M11 is arguable the best engine the world has ever seen.Reliability built in.■■■■■■■ still offer M11.Some people say their now short on power but at 1550lbs ft I don’t agree. The ISZ you refer to is in production,it is basically a smaller version of a single cam ISX.
[zb]
anorak:
How good was.the Euro5 M11? If it jad started to fall behind the Euopean competition on power or sfc, then that might have contributed to ■■■■■■■■ decision to call it a day in Europe.
More like ‘type approval’ conveniently seeming to suit the Euro manufacturers.While the Fuller box being put out of the frame,supposedly because of its deafening noise levels 
,being more than coincidence in that regard.On that note also seem to remember DAF going to ■■■■■■■ to meet big power targets which they couldn’t meet themselves.While the Detroit 60 series wasn’t exactly a no hoper either.It was obvious where this was all heading and the agenda behind it as early as the mid 1970’s.With the corrupt US and UK governments being up to their necks ‘in on it’.
In fairness to Detroit they had the job sorted before ■■■■■■■ did with the 12.7 DDEC(60).The rumour was a few ■■■■■■■ USA design engineers defected to Detroit and the 60 was born.
Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:
How good was.the Euro5 M11? If it jad started to fall behind the Euopean competition on power or sfc, then that might have contributed to ■■■■■■■■ decision to call it a day in Europe.More like ‘type approval’ conveniently seeming to suit the Euro manufacturers.While the Fuller box being put out of the frame,supposedly because of its deafening noise levels
Why would a “corrupt” US government seek to scupper the success of ■■■■■■■ and Fuller products in Europe?
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:
How good was.the Euro5 M11? If it jad started to fall behind the Euopean competition on power or sfc, then that might have contributed to ■■■■■■■■ decision to call it a day in Europe.More like ‘type approval’ conveniently seeming to suit the Euro manufacturers.While the Fuller box being put out of the frame,supposedly because of its deafening noise levels
Why would a “corrupt” US government seek to scupper the success of ■■■■■■■ and Fuller products in Europe?
Because the US ‘government’ was more interested in looking after the interests of Germany than ours those two interests as always being mutually exclusive with each other.In addition to being more worried about getting its combined European war debts paid off than helping us to be the strongest economic power in Europe.Obviously which one of us ended up having the most dominant automotive manufacturing sector in Europe and that obviously not ever meant to be us in that scheme,being part of that stitch up. 
The UK took 5% of ■■■■■■■ total global engine production volume in the 90,s.Somethings have changed but its far from dead in the water.
railstaff:
The UK took 5% of ■■■■■■■ total global engine production volume in the 90,s.Somethings have changed but its far from dead in the water.
What is ■■■■■■■ doing now? As I understand it, its US customers now have in-house engines as standard. I thought the writing was on the wall.
The American fraternity don’t class an MX as a worthy replacement for N14 or ISX,Seems PACCAR do.ISMe is still popular on city work.Volvo still offer the choice on their own badged product.Macks MP10 (Volvo D16D) is surprisingly frowned upon as a replacement for the E9 which I can understand,ISX is also an option there.
Regarding UK sales the bus and coach business is booming.With the introduction of a 4.5 and 6.7litre ISBe a couple of years ago and HP ratings over 300HP it opens up another field and allows their use were previously it didn’t happen.Daf now use it were before their 9 litre(PX) was fitted.There is also ISLe with ratings over 400hp from just 9 litres,this is proving very popular with coach makers.Im quite sure Darlington produces around 270 engines per day.
[zb]
anorak:railstaff:
The UK took 5% of ■■■■■■■ total global engine production volume in the 90,s.Somethings have changed but its far from dead in the water.What is ■■■■■■■ doing now? As I understand it, its US customers now have in-house engines as standard. I thought the writing was on the wall.
This is/was probably a reasonable guide at least in markets where Euro type approval obviously doesn’t apply.Although obviously a non starter in Euroland anyway without the old Brit assembly model v in house manufacture Euro one.
ttnews.com/articles/■■■■■■■■ … ar-decline
One thing I may add to Catepillars defence is that,they themselves decided to pull out of on highway engines.It was not that they failed to meet emissions,it was the volumes of engine sales did not meet or cover the cost of further developing ACERT.
railstaff:
The American fraternity don’t class an MX as a worthy replacement for N14 or ISX,Seems PACCAR do.ISMe is still popular on city work.Volvo still offer the choice on their own badged product.Macks MP10 (Volvo D16D) is surprisingly frowned upon as a replacement for the E9 which I can understand,ISX is also an option there.
Regarding UK sales the bus and coach business is booming.With the introduction of a 4.5 and 6.7litre ISBe a couple of years ago and HP ratings over 300HP it opens up another field and allows their use were previously it didn’t happen.Daf now use it were before their 9 litre(PX) was fitted.There is also ISLe with ratings over 400hp from just 9 litres,this is proving very popular with coach makers.Im quite sure Darlington produces around 270 engines per day.
I can understand US operators preferring a home-grown product to the DAF and Volvo engines, but how is that reflected in the sales figures?
Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:
Why would a “corrupt” US government seek to scupper the success of ■■■■■■■ and Fuller products in Europe?Because the US ‘government’ was more interested in looking after the interests of Germany than ours…
Who said anything about “ours”? Read the question again.
railstaff:
One thing I may add to Catepillars defence is that,they themselves decided to pull out of on highway engines.It was not that they failed to meet emissions,it was the volumes of engine sales did not meet or cover the cost of further developing ACERT.
