Might have been a bad intake grid heater. I had one in a straight truck that always started fine even when it sat out in the parking lot all weekend in the snow. Just had to wait a long time for that 'wait to start' lamp to go out, and then crank it right away before the heater grid started to cool off. This was a late 1990's 3126B with an Allison automatic in it. GMC 6500 cabover.
@@brnmcc01 The mechanic that I sold it to replaced the injectors when he pulled the motor. He put the motor in a plow truck. He says it starts right up without issue.
I was just one hapless engineering technologist that had to work on that disaster of a fuel system. The debris in the fuel pump from casting issues was the main culprit of those injectors failing. The core sand was so fine it would not plug the injector tips but would erode the pressure orifice in the injector causing fueling issues thus killing said injector.
@@erichumann8058 Yes buy a Cummins 500 HP or a C15 for your motorhome/dump truck. Any C models with a single digit number behind it STAY AWAY unless you have fools money and no common sense.
I run a 2008 CAT 535C skidder which has a C7 Acert. Which replaced the 3126 from the previous model 535... 21,000 hours before the engine was ever cracked open.. (in logging equipment that's almost unheard of) And all it had was gaskets and bearings replaced in the engine and still running to this day. Around 19,000 hours had a lot of fuel issues, Heui pump, main pump, filter housing/sending unit, and every injector and line; straighten it out. Still can't understand the engineering, but it's been an unbelievably tough engine
I have worked for a major truck leasing company for the past 16 years. The three things I remember about these were, “injector # not responding properly”, non stop road calls with the customers stating, “the engine just shut down” or “there’s oil coming out from under the hood” because of the huei pump failing, and every PM (oil change) there was an added job to attach a flow sensor to the breather tube because our data miners in corporate figured out they kept breaking rings or scoring the cylinder walls. They wanted us to catch the excessive blow by so we could have them rebuilt before warranty ran out.
The cat 3208 was a head gasket blowing sob. Our fleet mechanic used to have one on the engine stand at all times ready to put in our trucks when they went out!
I remember working on the preproduction engines C7S, C9S, LEE, AND SDP. Didn't have too many issues with them since they were all essentially built in a lab environment. I remember swapping out all the lab built engines to full production and they all fell apart. I've made a many paychecks off nothing but EPA 07 engines for a decade.
You are completely correct! Here is the worst combo for a c7s a yard Juckie. Forever lives in low rpms never completes a full regen. So glad this engine is gone!
You just described every newer diesel engine on the market today. I'll take an older pre EGR / after treatment system, diesel with half a million miles over any new diesel engine on the market today... So glad I retired and don't have to deal with that shit anymore...
In my opinion, they should have gone to SCR (which uses DEF) with a DOC (Diesel Oxidation Catalyst, a.k.a. Pre-cat), and tried to get that to work, while completely ditching EGR and DPF's. Also, the EPA should be less restrictive on particulate matter. Really, these emissions standards should be an international thing.
me too! The 855 big cam 4 was hard to beat and it was not hard to find someone that worked on them. The 3406B was good too and DDC was in DDEC 4 by that time. But they were all using EPA credits till their demise.
Those bloody fuel verifications. I’ve just got into the habit of doing the test a minimum of 3 times before changing an injector. Ensures that when you go to do one afterwards there’s no more extra “surprise” injectors that need changing. Another great informative video, thanks mate, keep em coming 👌🏻
I have had 3 of the C7 S engines in my shop to rebuild . Everyone of them were beyond repair . The main bearings and cam bearings were wiped out . To be honest I was thankful I didn't have to reassemble them . I think I know what the "S" stands for on this engine .
Also, a good friend of mine worked for a Budget truck rental location for a while, they had this engine in some of their trucks, and he said they had nothing but problems with them.
I place 3176 2YG at the top of my list. Was released to early. Production was stopped for six months, after release. Cat had a 800 number to call if one came in. You entered the last five digits of the engine serial number. A recorded message would play back the characters to circle on the fifty two page recall list. They was from A thru Z and since they ran out, picked back up at Z1 thru Z6. Inner and outer front cover plates would crack. Push rods could jump out and go through the side of the spacer deck. Put inferior o-rings under the spacer deck. Could leak oil or coolant. Had to pull head, liners, radiator, front cover and camshaft out, and deck, just to get to the o-rings. Injector cups was made out of copper and they would split filling cooling system up with fuel and running out the overflow all over the truck. It could cause the coolant seal under the spacer deck to swell up and leak. Camshaft gear had an outer ring that could be put on backwards and the engine would not start. Also it could warp and lose RPM signal. TDM had a fresh air line going to it. If it was routed incorrectly and a hole rubbed in it. You would/could fill the ECM, TDM and personality module up with water. A few recalls on Injectors. Just to name a few major items.
agreed , i thought that engine would bankrupt the company i worked for , they had plenty of freight just unreliable trucks to pull it. Cat finally replaced the first 150 engines for 9 thousand dollars each.
