Mack trans vs. Eaton Trans

[Vegartx]

2 hours ago, storkmack said:

What ever works.   

Does 19,000 - 20,000 rpm (according to the guy that has driven it) seem right?? It'd be my 1st time driving a Mack and that type of transmission. Wanted to get thoughts on it.

 

Thanks

[OldRedMack]

Yes and no.  Mine shifts easier at those higher rpm, but when you get use to it you will probably start shifting around 1750-1800.  The hardest part for me was getting use to how touchy the electronic pedal is on the macks.

[Vegartx]

58 minutes ago, OldRedMack said:

Yes and no.  Mine shifts easier at those higher rpm, but when you get use to it you will probably start shifting around 1750-1800.  The hardest part for me was getting use to how touchy the electronic pedal is on the macks.

Thank you for your reply!

Your info will give me an idea of what to expect. Obviously by ear would be best but wanted to know if that high of rpms was needed on the Mack. I've only driven 10 speed Eaton, where the rpms usually 1400-1600 range (for me at least)

[storkmack]

1 hour ago, Vegartx said:

Does 19,000 - 20,000 rpm (according to the guy that has driven it) seem right?? It'd be my 1st time driving a Mack and that type of transmission. Wanted to get thoughts on it.

 

Thanks

Mack’s are very tight and we joke that they are for real drivers, that anyone can drive a smash and grab fuller. Do what works you and the truck.  

[Vegartx]

4 hours ago, storkmack said:

Mack’s are very tight and we joke that they are for real drivers, that anyone can drive a smash and grab fuller. Do what works you and the truck.  

Lol. Will do, thank you

[doubleclutchinweasel]

Wow!  This always opens up a can of worms!  Here are my thoughts.  But, my thoughts aren't worth the paper they are printed on.  LOL!

Gear ratios needed?  Torque capacity needed?  Those, I think, are more important than the name on the box.

Mack transmissions are good.  RoadRanger transmissions are good.  If either was truly "bad", they would go out of the transmission business.  That being said, like some of the guys have said, one might be better in some respects than the other, and vice-versa.

I have driven both.  I have liked and disliked both...depending on the specific box.  I will say they feel "different"...not better or worse...than each other.

From a strictly engineering point of view, there's a lot to like about the triple-countershaft design.  But, the RoadRangers have proven themselves for years.  And, they ARE easier (and cheaper) to find parts for.  There's a lot of good engineering in those boxes, too.

Oh, and the MAINSHAFT gears on the RoadRangers are NOT pressed on...they float.  The COUNTERSHAFT gears are pressed on.  I've been in there.

I don't think you can go wrong with either, IF you select the one with the gear rations and torque rating you need.  Both have stories of running forever without issues.  Both have stories of premature failure.  There are probably certain models of both which are better and worse.