If I was CAT or ■■■■■■■ I’d be looking at the possibility of going back to their older simpler pushrod types but combined with spark ignition and alternative fuels.At least to provide an alternative way forward.
Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:railstaff:
The UK took 5% of ■■■■■■■ total global engine production volume in the 90,s.Somethings have changed but its far from dead in the water.What is ■■■■■■■ doing now? As I understand it, its US customers now have in-house engines as standard. I thought the writing was on the wall.
This is/was probably a reasonable guide at least in markets where Euro type approval obviously doesn’t apply.Although obviously a non starter in Euroland anyway without the old Brit assembly model v in house manufacture Euro one.
ttnews.com/articles/■■■■■■■■ … ar-decline
In OZ the bible reads-
E9
KTA19
3408
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:
Why would a “corrupt” US government seek to scupper the success of ■■■■■■■ and Fuller products in Europe?Because the US ‘government’ was more interested in looking after the interests of Germany than ours…
Who said anything about “ours”? Read the question again.
Realistically ■■■■■■■■ and Fuller’s ‘interests’ in ‘Europe’ were totally interdependent with the interests of the Brit manufacturers’ assembly operations including Leyland by that point.IE Mercedes/MAN/Volvo/Scania/DAF were never going to create any major opportunities for ■■■■■■■ and Fuller to crack the Euro market.Unlike the Brits given the right government commitment.Including trade barriers to balance the obvious one sided situation if that’s what it took.None of which obviously fitted US geopolitical policy in the region which was all about doing what’s best for Germany with the Dutch and Swedes also picking up a collateral advantage from that.
[zb]
anorak:railstaff:
The American fraternity don’t class an MX as a worthy replacement for N14 or ISX,Seems PACCAR do.ISMe is still popular on city work.Volvo still offer the choice on their own badged product.Macks MP10 (Volvo D16D) is surprisingly frowned upon as a replacement for the E9 which I can understand,ISX is also an option there.
Regarding UK sales the bus and coach business is booming.With the introduction of a 4.5 and 6.7litre ISBe a couple of years ago and HP ratings over 300HP it opens up another field and allows their use were previously it didn’t happen.Daf now use it were before their 9 litre(PX) was fitted.There is also ISLe with ratings over 400hp from just 9 litres,this is proving very popular with coach makers.Im quite sure Darlington produces around 270 engines per day.I can understand US operators preferring a home-grown product to the DAF and Volvo engines, but how is that reflected in the sales figures?
Not quite sure,but what I gather is unless the box is ticked the KW comes with the MX.My take on it is,and yes I’m biased I admit.Operators will give the in house option a try.It will not have the durability of ■■■■■■■ and this is now happening in the marine sector and will then hopefully come back.One issue at the moment is ■■■■■■■ are not prepared to match on price and I don’t know why or if its because physically they cant.Certain manufactures are selling at cost to mainly get a foot in the door and it seems to be working.Again time will tell.
railstaff:
I can understand US operators preferring a home-grown product to the DAF and Volvo engines, but how is that reflected in the sales figures?
Not quite sure,but what I gather is unless the box is ticked the KW comes with the MX.My take on it is,and yes I’m biased I admit.Operators will give the in house option a try.It will not have the durability of ■■■■■■■ and this is now happening in the marine sector and will then hopefully come back.One issue at the moment is ■■■■■■■ are not prepared to match on price and I don’t know why or if its because physically they cant.Certain manufactures are selling at cost to mainly get a foot in the door and it seems to be working.Again time will tell.
[/quote]
Regarding durability, do the US makers not offer bigger/cheaper warranty cover on the in-house option? (I am not anti-■■■■■■■■ just interested in the arguments/decisions/trucks!)
On both notes,the warranty lies with the builder.To explain when you buy the truck,you buy the whole truck off say for example KW,your warranty stays with KW as a whole.If a fault occurs with an out sourced part,KW then claim off them.
railstaff:
On both notes,the warranty lies with the builder.To explain when you buy the truck,you buy the whole truck off say for example KW,your warranty stays with KW as a whole.If a fault occurs with an out sourced part,KW then claim off them.
Understood. I meant the actual warranty package offered to the end user. IIRC, firms like Paccar offer a longer warranty on thier in-house engines. Either that, or the customer must pay a surcharge for a similar warranty package on a propietary engine. Newmercman is the man to ask, having bought at least one tractor unit in the US in the past few years. I’ll PM him, and ask him to post. 
Warranty is provided by the manufacturer of the part when it comes to the big components, engine, gearbox, differential, whereas other proprietary components, turbo, alternator, starter, steering box etc are covered by the builder of the truck.
Sometimes it’s simple to ascertain that it’s a warranty claim and the service agent will take care of everything, but other times the faulty part will have to be inspected by its manufacturer to determine whether it’s a warranty claim or not, in that case you either pay the bill and get a refund, or you leave your truck with the garage until it gets figured out, depending of course on the relationship between you and the garage in question, if it’s good you may be able to take the truck while the claim is processed, but the garage will put a lien against your truck until they get their money from somebody.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk