| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bandit102
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 246
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 7:25 pm Post subject: Bad kitty CAT |
|
|
Everyone here likes to talk about running slow, so I'm gonna post about my trip from New Mexico to Boston, MA.
1997 T-600 3406E @ 475hp 3.73 rears, 10 direct. (I think...Its an RTX 14-6-10) 78,500# full of fuel.
Las Cruces, NM to OKC, OK running 72-76 mph in the 1800 rpm neighborhood - 5.57 mpg.
OKC, OK to Effingham, IL running 70 mph (except for IL - I ran 58) - 5.67 mpg.
Effingham, IL to Lodi, OH running 58 mph the entire way at around 1450 rpm - 5.35 mpg.
Lodi, OH to Willington, CT running 65 mph around 1700 rpm - 4.8 mpg.
And that 500 Detroit in my Classic would run ALL OVER this Cat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
pdm
Joined: 11 Feb 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Waterloo,Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RT.........The X means its an o/drive with the standard shift pattern. About .73ish ratio i think, guessing but that should be close.
The fuel mileage is a bit of a puzzle to me................like it should be reversed.
My Detroit would run all over this cat..............power or fuel? orboth? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bandit102
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 246
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Power mainly. The detroit was in a Classic XL and got 5.5 doing anything between 65 and 85 mph...made very little difference. But now its blowed up...again...and getting an N14. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Trukrswyfe
Joined: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 2358
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| :roll: to you too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
BigDiesel
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 1170
Location: Space... The Final Frontier
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Trukrswyfe wrote: uh... excuse me...
Like your title. :twisted:
Very attention grabbing. :wink:
:roll:
Back to topic now..... The Cat motors are terrible for fuel economy. My ISX Cummins will out pull and get better fuel economy than the Yellow hunk of junk. |
|
| Back to top |
|
tankyanker
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 48
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| they make cummins for people who cant learn how to drive cats there, boss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bandit102
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 246
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I have to say, I drove a Cummins ISX in a T660 and it sure made every Cat I ever drove look like a....kitty.
Also, the N-14s we have will shame this Cat bad. But maybe I've been behind that Detroit too long to know how to drive a cat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
solo379
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 3162
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well guys, you may say what you want, but I'm averaging above 7mpg on my Acert, and was getting as high as 8.1 mpg for OH-NYC-OH round, with the light load. My old 3406E, was getting around 6.75 average.
And about "pull", with 40,000lb in a box, i don't shift in PA on I-80.
And i didn't even push it, or speed up... 8) |
|
| Back to top |
|
Walking Eagle
Joined: 02 Jan 2006
Posts: 400
Location: Normaly on the road
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I heavy haul so don't worry about MPG to much, if I get 3mpg I think it is good, but I traded a w900l 144inch sleeper with a 600 (tuned up Cummins) for the same configuration w900l with a tuned up 600 Cat and the Cat just snorts and digs deeper on a hill that I would have been grabbing gears on with th Cummins |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bandit102
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 246
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, I just did Cincinnati, OH to Montgomery, AL to Hammond, LA - beating the hell out of this Cat all the way...with a very light load of 8,000 lbs in the box, but I mean I bea the hell out of it. The entire trip somewhere between 75 and 85 mph - thats 1800 to 2000 or 2100 rpm. She did 6.01 mpg. I thought these Cats did't like rpms? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Bandit102
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 246
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Anyone here ever say anything in public that made you feel stupid later?
Bought the Cat injector tool and ran the overhead. Lots of power and gobs of torque...this is a different truck alltogether.
Fuel mileage is up to 5.8 at 72mph (1800 rpm).
Duh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Midnight Flyer
Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1198
Location: Livin' large in the Ozark mountains of western Arkansas
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| :D Seems like the Cats have gone to hell in a handbasket the last couple of years. Wonder what gives? 8) |
|
| Back to top |
|
tankyanker
Joined: 15 Dec 2007
Posts: 48
|
| Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
it really made that much of a difference, the over head work? i've been debating on whether or not to spend the money and get mine run on one of my days off. how hard is it to do yourself?
i took my CAC off a few weeks ago and carried it over to the radiator shop. come to find out, it was leaking from a little stress fracture at the top, where one of the metal hooks for the hood strap lays when i have the hood open. got it welded up. sucking sound i posted about somewhere else stoppped, mpg jumped .5 at least. always a good place to check too, i guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
solo379
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 3162
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bandit102 wrote: thats 1800 to 2000 or 2100 rpm. She did 6.01 mpg. I thought these Cats did't like rpms?
They sure don't! Next time, keep your foot off, and at around 1400.
You might be surprised! :wink: |
|
| Back to top |
|
solo379
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 3162
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
tankyanker wrote: it really made that much of a difference, the over head work?
I do it every 150-200,000. So it doesn't for me. :D
But if it's off a lot, it most definitely will! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
