Is Volvo Good Or Bad For Mack Trucks?

[kscarbel]

You are 100 percent correct. The performance of the internal EGR verson of the ASET engines was terrible. However there isn't a car or truck manufacturer on earth that hasn't had low points in terms of product. For example, another low point for Mack was the premature introduction of the mack T200 transmissions in the 1980s. I blame the gutless ASET AI engines on the Mack management at the time of its development. It gave Mack a huge black eye. R&D told management it wasn't ready for production yet, but management decided to gamble and rush it into production anyway. The transmission, once fully developed, of course performed exceptionally well and was worthy of the Mack name.

A company at any moment is only as good as it's leadership at the time (look at the way Roger Smith blindly ran GM into the ground). From the time Renault's brilliant Elios Pascual took over as Mack CEO from the incompetent Ralph Reins (1989-1990), Mack began climbing back on top and was performing very well by 1995. However in 1996, Renault installed a new president and CEO at Mack, Michel Gigou, who I believe didn't understand Mack or the North American truck industry. Under his tenure at Mack, the pathetic ASET AI engines were being developed and therefore a flatly blame him for launching what turned out to be the worst Mack engines in the company's history (outside of the ENDT711). (Interestingly, Gigou became President of Volvo North America after Volvo purchased Mack in 2000 - Hmmm)

With high quality management supporting Mack's legendary leadership position in engine technology, I have no doubt that Mack could have offered competitive engine product to meet EPA2002, EPA2004, EPA2007 and today's EPA2010.

Some Mack trivia, did you know that Mack wanted to develop AMT versions of the Mack T300 triple-counter shaft transmissions, but Volvo refused to allow the project? We now know, because Volvo wanted to use their weaker single countershaft design (even ZF uses a double countershaft design for their AMTs).

Edited May 14, 2012 by kscarbel

[41180]

i know volvo isnt the best people to be in with but until a better company aquires mack its pointless to keep complaining. theres alot of things mack did wrong in the 90s and 2000s. the e7 should have been bigger displacement around 800 cubic inch or even bigger or the e9 should have been modernized so mack had a 500 and 600 hp engines to compete with cat and cummins. also the superliner should have stayed in production longer or thecl should have been available in set forward front axle . i think today though mack is back competeing with the mp8 but the mp10 should be available in the highway trucks .

[kscarbel]

Yes, the E-7 should have been larger. And the E-9 should have been evolved into a modern V-8 that could meet ongoing emissions standards (as Scania has proven can be done with their Euro-6 compliant 500 to 730 hp V-8 engine).

Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. This should be a crime. The Mack truck today is nothing more than a Mack nameplate on a North American Volvo truck. If Mack had been a so-so truck in the US and globally (e.g. GMC, Ford, White), I would have no firm ground to stand on. But Mack in fact was a world leader. Mack's cutting edge design achievements from rubber-insulated suspensions on the AC Buldog to the Maxi-Glas cab of the MH Ultra-Liner continually put the world on notice that Mack Trucks was at the forefront of heavy truck development. Constantly introducing breakthoughs in technology and design, Renault understood the power of the spirit and pride within Mack Trucks and its employees that, I feel, remains unmatched.

Mack is now the butt of jokes at the other US truckmakers. The competitor they once respected (and feared) is gone. They'll be the first to tell you that there is no Mack Trucks anymore. They can't thank Volvo enough for taking Mack Trucks off the playing table. Look at any new Mack truck. Do you feel the quality of design and assembly is still representative of the former Mack Truck Company? I think not. The Mack-badged Volvo-engineered truck is a cheap disposable truck (what we used to call Freightliners when Mack Trucks was still in business).

[41180]

i dont know about that. macks still have there own cab that is in my opinion the best cab. they still have mack transmissions and rear ends so what is so disposable about a new mack truck

[Rob]

i dont know about that. macks still have there own cab that is in my opinion the best cab. they still have mack transmissions and rear ends so what is so disposable about a new mack truck

I too only agree with part of the analogy. I still repair both old and new, and there are some differences yes, but they are not near as drastic or negative as some would believe. Mack's in house engineering is still very strong for their product(s).

