User Tag List

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-21-2007, 07:55 PM
Midnight Flyer's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Livin' large in the Ozark mountains of western Arkansas
Posts: 1,360
Default Cummins, Cat, and Detroit vs. Volvo and Mercedes

As everyone well knows anytime you see a truck barrelling down the highway chances are it's either powered by a Cat, Cummins, or Detroit engine but now we're seeing more trucks advertised as being powered by Mercedes (Freightliner trucks) or Volvo. Anyone know how these engines hold up as compared to the Big Three? 8)
__________________
"Looks like a legend and an outta work bum look a lotta like Daddy," Little Enos Burdette.
Hook 'em Horns!!
"Life is hard. It's harder if you're stupid." John Wayne
"Talk to me Goose".
"What we're dealin' with here, is a complete lack of respect for the law," Sheriff Buford T. Justice.
Friends don't let friends drive for C.R. England!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-21-2007, 10:09 PM
GMAN's Avatar
Administrator
Board Icon
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 17,076
Default

I have heard more negatives than positives about the Mercedes engine. I don't recall hearing any negative experience about the Volvo engines. The down side to either is getting parts in case of a breakdown. I almost bought a Volvo several years ago with the Volvo engine. I decided against the purchase because I would have needed to find a Volvo dealer to have most engine work performed.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-21-2007, 10:20 PM
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: jackassville (winnipeg, mb)
Posts: 3,298
Default

I think the volvo is not a bad engine, although I would stay away from the EGR engine(or any EGR engine for that matter).

It gets fantastic fuel mileage, but it's a little gutless.

Other then a rebuild, mine has been rock solid with almost a million miles on it.

Not a fan of the MB engines, their blocks are aluminum. No diesel block should be aluminum.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-22-2007, 01:20 AM
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 1,004
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by allan5oh
I think the volvo is not a bad engine, although I would stay away from the EGR engine(or any EGR engine for that matter).

It gets fantastic fuel mileage, but it's a little gutless.

Other then a rebuild, mine has been rock solid with almost a million miles on it.

Not a fan of the MB engines, their blocks are aluminum. No diesel block should be aluminum.
Volvo needs to bring the 660hp version of the D16 over here.
__________________
You can take the driver out of the truck but you cant take the truck out of the driver.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-23-2007, 01:41 AM
silvan's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: East Coast
Posts: 856
Default Re: Cummins, Cat, and Detroit vs. Volvo and Mercedes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Flyer
Anyone know how these engines hold up as compared to the Big Three? 8)
I seem to recall that Detroits are Mercedes now.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-23-2007, 04:57 PM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: thunder bay ontario
Posts: 113
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PackRatTDI
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan5oh
I think the volvo is not a bad engine, although I would stay away from the EGR engine(or any EGR engine for that matter).

It gets fantastic fuel mileage, but it's a little gutless.

Other then a rebuild, mine has been rock solid with almost a million miles on it.

Not a fan of the MB engines, their blocks are aluminum. No diesel block should be aluminum.
Volvo needs to bring the 660hp version of the D16 over here.
the volvo's do get great milage, no doubt about that, but i would never say thier gutless, far from it to be exact..... anyhow why do u think they need a 660 hp truck???? the 625's get shitty enough gas milage with more then enough power, and if u need the power and torque, please tell me the road # your driving down, since ive yet to see a 35% grade more then a hundred feet let alone miles long.
__________________
Common Sence Is Effectively Dead
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-23-2007, 04:59 PM
Jackrabbit379's Avatar
Board Icon
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wichita Falls,Tx
Posts: 7,202
Default

I'd go with Perkins. :P :lol:
__________________


http://watsonsysco.com/
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-23-2007, 09:31 PM
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: FT ST JOHN
Posts: 650
Default

anyhow why do u think they need a 660 hp truck????

35% Grade? "proffit" Try 140,000 lbs up a 7% grade on ice, YOU, can have your 11 lit. fuel efficient engines,... you will be saveing fuel waiting for spring... or spending all your profit on chains... Big h.p. is for a reason
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-24-2007, 12:15 AM
TK THE TRUCKER's Avatar
Senior Board Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Macedon Center,NY
Posts: 1,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackrabbit379
I'd go with Perkins. :P :lol:
Kubota engines are pretty good too, are we talking about trucks or commercial mowers? :lol:

A few years ago I was specing a truck for the company I worked for. I stayed away from the Mercedes engine because the dealership said it taking them a lot longer to get parts for them compared to the other engines. I wasn't really considering the Mercedes anyways. I was set on a kitty cat. And I mean kitty cat, C7 300 hp to be exact.
Reply With Quote
Reply






Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 06:53 AM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.