I agree with you! The 3176 was a POS. I worked at a dealer that sold Cat parts, and the engines in their trucks. We sold tons of parts for that piece of junk. I know one company, I'm sure they were not alone, that really suffered because of it, Transport South. The engine was light that was it's selling point. So a lot of companies wanted a light engine along with a light truck to pull their freight. They fell into the trap of specing this motor in a truck with light frame rails, so they could haul more load. The engine flexed under load and that caused all kinds of trouble. The frame flexed and that broke cross members. The whole fleet had to have the engine problems fixed and then the whole frame rebuilt, end to end with stronger rails and cross members. Huge job per truck. Huge $. Perfect storm. Total POS package. Customer and salesman should have known better that to try to haul fuel and other liquid freight in a truck like this.
@@davidkeeton6716 it seemed like it was thrown together in a hurry. Like they were given a worksheet of criteria to meet and the first engine that met that criteria went into production. There was just so much garbage on them that wasn't redefined enough. Aluminum spacer block to save weight? Great idea, until you look at the long term aspect. I mean they learned a lot from their failures with this engine and made a lot of fixes on the c10 and c12 (well, some fixes) but man what a pile this batch was. My neighbor has a dump truck with one in it and he loves it. It's unbelievable dry and I think the odometer shows around 700k miles. I told him if he ever has a need to pull the head, don't bother. Find a c12 if anything.
Thanks Josh, I'm now breathing a sigh of relief knowing that my 2005 C7 Acert is not one of the problem children ! It's been good to me so far, and I'm happy with it's performance.
Just had the cam follower plates off of mine because of an oil leak and sent the ECU out for recalibration. New valve adjustment and running again this morning now. I think c7's are just fine, pre C7-S of course
@@kourtneywietecha9161 Providing that the school district that owned it performed regularly scheduled maintenance on it, (and I assume they did), you're good so far. Moving forward, as long as you do the same (keep clean, fresh oil and filters in it), never overheat the engine or abuse it... that C7 is capable of making it to half a million miles. Good luck. 🤓
@한국 카우보이SsaurabiRedneck Everyone's on the same page. If Cat knowing the rules couldn't produce a relatively simple, reliable engine meeting emissions it was simply a choice. Having hydro mechanical engines that spew out emissions is unacceptable. They do stupidly complex things that are just plain dumb. If I was the development engineer manager I would have been kicking desks over and sending engineers on they're way to the door. I was at Technical college in Australia and we took one shim set the injector heights on a Detroit Series 60. Then we went to the Cat C7. An hour later they were still overviewing the procedure and the Cat required tool set to tune or set injectors, what a total joke. Taxi. The truth is more than forty years ago these engines could have run on Hydrogen, almost emission free, aside from blowby. They wont allow it. Isuzu can meet Euro 5 with common rail and a cat SCR, reliably. Now where's that first desk
@한국 카우보이SsaurabiRedneck i think you've missed the whole point. Wealthy people who make millions from the status quo being unchanged is the reason for our planets problems. They don't want any structural change to the world economy. Lets review. World economy is valued off the USD. China doesn't trade in Yuan, it trades, buy and sell in USD. 1 Yuan is worth 21 Australian cents. The USD is valued off a cost of a barrell of oil. Wealthy people have rooted our planet. There's been alternatives available for decades mate. Hydrogen. Companies like Cummins or Detroit will enjoy Hydrogen because the architecture of the engines are the same and make money off core sales and basic components, ie pistons, sleeves, valves, gaskets, turbos, and remain viable with their current business model. Pressure to retain an oil fuel as the source of energy is responsible for all of the emissions crap trying to milk a dirty fuel for a clean one. It was obsolete decades ago, but the wealthy Sandi's wont have any of it. When I was a little boy a retired engineer in Australia developed and patented a device that could be retro fitted to any internal combustion engine and with a stainless watertank in place of a fuel tank and stainless delivery lines and it could be run off hydrogen. But he was terrified the fuel companies would buy it and scuttle it. He converted a Morris 1100 front drive car, run perfect. A simple design car that was basically emissionless, aside from blo-by. That was more than 40 years ago. Were've been totally rooted over by the wealthy mate, who dont want anything to change. And now our legacy, which is the only thing worthwhile to offer our grandchildren and great grandchildren is metling ice caps, 50% reduction and catastrophic bush fires. In Tasmania years ago they had a bushfire go through a certain area where the tree's died and never recovered they initially couldn't work out why. It had bush fires before, then an investigator realised the level of earth was a metre lower. The heat had actually incinerated the actual earth, being organic, it had court fire and burnt exposing roots and burning them. You're completely done over by emmissions control device's because your leaders, senator's etc are lobbied by wealthy Sandi's and those with vested interests trying to keep the status quo's of multi trillion dollars profits. And when they're gone our legacy will be nil. There's no reason for the object complexity in engine design, only the fuel that goes in them and to be seen to be doing GOOD. I live in Australia and have watched B and A doubles after double loaded with tonnes of fuel 24 hours a day to keep the coal industry fuel to level more destruction. Its just a visible joke. CSIRO scientist's have worked out how to convert ammonia into hydrogen. Bring it on. Even the Sandi's whom have never offered listed public shares did so 2 years ago because they can see the writing on the wall. Now the next time your emmisions device fails, and keep in mind I understand them fails, it because of some currupt, fat, Cuban cigar smoking politician in a smoking jacket sitting in club chair drinking $1000 a glass brandy with no vision. Vision being adult, structured imagination.
Mack had a 237hp slant 6 back the early 80s that the compressor had to be timed . It also used dog bone drive like a Detroit blower that also supplied the oil to the compressor. And they tended to break
There are 2 fuel lines going to the ARD head because this fuel supply provides the majority of the fuel needed to increase the exhaust gas temperatures at the inlet to the DPF however, due to environmental conditions we sometimes need to adjust that heat so CAT added a sort of back up line to ensure we are always meeting emissions requirements
CAT had a toll free 24/7 hotline for it for the RV owners broke down in BFE. Last four digits of the phone number were 3126.... the entire series is junk. Honorable mention to 3208
I can confirm I work on ISL-G(natural gas variant) and detroit series 50 and the isl has timed air compressors. We use both single and double piston versions
I've put probably one hundred ISC and ISL air compressors in without timing them They even have timing marks for the signiture series engines, also not required
@@Dilanom - Good points. This is nothing new. Decades ago Cummins would change the timing for the air compressors on various 855's. I worked for Cummins at the time, and we just ignored the bulletins, because the new settings did not make the slightest difference.
Have to agree the C7S or Cat Sucked was Crap .Cat pretty much Shit the Bed on ALL of their Emission Engines the SDP So DisaPointing was No Prize either and the 3208 that had the Exhaust Recirculation manifold on the left manifold with the tube that went up to the intake manifold was a real peach too We used to get School Buses towed in that quit running, pull the air cleaner and the intake would be Totally plugged with soot. I worked for a Cat Dealer in California in the Truck Shop for 31 years from 82 to 2013 saw A Lot of stuff that made you Scratch your Head and say WTF.
Cummins had engines, with timed air compressors, too. Emissions garbage on the SDP was a joke, as it was. And had nothing but IVA issues with a MXS, too.
@@electric7487 haven't ran one personally. But, a friend of mine has one that's been deleted. Don't think he's had any trouble with it at all, other than air compressors junking out on it. On #7, I think now.
5:30 Having the HPCR pump timed is actually fairly common in the automotive world. On my VW their explanation was that it matched up each pumping stroke to an injection event. I've also heard that it's done for harmonic/NVH reasons.
Don't know the model engine that was in the truck, but I went to a new company as a driver in 2007 and they had a brand new truck with the latest EPA-approved engine. That truck spent the first two years of its life being in the shop a minimum of every other week, took them over 6 months to finally track down the first problem with the DPF where the DPF heater/injector/burner whatever wasn't machined properly which is why it was clogging constantly, it wasn't getting anywhere near hot enough to burn off the residue. That was just one of MANY problems with the DPF system and a few other issues with the engine. What a nightmare. At least it had a lot of power and drove well on the rare occasions when it was working properly.
On Cummins, I know isb 6.7 so probably all of them, it tells you in the service manual to time the air compressor to the engine, but I’ve installed them without timing them and it didn’t cause any significant vibration
I'm not even a Cat man myself but in Australia the 3406B had incredible torque rise in it's time even more than a 350 Cummins. The 3208 was called a throwaway engine. The 1693T was ahead of it's time with overhead cam, impressive power but a bit thirsty. But torque comes at a price, look at these tractor pulls and the whole engine get's ripped off it's mounts.
From a retired US farmer... had the crap non turbo 3208's in New Holland combines.... rattle traps. junk,,, Now in 2022 I dont know a farmer that doesn't want a late 3406 or 6NZ, anything pre DEF in a old ass farm simi... LOL.... F this DEF shit, theyre farm trucks... and nothing pulls like a 3406!!!! Marine cam them and you have reliable 800HP...
@@paulpence8895 I remember a company I did a little bit of work for in the early 90's had a 3208 in one of their trucks, it ran ok, but idled at a really low RPM like 450 or so, and would really roll heavy coal when you got on it. Not much power, but it was pretty quiet.
2007-2012 was a horrible time period for Diesel engines. All my stuff is pre-emission and older, or low enough hp that it’s not required. However, the technology has come a long way in this last decade. I’m comfortable enough that I might buy a new diesel pick-up next year. Those new Cummins X-15 engines are pretty impressive too.
Absolutely correct. Worked on several of these in the army at a CRC (component repair company). These damned things had STEEL pistons and the bores would get out of round and were not rebuildable. We threw out ALOT of these for that reason. Another was the oil cooler cracking and letting coolant into the oil. Was a total nightmare
Army trucks dont have DPF ....yet, but the issued inherent in the C7 are still there. Namely the engine is not rebuildable. C7S issues with the electronics seem more tuning related since each fuel injector is programed individually to the ECM. The 3116 wasnt without its issues, but the c7s are a flawed engine for heavy duty use.