Myself, if in the trucking business, would try to run older in house rebuilt equipment, as I prefer profit margin and taking care of my personnel as opposed to status. However, I am a general exception as there is no reliance on financing for my goals.

Rob

[kscarbel]

The 26 year old Mack-designed cab (and hood) are all that is left from the former Mack Truck Company. Yes, Mack transmissions and axles are still available, but most highway Macks are built with Eaton transmissions, and Meritor or Dana/Spicer rear axles. Only the construction trucks still get some Mack transmissions and axles.

So with a Volvo chassis, Volvo engine, Volvo I-Shift transmission (rebadged as mDrive) and vendor axles, it's hardly a Mack truck anymore. It is a North American Volvo with a Mack badge. A new cab is coming and it will be shared with Volvo-badged North American product. So as I said, Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. It should be a crime.

Have you noticed how Mack parts prices have doubled or tripled since Volvo took over in 2000? That was no accident. They decided $6.00 for a belt was too cheap, that they could get away with asking $20 (more dollars flowing out of the U.S.to Sweden).

I'm not a Navistar fan, but realistically Paccar (Kenworth and Peterbilt) and Navistar are the only American-owned truckmakers left. If you are a "buy American" person that wants the money to stay in country, you might want to think about that.

Rob mentioned Mack's in-house engineering. Sadly, there is no such thing anymore. For example, the former Mack Trucks powertrain plant in Hagerstown, Maryland is now Volvo Powertrain North America. Volvo terminated any further pedigreed Mack engine, transmission and axle development. Mack hasn't introduced a new transmission in years. Mack wanted build AMT versions of the Mack transmissions (knowing Mack's triple countershaft design was far more rugged that Volvo's single countershaft I-Shift), but Volvo rejected any talk of that. And there is no design department in Allentown anymore (Mack's Allentown headquarters was closed by Volvo, with all functions taken over by Volvo headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina).

Edited May 17, 2012 by kscarbel

[41180]

international maxxforce 13 and lower are european designs. paccar mx engine is a euro engine as well. so that leaves cummpart as the only american engine . and we want no part of them. to me macks are still macks they are made in pennsylvania by proud people and yes volvo has screwed things up but peterbilt and kenworth parts are very expensive from what i here as now paccar calls them self a premium truck maker. i think western star is the only other truck close to as good as a mack for extreme jobs.

[cxn613]

I'm not taking up for volvo, but I think this question of

Is Volvo Good Or Bad For Mack Trucks?

can be answered by a first grader. You look at older post of how Mack lost this customer and that customer because of problems with the engines in 04 and 05 and so on. Now you look at post of how Mack has won back this customer and that customer over the last 5 years because of the reliable MP engine. People complain that "your not getting a full Mack truck anymore" well maybe and maybe not, but whats the difference if you have a Mack with vendor rears and trans or a KW with the same vendor rears and trans? At least you have the option with Mack to get the Mack rears and trans. As far as prices going up for parts, thats everywhere. If Mack today wasn't involved with Volvo, the prices of parts would still be more than what they were 10 years ago. I hear of guys complaining all the time about there cummins always in the shop and maxxforce is job security at the navistar dealer ship. Even thought Volvo has there hands in Mack, its still a great truck and dependable engine.

[kscarbel]

When you say that "Volvo has there hands in Mack", I really want you to realize that there is no more Mack. Ask your "Mack" district service representative for his e-mail and it will be a john.smith@volvo.com. My friend, it's all Volvo now. The only "Mack" is the logo on the truck.

If I wanted a Volvo truck, then I'd buy a Volvo. However, if I want a Mack, sell me a pedigreed Mack product. Don't insult my intelligence by attempting to sell me a Volvo chassis with a Mack logo on it.

I don't mind that Paccar is using the DAF engine because Paccar bought DAF (in 1996 for a small US$543 million when DAF was nearly bankrupt). It was a brilliant move, demonstrating that at least one of America's two truckmakers has what it takes to play ball on the global stage. Clearly, DAF is owned by the Americans, so I'm fine with their engine. Engines for U.S. market Paccar trucks (Kenworth and Peterbilt) are produced at a new state-of-the-art plant in Mississippi. When you buy a Paccar engine equipped Kenworth or Peterbilt, your money is staying in America. But when you buy a Swedish Mack or a German Freightliner, your dollars are on their way to Europe. Not good in these economically troubled times for our country.

