Paccar Engine(s)

And your answer is:

Simple question which needs only a simple answer from you.

It doesn't need a rude remark as an answer.

Any chance you will answer it?

 

It implies 2003 weren't egr engines!

 

Ohh,i will answer it.
In fact i allready stated it on this forum a long time ago.

 

That we allready know.


I asked you if you mean that after 2003 they were EGR engines?

 

I know you did ! But you know what? My mind is so sketchy these days, you should just tell me again!

 

Do u mean from 2003 on or the introduction date of egr???

 

Gotta love em... No one wins...

 

Hahaha I'll win!

 

Peace with you guys!

Still I am standing beside my words, and I believe, the MX not a wise choice, at least here, is not at all.
Oh there is one more information about the fuel economy vs. engine size. I have friend in Europe, a "Volvo man". He has three Volvos, three different age with 12 and 13 liter engines from 420-480HP (Or something like this. Do not beat me for the exact numbers). He sometimes tests trucks for Volvo. Lately he got a 16 liter, 700 something HP for a month. He was impressed with the power, of course, and the fuel economy, although insignificantly, but was better, with the same load.
By the way, the Volvo engine itself getting better here too, but still have lot of electrical problems. And around they build a comfortable smooth running junk. Just recently three local, Volvo loyal company fleet are started to switch to Freightliner. A fourth, pretty large are testing in large numbers Kenworth and Freightliner along the Volvos.