Is Volvo Good Or Bad For Mack Trucks?

[mudslut28]

Despite the fact that Volvo has headed Mack in a completely new direction (whether good or bad), I will continue to be a Mack fan. Seeing how I am young yet a, I am most familiar with the "Granite era" of Mack trucks, I would never buy anything older than a Granite. Therefore, I am just going to focus on the performance of these "Volvo" Macks, which, in the end, is what really matters isn't it? So far, I have yet to hear a bad thing about these new "2007" MP7 and MP8 engines. I was very impressed with the MP8 powered Granite I rode in, and so were many others. I can't see any other way. And you can't really blame Volvo for all the problems with the newer Macks, blame the Gov't who put all of these emissions regs in place.

If you are familliar only with the Granite era than you cant call yourself a real Mack fan because they really are not Macks. Sad but true. Also you are cheating yourself if you would never buy anything older. If you havent heard anything bad about the mp7's and mp 8's you havent been listening very closely. I work daily with a fleet of them...the ONLY thing good I will say about them is the engine brake. Its an improvement over the E7....but powerwise and mileagewise...not even close. They are in my way with the same weight and use around a half gallon more (short coal haul offroad) fuel per trip. The Granites I run with are all 06 and 07's. My E7 400 (92 model) with 21000 hours on it is still beating them on uptime. Just riding in one and having to live with them daily is completely different. The only thing Mack on those Granites would be the camelback suspension and rears. The rest is hybrid Volvo. Sorry to sound harsh but the truth is the truth...if I ruffled your feathers I am sorry.

We arent even gonna get into the trash they are selling with the "triple" frames for the heavy offroad apps that they deemed worthy to replace the beloved rd800's. I have seen a bunch of them already getting the frame plated. I can assure you the frame on my 76 DM 800 has never seen anything resembling a day it thought about breaking. After 31 years and literally millions of tons of coal...35-45 tons a trip....it still runs every day!

Its damn near criminal what Volvo has done to us!

[granitefan713]

Well, I don't doubt that the older trucks have more uptime, I see the same thing here in my area. However, the downtime with new trucks is not just limited to Macks, I see all brands of new trucks in the shop getting various things fixed. From what I've read and heard from others, most of this downtime is related to the emissions technology, not just 07, but 04 as well. Using Cat as an example, it seems that the C7s have more problems than the 3126s. And I will agree with you that Granites have very little true Mack in them, but they still look nice.

As far as my comment on the power of the MP series, it is really only based on what I've read in Heavy Duty Trucking and one personal experience. During the Performance Tour, I rode in a 2008 GU713 quad axle dump loaded with 24tons, it had a 415hp MP8 and a 10M transmission. During the ride, this 2008 out ran an older Granite tri-axle with 427hp on a hill. Hence my comment on having "more power".

But to sum it up, I don't doubt the older Macks were more durable, but like I said, everything nowadays is made cheaper. You see it in cars too. You barely have to hit something hard to put huge dents in them. It all comes down to $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[granitefan713]

Ok, I'll add this, I love the looks of "restored" B and R models and wouldn't mind having one, except for one thing. I've been told they are no where near as comfortable in the cab as a Granite. I'm one for creature comforts and would demand A/C and power steering. So maybe if you guys could shed some more light on this on how comfortable these older R models and such are, you may change my mind. The RD Legends are nice.....if that counts as a "MACK".

[storkmack]

Ok, I'll add this, I love the looks of "restored" B and R models and wouldn't mind having one, except for one thing. I've been told they are no where near as comfortable in the cab as a Granite. I'm one for creature comforts and would demand A/C and power steering. So maybe if you guys could shed some more light on this on how comfortable these older R models and such are, you may change my mind. The RD Legends are nice.....if that counts as a "MACK".

I just do not know what to say to this..... A granite cab is really no different from a Vision cab, besides the dash they are not that much different from a CH cab. On the newer ones a Pinicle and a Granite are the same. I drive a 94' RD everyday and I happen to think it is very comfortable. It has mack air ride cab and suspenion, and also has a/c. I installed a nice stereo system. The truck is a pleasure to drive. I drove one of our 05' Granites for a day and it is a nice truck, just not any nicer than my RD. I guess what I want to say is this....Did you think all of us were out there sitting on a wooden box, driving thermodynes with a triplex , no a/c and chain drive.....and only were saved when Mack came out with the Granite?? If all you want to pay attention to are the Granites and newer, you are missing out on some of the best trucks ever made. Thanks, Brad

[granitefan713]

I just do not know what to say to this..... A granite cab is really no different from a Vision cab, besides the dash they are not that much different from a CH cab. On the newer ones a Pinicle and a Granite are the same. I drive a 94' RD everyday and I happen to think it is very comfortable. It has mack air ride cab and suspenion, and also has a/c. I installed a nice stereo system. The truck is a pleasure to drive. I drove one of our 05' Granites for a day and it is a nice truck, just not any nicer than my RD. I guess what I want to say is this....Did you think all of us were out there sitting on a wooden box, driving thermodynes with a triplex , no a/c and chain drive.....and only were saved when Mack came out with the Granite?? If all you want to pay attention to are the Granites and newer, you are missing out on some of the best trucks ever made. Thanks, Brad

No, I didn't think you were all sitting on wooden boxes . See, in my area, the older Macks look like they've gone through hell and back--as in they are not very well cared for, except for a few. I personally like to see vehicles relatively clean and in good shape, granted I know it is very hard to keep a work truck clean in most conditions, but at least wash it once a month. Therefore, when I see all these old Macks around here with dented hoods, ripped seats, switches broken off on the dash, it turns me away and I turn towards the clean shiny Granites. (And yes I have seen Granites that look like they've gone through hell and back too).

As far as the cabs go, it was my understanding that the R model cabs were not as "spacious" as a CV/CX/CH/CL cab. Someone here said that the seat in a DM was slightly off center from the steering wheel making it a bit uncomfortable over a long day. I'm glad to hear to hear that your truck is comfortable, and I have always liked the looks of the RD, and as long as it has the options I've mentioned above and that its comfortable, I wouldn't mind having one. I do know however, that new Granite/Pinnacle cab is 4" bigger than the previous version giving more belly room.

Once I finally get my CDL, I hope to drive some of these trucks and find out for myself how they are. So far, the only Mack I've ever ridden in was a 2008 Granite so thats all I really know.

[Joe Cummings]

This is the VOLVO D13 engine.

This is the VOLVO D11 Engine.

This is the VOLVO D16 Engine.. (What soon will be cloned as the MACK MP10)

This is the MACK MP7 engine.

Are they the same ???? or Do they share external components that makes them look alike ??????

Please read this.

All in the Family

Mack and Volvo engines may come out of one factory, but they aren't twins

By Paul Abelson

Mack and Volvo engines for 2007 have much in common, both with other 2007 engine brands and with each other. As with most other engine makers’ offerings, this includes cooled exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) to control oxides of nitrogen (NOx), diesel particulate filters (DPF) to control soot and particulate matter (PM) and variable geometry turbochargers (VGT) that control throttle response and improve drivability.

But commonality does not mean that these engines are identical. All diesel engines use compression ignition and will burn the same ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD), but they differ in many important details. Mack and Volvo strategies for meeting 2007 (and 2010) EPA emissions regulations are similar to others’ but differ in detail.

Mack and Volvo are mentioned together because they are sister companies, part of Sweden’s AB Volvo. Both makes’ engines are made at the Volvo Powertrain Hagerstown, Md., factory. The engines are similar, but they differ according to the particular market they’re developed for, and the nature of the truck they go into.

Both makes share the same production lines. Engine blocks and cylinder heads are identical. Both use an overhead cam design with four valves per cylinder. They have 38 cylinder head fasteners to better contain increased pressures in the cylinders and the fuel injection system. Both use steel ladder-type reinforcement that increases stiffness at the main bearings for greater resistance to distortion.

The common design has internal drive gears that turn the camshaft, air compressor and power steering pump. The camshaft has a viscous vibration damper. Placing the damper there helps absorb torsional vibrations created by the high-pressure fuel injection system, and directs them to the flywheel where they are managed with traditional hardware.

