Spoke to a O/O of 23yrs, he had an outspoken opinion regarding years than model. why?

Every generation says they don't build them like they used to. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, they all say it.

 

They say it because it is true. I am only 25 and I say it. The best truck I ever drove was a 2003 KW w900L with a caterpillar 6nz engine in it. That engine gave me ONE problem in the 300,000 or so miles I drove it. One day it just decided it wouldn't start. Everything was there, it was pumping the fuel, it was turning over well, it just wasn't coming to work that morning. After I went in and had breakfast it fired right up. Never was able to figure out what happened. That truck would perform the same way, every day of the year. I knew exactly what it was capable of doing. It was the most reliable truck and if my old boss would let me buy the darn thing then I would pay higher than market value for it.

Now I have, my own truck now, a 2009 w900L. It sometimes performs as well as the old one did, but most of the time it is more concerned with giving me low power and less mpg than the old truck. It seems to always be cooking in the dpf. Part of the reason I bought it, before I got my own authority I was all hung up on the cali, cali, cali deal. Now I am learning that cali is mostly a waste of time. Take a look at how many "old" trucks you see and how long they live, and then take a look and see how many newer trucks last the same amount of time. They don't. It would be a dream if cat was allowed to still build the 6nz motors, and figure out the emissions system after that on a totally separate system. An emissions system big enough that it didn't choke the motor of all its power.

 

if i still owned trucks mpg would b the big deal. in todays world for many o/o its the line between profit and loss. my first truck was 65 pete long hood with a V12 detroit, it got 2 1/2 mpg on a good day, if the wind was blowing out west it might drop below 2 mpg. fuel mpg was not a big deal until well into the 80s until then engine manufactures could give a poop less about mpg. have a safe day out there

 

It's' because of the EPA. Mid 2003 they threw up a bunch of new regulations that have forced engine makers to lower particulate output. As usual they have reeked havoc. Cummins, CAT, DETROIT all had excellent performing engines at that time. The new changes killed mileage for many years. They have constantly made the simple diesel engine to complex and much more prone to breakdowns and computer shut down or derate. CAT tried and finally said F it. Cummins used stupid EGR valves that did not last and were expensive. Bottom line GOV interference on another thing they know little about. Their socialist/commie bookworms writing excessive regulations. Every thing you buy or eat costs more because of these. Have they cleaned up the environment ??? Maybe a little. I don't think they were worth the cost. I think if the engine makers were left alone they would have developed their own methods and the newer motors would have been more reliable. Now they don't have to be. They can just blame the Gov. I still drive an 02' Ford w/7.3 diesel. In my opinion best engine ever put in a pickup. Over 200K and not a hiccup. Looked at new Ford. Replace exhaust system upwards of $ 5000. You can keep that POS.

 

True. But this generation had the data to back up why those years are bad. Unfortunately it's only getting worse as we go along.

 

Interesting, considering HDT has numbers showing cost of ownership on 2010-11 is the lowest, then 2005-07 (not a big difference but considering purchase price that makes a big statement in fuel economy). Pre-03 does beat '08-09 and it is no secret that these motors are an abomination. But the two killers for pre-03 are fuel economy and the number of kitties being run.

So everybody has data. But the data that trucking companies use to make decisions says hold your '06-'07 till you can jump '08-'09.

 

And the data also shows that down time for repairs has risen every year for the last 4 years. 46% of trucks from 2012 have engine related problems up from 42% in 2011.

But no one can deny when there running right they do get much better mileage.

http://autos.jdpower.com/content/pr...-duty-truck-engine-and-transmission-study.htm

 

If you look at the dates of the study and the qualifications it is likely that most of the data is coming from 2009 and 2010 trucks. Because you can't be surveying people in May of '12 on trucks that have been in-service at least a year and get any data on '12 and very little data on '11.

Also it is interesting that they are showing such low MPG numbers. Most fleets are reporting mid-7's.

 

He knows what he is talking about.

IIRC, 2003 was the first year of the EPA mandated EGR valve and 2007 was the first year for the EPA mandated Diesel Particulate Filter. I think there was another round of emmission requirements in 2005 also...think that was why CAT came out with the ACERT.

EGR valve trucks have poorer fuel mileage.
ACERT cats had VVA (Variable Valve Actuator) housing failures that cost $13,000 don't ask me how I know.
DPF (at least ISX engines) have poor fuel mileage, doser valve failures, EGR cooler failures, DPF failures and on and on don't ask me how I know.

What do you mean by that? You don't have to pour any exhaust fluid into a 2007???