I never understood Cat's "throwaway" engines. I was familiar with the 3208. Guys running dump truck and dump trailer on our road crew were running them. They were underpowered in that application but were fairly reliable for a few years until......
I've heard of common rail pumps being timed to the engine, I don't see why either, but the official excuse is to have the pulses of the pump output being timed with when injectors fire.
nice! -- QUESTION -- So we are looking at a 2005 Alfa See Ya Motorhome with a C7 CAT. Since it was made before 2007, does that mean it is better? Has only 38k miles. (We will never be rebuilding this as it is a RV so not worried about the lack of sleeves), How was the 2005 engine?
That is correct it out survived all the rest of the competition for that particular. He was incorrect about being the only engine to time the air Cummins your recommended to time the air compressor crankshaft in relation to the engine crankshaft. In our repair shop we rebuilt more 3208 cats in our three state area. They were like rebuilding a big V8 gas engine. Board them .020 and then.040 and then on the third overall we would install a dry sleeve. Very inexpensive to bore and no cylinder liners leaking water we're jumping around in the block. They are still used in our area a lot but there's no triple nickel cummins's or 6V53 Detroit's around either
Don't know how it came out that way. He was incorrect on the 855 Cummins it was recommended to time the air compressor crank in relationship to the engine crankshaft
Hino Diesel engines have timed air compressors and fuel pumps. The fuel pump bolts to the front of the compressor and they are timed together and then timed to the engine when installed
So is the C7 Heui a good engine? Have an 05 F650 with the Cat C7, 266k miles, that I’m looking to purchase. Based on your video, I would assume it is the Heui.
Maxxforce 9 is just as bad. A customer of mine had one in a 2012 4400. In 2 years, we replaced both turbos, both intercoolers, several injectors, egr cooler, fan hub, head gasket and after all that dropped a valve and took out the piston
Sounds like caterpillar butchered the emmisons and tried to make their own common rail fuel system instead of going with BOSCH common rail system like cummins paccar Detroit and others. I did my apprenticeship at a caterpillar dealer and we were brainwashed to think that everything cat does is the best and is far superior to all others. Well 15 years later in the diesel equipment world I have my own opinions now. The fact that this company isn’t putting money into on highway engine development or electric drive systems is really a bummer. On the heavy equipment side of their company I feel like as Caterpillar became bigger they just bought other companies products and slapped their name on it. Like forklifts, electric drive haul trucks and small construction equipment. Caterpillar used to pride them selves on how everything in their engines and equipment was made by them now that’s a different story.
Every engine from C9.3 up now IS a Cat engine. All under are other makes. C7.1, C6.6, C4.4? Perkins. C3.3, C3.8? Kubota. C3.4? Fiat. The C9.3 was a big pile of crap for some time.... spun lifters, failed pumps, dropped valves.... Though yes, the C7S series was a booger.
Kinda how Ford butchered the International. I’ve had 6.0s and my current 6.4…. All were deleted immediately and tuned. Guess what, never been in a shop for failure. My 6.4 has 247k on it and has been tuned 250-350+hp tunes for 246k. It’s a f450 and tows daily. Had to replace a transmission in it…. (4wd brake boosted launches on a 350 tune) is the best thing for stock transmissions. All in all, the EPA is cancer on the diesel world. These engines can be amazing and provide plenty of service for you $60-200k rigs, but they won’t rest until batteries have replaced everything
The 3412E is allmighty, we've had these screaming away in Drill Rigs for 30-40 000 hrs & hardly even put a spanner on them. 3306, 3406, 3412 are my favorites
We had 4 C7 and 10 3126s. The C7s occasionally caused some work. The Cummins were the biggest problem after the VT365s. We had one 5.9 Cummins in a blue bird that hit all of 300,000 before it threw a rod through the block. All the Cats we got rid of at 350-400,000 still running.
Back in high school I was the kid who hung around the buses. When I was around, the 3126 and C7 seemed pretty strong as an observer, and I rarely seen any of the buses I followed with them on the side of the road waiting for Currie or Classic to show up. However, when EPA2007 became mandatory, they disappeared from new builds, and more Mercedes and Cummins made their way, while the International VT365 and Shitforces kept being bought by cheap conglomerates like First Student and kept grenading, blowing turbos and getting antifreeze in the oil. The company I did co-op for actually imported some 2004-2007 pre-EPA07 Blue Birds with CAT from Quebec, because we loved the reliabilty at the time. Wasn't until the crooked Liberal Party changed the bidding processes for school bus contracts, killing the local firms, that Cummins and Maxxjoke became the norm. Now almost every bus on the road is an IC, and now my previous co-op is buying Visions with gas engines. IMO, EPA04 seems to've been the pinnacle of the post-emissions engines. The right balance between environment and performance, and if maintained right, will run forever. Just from the sound of one running normally. you know they're solid. The transit system in my city retired all our EPA07 buses before we retired our last 2004 EPA04 buses. Now if that ain't the case to be made to make the entire office piss in a bottle in another lab, Idk what is. what drugs are they on?
