Pacar MX Engine fuel mileage

Hey fland, we haven't heard from you on this thread in a while. Did they finally get your ride lined out?

 

Please let us know what you find out.

 

Just got in and slowing to 65 mph from 75 mph I went from 6.8 mpg to 7.1 mpg. Conditions were the same, load was the same. My MX was just built in late Jan and they have made some changes recently. I like driving it better than the C12 Cat I have, the MX definetley has more low rpm power I shift it at 1300 rpm in a pull with a 13 spd. It doesn't fall on its face even at 1200rpm, my Cat won't do that, of course it's a 2001 model

 

No, not really.

I cannot (and shouldn't) complain about fuel mileage. I still do complain about the engine not working well, not picking up smoothly after shifting. It's annoying and a lot of the time takes away the fun in driving...

Since the end of January it doesn't give problems. I did have a lot of downtime last year, not because of major failures but because of stupid little things like a bad contact in the fusebox. Small problems but it takes ages to find them or figure out what really is wrong. It also has had some problems that simply disappear. Last problem was a check engine light and the red light in the DEF gauge. Computer figured I was low on DEF while the tank had just been filled up. Engine got derated but was drivable. An hour before arriving at the dealer shop the problem disappeared and never showed again...

I'm sick of this truck, only fuel mileage keeps a slight smile on my face.

Thanks Larry, for showing interest

 

I also have a 2012 paccar mx 455 had it since it was new it has 165000 now stay away from this motor lots of problems engine light derating power from all sorts of different problems fuel millage is around 5.5 has no pulling power and it is heavier than similar trucks with the ISX very disappointed with this motor run for the hills

 

How is the engine weight a issue?

ISX12 for Heavy-Duty Truck (2013)

[TABLE="class: table, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]System Weight[/TD]
[TD]

2880 lb​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
http://cumminsengines.com/isx12-heavy-duty-truck-2013?#specifications

ISX15 for Heavy-Duty Truck (2013)

[TABLE="class: table, width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]System Weight[/TD]
[TD="width: 195"]

3204 lb
​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
http://cumminsengines.com/isx15-heavy-duty-truck-2013?#specifications


Paccar MX 13
Dry Weight 2,600 lbs.
http://www.paccarengines.com/PDF/2013-MX-Spec-Sheet102612.pdf

 

Yep, you should have waited. You still have the 2010 M engine, you should have had the MX-13. All problems there were with the 2010 version should be solved in the 2013. The MX-13 is the same as the euro 6 engine in Europe.

You should ask yourself though whether you need a 500HP/1850 torque motor. More HP or torque is not always better for fuel mileage. With 80.000 gross you better have the 430 HP multitorque...

70 horses less to feed...

 

I have a 2013 KW T-660 with the 485 Paccar. I have 207,000 mi and am averaging 6.7 mpg with no issues except new truck teething problems. I run an avg speed of 75 mph

 

SERIOUSLY????
This is the US EPA regs???

Gonna be a lot of dead bulls and pigs....

Im gonna buy a 96-02 truck and inframe it. Big bro will not force me in that Swift Transportation corner.

 

I realize that I'm reviving this thread from the dead but I wanted to post my units numbers for future readers.

I just recently purchased a 2015 Pete 567 (385 steers, heavy spec, 72" bunk) for a log haul and decided to try the 500/1850 MX series at the urging of my dealer and the reports I was getting back from other local log truck owners (and a general unhappiness I have with my Cummins trucks).

I am only 2 weeks into the ownership and I'm driving this unit myself for a while to test it out, so longevity and so forth I can't really comment on.

Fuel milage though I can and I'm very happy with it so far. I am getting an average of 4.72 US which is, for my industry and region a VERY good number. In the real world reality, it means that I am burning approximately $55 to $60 a day less fuel than my other trucks doing the exact same haul and doing it in exactly the same time.

I am pulling 145000 pounds (66500kgs actually) and I only notice the small block difference in 7th over, 8th and 8th over. Even then its very little change in power from the Cummins trucks that I run. I have a 2012 Pete with 4.10's and 500 cummins that pulls a hill at 78km/s per hour at the top, and this truck is pulling that same hill at 77km's per hr with 4.30s. So there is a small difference but not enough to regret buying it so far.