What I am finding is this. It is like trying compare a Ford to a Chevy. Your either a Ford guy or a Chevy guy. Both are good, just depends on what you grew up with.

So, I am looking to know if anyone knows what engine is working with the CA emmisions the best.

Any pro's or con's out there?

Attached is the Mack quote with specs.

MackCXU613.pdf

Edited December 29, 2010 by DMHequipment

[rhasler]

I am a construction asphalt company and am looking into buying the Mack CXU613 truck. Has anyone had any issues with the new California emissions and the urea system.

I am comparing it to the Peterbuilt with the same specs. Peterbuilts ISX 15 425ST Cummins motor.

What I am finding is this. It is like trying compare a Ford to a Chevy. Your either a Ford guy or a Chevy guy. Both are good, just depends on what you grew up with.

So, I am looking to know if anyone knows what engine is working with the CA emmisions the best.

Any pro's or con's out there?

Attached is the Mack quote with specs.

I haven't seen any issues with the Mack 2010 emission engine as of yet, but I can't speak for the Peterbilt/Cummins combination. One thing you might reconsider is the air assist clutch-get rid of it if you go with the Mack, it's a headache waiting to happen, especially for an asphalt truck.

[Mackpro]

I am a construction asphalt company and am looking into buying the Mack CXU613 truck to replace our 1999 378 Peterbuilt end dump. Has anyone had any issues with the new California emissions and the urea system.

I am comparing it to the Peterbuilt with the same specs. Peterbuilts ISX 15 425ST Cummins motor.

What I am finding is this. It is like trying compare a Ford to a Chevy. Your either a Ford guy or a Chevy guy. Both are good, just depends on what you grew up with.

So, I am looking to know if anyone knows what engine is working with the CA emmisions the best.

Any pro's or con's out there?

Attached is the Mack quote with specs.

We have sold 5 new 2010/11 truck with the SCR/urea injection, all 5 have had no issues with any on the emission controls.

[MidniteMechanic]

If you have the option, delete the automatic traction control. Also add parking brakes on both axles and upgrade to a Sheppard steering gear. If you haul heavy a 13 or 18 speed trans might be a better choice.

[superliner79]

I am a construction asphalt company and am looking into buying the Mack CXU613 truck to replace our 1999 378 Peterbuilt end dump. Has anyone had any issues with the new California emissions and the urea system.

I am comparing it to the Peterbuilt with the same specs. Peterbuilts ISX 15 425ST Cummins motor.

What I am finding is this. It is like trying compare a Ford to a Chevy. Your either a Ford guy or a Chevy guy. Both are good, just depends on what you grew up with.

So, I am looking to know if anyone knows what engine is working with the CA emmisions the best.

Any pro's or con's out there?

Attached is the Mack quote with specs.

do not buy a new mack they are junk more problems than they are worth stay in the shop than on the road

[MackMann85]

I'd disregard Superliners bad additude unless he cares to substantiate his negative claim. I've heard largely great things on the 2010 emissions Macks especially with fuel economy. Both trucks use an EGR and SCR combination with urea so no big differences there. The Shepperd steering gear and 13spd recommomendations are good ones. You may want to also consider going with the 445C rating instead of the 415C if the cummins 425ST had the 1750 lb-ft torque optional rating. The torque would match up better with the 445C. Good luck and enjoy your new MACK!