Yep, 2007 is why we are plagued with EGR problems. Then, 2010, it gets worse with DPF(DEF) problems. These emissions systems problems aren't just a plague on any particular brand. It's all diesel engines that have this garbage. This is precisely why, when I was in the market for a newer diesel pickup truck than my 99 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins, it had to be a pre-2007.5(Cummins). In December of 2019, I found my current truck, a 2005 Dodge Ram 3500(SRW) 4x4 with the six speed manual transmission(I won't touch anything Chrysler automatic).
Parent bore is a good way to build a compact and light block, that is also stiff enough to make some power. Cat just did a poor job of it. The 273 Buda and the 5.9 Cummins would be examples of a successful design.
Some ag tractors used them back in 70s 80s . Mechanics who worked on them said they would run for years if you did 2 things . Never run them over 2500 rpm and do a bearing roll every 2000 hours
The original one in my truck was mint for a long time, until a rod bering went. I bought one that had been remanufactured by powerbuilt, it lasted a little over a year till it started ticking. Turns out the block was machined to big and a liner they put in a cylinder is moving up and down.
Back when I was a truck mechanic there was a thing I would say. If it starts like shit every time, there's a good chance it's a C7, if it actually starts properly, it's not a C7. Every C7 I have ever worked on, would start, stumble for a few seconds, and then run right. Even when hot.
Josh...I heard you mention that the 3126 was "Parent Bore" (No Removable Liners) is the smaller bore 3114/3116 *ALSO* a liner-less aka "Throw-Away" design?
Cummins big cam and n14's with single cylinder air compressors the air compressor is supposed to be times to the engine. It will still work fine if it's not timed but it's to reduce noise/vibration.
Heh there’s a 2005 Ford F750 in a local heating oil company fleet. I drove it and I knew from day one it had serious problems. Lack of power, heavy fuel consumption and smoking. C7. The other older trucks had the 3126 and 3126B and ran great.
So if I understand correctly the pre 2007 CAT C7 is a good engine? I used to own a 2006 freight liner m2 and it was a grea t truck it outlived all 4 of my International 4300 with the DT466. I'm in the market again for a medium size truck is the 2006 freight liner c7 good or no?
My vote for the worst cat engine would have been the 2007 and newer C15 Acert engine with the DPF. I was buying a 2008 Freightliner Classic that had that particular engine in it. That damn thing spent more time in the shop and than it did on the road. I nearly lost everything because of that damn engine. Years later I found out there was a class action lawsuit against CAT over those engines. The only engine that I've seen be equally as bad, was that MaxForce abomination the International put out a few years ago. There was also a class action lawsuit involving that engine.
If I recall correctly timing the compressor was only for noise reduction. I know for sure on the Cm2350 ISX15 the compressor used to be timed but the service manual was updated and it is not required to be timed anymore
Generally on the electronic Cat engines the low setting fires the cylinder 3,4 compression brakes (solenoid 1). Medium is 1,2,5,6 (solenoid 2) even though it's actually 2 solenoids and high is all cylinders.
I have a question....I have a 1998 topkick with a 3116 / 6 speed man. Engine is going bad. Can I replace it with a ,3126 without to much modifications.
My school district payed over $32k over 40 thousand miles before we finally shut the otherwise good bus down. Thank God it was the only bus with this engine in our fleet
I liked Cats reliability a long time ago, but I didn't like Cats idea of always making parts that take a special tool. GREAT VIDEO Thanks William Orange county, ca.
In my opinion 2006 is the year the diesel engine died. I see how much worse the newer automotive diesels are since then. They're so fragile and have so much just waiting to go wrong with them.
The sad thing is, the C7S is probably STILL more reliable or just about the same as these modern emissions trucks. My next truck will either have a 3406 or 6NZ C-15 in it. I'm ready to go back to an engine when it "just worked" without any 5k+ parts for keeping the stealerships/repair shops and Commiefornia rich.
Ssaurabi Redneck, the 6NZ version is widely regarded as one of the best diesel engines ever made. Certainly the best electronic engine. The only other C-15 was the MBN (the ‘bridge’ engine that had the first emissions garbage). Same block, garbage added on. The C15 (BXS/MXS/NXS) ACERT were/are good engines but had/have the emissions junk. Note the difference between the C-15 and the C15 ( no ‘-‘ between the C and the 15). C-15 are a 14.6L engine, C15 ACERT are a 15.2L engine. Nice thing about them is you can use the ACERT crank and pistons in a 6NZ to make it a 15.2L stroker with extra power/torque. The ACERT pistons are a better design, and are stronger, too.
