Truckers, lets see your rigs!

It has a Borg Warner turbo on it non w/g. Which I think is too restrictive on the top end and hurting fuel mileage a lot.
 
Just doin what I do
05e138001317503cf975e2abd716ef75.jpg
 
Mr.T said:
I was getting 4.8-5.1 with a 625 Acert pulling trains, how are you fackin lightweights only doing low to mid 5's?
Click to expand...

Because they are babying them. Pedal to the metal is most fuel efficient way of driving. Too bad some Cats cant take it.
 
Maybe I'm reading that post wrong, but when I could almost match their mileage with one more trailer and being 25-30,000 pounds heavier....something isn't right
 
46edda4d5461234c998ec8581b98f56c.jpg


Looks like we're gonna overhaul an N-14 instead of swap it for a good engine. Haha
 
They decided there would be no return on their investment so no cat swap, I say any time a Cummins gets yanked out and replaced with a cat its a worthwhile upgrade
 
I have to ask, was the blown up N14 past a million miles yet? They seldom fail before that... I pulled a 1.2 million mile N14 apart in a Watkins truck (now fedex freight) only to find a clean crosshatch in the liners still and only a hint of wear in the bearings. Cam boxes were leaking pretty good but man did that thing look good inside. Watkins did have a hell of a PM program though!
 
97rada said:
Your guys hatred for cummins is amazing
Click to expand...


I don't hate them, I've owned both and
worked on both and yellow holds up better to HP (except for head gaskets). I can make a list of pros/cons for both. If you could get Cat/Cummins to build one together......

Cat's bottom end is bulletproof. Combine that with Cummins liner and headgasket and use common rail and you would have something. And not the 2250 crap fuel pump.
 
Last edited:
biggy238 said:
You're just biased :D
Click to expand...


I like both engines both have strong points. Yes I am bias. I work for the red guys. But if properly maintained they can be great engines. I always wonder where people say they are so weak though
 
jfaulkner said:
I don't hate them, I've owned both and
worked on both and yellow holds up better to HP (except for head gaskets). I can make a list of pros/cons for both. If you could get Cat/Cummins to build one together......

Cat's bottom end is bulletproof. Combine that with Cummins liner and headgasket and use common rail and you would have something. And not the 2250 crap fuel pump.
Click to expand...


That fuel pump has a lot more to do with oil quality rather than the pump itself. But both have been updated. I think without all the after treatment it would be nasty. It can already do 650 in trucks
 
How much simpler would it have been if that hadn't decided that ceramic parts were the way to go.
 
SmokinCAT said:
How much simpler would it have been if that hadn't decided that ceramic parts were the way to go.
Click to expand...


Would have painted that engine in a whole new light. Only real problems we see are related to EGR valves otherwise it's a good engine
 
They did the same stupid thing to the modern STC injectors, since when has anyone seen a damaged link in a PT injector.
 
will24 said:
I have to ask, was the blown up N14 past a million miles yet? They seldom fail before that... I pulled a 1.2 million mile N14 apart in a Watkins truck (now fedex freight) only to find a clean crosshatch in the liners still and only a hint of wear in the bearings. Cam boxes were leaking pretty good but man did that thing look good inside. Watkins did have a hell of a PM program though!
Click to expand...
This engine went down due to a turbo failure, it was nothing to do with internal parts, it had roughly 900,000 miles on it and the bearings all looked great, I pulled liners today and there was almost zero cavitation on #'s 1-4, 5 and 6 had a little bit but nothing really deep, overall the internals were in really good shape and if the turbo hadn't failed I bet it would have gone another 3-400k before needing an inframe.
97rada said:
I like both engines both have strong points. Yes I am bias. I work for the red guys. But if properly maintained they can be great engines. I always wonder where people say they are so weak though
Click to expand...
The N-14 is a great engine, anyone who says otherwise is delusional, but if someone walked up to me and said they have an N-14 that would embarrass a strong running 550-625 cat, I'd have them institutionalized, they never have been and never will be capable of the kind of power a cat is and have any kind of longevity to go with it.
 
The only Cummins I'd be proud to own is a signature 600, those were great.
 
Mr.T said:
This engine went down due to a turbo failure, it was nothing to do with internal parts, it had roughly 900,000 miles on it and the bearings all looked great, I pulled liners today and there was almost zero cavitation on #'s 1-4, 5 and 6 had a little bit but nothing really deep, overall the internals were in really good shape and if the turbo hadn't failed I bet it would have gone another 3-400k before needing an inframe.

The N-14 is a great engine, anyone who says otherwise is delusional, but if someone walked up to me and said they have an N-14 that would embarrass a strong running 550-625 cat, I'd have them institutionalized, they never have been and never will be capable of the kind of power a cat is and have any kind of longevity to go with it.
Click to expand...


I am sure you are 100 percent Correct with those older engines. But I am leaning more towards the 2350. It's a very well build engine. I don't see cat having anything that could hang with it even if they got back in the truck market and still meet emissions. Without emissions I think the new cummins stuff would be unstoppable with common rail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top