Jump to content


Photo

Heavy truck engines


7 replies to this topic

#1 Soverigen680

Soverigen680

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manitowoc WI

Posted 22 July 2012 - 06:11 AM

Somthing I have always wondered.

Can some of you experts on here give me the pros/cons on the big three?

Cummins

Cat

Detroit Diesel

You get a different answer from anyone you ask. We had an old 4300 transtar (if memory serves me!) and I remember the ol'man refering cummins to "cumapart" He used to call a 3208 cat as a "throw away motor" I guess because it was not worth rebuild?

Discuss at will! I am interested in your feedback

#2 Delta Dirt

Delta Dirt

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,969 posts
  • Location:Avon, Ms 38723

Posted 22 July 2012 - 11:35 AM

Probably gonna here pros & cons for all-----I have heard people swear by & swear against some of all of them.

The 3208 Cat was generally considered a short life diesel--Cat seemed to have planned for that in their remanufactured engine specials. In most cases---you could pick up a rebuilt engine from Cat cheaper than rebuilding yourself.

Will be listening in to hear the war of words for & against these brands!!!LOL


Delta Dirt
Avon, Ms. 38723

#3 ALLIS

ALLIS

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 218 posts

Posted 22 July 2012 - 11:58 AM

All of those engines have their good and bad points.The Cummins have been around for ever(30,s)and usually are very good if you treat them right;eg.dont over rev them ,and the big one ,dont let them lug down much below 14-1500 rpm.That kills them over time .The exhaust temps get too high,valve seats can loosen up ,and lots of other good stuff.You get an old Mack driver in them ,and those guys are used to pulling their Macks down to 11-1200 rpm ,but the old Cummins doesnt like it .The Detroits(2 -strokes) are great if they are kept warm and need very good air filtration;ie;regular air filter maintenance,also they have to be revved as they are a little bit torque limited at low r.p.m. and tend to heat as well also not performing. plus they like to piss oil everywhere!!The Cats are ok,rpm is fairly critical(thats why you have a pyrometer).The engine you mentioned (the3208)was built fairly low cost,not for the big rigs,but more for the mid range stuff,gravel trucks,5-8 tonners,single axles ,town delivery etc.Fairly good on fuel on those applications.They needed rpm,no lugging ,and low end torque is not that great ,due to low cubes(638 from memory)short stroke ,and V-configuration,but they are quite lively.The other Cats(3206,3306,and the 3308,s are way different beasts.Like I said before,they all have their good and bad points,personal preference .I guess.

#4 Soverigen680

Soverigen680

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manitowoc WI

Posted 24 July 2012 - 08:55 PM

Mack made their own engines correct?

#5 Pukeko

Pukeko

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 43 posts

Posted 24 July 2012 - 09:59 PM

Mack made their own engines correct?

Made made their own engines.Initially they were sourced out in the early days .I think Waukesha and a couple of others in the gaspot era.,dont forget they started aboutv 1900,originally called manhatten,I think,then name changed a bit later.The "Maxidyne" came out in 1968,designed by Walter May.Now they are owned by Volvo since 2000,along with Renault,but still manufactured in Greensboro.A Mack with a gold Bulldog is all Mack components,chrome bulldog is some outside stuff.You can get new macks with Cat,Cummins or what ever you want to specify.

#6 Soverigen680

Soverigen680

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 42 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manitowoc WI

Posted 25 July 2012 - 05:46 AM


Mack made their own engines correct?

Made made their own engines.Initially they were sourced out in the early days .I think Waukesha and a couple of others in the gaspot era.,dont forget they started aboutv 1900,originally called manhatten,I think,then name changed a bit later.The "Maxidyne" came out in 1968,designed by Walter May.Now they are owned by Volvo since 2000,along with Renault,but still manufactured in Greensboro.A Mack with a gold Bulldog is all Mack components,chrome bulldog is some outside stuff.You can get new macks with Cat,Cummins or what ever you want to specify.



I always wondered why some were gold and some were chrome!



