Jfaulkner

No but the company is from Ohio so they're running around here all the time. I've seen them hauling transformers to the powerplants on the Ohio river. They've also delivered a huge press to an automotive factory here locally.

Jfaulkner

Nice looking truck. I never saw the point of those "transfer" trucks. Looks like a huge hassle for for very little capacity.

RollinCoalSmoke

I don't have a truck that you could push and get 7 mpg out of. All mine are 3406 B 425hp or Big Cam 3s 400hp turned up to work. They may smoke a "lil" but they will haul whatever you hang behind them. They were fast trucks but now slow n steady, had to keeps drivers cdl's. I've always heard of 7 to 9 mpg but i've never ran one or ran with anyone who has one. Alot of detroits around here but none of the guys owning one will fess up to 6 mpg much less 7 mpg. A few hmmmm mercedes engines doing 5.2 mpg doing the math or 7.6 going off the ecm readout. To much difference in real world math and the computer readout.

2006Mega

i dont think the pic shown is a transfer truck, the trailer box is to long and would hang way of dump box when dumping.
the transfer trucks are a curious thing to me also. they save weight by only needing one lifting ram and one hydraulic line. also it is alot eaiser to get around the job site with just the truck and no trailer.
of course here im michigan you rarely if ever see a transfer set up, i think i have only seen 2 out of grand Rapids. the rest are all michigan gravel trains.

1-5-3-6-2-4

the purple dumper is licensed at 120,000lbs. I'm not getting what you mean by "You don't see the point of it"? Maybe I'm not getting what a transfer truck is? you mean where the truck box slides into the trailer box then end dumps? No, this truck is not one of those for sure. actually I've never seen one of those in operation in Calgary.

He parks that rig across the street from my shop. we're in the industrial park, lots of guys street park thier rigs around here then drive their "little" trucks home

1-5-3-6-2-4

heres 4 Premay C500 Kenworths with planetary drives pulling a 900+ ton machine uphill in the dirt in a copper mine in BC. I don't what it is or what is does but it sure is huge.




heres that 1997 Freightliner Joint Venture race truck. the article says the 16v-92 is up too 4,500hp, I'm not sure I believe that number totally but thats what it says. in 2006 this thing set a speed record on the Bonneville at 230-ish MPH at 18,500lbs.

DetroitDiesel71

Def a 16v92, still has the marine water jacket manifolds, and jabsco r/w pump.... looks like they jerked it out of a boat and slapped it in the truck. Thats the beauty of the old school detroits, you can swap application however you want with minimal changes. Now as far as the HP they claim, I don't know, maybe thats a torque number they meant? Hard to say what they have done to the engine.

fschiola

I know what that is! It's a Jawa sand crawler from Star Wars!



And the trucks aren't doing anything except for clearing the way, it's the guy in the back with a whip that's doing all the work.

dodgeguy71

[QUOTE=fschiola;2508866]I know what that is! It's a Jawa sand crawler from Star Wars!

QUOTE]

Now that's funny!!

HOHN

Would that be that brand of engines that was so good everyone quit buying them and the company no longer offers them for sale in ANY new truck? Ya, THAT one, right?

(Yes, I'm biased!)

Jfaulkner

Their still going to sell them, they'll just be painted blue and only in IH trucks.

I can't wait to get me one of those awesome ISX boat anchors.

From another forum.....
Gee I've got 6 trucks I guess I'll have to buy 12 when I switch to Cummins so I can still keep stuff running when all of them are being worked on weekly.

Better yet I'll get a Volvo with 2 egr valves so I have twice as many problems. awesome!!

HOHN

So tell me why that is, exactly. Really, I'd like to know.

ON the guy bashing Cummins--

It's no secret that Cummins has been having problems with turbochargers and the EGR system-- specifically the EGR cooler. This is being worked very aggressively to fix. Why?

Cummins pays over $200,000 a DAY paying to cover warranty! These two components are some of the big contributors.

The load-based speed control is one of the most popular features because of the very tangible fuel economy benefits to fleet owners. Not all the features designed to please the fleet owner are that popular with drivers.

Let's face it, if I'm a driver, I want a 700hp engine that knocks down 8mpg no matter what load or conditions and never needs a downshift. Oh, and I'll only need to change the filters every 100K and it will go a million miles without a single repair.

But it doesn't work that way. As heavy duty engineers we could easily build an engine that's bulletproof-- but it would weigh twice as much and cost TEN times as much.