Wow! Back when I was working at a yellow dealership during the infancy of the ACERT rollout, it was a mental battle seeing the shear number of warranty claims and repairs everyday. The C7 always made me mad during those times because the base engine was a good product with the exception of the cheap run of piston rings. However, the early HEUI system literally crippled these engines and many CAT owners lost faith. Even my boss of 38 years called the SAP serial numbered C7's the "Sorry Ass Product" I am old school but understand that the emissions technology is needed. It is just sad to see the result of engineers scrambling to meet the regulations numbers and in turn creating a product that end users cannot afford to operate or use to produce profits of their own. Thanks for the great channel!
![How To BULLETPROOF a CAT 3126 Diesel Engine | #FTreeKitty [EP9]](/img/n.gif)
My church not too long ago got 2009 Blurbird Vision bus with the Cat C7S with 40,000 miles. It took the mechanics 6 months to get it running.
The fury on your face when you're talking about the C7S had me cracking up. I had this engine in my service truck so I can certainly empathize.
I'll always love the 3126. It was a loud clattering motor that was a huge PIA to start when cold, but once it got itself started it was perfect.
I’ll always love the sound of them! I basically grew up hearing it in a couple school buses I rode in elementary school
Might have been a bad intake grid heater. I had one in a straight truck that always started fine even when it sat out in the parking lot all weekend in the snow. Just had to wait a long time for that 'wait to start' lamp to go out, and then crank it right away before the heater grid started to cool off. This was a late 1990's 3126B with an Allison automatic in it. GMC 6500 cabover.
@@brnmcc01 The mechanic that I sold it to replaced the injectors when he pulled the motor. He put the motor in a plow truck. He says it starts right up without issue.
@@thethomasj1795 Makes sense, bad injectors will make any diesel run terrible.
Whew! 2005 Cat C7 ACERT engine over here. Drove it from WA to CO , no issues. Runs like a champ! You're the go on my engine Adept Ape, thanks!
I was just one hapless engineering technologist that had to work on that disaster of a fuel system. The debris in the fuel pump from casting issues was the main culprit of those injectors failing. The core sand was so fine it would not plug the injector tips but would erode the pressure orifice in the injector causing fueling issues thus killing said injector.
I there a way to remedy that issue or is it a fools errand?
@@erichumann8058 Yes buy a Cummins 500 HP or a C15 for your motorhome/dump truck. Any C models with a single digit number behind it STAY AWAY unless you have fools money and no common sense.
@@gregbutler9873 the predecessor to the C7/C9 was the 3116 and 3126 right? And they where solid weren't they?? Just askin
I run a 2008 CAT 535C skidder which has a C7 Acert. Which replaced the 3126 from the previous model 535... 21,000 hours before the engine was ever cracked open.. (in logging equipment that's almost unheard of) And all it had was gaskets and bearings replaced in the engine and still running to this day. Around 19,000 hours had a lot of fuel issues, Heui pump, main pump, filter housing/sending unit, and every injector and line; straighten it out. Still can't understand the engineering, but it's been an unbelievably tough engine
We had a couple in our fleet spent more time in the shop then they did anything. I would absolutely agree with you
Glad you didnt say 3116 which I have in my 96 M1078, havent had an issue with it yet!!!!
Hope you never have to get an injector replaced!
Keep your governor adjusted!!!!!!!!!
I had a 3126B many years ago and it was a great engine. Wish I still had that truck actually.
I have worked for a major truck leasing company for the past 16 years. The three things I remember about these were, “injector # not responding properly”, non stop road calls with the customers stating, “the engine just shut down” or “there’s oil coming out from under the hood” because of the huei pump failing, and every PM (oil change) there was an added job to attach a flow sensor to the breather tube because our data miners in corporate figured out they kept breaking rings or scoring the cylinder walls. They wanted us to catch the excessive blow by so we could have them rebuilt before warranty ran out.
The cat 3208 was a head gasket blowing sob. Our fleet mechanic used to have one on the engine stand at all times ready to put in our trucks when they went out!
I remember working on the preproduction engines C7S, C9S, LEE, AND SDP. Didn't have too many issues with them since they were all essentially built in a lab environment. I remember swapping out all the lab built engines to full production and they all fell apart. I've made a many paychecks off nothing but EPA 07 engines for a decade.
If you going to my country you opinion prprrr,C7 is trashhhhhh amigo best is Cummins 8.3 meachanical fuel pump!
You are completely correct! Here is the worst combo for a c7s a yard Juckie. Forever lives in low rpms never completes a full regen. So glad this engine is gone!
I had to pull a C7S out of one of those one time to do bearings. It was a miserable experience lol
You just described every newer diesel engine on the market today. I'll take an older pre EGR / after treatment system, diesel with half a million miles over any new diesel engine on the market today... So glad I retired and don't have to deal with that shit anymore...
In my opinion, they should have gone to SCR (which uses DEF) with a DOC (Diesel Oxidation Catalyst, a.k.a. Pre-cat), and tried to get that to work, while completely ditching EGR and DPF's. Also, the EPA should be less restrictive on particulate matter.