#7 Dr. EVIL

Dr. EVIL

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,773 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SC Wis

Posted 25 July 2012 - 03:42 PM

I've walked home from blowen-up Cummins powered trucks more than any other brand of engine, but then that's what I drove the most back in the 70's & 80's, but Yes, Cum-a-Part was a good name for them. I've seen ALL kinds of weird failures on Cummins, from valve pushrods worn off over an inch, to broken wrist pins allowing the conn rods to saw the engine block almost completely in two. I was driving an IH S2200 one afternoon when I welded an exh valve into the valve guide, it screeched to a halt quickly. And I shut my 903 V8 Cummins off to unload one afternoon during a big rain storm, and two cylinders filled with water due to loose intake manifold bolts, which resulted in two bent conn rods. No wonder the thing wouldn't pull hills well anymore, if rain water could get in, I wonder how much boost I was loosing?.... All 4-5 PSI? Engine had a real bad knock when I started it, but I still made it 20-25 miles to where the wrecker was supposed to pick me & the tractor up later that night. By the time I got there the knock had stopped. Turned out the knock was the counter weights on the crankshaft hitting the wrist pin bosses inside the two pistons. The bosses wore down about 1/8th inch and the knock stopped. I still didn't want to rev that engine much over 1200-1400 RPM with the two offending cylinders about a foot away from my feet wth only a fiberglass dog house between me and the engine.

I drove straight trucks with 3208 Cats a little, they were all geared slow with 4-spd Allison A/T's, think they were late 70's vintage IH S1700's. One ran 47 MPH, the other one about 54 MPH. EMPTY, load them up and they got slower. I ran a '74 Diamond Reo w/555 Cummins V8 ready-mix truck with 5-spd Allison A/T & Brownie 3-spd auxilliary trans. It grossed over 50,000#, ran 50-55 loaded and 60-65 empty. Other than routinely sucking the o-ring out of the fuel filter it always ran O-K. Much nicer truck to drive than the old '66 White with the tiny 165 HP Cummins 6 & 5+4 transmission. I hate to think what a slug those mixers would have been with a 3208.

The BIG Cat's, 3406 were a great engine, but costly to work on, and to protect the $15,000 crankshaft most people rolled new main & rod bearings in them about every 100,000 to 150,000 miles. The 3408 V8 Cats were Hot-Rods, making 450+ HP back when most trucks were still running 270-350 HP.

The 2-stroke Detroits were noisy, used or more correctly, leaked a LOT of oil, gallon a day was common, but got about 1 MPG better fuel MPG than a Cummins. You needed a lot of gears to keep them wound-up, 9 or 10 was barely enough, 13 or more was better. Whether it was a 318, or 8V-71 (Same thing) of a Silver 92, 6V-92 TTA, didn't make much difference. Company I drove for had one TranStar II with an 8V-92 TTA, rated about 425 HP, 9-spd Road-Ranger.... first time I drove it, took a couple miles but it motored right up to 75 MPH loaded into a head-wind. Also only got about 3-1/2 MPG.

The later 4-stroke Detroits were very similar to the big 855CID Cummins, only more durable if reasonable care was given to them. They made good MPG, made good power. They were not made yet when I was driving.

I did drive an early 80's vintage F-700 Ford single axle tractor one summer, had a 5+2 trans, plus a Wonderful dreation called the 8.2L Detroit V8. I loved the truck, was about like driving my F150 except for the air brakes. The engine is generally considered to be the WORST diesel engine ever created. When it ran O-K, it would get 6-7 MPG, and run up & down the small hills in eastern Iowa on I-80 loaded to around 40,000 to 50,000 pounds just fine. But about every 4 to 6 weeks it would start dropping 2-3 cylinders, not sure why, blown head gasket, injector problems, valve problems, not sure, but then I would drop to 4-5 MPG, and my normal 3 hour trip took 4 or more hours. Truck would disappear for 3-4 days, maybe a week, and come back and run fine for a while longer. Today's 5.9L Cummins Dodge used in their pickups would have been a great replacement for that engine.

#8 250C

250C

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Gatesville Tx
  • Interests:Hunting, fishing,playing in the dirt,cooking on a woodstove, Guns and more guns,foraging,keeping the wife from taking over the 250C. And teaching anyone young anything I can.

Posted 04 August 2012 - 08:41 AM

Dr Evil, I've been in the engine rebuild for a long time and it is rare that I share the same opinon on this subject. Most of the time I remain silent lol. I would add the cummins 400 hp was probably one of the most cost effective engines other faults withstanding.
The 903 was a complete failure at all it's attemtpts for fame it went on for many years in the marine industry and currently is used in the bradley fight vehicle(think Pentagon Wars movie) in a 600 hp version (very short lifespan) .
Con is the opposite of Pro, What's the opposite of Progress?.... Congress



Reply to this topic