The engines come in three sizes, roughly 700 cu-in, 800 cu-in and 1,000 cu-in. In Volvo nomenclature, based on liters of displacement, they are the D11, D13 and D16. Mack’s system designates hundreds of cubic inches: MP7, MP8 and, for later release, MP10.

A sliding nozzle controls the variability feature of the VGTs, allowing the turbochargers to respond virtually instantly to throttle demands and engine requirements. Drivers of pre-10/02 engines are amazed at the responsiveness and lack of turbo lag of VGT-equipped engines.

Mack Specifics

Mack’s fourth generation Vehicle Management and Control System, V-MAC IV, allows tailoring of the engines for specific customer applications. For LTL operations primarily on Interstate highways and application where fuel economy is the top priority, Econodyne engines have an operating range from 1200 to 1800 rpm. MaxiCruise engines are for full-load applications and travel on rolling Interstates. Its rpm range is 1200 to 1950. For applications requiring highest power — off-highway, mountains and other severe-duty applications — Maxidyne engines run from 1200 up to 2100 rpm.

For 2007, MP7 engines will offer from 325 hp to 405 hp. Torque will range from 1260 to 1560 lb-ft. Thirteen-liter MP8 engines will be available starting in 2007. Power will be 415 hp to 485 hp, with torque of 1540 lb-ft to 1700 lb-ft. MP8s will be available for all three applications. Details of MP10 engines have not yet been announced. For Mack buyers needing big power, Cummins ISX engines are available.

The V-MAC IV system allows Mack to program customer-requested variables including idle shutdown, improved theft deterrence, tamper detection and normal operating parameters.

Mack’s proprietary PowerLeash engine brake is light-weight. The company claims best-in-class braking performance.

Volvo Features

The Volvo engine lineup for 2007 is based on vocation and the Volvo trucks that they will power. The 11-liter D11 is intended for P&D, LTL and regional distribution, in VNM (medium hood) and VNL (long hood) truck models. Horsepower will range form 325 to 405. Torque will be 1250 lb-ft to 1450 lb-ft. The D13, derived from the D12, which will no longer be available, is for economical line haul and long haul, as well as general vocational applications. The D13 will go into VNM, VNL and VHD trucks and tractors. Horsepower availability is from 335 to 485, with 1350 lb-ft to 1650 lb-ft of torque.

Volvo’s “big power†is the D16, developed to meet 2007 and 2010 regulations. While early D16s had as much as 625 hp and 2250 lb-ft, 2007 models will start at 450 hp and to “only†600 hp. Its torque goes from 1650 lb-ft to 2050 lb-ft. The big engine is intended for heavy haul and over-the-mountains Interstate travel. It will be available only in Volvo VNL and VT (premium sleeper) trucks and tractors.

The Volvo Engine Brake (VEB) is a two-part system, consisting of a compression brake and an exhaust pressure governor. The combination allows more effective braking at lower engine speed, especially below 1600 rpm. The engine brake weighs only 25 lbs. The VEB is so quiet, it can be used in communities where use of compression brakes is restricted.

The exhaust pressure governor works with the compression brake. It restricts the exhaust to build backpressure when the parking brake is on and coolant temperature is below 149 degrees F. That places a load on the engine, which raises engine temperature until temperature reaches 158 degrees F. It provides more rapid warm-up after engine start. The unit saves fuel by keeping warm air in the cylinder, allowing idling as low as 500 rpm.

See this article at:

http://www.roadking.com/story.php?id=748

Paul Abelson is pretty much an idiot. I think he is as full of it as that guy from Pittsburgh power.

[Camelback]

as far as volvo goes ... i hate volvo's period. there ugly as hell and whimpy as can be. I am very afraid that they will totally ruin the mack trucks completely. Volvo has never done nothing right and never will. AFter volvo took over going to buy parts at a dealer is a pain in the ass in my neck of the woods. You ask for mack parts and they act like they have never heard of them. Volvo will totally ruin the true American mack truck that we once knowed of and enjoyed driving and working on. GRANITEFAN.. as far as the comfort of an R model goes they do have power steering and most was equipped with A/C and its easy to install on the ones that don't have it.. Most old macks do look like they have been through hell and back simply because they have and they will go through it again if they are allowed. The 70's era R models are getting up in there 30's and the age and hard work is showing through if they have not been restored so lets give the old dogs a break. I can't speak much for the B's cause i have not owned or drove one but The comfort of an R is what you make out of it .. You would not want to pick up a load in new york and go to california in a day cab R but they do have there applications. Very comfortable truck if you haul local and have to hit the off roads alot. Although i have worked an R model from kentucky to ohio to indiana and virginia and west virginia and would do it again. About the only comfort issue i do have with an R model is the noise. I gross out at 120,000 and they do get very noisy in the cab on pulls compared to a pete. There simply a work truck not a caddilac

[HK Trucking]

The 70's era R models are getting up in there 30's and the age and hard work is showing through if they have not been restored so lets give the old dogs a break.

I wonder how many Volvos of that era are still running?

Probably not many.

[Rob]

I wonder how many Volvos of that era are still running?

Probably not many.

"True" Volvo produced trucks, (not someone they merged with, or bought up) are not into their 30's yet in this country. They started by picking apart the White corporation's assets in the 70's along with GMC's heavy truck division. I do see a lot of Volvo produced trucks in salvage yards that are much younger than 10 years.

In my opinion, you will not see many other brands of trucks able to perform viable work when they are 30 plus years of age without a bulldog on the hood. Most are long prior, "shaken apart", and used as donors until worth nothing more than scrap value.

My personal preference is Mack of course. This preference is not based on my personal experience earning a living with a truck as I have never had a job driving, or purchasing one. It is based on my family's experiences. My side has a lot of truckers in the past. Mack trucks, and dealer support, (St. Louis area) was very good and reliable. In those days Mack dealerships were corporate owned. My wife's side also has a lot of trucking history and they prefered International Harvester products for many of the same reasons. Admittedly, part of that fault was the distance to a Mack dealer as there was little/limited support in their locale.

I feel that Volvo is nothing more than a great consolidator. This is much the same as the White corporation did starting in the 1950's with their acquistions of many smaller corporations, ie Diamond T, Reo, Hercules Motors, etc. Their incessant need for growth, and profits to satisfy stockholders could be their ultimate downfall/demise just as it was for White. Ford and General Motors are in the same situation. Take a look at the losses many american corporations are experiencing due to being overextended. Overextension can certainly kill good intentions. I do hope the Mack brand name and in house engineering can survive through these times.

Back to the original question of "Is Volvo Good or Bad for Mack Trucks?", not for the long haul would be my answer. I don't think a quality built product, well priced and represented will survive in today's market. There will always be something cheaper available in both quality and price. Many corporations do not look at the cost of long term operation. Trucks for example are not acquired, maintained, and ran till unfeasable to repair any longer. They typically are "turned over" at a certain mileage interval, or age to avoid downtime in an industry where a driver is a driver, a mechanic is a mechanic, a painter is a painter, with very little interaction between each other takes place.

Oh well just some of my thoughts. Way off subject so I'll close.

Interested thread to see other's input to this subject.

Rob

[HK Trucking]

"True" Volvo produced trucks, (not someone they merged with, or bought up) are not into their 30's yet in this country. They started by picking apart the White corporation's assets in the 70's along with GMC's heavy truck division. I do see a lot of Volvo produced trucks in salvage yards that are much younger than 10 years.

Rob, what I meant was that even if you were to go to Europe, I'll bet that percentage wise there are no where near as many 30 something Volvos still in daily use as there are 30 something Macks still working in the U.S.

[mudslut28]

Ill go with that.. I always considered a Volvo a "disposable" ride anyways...notice I stopped short of calling it a truck?

[rw613]

Ill go with that.. I always considered a Volvo a "disposable" ride anyways...notice I stopped short of calling it a truck?

do you know of any company that volvo has bought that is still around white was a good truck

[bulldog man]

Autocar which i think bought after V^L*O Threw it to the wolfs around 2000 or 2001 by someone else & they have the patent on the old White expidator cabover & is build Refuse (garbage) & rolloff trucks i wish they would come back out w/ a conventail myself i buy one as a tractor or a Dump bucket we had some of DC & DK Butterfly hood ACARS (pre VO**O) & IMOP They were next to a In the field

heres a link to AutoCar's Site

later

[rd866sx]

Stick to your Ikea stores and Meatballs and leave the Macks to US!!!!!

[ciw65]

Amen Lmack. When I bought my last truck it had to be no newer than a 97 model. That should speak volumes. My only prob with the one I bought is the Eaton/Fuller 8LL which I think has weak wrote all over it. Maybe it will prove me wrong but I cant figure out why anyone would ever use 2 countershafts when you could have 3 and completely eliminate the need for that tranny pump and all those lines and coolers. Theres nothing like the simplicity and the dependability of the time tested Mack components. I will give them props on the Granite cabs...but they can keep the rest.....especially that pos motor.

Not to disagree with you here, but in Australia, millions of miles have been done by hundreds of trucks with eaton/fuller ( we call 'em road rangers) transmissions, especially on the northern run to Darwin, over dirt, through water pulling 120 tonnnes or better as a triple road train behind 550 and 600 hp engines of all breeds. And these transmissions have lasted a million miles or more before rebuild. Agreed 3 countershafts is stronger than 2, but the trusty old road ranger has proved itself for many years here. Yep, all those oil lines look scary, but oil coolers are a good idea, and some Mack boxes here have them too!!

[ciw65]

Paul Abelson is pretty much an idiot. I think he is as full of it as that guy from Pittsburgh power.

Interesting view Mr. Abelson has there, considering the Volvo D16 is a Cummins Signature clone!!!! The company I work for has 5 Ovlovs, with 2 having the older D12, 2 with the new D13 and one D16. At 125,000km, we were advised Volvo had a new engine ready to replace the D16. We were shocked as ours was running fine and Volvo didn't want to elaborate, but when pressed they spilled the beans. Seems the D16 has the same problem as the first Signatures. Talk about a true clone!!! So we got a new engine for freebies. We call the Volvo engine the green Signature! Coz that's all they are. When volvo brought out there "big banga" a few years ago in Australia in the last of the NH series, they didn't have there own big 16 litre engine anymore, so all the FH and NH 16's all had Signatures. What a disaster that turned out to be!

As for Volvo taking over Mack, well in Australia we have had the misfortune of experiencing the merger of Mack and Renault in the form of the Magnum and Quantum, neither of which are available here any more, and for good reason!!!

[ciw65]

I think it all began with this.....

When the MACK Mid Liner and CS series got replaced by this "MACK" Freedom.

By the way the MACK CS Conventional, has a RENAULT Counterpart or Twin...

MACK CS

RENAULT....

Oh please, it's bad enough I have to work on a quantum (big sister to this bucket) every second day, and then I come home to see this. Please people, have mercy. And they might have left the Class 8 trucks alone over there, but here we got the rubbish. The Quantum and Magnum with the EA7-470 and Cummins signature respectively, Eaton box and Meritor diffs all stuffed inconveniently into a european chassis with euro plumbing and electrics. Charming!!!

[james j neiweem]

Interesting view Mr. Abelson has there, considering the Volvo D16 is a Cummins Signature clone!!!! The company I work for has 5 Ovlovs, with 2 having the older D12, 2 with the new D13 and one D16. At 125,000km, we were advised Volvo had a new engine ready to replace the D16. We were shocked as ours was running fine and Volvo didn't want to elaborate, but when pressed they spilled the beans. Seems the D16 has the same problem as the first Signatures. Talk about a true clone!!! So we got a new engine for freebies. We call the Volvo engine the green Signature! Coz that's all they are. When volvo brought out there "big banga" a few years ago in Australia in the last of the NH series, they didn't have there own big 16 litre engine anymore, so all the FH and NH 16's all had Signatures. What a disaster that turned out to be!

As for Volvo taking over Mack, well in Australia we have had the misfortune of experiencing the merger of Mack and Renault in the form of the Magnum and Quantum, neither of which are available here any more, and for good reason!!!