Really, these emissions standards should be an international thing.
me too! The 855 big cam 4 was hard to beat and it was not hard to find someone that worked on them. The 3406B was good too and DDC was in DDEC 4 by that time. But they were all using EPA credits till their demise.
Those bloody fuel verifications. I’ve just got into the habit of doing the test a minimum of 3 times before changing an injector. Ensures that when you go to do one afterwards there’s no more extra “surprise” injectors that need changing. Another great informative video, thanks mate, keep em coming 👌🏻
I had a 3126 B in a 2000 330 Peterbilt I put 421 K miles loved that truck, a lot of Rotella T used in this truck.
I have had 3 of the C7 S engines in my shop to rebuild . Everyone of them were beyond repair . The main bearings and cam bearings were wiped out . To be honest I was thankful I didn't have to reassemble them . I think I know what the "S" stands for on this engine .
Spectacular! Super! I'm not sure what the "s" could stand for 💩
Superior?
Hey bud is the 3116 a good engine?
C7S = C7 Shit.
If you want to make a C7S even halfway decent, you have to delete.
@@dioniciobedoy8319 no
Thanks for the info on the C7S but please bring back the destruction of the week.
I filed Cat warranty and the 3176 was the worst one I ran into.
Also, a good friend of mine worked for a Budget truck rental location for a while, they had this engine in some of their trucks, and he said they had nothing but problems with them.
Stop saying "in my opinion".
You are stating facts. I believe CAT would agree with you.
Because. Lawyers.
Agree. Also, because people who just bought something with a C7S and they're in denial and flip out if you tell them facts.
I place 3176 2YG at the top of my list. Was released to early. Production was stopped for six months, after release.
Cat had a 800 number to call if one came in. You entered the last five digits of the engine serial number. A recorded message would play back the characters to circle on the fifty two page recall list. They was from A thru Z and since they ran out, picked back up at Z1 thru Z6.
Inner and outer front cover plates would crack.
Push rods could jump out and go through the side of the spacer deck.
Put inferior o-rings under the spacer deck. Could leak oil or coolant. Had to pull head, liners, radiator, front cover and camshaft out, and deck, just to get to the o-rings.
Injector cups was made out of copper and they would split filling cooling system up with fuel and running out the overflow all over the truck.
It could cause the coolant seal under the spacer deck to swell up and leak.
Camshaft gear had an outer ring that could be put on backwards and the engine would not start. Also it could warp and lose RPM signal.
TDM had a fresh air line going to it. If it was routed incorrectly and a hole rubbed in it. You would/could fill the ECM, TDM and personality module up with water.
A few recalls on Injectors.
Just to name a few major items.
😲🤮
agreed , i thought that engine would bankrupt the company i worked for , they had plenty of freight just unreliable trucks to pull it. Cat finally replaced the first 150 engines for 9 thousand dollars each.
I was looking for this! Terrible engine. The horror of trying to get the head bolts out of these things. I dreaded these anytime one came in.
I agree with you! The 3176 was a POS. I worked at a dealer that sold Cat parts, and the engines in their trucks. We sold tons of parts for that piece of junk. I know one company, I'm sure they were not alone, that really suffered because of it, Transport South. The engine was light that was it's selling point. So a lot of companies wanted a light engine along with a light truck to pull their freight. They fell into the trap of specing this motor in a truck with light frame rails, so they could haul more load. The engine flexed under load and that caused all kinds of trouble. The frame flexed and that broke cross members. The whole fleet had to have the engine problems fixed and then the whole frame rebuilt, end to end with stronger rails and cross members. Huge job per truck. Huge $. Perfect storm. Total POS package. Customer and salesman should have known better that to try to haul fuel and other liquid freight in a truck like this.
@@davidkeeton6716 it seemed like it was thrown together in a hurry. Like they were given a worksheet of criteria to meet and the first engine that met that criteria went into production. There was just so much garbage on them that wasn't redefined enough. Aluminum spacer block to save weight? Great idea, until you look at the long term aspect. I mean they learned a lot from their failures with this engine and made a lot of fixes on the c10 and c12 (well, some fixes) but man what a pile this batch was. My neighbor has a dump truck with one in it and he loves it. It's unbelievable dry and I think the odometer shows around 700k miles. I told him if he ever has a need to pull the head, don't bother. Find a c12 if anything.
Thanks Josh, I'm now breathing a sigh of relief knowing that my 2005 C7 Acert is not one of the problem children !
It's been good to me so far, and I'm happy with it's performance.
Just had the cam follower plates off of mine because of an oil leak and sent the ECU out for recalibration. New valve adjustment and running again this morning now. I think c7's are just fine, pre C7-S of course
We are looking at a 2005 C7 in a school bus that I want to convert to a RV. It has 250k miles. In your experience does it still have some life in it?
@@kourtneywietecha9161 Providing that the school district that owned it performed regularly scheduled maintenance on it, (and I assume they did), you're good so far.
