Tim
U.S.Constitution
Why do you have to have an 18 to hit the bottom of a hill at 80?
I got a 13 and can hit one at over 100 if I choose too.
What is your favorite engine? and what engine do you think gets the best fuel mileage
- Thread starter bfry381
- Start date
Why do you have to have an 18 to hit the bottom of a hill at 80?
I got a 13 and can hit one at over 100 if I choose too.
I have no idea who "Donald Sutherlin" is....But Donald SutherlandView attachment 17085 is a great actor
View attachment 17085
Fageol
Old acid hauler but not too caustic
According to the information on this site, the "Donald Sutherlin" pic was originally posted by Double D.
I too think that Donald Sutherland was great. My favorite was his acting as a German spy in "Eye of the Needle".
I too like flatbeddin'. It was more fun when I worked for CF in the late 60s and 70s. All we had then were ropes, chains, or cables. So I really appreciate straps. Here at Sourdough we mostly flatbed. However as a percentage of all of its trailers, more reefers are creeping into the mix.
I too think that Donald Sutherland was great. My favorite was his acting as a German spy in "Eye of the Needle".
I too like flatbeddin'. It was more fun when I worked for CF in the late 60s and 70s. All we had then were ropes, chains, or cables. So I really appreciate straps. Here at Sourdough we mostly flatbed. However as a percentage of all of its trailers, more reefers are creeping into the mix.
Gased
Well-Known Member
I used to be a fan of Cummins but after going back to the Detroit 60 which turns 500 to the tires, I'm saying the good ol' Detroit 60.
BTW, I have an error code of EC 128, any ideas. It does it when I first get it started. All fluids are good. It did seem flat the other day but the code went away and I got all my horsies back.
BTW, I have an error code of EC 128, any ideas. It does it when I first get it started. All fluids are good. It did seem flat the other day but the code went away and I got all my horsies back.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
Les2
Hobbie Trucker
Engine makes rate HP to the flywheel not the tires, only Mack did that. Now if you had someone play with the ECM I can understand 500 RWHP. BTW didn't Detroit only build at the highest HP a 515 which was a 14l motor? Detroits are also well know for putting escape hatches for pistons in the side of the block...LOL
To the OP.... 22k is way to much money for a 94 Pete. If you do feel the need to blow your wad on that overpriced piece of chrome, ask the owner when he changed the bull gear and make sure he has proof if he says he did! I'd also ask why the head was changed with less than 100k on it.
I'm also gonna throw this out there so if I'm wrong someone please by all means feel free to correct me..... In 94 Detroit only had the DDEC I and it was only rated at 425hp and at most Detroit would turn it up to a 430hp. My dad had one of these in a 94 KW, it got great fuel mileage but was gutless!
IMO keep the Cat you have, it will out perform most Detroits on the road today with the right tuning and parts. I used to get over 6.5mpg out of mine running it hard. With the installation of wrong parts, not by me, it is now lucky to get 6 but thats still hauling more than most can legally gross.
Duck
Sarcastic remark goes here
You should see mine. If I dyed it yellow, I'd look like a dandelion.
Tim
U.S.Constitution
Fageol
Old acid hauler but not too caustic
Because I'm scared. Gross weights commonly of 130,000 lbs on doubles consisting of a 324" tractor and two 45' trailers at 80 mph on white roads (i.e. roads covered with a mix of snow, compressed snow, and ice) just have to many pieces and parts that can go wrong or sideways at more than 80 mph IMHO. And I observe that this opinion is shared by most others running Anchorage - Fairbanks. The 18 is nice because the gears on the low side can be split when somebody ahead is slow or one is chained up. I think that's why most of the line tractors up this way run 18s. Otherwise a 13 is just fine.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
Didn't you just cut that mop?
The motor I ran before this one was the last production year of S60. I could not keep that engine out of the shop. I never got above 6mpg with it, no matter what I did. It was supposed to be a 515, but I can say this piddly little 435 Cummins out pulls, out accelerates and out everythings that S60.
[MENTION=9031]Les2[/MENTION] is spot on.
R
Racer X 69
Guest
When only considering stock setups, and all else being more or less equal the Cummins powered rigs I have driven over the years have always been strong runners.
Gus
What?
I heard that on channel 19 at the Peelot... it must be true.
Fageol
Old acid hauler but not too caustic
Sorry, I don't keep up with movies, actors, etc.; I average about a movie a year. Is Mr. Sutherland in any of the currently shown movies? If so, I'll go in a heartbeat.
On engines: The guys in these parts that run the big Detroits have had quite a few problems with them. And our guys with the 550 ISXs have had plenty of problems with them. Most blame the problems on the weed burners and I've heard a few comments about the pee (urea solution or whatever chemical that removes or helps remove supposedly noxious things) freezing.
It seems that less is mo bettah. Evidently there's a 550 ISX in these parts that has the exhaust recirculation circuit and other CARB-loved (maybe Obama Czar-loved or Obama contributor-loved) engine components modified, removed, or made wholly or partially inoperable. I have heard that said motor runs mighty good.
I'm just happy that the old C15 I run has no capacity for derating or for regenerating. Maybe Donald Sutherland would like that.
When I was driving for swift i had 2 detroit 60s. A '93 and a '95 (new back then). The first one got 7.4 mpg untill the put recaps on it and then it got 6.3. Went back to 7.4 when they put virgin rubber back on it. The second one usually got about 8.5 and never lower than 7.8. On one trip we recorded 9.8. never had a problem with either motor. keep in mind those we were governed to 57mph in those days.
My current truck has a Mack E7b 400hp. MPG varies greatly based on weight and wind. Usually between 5.5 to 7, but probably 8+ bobtailing. I usually drive about 60-62mph and probably average just under 6 mpg. The motor now has over 2.2 million miles and has never been overhauled (even has the original turbo and fuel pump). Mack really underbuilt this motor. Later, higher HP versions are far less reliable. Although the poor fuel economy cost me allot of money, it is offset by the fact I have not had to pay for major engine repairs. I wouldn't buy a mack engine today.
If I had a choice i would like another detroit 60, but with the EPA Nazis these days that may not be the best choice for the future.
My current truck has a Mack E7b 400hp. MPG varies greatly based on weight and wind. Usually between 5.5 to 7, but probably 8+ bobtailing. I usually drive about 60-62mph and probably average just under 6 mpg. The motor now has over 2.2 million miles and has never been overhauled (even has the original turbo and fuel pump). Mack really underbuilt this motor. Later, higher HP versions are far less reliable. Although the poor fuel economy cost me allot of money, it is offset by the fact I have not had to pay for major engine repairs. I wouldn't buy a mack engine today.
If I had a choice i would like another detroit 60, but with the EPA Nazis these days that may not be the best choice for the future.
Duck
Sarcastic remark goes here
I've been talking about it for a while, .. but haven't cut it in months.
With all that tree hugging bull**** on diesel engines these days, the ONLY good choice would be a glider, or babying the hell out of an older truck & keeping it running forever.
Fageol
Old acid hauler but not too caustic
IMHO you've made the best choice from what I see in these parts. That old N14 in a Western Star (the guys called it a "Porn Star") that I used to drive until a bearing spun could darn near keep up with the 550s and 565s. It outran our ISX 530s. And other than an old 3406E at 600 hp, we had no Cats, including the one that I presently drive, that could keep up with that N14. WIth that red top I'd use about 220 gallons of fuel for the 728 mile Anchorage -- Fairbanks -- Anchorage loop. The C15 @ 500 hp Cat that I now drive takes about 230 gallons for the same trip.
Briefly, the N14 could get me there and home more quickly and at less cost to the company.
Similar threads