[41180]

renault owned mack for years before volvo bought them so you could say that mack hasnt been american in a long time. the e7 460 in our cls has renault cast into the block . it doesnt bother me that mack is owned by volvo. for now the macks loook nothing like volvo. our mack service dealer does great by us so we are sticking with masck . we got a new titan on the way and cant wait to pass some petes and kws in the mountains of vermont

[Frmconcrete09]

Very interesting read... We'll keep our 01 and older macks serviced and rebuild them as long as it's possible ..

[kscarbel]

I never saw a Renault (RVI) logo on an E-7. Could you possibly be thinking of the later ASET engines?

The contrast between Renault's excellent management of Mack and the sad state of affairs today at Mack under Volvo ownership is staggering. Renault realized the incredible value of Mack, and had foresight that paid off with solid profitability. Mack flourished under Renault with revolutionary new products such as the MH Ultra-Liner, a breakthrough in technology and design featuring cutting edge chassis design and a cab with safety cage and fireproof Maxi-Glas composite construction.

Volvo has demonstrated again and again since 2001 that they are completely oblivious to the very meaning of Mack Trucks and the immense value this company represents when it is allowed to flourish in its own right. I had no problem with Volvo reducing White and GMC to nothing, because those two brands realistically were already nothing. But Mack Trucks is a totally different situation entirely. The strength of the Mack brand, its incredible employees, and the company's legendary engineering is immeasurable. It is nothing less than amazing how ignorant Volvo Group's business strategy is relating to Mack Trucks.

Volvo is not adept at selling outside of Western Europe and their track record in country markets like China and the US is a good example. In fact, Volvo has a history of deep spending that brought little or no results.

Volvo spent millions on an ill-planned and fruitless 6-year journey in China. Volvo signed a 50-50 joint venture with China National Heavy Truck Corp. (CNHTC) in March 2004 and proclaimed they'd produce 2,500 units in 2005 and 10,000 units in 2008. But Volvo didn't do their homework and learn the unique metrics of the world’s largest truck market, and has since dissolved that relationship after building only 1,000 (CKD) trucks total, which were all sold at a loss.

Volvo's track record in the US market speaks for itself. They've been in the U.S. market 38 years, since they introduced the F86(US) in 1974. The fact they've accomplished so little in that long time period supports my view that Volvo doesn't understand the US market. They've tried many avenues over the years and yet have never been able to get their U.S. market into gear. The F86US cab-over was a flop, as was the underpowered 253hp N10(US) conventional. They tried a new tact buying the assets of White and forming Volvo White Truck Corp. in 1981. Still making no headway (or profit), Volvo purchased General Motor's heavy truck division in 1987 to form the WHITEGMC brand as Volvo GM Heavy Truck and continue their unprofitable trek forward. Volvo for years followed the failed money-losing strategy of buying market share, selling to the fleets at a loss and committing to unrealistic buy-back amounts (you couldn't give away a used Volvo White truck because its was a cheap throwaway truck as a Mack has become today under Volvo). And finally in one more attempt to establish itself in the US market, Volvo exchanged 15% of their shares for 100% of the shares of Renault Vehicles Industries, taking control of Renault's heavy truck division which included Mack Trucks. Observe how Volvo has purchased three competitors in the US market and yet has benefited so little.

Volvo remains clueless of the unique and invaluable asset they now hold in Mack. The closure of Mack headquarters in Allentown, transferring all functions to Volvo Truck Headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina, is a mortal wound to the Mack brand. Mack is now no more than a nameplate on a low-end disposable US-market Volvo truck. Volvo has step-by-step destroyed the very soul that deservedly made Mack Trucks great. Any remark to the contrary is a distortion of the fact.

If Volvo Group followed Renault’s example and placed Mack under competent and independent management, Mack Trucks could benefit Volvo Group far more than a decapitated Mack brand which now is no more than a Mack emblem on a disposable low-quality truck built around Volvo components.

