Daf MX engine

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS OWNER AND FLEET OPERATORS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
1

Hi,

My company, which is based in Canada, is in the market for some new trucks, the bosses are diehard Peterbilt fans & for the 2010 model range Peterbilt is offering the MX engine alongside ■■■■■■■■ we currently run CAT, but they don’t have the brains to make their bulldozer engines meet the new emission regulations that the Americans have forced upon us unfortunate souls north of the border, these regulations require the use of SCR so to cut a long story short it’s a toss up between the MX & the ■■■■■■■■ now this is where you can possibly help, the ■■■■■■■ is an unknown entity, obviously they’ve done plenty of testing & a company with their reputation is going to have put together a decent engine, but some of you will have real world experience of the Daf engine & I 'd like to hear your thoughts.

1, Any reliability issues.
2, Relative fuel economy, compared to other trucks on the market, our operation here differs from UK/Euro so no need to be too specific.
3, Ad-blue consumption.
4, Would you buy another.
5, Anything else I should have asked & forgot!

Thanks in advance :wink:

2

what about the VOLVO, as they are sold in the USA ,
also have a look at THE MODEL SOLD IN Australia,
would have thought this would be a better buy,

3

brit pete:
what about the VOLVO, as they are sold in the USA ,
also have a look at THE MODEL SOLD IN Australia,
would have thought this would be a better buy,

Pete, you need to read this again :wink:

the bosses are diehard Peterbilt fans

4

so stuff em, if they can not see where they can improve their
““PROFITS”” , they deserve to suffer, I would even drive a TATRA
if it was going to bring in more profit and so ensure that the firm
stays in existence.sorry that’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.

5

Dont know much about the lumps so the only thing I can truly say is ■■■■■■■ was always our fitters choice and we never had any real probs with them. Not much use bet hell thats all i know

6

■■■■■■■ any day. I’ve run an ISM since last october. all its needed was a water pump. 7.2 mpg @ 44000 kgs loaded about 70% of the lime doing bulk tipper work. ive seen it 6.5 mpg in the winter.

Before you even consider the DAf engine find out if they’ve cured the head / water problem where the water comes up past the head bolts.

I know of a company doing same work as me and his fleet average is 6.5 mpg.

remember our Gallon is 4.56 litres. isnt yours 3.8 litres?

any one who says their daf is doing 9.5 mpg at 44 tonne is talking ■■■.

7

Daf have apparently cured the problem with the head gaskets on the new MX engines,
I was reliably informed :exclamation: :exclamation: :exclamation:

8

brit pete:
so stuff em, if they can not see where they can improve their
““PROFITS”” , they deserve to suffer, I would even drive a TATRA
if it was going to bring in more profit and so ensure that the firm
stays in existence.sorry that’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Not getting any then Pete?

My company is not in any financial difficulties at all, so they can still buy the most expensive truck on the market, namely a custom built Peterbilt, what I would like to know, as I think I stated quite clearly in my post, is information on the Daf MX engine.

The Volvo is not even in the running, it cannot compare with a Peterbilt on whole life costs, it may be more economical, by virtue of its better aerodynamics, but when it comes to trade in time, they’re worth 2 balloons & a Goldfish, whereas the Pete commands top dollar. I also have never seen any Tatra over here so they may only be available on the Czech market, that may cause a few problems so I don’t think I’ll be piloting one of them around anytime soon. I won’t be getting a new Pete either, not that I’m not in the running, I want to keep my existing truck, I’ve got used to it & it’s got used to me & we’re very happy together.

Dozer,

Thanks for the info, the bosses are not particularly fond of ■■■■■■■■ a few of our O/Ds run them & the ISX ■■■■■■■ (15ltr, 450-625hp & the most common over here) used to be a very good engine, until the 2007 emissions regs that is, then it went EGR & turned into an Iveco, get a good one & it’s ok, but get a bad one & you have a real headache, who’s to say that they don’t have the same problems with SCR?

So back to my original questions…

9

If the firm is so interested in a change why not approach the manufacture
and talk to them ,For EXAMPLE we had from Volvo many years ago when it First came out a F10; On trail with us for 6 months it went back to the dealer for all of its servicing etc…, in 3 months we covered 139,700kms, by doing such a trial you will find out if the vehicle and its MX engine is right for your firm, Or do
the manufactures in the USA, not participate in such trials?? This can save you having major problems in the long run,by the way this is the company
which are calledTatraEven the Germans buy the truck as well,

10

it gets prety cold in canada, so i would say adblue would be useless when it freezes.

11

brit pete:
If the firm is so interested in a change why not approach the manufacture
and talk to them ,For EXAMPLE we had from Volvo many years ago when it First came out a F10; On trail with us for 6 months it went back to the dealer for all of its servicing etc…, in 3 months we covered 139,700kms, by doing such a trial you will find out if the vehicle and its MX engine is right for your firm, Or do
the manufactures in the USA, not participate in such trials?? This can save you having major problems in the long run,by the way this is the company
which are calledTatraEven the Germans buy the truck as well,

I’m a lorry nerd & not only have I read the books, I’ve written some too, so I know all about Tatra, spine framed off road vehicles are their USP :open_mouth:

The firm isn’t interested in a change, by law all new trucks must meet the EPA 2010 emission regulations, our current engine manufacturer of choice CAT can’t do it so they’re pulling out of truck engines, Detroit Diesel are only available in Freightliners, although that’s not strictly true, as you’ll soon be getting the DD13/15 in Actros. So that leaves ■■■■■■■ & the Paccar/Daf MX engine.

Now I know a few people from the Daf factory in Holland, as it so happens I was the 1st non Daf employee to drive the 2nd generation Daf CF, so I know them quite well & I could quite easily ask them, but they’re hardly likely to give an unbiased answer are they? The same applies to the Peterbilt dealer here, so I thought I’d ask on here.

As with any business decision, the more information you have, the better the decision is likely to be. In all probability we will be getting a couple of each & running them for a year to see which is best for our operation.

Is that ok with you Pete? Or perhaps you want to PM me your number & then my bosses could call you & then you can tell them how they should really be running their business, BTW how many trucks do you own?

12

limeyphil:
it gets prety cold in canada, so i would say adblue would be useless when it freezes.

Ad-blue or DEF (Diesel Exhaust Fluid) as the yanks insist on calling it :unamused: freezes at -40c, which by coincidence is where the farenheit & centrigade scales cross over, handy for the suppliers as it means they can just print ‘freezes at -40’ on the containers & please the Canadians & the Americans :laughing:

It does get colder than that up here, so I presume that the tanks & supply lines will have some form of insulation to combat freezing, it gets just as cold in parts of Scandinavia so I’m sure Volvo or Scania have come up with a solution to that problem.

13

adblue freezes at -11c and seperates at +30c.
unless there is a different type in canada.
but it’ll have to be addressed otherwise drivers could be stranded in sub-zero temeratures.

14

Hi Newmercman I read an article recently written by Oliver Dixon that said North america might be getting a raise in Gross Weights, and operators were more likely to go for a 15/16 litre engine and that
might put the 13 litre Daf/volvo/merc engines in nomansland. There was even rumors of Daf importing the ■■■■■■■ to europe again for a big banger. So for resale factor might it be best to go for the ■■■■■■■ ? I 've personally not had alot to do with Daf but know scores of people who tried them
but now gone back to various other manufactures. It also seems like Dafs had there R&D budget cut not good if there are teething troubles with the MX.

15

.Hello ;I did not mean to upset or annoy you ,so sorry if I came across the wrong way, but as you have wrote the company does not want to move from their choice,okay, then , as I wrote we tried the Volvo but it was not suited to the way the firm worked or the daily change of drivers,
so it went, all the best hope that you get all the information that you require,

16

Pete,

No offence taken, one of my favourite things about TNUK are the healthy debates, I was enjoying your posts :wink:

Limeyphil,

I understand that the ad-blue/DEF/whatever over here goes down to -40, must be a different blend, maybe they’ve added Glycol?

Big Bear,

As an ex-colleague of Mr Dixon, let me tell you, don’t believe everything you read in the papers :open_mouth: :laughing: There is an element of truth in his ramblings though, the ATA (American Transprtation Association) is pushing for an increase to 97000lbs from the existing 80000lb limit, this will be achieved by adding another axle to the trailer taking it’s bogie weight from 34000lbs to 51000lbs, a fairly straightforward exercise you’d think, but no, this is America! The sheer amount of trailers on the road here would make that almost impossible, I believe the ratio of trailers to units is something like 5:1 & if you just take into account the mega-carriers such as Swift which has 18000 units on the road, you are talking about a lot of axles :open_mouth:

Then there is the environmental aspect, for that read California, more weight means more power & more power means more fuel, now I know that that’s not the case as in terms of ton/miles moved, a heavier truck is more efficient, but try having that argument with a sandal wearing, tofu eating tree hugger & they have a lot of influence within the corridors of power :unamused:

The way America works will also make this idea almost impossible to achieve. If it was passed into law only Federal Highways would have to allow the heavier trucks (Interstates & US Highways) but a lot of bridges would have to be upgraded & that costs money that America just hasn’t got. State road laws are imposed by individual states & as most states are in a budget deficit already I don’t think they’ll be diverting funds from, say education, to upgrade their roads. Also it would have to be passed into law in each State & Illinois for example still hasn’t passed the bill to allow 80000lb trucks on it’s state roads & the weights went up from 73800lbs over 20 years ago :open_mouth:

As for engine sizes, the 15ltr engine is already the popular choice over here, CAT with it’s C15, the ■■■■■■■ ISX & the Detroit Diesels DD15 are all 15ltr, Volvo has the D13 & D16, but most Volvos have a ■■■■■■■ ISX, strange I know, but this is America :laughing: The D16 has a reputation for being uneconomical, unreliable & not powerful enough, so god only knows what they’ve done to it over here :unamused:

17

I know several operators who are running the Daf MX at 460 and 510. The only concern they have is AdBlu usage, all report about 6% at 44 tonne running compared to 3.5 to 4% for Volvo D13 and Merc OM501. One of them, who does some work at lighter weights is dissapointed with fuel usage compared to the old DAF 430 unit, suggesting that part throttle fuel efficiency, always a DAF strong point has gone awray, the Scania 420 turbo compound unit appears to be suffering the same issue, not that that is relevant to you.