Fleet owners need to balance all the variables in purchasing an engine. They need an engine that gets good fuel economy and doesn't kill them with downtime. They need enough power to get the job done and performance that lets even rookie drivers get decent mpg.

Cummins market share has continued to grow-- approaching 49% of ALL new trucks-- because we listen to the people who buy our engines. We CARE. The problems your quote refers to are being worked aggressively to improve reliability.


~~~~~~~

Now let's talk about International and CAT. CAT is out of the market because their ACCERT technology was bad. They couldn't meet emissions without killing reliability AND fuel economy. The CEO of DTNA (Diamler truck-- freightliner, western star, Sterling) PUBLICLY called the CAT engines junk because they were killing DTNA. As of last fall, Cummins ISX has replaced CAT as the engine offered in Freighliners-- Cummins was not offered in a Freightliner for a few years, as you know.

Meanwhile, Cummins was "kicked out" of the International chassis where as recently as last year, 85% of all Internationals were shipping with an ISX in them. The falling out was related to the Cummins announcement of a change in 2010 emissions strategy.

As you might know, Cummins switched from an "in cylinder" emissions strategy (EGR only) to the SCR system most of the other manufacturers had committed to.

International has committed to an EGR-only solution, and was a little more secure in the viability of that position when Cummins "had their back" so to speak-- both companies were planning to use EGR Only.

But new technology came along that had benefits that Cummins simply couldn't ignore. The Copper Zeolite catalyst give NOx conversion efficiency gains that are undeniably good for the customer. EGR only simply can't deliver what the new technology could.

So at great cost and inconvenience, Cummins switched to SCR and changed horses midstream. Why? BECAUSE IT'S BETTER FOR THE CUSTOMER! Better MPG!

International wasn't convinced, even though we showed them that data and told them of our plan to switch before we announced it publicly.

So they decided to go it alone-- sort of. Apparently they have been working a side deal with CAT (that whole severe service truck thing).

International didn't have a 15L engine without Cummins, so re-badged a C15 by putting Navistar EGR and such on it makes a lot of sense. The C15 base engine is solid-- it's the turbo(s) and all that drove high warranty and low MPG.

Keep in mind that International's MAXXFORCE engines are closely linked to MAN (a European truck maker)-- Some of them are just rebadged MAN engines.

The President of MAN has talked about how they will need to a "a little SCR" to meet the next round of European emissions regs, because EGR-only would have a mpg penalty of 17%. So if Navistar follows MAN, they too will have a "little SCR" and be eating a lot of crow in the process.


So what's the fate of the MAXXFORCE 15? Well, I suspect you'll see a lot reliability problems. When you flow as much EGR as they are, you have REALLY hi temps in the cylinder.

Something else to think about: What's one of the main combustion products in the exhaust? WATER! (you are oxidizing a hydrocarbon, so you are making CO2 and water).

Now, if you start flow 20kg/min of exhaust back into the engine, what's going to happen? I predict you will have corrosion on the pistons, liners, and head that will really hurt long-term reliability. Not to mention what all that acid formation does to the oil and bearings.

The only alternative is to use VERY expensive materials, which increases engine cost to the customer.




There are other good engines coming down the pike (DD15 promises to be a great engine, imo). But I assure you that this C15/MAXXIPILLAR concoction, unfortunately is not going to be one of the.

Mark the date of this post so we can look at it again this time next year and see what the MPG and reliability reports show for the MAXXFORCE against the competition.

I'm a big fan of simplicity, but I fear that Navistar is using it as an excuse, not a virtue, for their insistence of sticking with EGR only.


I really, really, like Navistar trucks, so I hope that this EGR mistake they are making doesn't hurt the company too badly (again, my opinion, but there are lots of industry insiders that agree with me).

JH

PS-- In a pretty obvious act of desperation, Navistar Sues the EPA, claiming that SCR shouldn't be allowable. Their claim is baseless, but hey-- they are doing all they can.
Recall now how CAT lobbied and tried every bit of legal wrangling to get out of emissions when they didn't have good technology. CAT is now out. History may be repeating.....

deerslayer1979

The post above is great, and I have to agree with every word!

For ever one of you "wanting a CAT" I hope you like the pre 2010 trucks cause thats all your going to be driving!
DS79

mwlu711

i mite be wrong but that looks like part of a bucketwheel excavater