Mack customers are alienated by this product and the sales figures reflect this reality better than Volvo's Mack marketing hype. Simply speaking, most Mack customers want to purchase a "real" Mack truck, with genuine Mack components that incorporate the engineering that Mack Trucks is legendary for.

Based on Volvo's poor track record in the U.S. market, it would be prudent for Volvo to reconsider their strategy for Mack Trucks before the brand's recovery potential is forever lost. After twelve demoralizing years for both customers and employees in a net-negative spiral that has achieved no mentionable results, admitting their error by relocating Mack World Headquarters back to Allentown, Pennsylvania would be a critical first move towards getting the Mack Truck organization back on track and in the right direction.

Mack Trucks, unlike any other truckmaker throughout U.S. history, has a soul. Mack is not a brand. Mack is a legend. Mack is a family, of employees and customers. For customers, Mack is a feeling. For Mack employees everywhere, Mack is a way of life. Nobody ever said "built like a Freightliner, or International". No other U.S. truck brand ever became a household word.

Edited May 23, 2012 by kscarbel

[41180]

its a e7 460xt built in 1999 says renault on the block it came in a custom built ch613

[mack4ever]

i`m a mechanic at a renault dealerchip for six years now.

i`ve bin a mechanic for 34 years now.

first whe had saviem trucks

they had there own engines in there smal trucks.

in the big trucks they had MAN engines.

by 1980 saviem went together with berliet trucks.

they took two brands and meltet it together to renault v i .

the first big renault`s we sold had all enginge problems.

from the ten trucks that where sold whe had to replace on nine trucks the engines.

but renault workd hard on it and improved the engines.

then they could sell trucks with dood engines.

they had inline six and a v8 from berliet.

they put up the horse power of the v8 to 420 hp.

then they got together with mack and they replased there own v8 by the mack E9.

in the beginning there where some issius but they solved it

then they repaced there 6 inline with mack engines

also some issius (cams and some smal stuf)

but it all worked out.

now they sold it all to vulva.

but maybe it`s not all so bad.

by renault whe have the mp7 mp8 engines but they are with renault software.

we have the mdrive transmission but with renault software.

the renault trucks shift better end smoother the a vulva.

the frulconsumption on a renault is better the a vulva.

so some people and companies won`t buy a vulva but the buy a renault.

in the usa there are not manney brands who have there own driveline.

some people buy a cummings or cattepilar or detroit.

i stil beleave mack is a good truck and the componends are not so bad also.

if you look on youtube for the new vulva and the new renault you wil see the trucks are almost indentical

but there is stil a renault for people who love them.and a vulva for the other people.

i hope mack will tread there customers good and mack will be always a very good truck.

mack4ever.

[mack4ever]

there is somewhere on here a photo of a guy from austalia with the mack and renault casting on the engine.

[daveigou]

its a e7 460xt built in 1999 says renault on the block it came in a custom built ch613

An E7 built in 1999 should be an E-tech (unit injector pumps) (1998 my - 2003 my) engine and most likely did have "Renault" in about 1" high capital letters cast in the block.

[daveigou]

I have to disagee with some of the remarks posted here. I think at the outset it was Volvo's intent to integrate the Mack product into Volvo. But I think they finally did get the message that Mack customers are some of the most brand-loyal customers in the world. I was sad to see the world headquarters close, but the fact is the square footage was no longer needed. The Volvo partnership has been very positive at a time when all US engine makers were scrambling to meet the newest EPA mandates, and I think the Volvo / Mack MP engine is one of the most respected in the market.

The opening of the Mack Customer Center is one of the most impressive things accomplished by any truck manufacturer. As far as Volvo not getting the US market, have you looked at the market share gains for Volvo Construction Equipment? And the exspansion of the Shippensburg, Pa manufacturing facility? Pretty impressive.

