|
Note: This is a Text only archive. Go directly to the real forum.
FTE wtf is up with the new diesel?
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
banner
| FTE wtf is up with the new diesel?
- Click HERE to go to the original thread with graphics
|
| genelaskerrules |
| has anyone else had problems since the switch? i drive a 06 pete w/ a c-13 and it won`t get out of it`s own way now. |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| don't you love the low sulfer diesel... I herd that their supposed to be a additive or something don't know fork sure.. |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
| it`s an 18 speed and with a load it`s unbearable, sister truck has same problem |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| how bout a c-15 |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
| we have 2 trucks with c-15`s and neither seem to be affected as much if at all |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| mite be in the fuel filter or something |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
| no we tryed that just serviced both we tryed atf in the tanks also. iknow 4 other guys runnin`c-13`s same problem and pete says there is no problem |
|
|
| Bi For Now |
| Thank the tree huggers. |
|
|
| rrhoden |
| You just answered your own question. A peterbilt ain't made from nothing but parts that KW rejected. |
|
|
| FTEnelson |
thank the tree huggers is right
they dont realize with out us fte's they wont get ANYTHINGGGGGG
sounds like you might have yourself a clogged fuel fliter river i had the same problem put a new fuel filter in seemed to be better then again my rigs an 88 mack not an 06 pete haha |
|
|
| Swish |
Quote: Originally posted by trainwrecker22
don't you love the low sulfer diesel... I herd that their supposed to be a additive or something don't know fork sure.. |
This is why truckers are truckers. :jj: |
|
|
| insulin |
| Hate to burst your bubble's FTE's, but Pete and KW are actually owned by the same parent company- PACCAR. Regarding- C13 and it being Peterbilt's deal- not true- Cat's problem. Anyway- have a nice day. |
|
|
| catdr9155 |
| I havnt noticed any power problems as of yet, slow to go all the time, 3126. |
|
|
| sabotage70 |
Quote: Originally posted by insulin
Hate to burst your bubble's FTE's, but Pete and KW are actually owned by the same parent company- PACCAR. Regarding- C13 and it being Peterbilt's deal- not true- Cat's problem. Anyway- have a nice day. |
Chevy and Cadillac are made by the some corp., but what would you rather drive? I know I would drive Caddie over a chevy. |
|
|
| rigmover2307 |
| got a c15 no problems. the additive is supposed to replace the injector lubrication that was formerly accomplished by the multiple sulfur compounds present in the fuel. similar situation to the removal of lead from gasoline. so i am told anyhow. |
|
|
| mcbutton1970 |
I simply drive a shitty company truck ('06 Freightliner Columbia Mid-Roof w/Detroit series). I haven't noticed a drop in the power area (truck pulls pretty good, even when I am maxed out weight-wise), but the big thing with LSD vs ULSD is that my fuel mileage is in the shitter when I run the ULSD. I lose between 1/2 and 1 mpg running ULSD in the tanks. I'm getting 5.5 - 5.8 mpg with ULSD as compared to 6.0 - 6.5 with LSD (again, fully loaded). I bobtail around 230 miles/week (Atlanta to home and back), and the LSD mpg gets me up near 10mpg, but ULSD just continues to take a big shit, barely netting me 6mpg.
