Well we have had the others let’s talk about these
Ops I see some one else has started a Cat thead sorry just make this Detroit engines then . Tony
The only dealings I have had with Detroit engines was when we had some Bedfords on hire from Saford van hire. They were crap, would not pull a greasy stick out of a cows a++e.
Carlc:
The only dealings I have had with Detroit engines was when we had some Bedfords on hire from Saford van hire. They were crap, would not pull a greasy stick out of a cows a++e.
Not surprising considering that I don’t think that the Brit operators ever specced anything better than the non turbo 7 and 9 litre 71 series even in max weight artics.Then they moaned about them needing to be thrashed and drinking loads of fuel.The fact is there wasn’t and still isn’t much around that can provide as much reliable specific power/torque as the old two stroke 71 and 92 series especially in turbocharged form.
Carryfast:
Carlc:
The only dealings I have had with Detroit engines was when we had some Bedfords on hire from Saford van hire. They were crap, would not pull a greasy stick out of a cows a++e.Not surprising considering that I don’t think that the Brit operators ever specced anything better than the non turbo 7 and 9 litre 71 series even in max weight artics.Then they moaned about them needing to be thrashed and drinking loads of fuel.The fact is there wasn’t and still isn’t much around that can provide as much reliable specific power/torque as the old two stroke 71 and 92 series especially in turbocharged form.
Well i agree with Carryfast,we had 4 Bedfords with the extended LWB KM cabs,with the 6V71 Detroits and they flew even with 32 ton gross,we just loved
the high reving engines and once you got the hang of that they were great engine.
these are some of ours ones. We were set to have the new wide cab TM sleepers which was going to have the big Detroits in,but Penfolds were to slow on the new release dates, so we finnished up with new Volvo 88 290s and Transcons instead.
The Detroit Diesel 60 Series DDEC4 is one of the finest diesel engines ever made. It was top in every category (except pulling power) when compared to its peers 
Nothing can touch it on fuel economy or reliabilty (easy to go 1.2+million miles before rebuild) and when they do go wrong they are cheap and easy to repair 
I also once drove a TM 4400 with the V8 two stroke, it was a flying machine and made an incredible noise, but they were no match for contemporary european engines, no matter what Carryfast says 
newmercman:
The Detroit Diesel 60 Series DDEC4 is one of the finest diesel engines ever made. It was top in every category (except pulling power) when compared to its peersNothing can touch it on fuel economy or reliabilty (easy to go 1.2+million miles before rebuild) and when they do go wrong they are cheap and easy to repair
I also once drove a TM 4400 with the V8 two stroke, it was a flying machine and made an incredible noise, but they were no match for contemporary european engines, no matter what Carryfast says
Evening all, Mark, I can only agree about the DDEC4, that John Deere design is pretty sensational. My J.D. took me to Bordeaux with an empty trailer, and returned with my LB76 on the back. (I wonder if that qualifies as some sort of long distance European record for a tractor? though not like the US Combine teams, they cover real distances)! The engine is a delight, I love to sit behind it most days, the noise it makes is excusite! and its not bad on fuel, even when ploughing! Cheerio for now.
They also did a four pot version, called the 50 series, it has the same reliabilty as the bigger 6 pots, imagine a 16tonner engine that runs for over a million miles 
You could stick one under a TK/KM cab and never lift those side flaps
Amazingly, it did, as you say, come from John Deere as a tractor engine. The little 6 pot in the smaller IVECO and Daf models is also a design shared with Case New Holland in their tractors, I’ve only driven them in road tests, but it seems as though it’s a pretty sound design, maybe there’s something in the old tractor engine designs 
Bruce Mallinson was mentioned over on the ■■■■■■■ thread. I’ve met the man a few times, what he doesn’t know about engines is not worth knowing. He is a ■■■■■■■ man through and through, to the point that a number of his modifications have been made on the production line at ■■■■■■■■ he still advised me to buy a lorry with a Series 60 under the hood, that’s how good they are
Back in 1994 we were running two 6x4 Volvo WAs with the 11.1l DD series 60. The early 11.1 sounded and pulled better than the later 12.7l after inter-cooling and addition of electronics Both were double shifted, city deliveries by day, linehaul 520/550 miles by night, pulling 28ft double pups, and 53 ft trailers but seldom at max weight 80,000 lb roughly 36,000kgs. They were little trouble and were sold on at 600,000 miles with plenty of life in them.
I found the 12.7s thirsty on juice, and performed better with a 13 speed as opposed to a 9 speed which suited the 11.1l.
In the U.K. at Henllys of Wembley I road tested a few TMs with V6 and V8 2 strokes. Ryders at Park Royal had a V6 running at 32,000kgs in their hire fleet, as everyone says great sound, high revving with a very narrow torque band.
There was only one fitter who could tune them to run sweet, both were thirsty as well. Iirc later V8s had twin turbos as well.
Never pulled a load with one.
Paul.
Paul John:
In the U.K. at Henllys of Wembley I road tested a few TMs with V6 and V8 2 strokes. Ryders at Park Royal had a V6 running at 32,000kgs in their hire fleet, as everyone says great sound, high revving with a very narrow torque band.
There was only one fitter who could tune them to run sweet, both were thirsty as well. Iirc later V8s had twin turbos as well.
Never pulled a load with one.Paul.
The thing with two strokes is that a lot of people confuse the amount of times it’s firing per revolution with engine speed.Max power at around 2,000 rpm and a torque peak at around 1,200 rpm was about the same for all of them which wasn’t much different to anything else.I learnt that within a few minutes of my first introduction to hearing a 16 cylinder running at max pumping power on test while standing a few feet away from it. Effectively that was similar to what listening to an old naturally aspirated V8 merc engine running at around 8,000 rpm would be like.
But it’s surprising why no one seemed to understand that thrashing a 7 litre non turbo motor hauling 32t gross is obviously going to burn loads of fuel when that size engine was about right for a local running bus. 
Does any one know how too change the thread name some one else has posted a Cat one so i wanted too rename this to Detroit engines . Tony
this is one of very few DD,s in roadwork in finland,carryfast,s favorite,not mine.cryed when the bedford recovered my 142 once , 
benkku