|
|
06-17-2007, 02:19 AM
|
Board Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Western PA
Posts: 404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Kenworth vs Mack, & T600 vs T800
What are the chief points of difference between the T600 and the T800 ? Which one would be more suitable for hauling pneumatic bulkers ( cement & sand mainly ) within a radius of about 800 km ( 500 miles ), combined with city work ?
For the same application as above, which would be a better buy used : Mack or Kenworth ? What other truck would be well-suited for this kind of work ?
Also, what kind of engine would be most suitable ? I'm looking at a GVW rating of 63,500kg ( 139,700 lbs ), 18-speed, minimum 475hp for pulling hills. Key considerations :
-- fuel economy
-- inexpensive maintenance
-- reliability
-- easy availability of spares
-- endure extreme cold
I would really appreciate some advice.....I'm trying to build up an information bank for myself, for reference in the future.
|
06-17-2007, 02:34 AM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
I believe T800 is written all over that job description, but what do i know? :roll:
Oh, i forgot to mention C15 550! :wink:
__________________
Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!
|
06-17-2007, 03:03 AM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Concordville PA
Posts: 3,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
well forget a MACK you can only get a 460hp unless with you with a CH or is it the CL then you can get a 565 cummins.
__________________
Truck Driving an occupation consisting of hours of boredom interrupted by sheer terror!!
"All the coolie carriers suck. Log 70, work 80-100, paid for 50." - the Great ColdFrostyMug
|
06-17-2007, 05:10 AM
|
Board Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ontario Canada
Posts: 252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
The T-8 is more suited to what you want to do than the the T-6 plus you might find you can't get a heavy front axle in the T-6. Kenworth over Mack any day. Macks in the last 5 years have had some serious turbo issues in thier higher horsepower engines. Although I'm a CAT man I'd be tempted to go Cummins because ofthier simpler EGR system and Cats seem to be harder on fuel than some others.
|
06-17-2007, 12:05 PM
|
Administrator
Site Admin
Board Icon
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 17,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
I would probably go with the T800 given the choices you mentioned. I prefer CAT and have had good service out of them. A cummins is less expensive to work on. Detroit also makes a good engine, but for heavy haul I would go with CAT. I think they are better put together. In any case, I would stick with one of the big 3 engines: CAT, Cummins or Detroit. Availability of parts and service should be comparable. Fuel mileage will probably be slightly higher with Cummins, although I consistently do more than 6 mpg with my CAT's. CAT is known for their torque, which is important with heavy loads and mountains. If you go with at least a 500 hp engine, the new Cummins have been doing well with torque. Most people I know who do heavy haul seem to prefer CAT.
|
06-17-2007, 12:42 PM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 603
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
I'm ashamed of you Mackman.
Go with a Mack get a 460HP 18spd it will pull anything you want it to.
|
06-17-2007, 06:30 PM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
I'd vote for the T-800. I've got one running OTR and for the most part have been happy. I've got some compatibility issues between my suspension and s-cam setup, but you'd be running a heavier suspension so it wouldn't be a problem. It's a solid truck and is very easy to work on. I've got a ISX ordered at 475 and 1850 but since bumped to 550. Have had no complaints with that engine. Decent fuel mileage and no real issues. Going through the spec process, you've got a lot more options with the T8 than the T6 when it comes to heavy apps like you're looking at.
|
06-17-2007, 11:32 PM
|
Board Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Western PA
Posts: 404
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
What would you recommend for the suspension ? What kind would be suitable for the application that I have in mind ? Also, when we talk of front / rear ends of, for eg 12,000 & 44,000 respectively, what exactly do those figures mean ?
Finally, when it comes to the power aspect, which is the key...horse power or torque ? Would it be okay to go in for something with average hp, say 430-450, but a huge amount of torque ? How would it affect pulling power and performance ?
|
06-17-2007, 11:57 PM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,831
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graymist
which is the key...horse power or torque ?
|
Definitely torque, especially for your application!
__________________
Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!
|
06-18-2007, 12:12 AM
|
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: over here
Posts: 1,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
|
fuel economy? in a heavy haul truck?
BWAHAHAHAHA
|
|
|
|
|