Just my 2-cents worth, based on my experiences ... |
|
|
| Mr.Tucson |
| Did he finally take acting lessons? He sucked in XXX. ;) |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| ultra low sulfer deisel sucks donkey dick |
|
|
| dw16063 |
| It could be the motor itself , i know CAT was having a bunch of problems with the new ACERT motors but the new low sulfur fuel is a problem itself every time i fill up my pickup with it within an hour the water is fuel light is on and the housing has to be drained off . |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| with the cat ACERT technology you got to use that progressive shift bull shit |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
Quote: Originally posted by trainwrecker22
with the cat ACERT technology you got to use that progressive shift bull shit |
i don`t know exactly what you mean never drove otr not up on all the lingo |
|
|
| cocksmacker |
| I haven't heard of anyone reporting a real difference. I haven't. But I run an 8v-92 Detroit, which will run on anything. Back when trucks had real motors, leaked oil, and smoked like a chimney. |
|
|
| cocksmacker |
Quote: Originally posted by dw16063
It could be the motor itself , i know CAT was having a bunch of problems with the new ACERT motors but the new low sulfur fuel is a problem itself every time i fill up my pickup with it within an hour the water is fuel light is on and the housing has to be drained off . |
that's because of a shitty fueling station, not the ULSD itself. |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| I don't now exactly what it is either but we had to sit through this shitty ass cat video about driving the new pete's our company bought "I fell asleep" O and I'm not a truck driver either I'M A TRAINWRECKER. |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
| yeah we have 1 truck with a c-13 that has blown 3 turbos and has been back to the dealer for varius oil leaks around the turbos at only 65000 miles |
|
|
| CadillacKing3 |
| you think everybody is having problems now, just wait till the new motors with EGR and traps and catylists start coming out..... been nothing but TROUBLE on CNG motors in buses!!! Look out, mechanics are in for a nice payday |
|
|
| trainwrecker22 |
| pete is giving a hell of a deal they are allowed to sell their o7 with 06 motors in them, but the catch is if u buy a o7 with a 06 engine you got to buy a 07 with a 07 engine at 45% discount. our company bought 5 and 5 i think or someting like that. |
|
|
| mcbutton1970 |
| The company I drive for has been getting '07 Freightliners in since March, but all of them have '06 engines. According to one of my messages that came across the satcom the other day, we have three test trucks that have the '07 engine (no specifics were mentioned other than how many we have). I don't know how they're working out up to this point, but the one thing I thought was interesting is that they've been instructed NOT to use fuel additive in those three trucks. Thoughts on this? |
|
|
| ymmit f |
| I think in California we have been running that low sulfur diesel for a long time it's been working OK but I run a old school cumming 400 |
|
|
| CadillacKing3 |
Quote: Originally posted by ymmit f
I think in California we have been running that low sulfur diesel for a long time it's been working OK but I run a old school cumming 400 |
ULSD has been in california for at least 2 years maybe longer, thats why the prices have been so out of wack with the rest of the country. |
|
|
| OSCER |
Quote: Originally posted by genelaskerrules
has anyone else had problems since the switch? i drive a 06 pete w/ a c-13 and it won`t get out of it`s own way now. |
I haul gas& diesel all I know about the ultra low sulfur diesel is it"s 15ppm. The old diesel was 500ppm (parts per million) |
|
|
| insulin |
| Remember this- you think it is bad now (2007)- Wait till 2010! The days of 600hp motors and decent fuel mileage will go the way of the model t, and full bush! Might be some interesting combinations for fuel too! I'm not talking H2 either. Alright then- keep it between the lines and keep your dicks out of the lizards- |
|
|
| cocksmacker |
| I predict that in the near future, people are going to start looking at the old stuff again. My 8v-92TA will run on anything. Anything. You can dump used fucking motor oil in the tank, and it's just fine. No emissions crap, and 475hp out of the box, with no electronics, etc. I predict that lots of people will start buying up the older trucks, and running them again. I have a 1986 GMC General. I paid $6k for it, and it's just as nice as any brand new truck out there, plus, it has a classic look. Even if I had to dump $10k a year into maintaining it, it's still cheaper than a new truck, without the bullshit. Power windows, ice cold A/C, nice ride, quiet, bitchin sleeper. |
|
|
| genelaskerrules |
| i swear the 97 international i used to drive with an m-11 is not much worse then the new pete w/ the c-13 |
|
|
| BooBooDay |
| I,ve got a c -14 475, 336 18 speed, That is one haulin ass ride.. I pull tanker , When i,m loaded i usuall weigh between 82@ 83 .. GARFIELD.... PPEEAACCEE |
|
|
| webcams |
Just a side note computers control a lot in the newer trucks most Owners or fleet managers get these trucks turned way back to save on fuel, so no matter how hard you lay on it your only going to get a limited amount out of it.
Want max power get the computer to release all that power.
The new diesel is crap it is getting worse we need to add more additives then fuel these days. |
|
|
| mcbutton1970 |
Quote: Originally posted by webcams
Just a side note computers control a lot in the newer trucks most Owners or fleet managers get these trucks turned way back to save on fuel, so no matter how hard you lay on it your only going to get a limited amount out of it.
Want max power get the computer to release all that power.
The new diesel is crap it is getting worse we need to add more additives then fuel these days. |
Thing is, they're not really getting better fuel mileage out of these castrated trucks. Lack of actual power results in having to burn more fuel to compensate for that lack of power. My company has all the OTR trucks set at 65mph because the owner listened to the wrong person. Mine is set at 70mph, and I will outpull every last one of the 65mph trucks on the hills (even with me grossing 75,000-80,000 pounds). |
|
|
|
|
|