[james j neiweem]

Interesting view Mr. Abelson has there, considering the Volvo D16 is a Cummins Signature clone!!!! The company I work for has 5 Ovlovs, with 2 having the older D12, 2 with the new D13 and one D16. At 125,000km, we were advised Volvo had a new engine ready to replace the D16. We were shocked as ours was running fine and Volvo didn't want to elaborate, but when pressed they spilled the beans. Seems the D16 has the same problem as the first Signatures. Talk about a true clone!!! So we got a new engine for freebies. We call the Volvo engine the green Signature! Coz that's all they are. When volvo brought out there "big banga" a few years ago in Australia in the last of the NH series, they didn't have there own big 16 litre engine anymore, so all the FH and NH 16's all had Signatures. What a disaster that turned out to be!

As for Volvo taking over Mack, well in Australia we have had the misfortune of experiencing the merger of Mack and Renault in the form of the Magnum and Quantum, neither of which are available here any more, and for good reason!!!

[james j neiweem]

AussiChris: Just curious are you saying that the volvo D 16 and the cummins signature are the same or similar engines. How are they the same and what is the relationship between Cummins and volvo. Good day

[ducky698]

Here in Australia horsepower is usually around 550-600 hp, especially here on the west coast, our company pulls triples up north and has 1 kw, 1 freight liner and 610 volvos. the KW an FL both have 550hp and they leave the Volvos for dead. the Volvos have no guts, they hit a hill and you loose count of how many gears you have to go back to get up them.

the volvo feels like your sitting in a boat on the ocean, you get out feeling sea sick! they are allways in the Doctors getting fixed due to some silly problem, sensor faulty, air bag system failed, gear lever lost gears.

the vovlo is nice to drive, its quiet on the road, but are you going to make it there an back with out a problem? maybe.

from my understanding Mack got a bull dog from brittish soldiers in WW2, known to go like a bull dog and never stop!

volvo should keep volvo to itself and leave the bull dog alone before it turns into a puppy!

[ciw65]

AussiChris: Just curious are you saying that the volvo D 16 and the cummins signature are the same or similar engines. How are they the same and what is the relationship between Cummins and volvo. Good day

Pretty much they are a Cummins rip off. Ok, the filters and bolt on bits are different, but block and head are pretty much identical. If you see a D16 next to a Signature with its shrouds and tin work off, there isn't much difference. And they have kept the design and scaled it down for the D12/D13. That's how come all of a sudden Volvo's had engine brakes.

Have to agree with old mate about them being gutless too, our 550 Volvo just isn't a shadow on our 550 Cat powered Sterling. They might be same cubic capacity, but they just can't make the torque.

[ciw65]

Pretty much they are a Cummins rip off. Ok, the filters and bolt on bits are different, but block and head are pretty much identical. If you see a D16 next to a Signature with its shrouds and tin work off, there isn't much difference. And they have kept the design and scaled it down for the D12/D13. That's how come all of a sudden Volvo's had engine brakes. As for the relationship between Volvo and Cummins, as far as I am aware, it originally was to supply the Signature as a powerplant while Volvo developed and built their new D16. Somehow I think a Signature may have found its way into Volvo's R&D office. Paint it green, cut the fuel to a minimum, bolt volvo filters and accessories on it and call it ours.

Have to agree with old mate about them being gutless too, our 550 Volvo just isn't a shadow on our 550 Cat powered Sterling. They might be same cubic capacity, but they just can't make the torque.

[mudslut28]

Not to disagree with you here, but in Australia, millions of miles have been done by hundreds of trucks with eaton/fuller ( we call 'em road rangers) transmissions, especially on the northern run to Darwin, over dirt, through water pulling 120 tonnnes or better as a triple road train behind 550 and 600 hp engines of all breeds. And these transmissions have lasted a million miles or more before rebuild. Agreed 3 countershafts is stronger than 2, but the trusty old road ranger has proved itself for many years here. Yep, all those oil lines look scary, but oil coolers are a good idea, and some Mack boxes here have them too!!

Chris the 14708LL has proven me wrong on this one. You were right on the durability part. After a year and a half it has done very well. I had my doubts about it but it has proven itself to be very worthy. I know I did fill it with some very expensive Red Line synthetics though...lol. Hopefully it continues to do as well.

[ciw65]

Yep all the latest Eaton transmissions run synthetic oil Expensive, but worth it in the long run.