What engine do you prefer.

[Birken Vogt]

Pete, How have you been dealing with the California DPF retrofit requirements. I have not found a fleet guy yet who has done one but they are starting to appear on LTL tractors, garbage trucks etc. around me finally. I need to know what's good, bad, ugly and how they can be financed.

 

[Deere500a]

^Birken have you called Cummins, one co I was with had them add the filters to their 06-07 trucks.

Pre '03 ISX Cummins & DD ser60 12.7 would be my choice.

 

[Birken Vogt]

The local mechanic works with Cummins when installing them, and they seem like the best deal to me too. I just haven't talked to anyone who has had them installed, from the smaller fleet/short trip angle.

 

[928G Boy]

I've got 3 DT466Es, for medium duty engines there is no question.

 

[Birken Vogt]

I've got 3 DT466Es, for medium duty engines there is no question.

I think the 8.3 Cummins is right on par, and better once International tried that bad super-EGR mess after 2007.

 

[Dig_Texas]

Ran a 444E in an Intl SA dump that was pretty weak. The pete has an N-14 and my FLD 120 has the 12.7 Detroit. Both tractors are backed by a fuller 10-sp. The N14 seems to have a little more low-end while the Detroit gets better fuel economy and doesn't leak as much oil.

 

[Birken Vogt]

while the Detroit gets better fuel economy and doesn't leak as much oil.

Years ago the opposite would be true for just about any other brand of engine

 

[Dig_Texas]

I operated a Drott excavator in the 80's that had a Detroit and it was a screamin' powerful engine but you sure hated working on it because you knew that everything under it would be covered in black nasty oil.

 

[ben46a]

Any body running 16 litre engines in their trucks?

There's a few cats around new glasgow/antigonish, but most people are happy with the 550 and never went with the C-16. They are a strong runner though.

 

[RollOver Pete]

Pete, How have you been dealing with the California DPF retrofit requirements. I have not found a fleet guy yet who has done one but they are starting to appear on LTL tractors, garbage trucks etc. around me finally. I need to know what's good, bad, ugly and how they can be financed.

Same here. We know that we will eventually be forced to spend money on these DPF's but for now, we have been able to buy some time (2 years) by putting these on out trucks.



I don't know the exact details on how these things work but it has to do with mileage, credits and so on.
IOW, much like the new log book regulations, this is another way of making liars out of otherwise honest people.

 

[nickbowers]

The engine to run in the U.K. now is the 16 litre V8 Scania motor it knocks out 730 Draft Horse's and pulls like a Loco, on the older style motor the Cummins 855 big cam is some tool, with a jake is best.

Better than the Volvo?

 

[GPC]

We have had them all. I would have to say in the older trucks you can't beat the Cat's for power but, my personal favorite in the 2000 year model range is the 12.7L Detroit. Not the most powerful engine out there but, it was reliable as hell and got better fuel mileage than any of the other trucks. Infact it was getting 6mpg pulling a 50Ton lowboy.

In the newer trucks the Cummins ISX is hard to beat. No real major problems and with the proper gearing blows the Cat's out of the water for fuel mileage.

The new Mack and Volvo engines have way too many problems to even consider one of them. Though the old E7 Mack engines were tough.

 

[tctractors]

Hi Nickbowers, I am a fairly lucky dog getting the chance to pilot all sorts of iron, the 750 HP Volvo is 1 banger that I have not managed to get the feel of, the biggest Volvo I have tried was the FH16 chipped up to 680 HP, the 16 litre motor was a power house without question but the down side was all those oil filters and all that oil needed to give them fresh soup, lucky for me doing the service work I soon swapped the oil changing job to the VDS3 spec oil, the comments on the new I-shift are very good and Volvo need a pat on the back for their effort is the common word, but this is something I have not tried as the FH16 was a stick job custom build (Holland bolted chassis) so my comments are only of what I know regards the Scania 730's (fitted with 3 peddles) they pull a heavy load easily and fast, I love Volvo kit in construction iron but I dont get any seat time in Volvo trucks.

 

[RollOver Pete]

I just don't get it.

This 2005 T800 will probably be put up for sale as it is too new for us to use.
Thats right. in order for us to keep this truck with 390,000 original miles, we need to by 2014 spend $20,000.00 on some exhaust crap that is supposed to make this a better world for everyone to live in.
Power is by Cummins ISX 565, 18sp, 20k front, 46k rears.



This 1994 Ford L9000 is what will end up replacing the T800.
Yep...the reason....we don't need to spend a damned thing on any smog crap....in fact, I can and will end up bombing the 3406E in this 94 L9000 to make a runner out of it. We will change the front to 20K and have it certified and add lowbed ramps. Other than that, its good to go. And yes, 89,000 original miles. :beatsme:beatsme
We picked this one up at a military auction a few years back with about 50,000 miles.
Power is a 3406E@435hp, 13sp, 16K front, 46K rears and no smog crap!

 

[Lee-online]

Pete, I see CA is really screwing truck owners over. The 1994 will have to get a new emission engine installed in 2016.

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/multirule.pdf

 

[johndeere123]

Could you Glider a 2012 truck with a 1994-1995 engine and still get away with no emissions until 2016? The article Lee-online posted only states that the emissions must be compatible with the engine year. Are many people Glidering trucks down there?

 

[980C]

I have an '07 Pete 379 with a Cat C15 in it. I recently had it turned up from 475 to 575, and the torque from 1850 to 2150. 604,000 miles on it, and have never had any issues with it.

 

[928G Boy]

I think the 8.3 Cummins is right on par, and better once International tried that bad super-EGR mess after 2007.

those 8.3 cummins seem pretty rare around here at least, for medium duty trucks it's almost always either got a little cat 3126 or a 466E it seems...

 

[Birken Vogt]

those 8.3 cummins seem pretty rare around here at least, for medium duty trucks it's almost always either got a little cat 3126 or a 466E it seems...

Those 3126/C7 engines are hated among those who actually keep track of their breakdowns, and also those who have to drive them. One thing I discovered, ours has 300 horsepower listed on the nameplate but if you make a pull for very long up a steep hill on a hot day it derates the engine to keep exhaust gas temperature under control but Cat doesn't send you any money when this happens for lack of performance as advertised....this is when working without mechanical or electronic failures which I won't go into now.

On the other hand Cummins support has been great. They covered us for a major failure that was technically outside warranty with only a little prodding.

 

[RollOver Pete]

I have an '07 Pete 379 with a Cat C15 in it. I recently had it turned up from 475 to 575, and the torque from 1850 to 2150. 604,000 miles on it, and have never had any issues with it.

Just wait....they will find you. They find everyone.