As for the Volvo D16 being uneconomical, unreliable and short of power, well I can’t agree with short of power; but other than that, I would say spot on. I seem to recall several years ago Volvo making a song and dance about getting some FH16s onto road train work in Australia, NT & FNQld, after a couple of dissasterous years trying to keep the together, they quietly took them out and replaced them with ■■■■■■■ ISX.

18

Hi Newmercman thanks for the reply its nice to here both sides of the story. You seem well up with the technical side of things maybe you can answer a question for me. The new MX as well as Volvo , Damiler
■■■■■■■ etc… will be using a combination of EGR & SCR for EPA 10 close to the future euro 6 limits, but in europe all the manufacturers say all the engines will need common rail fuel injection to meet euro 6. Why don’t they need common rail for EPA 10 ? Also because nearly all US trucks are bonneted does that do away with the cooling problems that people say manufacturers have with euro 6 ?
In away the US is going to be a test bed for all this and hopefully sort out any problems before we have euro 6 thrust apon us.
Maybe nobody over here can really comment on the MX because with the EGR added it is going to be a unknown quantity. :smiley:

19

Big Bear:
Hi Newmercman thanks for the reply its nice to here both sides of the story. You seem well up with the technical side of things maybe you can answer a question for me. The new MX as well as Volvo , Damiler
■■■■■■■ etc… will be using a combination of EGR & SCR for EPA 10 close to the future euro 6 limits, but in europe all the manufacturers say all the engines will need common rail fuel injection to meet euro 6. Why don’t they need common rail for EPA 10 ? Also because nearly all US trucks are bonneted does that do away with the cooling problems that people say manufacturers have with euro 6 ?
In away the US is going to be a test bed for all this and hopefully sort out any problems before we have euro 6 thrust apon us.
Maybe nobody over here can really comment on the MX because with the EGR added it is going to be a unknown quantity. :smiley:

Firstly, thanks acd1202, good feedback. On the D16 I can’t really comment, I had one out for a fortnight when I went from running my own trucks to being a newmercman, it pulled like a train but that’s about all I learned, except that Volvo’s cable gearshift is bloody awful :unamused:

Big Bear, yes a combination of EGR & SCR is going to be the norm for EPA 2010, I say the norm as Navistar (International) have got their own EGR only lump ready for 2010, it’s based on the CAT C15. As for the DD15 & Volvo engines, I know that they run common rail with upwards of 40000psi injection pressures, the ■■■■■■■ I don’t know for sure, although knowing the work they did with Scania & it’s HPI injectors, I would think it likely that they do too. The problems with the cooling system are not as difficult to overcome with a conventional as you just make the bonnet bigger to get a bigger radiator underneath, with a cabover you have a lot more difficulty, the larger cooling system is needed because of the EGR & the current (2007) engines are running very high EGR now so it may be that as that is reduced when used in conjunction with SCR, a smaller capacity cooling system could be used on the 2010 engines.

My bosses are long time Detroit Diesels fans, so hopefully they’ll go for that in the Freightliner Coronado, then I’ll be putting my name down on the ‘can I have a new truck please boss’ list :wink: :laughing:

20

newmercman:
– I say the norm as Navistar (International) have got their own EGR only lump ready for 2010, it’s based on the CAT C15. – the larger cooling system is needed because of the EGR & the current (2007) engines are running very high EGR now so it may be that as that is reduced when used in conjunction with SCR, a smaller capacity cooling system could be used on the 2010 engines.

I know nothing about DAF engines, but I’d like to comment about differences between pulling power on EGR and SCR engines. On a quite general agreement among drivers here in Finland is that Euro 4 and Euro 5 engines pull much better than Euro 3 engines. What’s interesting in this, is that, as a generalization, Euro 3 equals to EGR only and Euro 4/5 is SCR only which in turn means more optimal burning of fuel in combustion chamber. I can’t personally comment about Euro 4/5 engines, but Euro 3 Volvo engines definitely feel sluggish when compared to older engines with less or no EGR.

Oh, and about Volvo’s cable gearshift. It is pretty awful and if not repaired early enough it tends to worn out so badly that you even have to do double clutching when changing high range with cold gearbox, but that was completely off-topic :confused: