Mack E9 V8

[Superdog]

Thanks guys! I understand the B model naming scheme reasonably well, but I'm new to the R's and the Superliners I saw advertised didn't seem to have a clear pattern - some were 721's, some were 713's, and a lot of them were listed as 613's - and the engines were all over the map. For example, I just went back to http://www.trucktotruck.com/ and it's showing RW's of:

Rw613

Rw712ls

RW713

Rw733

Rw753

Rwl766ls

Rwl766lst

Rwl770

Rws754lst

Rws788st

RW713 is the most popular category, and the listings under it have engines from E6-300 to E9-500. I have also noticed that a lot of the 500's I looked at were 13's - was "13" the code for the E9-500, and people have swapped down to sixes over the years?

It does get a bit confusing,especially if you try to go by truck trader ads,alot of typos and misinformation there.To decipher the list in your post,the following are the later Superliner II,built from 85 to 93.

RW613

RW713-These 2 were Mack powered,either 6 or V8,613 was standard frame,713 was the heavier duty model.

RW733-heavy frame,Cummins power

RW753,heavy frame,Cat power

the rest in your list are Superliner I built from 78 to 85

712-300+ Mack power

766- 400 Cummins power

770- 8V92 Detroit power

754 - 3406 Cat power

788 - 350 Mack power

[louisgbone]

I  only saw 1 of these E9 engine in 1998 I had one in the shop with rocker shaft problems it was in a

RWS model owned by Union Pacific it was used to haul lowboy trailers. What I do know is that mack

brought out the RW series for the E9 engine because the E9 needed a larger radiator to keep the engine

cool the RS700 series could not fit a large enough radiator to except this engine.

[louisgbone]

I heard that Mack discontinued this engine in 2000 because it could not meet emission standards

in California.

[tjc transport]

3 hours ago, louisgbone said:

I heard that Mack discontinued this engine in 2000 because it could not meet emission standards

in California.

nope, not true. 

Volvo discontinued the V8 because they wanted to use their engines. 

[fjh]

I believe the deed was done before the Volvo turds took over ! they didn't step in till 2003!

[Terry T]

It's been a while so I'm not completely sure but in 1999 I was selling Mack trucks and I believe that during 1999 the E9 became unavailable for the 2000 model year in the US & Canada. I think it might have lived on for another year or so down under and in marine applications.

[Joey Mack]

I did a head repair on a CL 15 years ago. I think the truck was a '98.. i've worked on a few '86'ish RW's recently ..   Hell the 350 did a better job in my basic opinion..    "6 in-a-row,, makes it go"...   anyway, just my thought's...   jojo

[fjh]

On 11/13/2021 at 6:12 PM, Joey Mack said:

I did a head repair on a CL 15 years ago. I think the truck was a '98.. i've worked on a few '86'ish RW's recently ..   Hell the 350 did a better job in my basic opinion..    "6 in-a-row,, makes it go"...   anyway, just my thought's...   jojo

We sold lots of v8 here We are in hill country here V8 would pull these without question ! The V8 loves logging ! The V8 how ever didn't like long haul ! Try and drag the full 500 HP for hours at a time on miles of steep country  with out a breather ,They would drop valve seats break head bolts Crack liners  Bla Bla Bla!  I They had their issues But the power and fuel economy was tough to beat! I to Think Highly of the the E6 /E7 ! But soon these ALL will be dinosaurs Be cause Volvo is starving the parts market to force there agenda on the masses! 

[63BMack]

Your right on fjh. About the V8s and the E6,E7. Well said. 

[harrybarbon]

I have been seeing late model cab over V8 Scania's recently in Melbourne Australia and with 1 exhaust pipe, they do sound very similar to the Mack V8's. Yet I have not seen any with 2 stacks.

about 3 months ago I spoke to an owner driver of a cab over Scania with V8 and 18 spd manual box, he pulls a low loader, hauling excavators and similar heavy equipment. He bought it new and said a fantastic truck, motor has never given any issues, good fuel economy and pulls too. And as he got moving fully loaded with 35 ton machine, I was right next to the truck, gee it sounded very close to a Mack E9.

So if all else fails, could the Scania V8 be an option for a good condition Mack Superliner and the Aussie V8 Valueliner, and given it is current Scania motor it would meet the latest emissions regs in USA and Aust! I wonder how compatible the engine mountings are for Mack E9 and the Scania V8?

A comparison is the Subaru boxer 2 litre motor being fitted into VW Beetles and the VW Combi wagons.

I also notice there appears to be many of the V8 Scania's in the UK and Ireland, that travel across Europe, single and tandem drives with tri-axle fridge or dry pantechs.

[mrsmackpaul]

https://fb.watch/9mpiEdrdCN/

 

Reckon this truck might be on the forum already, but this appeared on my Facelessbook book doo hickie this morning 

 

Sounds pretty good to me, not the same as a E9 but nothing wrong with tit either 

 

Paul

[mrsmackpaul]

And would they sell any good in the US or Australia, probably not as they are pretty price in a Scania truck let alone putting them in a Mack and they are a far better built motor than a E9, sorry everyone but the E9 lacked reliability in the long run on full power every hour of the day, they sounded tough and went well but were not a million mile motor were as the Scania V8 is and has certainly proven that over the 4 or 5 decades they have made them 

 

Paul 

[harrybarbon]

There you go Paul, it sounds very close to a Mack V8! So apart from keeping 100% Mack, if desire is to have a V8 as close as possible to an E9, and want to keep a Mack truck going, it seems to me that say resting and preserving the E9 in the shed, running a Scania V8 for working purposes (reliable and compliant for the regs etc) then it would be a win/win. 

[harrybarbon]

I have just looked up Sacnia V8 DC16 engines for sale in Australia. This English motor is 2006, tested and price is $Aust 22,000 ($US 17,000). The English motors have not been worked any where near the E9's as in Australia. It looks similar in size to an E9, so it should fit into the Mack engine bay comfortably and with our hydrogen unit fitted onto it, it would reduce 80% of emissions. Compared to the cost of an E9, considering all else, this would be a practical option to keep a Mack Superliner and Aussie Valueliner operating for many successful years, plus the joy of having your Mack working. And the E9 preserved, so the Mack could be returned to original specs.

[mrsmackpaul]

And don't get me wrong, the Scania sounds pretty bloody good, the E9 has a sound all of its own, not better or worse but very distinct to it 

 

I think and I say this with the greatest of respect to our American friends, there is little chance of this becoming a swap in America because what we consider to be normal amounts of money to spend they tend to baulk at as the options in America are so much greater than Australia 

That Scania sounds pretty darn good 

 

Paul

[Hayseed]

The E9 & Scania V8 shared a common engine Block Too..

 

 

[Mark T]

The E9 and Scandia are the same displacement too.  This isn't a coincidence.  And yes, a huge 90 degree turbo charged V8 does sound awesome.  Like a giant Power stroke..... except it can move 50+ tons all day

[mrsmackpaul]

Okay a recent discovery,  had the phone blue tooth thingymabob in the ute and just listened to video of the Scania V8 on full volume 

Not only could I hear it fully, I could also feel it fully 

Enough to put a horn on a jelly fish  🤩😍😍

Go on you lot give it a try, I could listen to that all day 

 

Paul

[Marin]

Hi, I live in New Zealand and back in the 1990’s I owned a trucking business  in which we had both Super Liner and Ultra Liner Mack’s that were E9 V8 powered. One was 525hp / 2050ftlb and the other 575hp / 2180ftlb torque. They were undeniably reliable and having driven both nothing on the roads of NZ even came close to being able to out pull them. The Mack V8 burble is still the sweetest sound you will ever hear when hauling arse up the Napier - Taupo road which has some of the steepest long inclines in the Southern Hemisphere. The key thing to these engines is to never ever over rev them above the 1750-1800rpm recommended restrictions. The pulling range of theses 2 vehicles we had was 1150 - 1650rpm and the worst thing about these trucks was their lack of engine braking as the engines were fitted with the Mack Dynatard which was not very effective. We resolved this by fitting an after market Voight retarder which was very good if not brilliant at saving the vehicle brakes.

Regards, Geoff.