Now about the Mack vs Volvo chassis, the frame rails might be the same, but Mack crossmembers still retain Mack influence. The Volvo "I" shift / Mack "M" drive transmission is one of the hottest products out there. Automated mechanical transmissions will continue to gain market acceptance, because of the ease of operation, and the advantage in fuel economy. If you want a Mack manual transmission, or Mack dual reduction rears, you still need to buy a Mack.

What will happen in the future, who knows? But for now, I like what I see.

[kscarbel]

Volvo purchased the Mack brand, as they did White and GMC, to remove another competitor. True, they tried a different tact with Mack. Perhaps they were forced to, since their vocational truck sales in the U.S. are terrible and tractor sales remain modest.

Volvo has done well in construction machinery, but that's another deal altogether, unrelated to their lack of success in American's heavy truck market.

If I want a Volvo truck, then I'll head to a Volvo truck franchise. But if I want a Mack Truck, it is because I desire a pedigreed Mack designed product. I don't want a Volvo chassis. I don't want a Volvo engine and Volvo transmission. People will say that Mack did their own software tweaking but that's nonsense. There is no Mack. Hagerstown is a Volvo facility. You can only say that Volvo gave the Volvo-branded version and the Mack-branded version slightly different programming. Big deal - it's still a Volvo drivetrain thru and thru.

From the 1950's to 2000, Mack was totally unique in the U.S. truck market in that Mack became the country's last vertically integrated heavy truck manufacturer. When under good management, Mack soared with cutting edge products that were sold world worldwide.

The Volvo global plan: Except for few countries, Volvo doesn't want Mack to be a global brand. Volvo only "allows" Mack into a handful of countries where Volvo has no success (e.g. Venezuela, Ecuador). But, for example, you won't see a Mack in Brazil (South America's most profitable market) because Volvo doesn't want Mack there.

Mack used to be HUGE all over the Middle East. Huge and profitable deals for construction trucks. The Macks became legendary there for their robust engineering (as they had in the U.S.). No European brand heavy truck ever rivaled the reliabilty and durability of the Mack truck, because Mack continually used higher testing standards than the European truckmakers. Any former Mack engineer "in the know" will tell you that Volvo's testing in Greensboro, North Carolina pales in comparison to what Mack demanded at the Mack Trucks Engineering, Development and Test Center in Allentown. This world class facility, logically nearby the Macungie plant where all Mack trucks are produced, was closed by Volvo. All its functions were relocated to an inferior Volvo facility, some 400 miles away from the Macungie plant, at Greensboro, North Carolina. Apparently, Volvo sees no need for R&D and production to ideally work closely together nearby in adjacent facilities to refine product design, quality and performance (in "Mack speak", that's called "Pedigreed Performance").

Mack of course was a major player of course in off-highway trucks and fire apparatus. As they say, respect and trust must be earned, and Mack certainly earned its tier one reputation in off-highway trucks and fire apparatus. Volvo of course didn't kill these products (that occurred in 1980 and 1990 respectively). After the long-time superb leadership at these two Mack business units retired, their replacements were as bad as their predecessors had been good, and sales subsequently fell. But here's a thought. If Volvo was truly aware of the value of the Mack brand, Volvo would by now have taken advantage of the strength of Mack's former leadership position in these two profitable business sectors.

[mackdaddy]

only comment I have is that .............Freightliners are not German...............they are Mexican...............most are built in Mexico as they closed the Portland Oregon line except for government contracts and now the Western Star. Shameful to see Mexican built trucks hauling our freight!!! Even more shameful is the American people who buy the damn things.

[kscarbel]

German-owned Freightliner producing trucks in Mexico for the U.S. market, and the proceeds head straight out of the country to Stuttgart. Just like your U.S. dollars flowing to Sweden every time you buy a U.S. Volvo or Mack-branded Volvo. Do you think the Swedes or Germans care about the U.S. economy. They watch their back, and we watch ours.

I haven't been a big Navistar fan in recent years (the idiodic EGR direction), but they and Paccar (Kenworth and Peterbilt) are in fact the only American-owned truckmakers left (plus Oshkosh in the specialty truck field). Given the economy in 2013 and 2014 is probably going to be turbulent (before recovering in 2015), it would be wise for American truck operators to invest in trucks produced by American companies for a while, keeping U.S. money in the U.S. in support of our country's best interest.

[220cummins]

Kscarbel----Mack has been exporting trucks. Take a tour of the Macgunie Plant, there are a lot of trucks tagged with "EXPORT ONLY." I've toured the plant a couple times and each time I can see a more organized and planned production facility because of Volvo's influence. Also you say that Mack has been Mack from 1950's to 2000's. The Midliners built from the early 80's onward were all Renault. What is your motivation to keep posting in here about how bad and the harm Volvo has caused for Mack?

[fifth wheel]

Without the backbone of Volvo, I think Mack would be gone. To answer your question is Volvo good for Mack? I have to say yes.

FW

[41180]

seems like some people want to see mack gone . if you want to keep mack alive buy a new mack . not a navistar or paccar truck . enough said. things change . volvo owns mack and shares some components just get over it. once again if it wasnt for the new mp series engines mack would be in serious trouble right now. maybe im wrong but did mack/ renault have some secret new engine in development back in the late 90s that would have offered 550 to 600 hp ? i dont think so. was volvo the one that killed the superliner back in 1993 ? or the e9 v8 in 1999 ? or the rd800 ? i think the renault mack alliance wasnt as great as kscarbel says just my opinion

[kscarbel]

Mr. 220 Cummins, I'm sure you mean well. A VERY small percentage of Mack production is for export. You may have observed KD shipments for Venezuela or Australia. Go to Europe, the Middle East or Africa and tell me how many Mack trucks you see today. And note Mack's declining market share in Australia and New Zealand compared to 10 years ago. Question answered.

Yes those Mid-Liners (and Managers) were built by Renault. And they were great medium trucks. Mack had not produced medium trucks for many years so it was a superb joint decision by Mack and Renault executives to diversify the Mack portfolio with these medium trucks.

As I already said, it is extremely significant to realize that unlike Volvo, Renault understood the value of the Mack brand. Renault got involved with Mack when the company was just days away from bankruptcy (only Mack people know that). Renault could have pulled a Volvo and began dismantling the Mack truck and replacing it with Renault components. But instead, Renault invested "heavily" in Mack and brought the company back to greatness. Renault realized the incredible capabilities of the Mack company, including its cutting edge engineering (Kudos to Mack engineers in Allentown and Hagerstown). It wasn't an alliance. Renault owned Mack. But with Renault's Elios Pascual acting as Mack's president (he was an outstanding and respected leader at Mack), the company got back on its feet and ran with the ball.

Volvo, on the other hand, has gutted the company down to nothing. Volvo has taken a once great icon and reduced it to a mere shell of its former self. This should be a crime. That's my opinion, and you'll have a hard time locating a Mack employee that feels otherwise.

If one thinks that Mack trucks now share only "some" components with Volvo's North American product range, its only because your not in a position to know. I can park a Volvo and Mack tractor side-by-side, and the only difference is the cab and hood. It's disgusting what Volvo has done.

Some have mentioned products that we now believe should have come on to the scene in the 1995 to 2000 period. Every company's management goes thru cycles of highs and lows, unfortunately (something to do with us being human). I believe that Mack hit a down cycle when company president Elios Pascual (1990-1995) was replaced by Pierre Jocou (1995-1996) and Michel Gigou (1996-2001). The company lost its direction. If Volvo had put the great Mack Trucks back on its feet with investment and the freedom to continue independent development, rather than dismantling Mack Trucks (the company and its product) like the loser in a leveraged buyout, we'd have a much more positive story today.

Ask any veteran Mack parts or service man what they think of Mack now (the parts people love how Volvo has replaced Mack part numbers with new meaningless Volvo global part numbers - sarcasm). Ask them if Mack's factory parts and service representatives get fired for disagreeing with Volvo? By all means please ask if veteran Mack people get fired for telling the Swedes they are screwing up Mack? Maybe you'll believe them.

[41180]

as far as volvo chassis being less strong than a old mack chassis is false. the new gu granites double frame has a much higher resistance to bend rating than the cv granite or the rd . or even the cl700 . so why is that a bad thing its a stronger truck. i think mack has its most competitive line up in years.