Moving forward, as long as you do the same (keep clean, fresh oil and filters in it), never overheat the engine or abuse it... that C7 is capable of making it to half a million miles. Good luck. 🤓
So basically the epa ruined everything (as usual)
@한국 카우보이SsaurabiRedneck Everyone's on the same page. If Cat knowing the rules couldn't produce a relatively simple, reliable engine meeting emissions it was simply a choice. Having hydro mechanical engines that spew out emissions is unacceptable. They do stupidly complex things that are just plain dumb. If I was the development engineer manager I would have been kicking desks over and sending engineers on they're way to the door. I was at Technical college in Australia and we took one shim set the injector heights on a Detroit Series 60. Then we went to the Cat C7. An hour later they were still overviewing the procedure and the Cat required tool set to tune or set injectors, what a total joke. Taxi. The truth is more than forty years ago these engines could have run on Hydrogen, almost emission free, aside from blowby. They wont allow it. Isuzu can meet Euro 5 with common rail and a cat SCR, reliably. Now where's that first desk
No, cat did it mostly all by themselves.
@한국 카우보이SsaurabiRedneck i think you've missed the whole point. Wealthy people who make millions from the status quo being unchanged is the reason for our planets problems. They don't want any structural change to the world economy. Lets review. World economy is valued off the USD. China doesn't trade in Yuan, it trades, buy and sell in USD. 1 Yuan is worth 21 Australian cents. The USD is valued off a cost of a barrell of oil. Wealthy people have rooted our planet. There's been alternatives available for decades mate. Hydrogen. Companies like Cummins or Detroit will enjoy Hydrogen because the architecture of the engines are the same and make money off core sales and basic components, ie pistons, sleeves, valves, gaskets, turbos, and remain viable with their current business model. Pressure to retain an oil fuel as the source of energy is responsible for all of the emissions crap trying to milk a dirty fuel for a clean one. It was obsolete decades ago, but the wealthy Sandi's wont have any of it. When I was a little boy a retired engineer in Australia developed and patented a device that could be retro fitted to any internal combustion engine and with a stainless watertank in place of a fuel tank and stainless delivery lines and it could be run off hydrogen. But he was terrified the fuel companies would buy it and scuttle it. He converted a Morris 1100 front drive car, run perfect. A simple design car that was basically emissionless, aside from blo-by. That was more than 40 years ago. Were've been totally rooted over by the wealthy mate, who dont want anything to change. And now our legacy, which is the only thing worthwhile to offer our grandchildren and great grandchildren is metling ice caps, 50% reduction and catastrophic bush fires. In Tasmania years ago they had a bushfire go through a certain area where the tree's died and never recovered they initially couldn't work out why. It had bush fires before, then an investigator realised the level of earth was a metre lower. The heat had actually incinerated the actual earth, being organic, it had court fire and burnt exposing roots and burning them. You're completely done over by emmissions control device's because your leaders, senator's etc are lobbied by wealthy Sandi's and those with vested interests trying to keep the status quo's of multi trillion dollars profits. And when they're gone our legacy will be nil. There's no reason for the object complexity in engine design, only the fuel that goes in them and to be seen to be doing GOOD. I live in Australia and have watched B and A doubles after double loaded with tonnes of fuel 24 hours a day to keep the coal industry fuel to level more destruction. Its just a visible joke. CSIRO scientist's have worked out how to convert ammonia into hydrogen. Bring it on. Even the Sandi's whom have never offered listed public shares did so 2 years ago because they can see the writing on the wall. Now the next time your emmisions device fails, and keep in mind I understand them fails, it because of some currupt, fat, Cuban cigar smoking politician in a smoking jacket sitting in club chair drinking $1000 a glass brandy with no vision. Vision being adult, structured imagination.
@한국 카우보이SsaurabiRedneck lithium type batteries dont have liquid acid... they has "solid" (sounds stupid) electrolyte. They cant and dont leak
@@liamcooper5202 they actually do have a liquid electrolyte, otherwise, what the hell is all this fuss i see about a solid-state one?
Mack had a 237hp slant 6 back the early 80s that the compressor had to be timed . It also used dog bone drive like a Detroit blower that also supplied the oil to the compressor. And they tended to break
7:56 I feel like he had to try very hard to not drop an f-bomb when talking about injector codes
5:44 too, like wtf?
There are 2 fuel lines going to the ARD head because this fuel supply provides the majority of the fuel needed to increase the exhaust gas temperatures at the inlet to the DPF however, due to environmental conditions we sometimes need to adjust that heat so CAT added a sort of back up line to ensure we are always meeting emissions requirements
Always amazed at your knowledge
This is creeping me out. I just mostly deal with Mx13s these days. Makes nostalgic for my old BC 350 days
You have my sympathies
CAT had a toll free 24/7 hotline for it for the RV owners broke down in BFE. Last four digits of the phone number were 3126.... the entire series is junk. Honorable mention to 3208
Love your videos very informative wish they were more often. Always learn something m
I know the fleet of isl cummins I work on wants the single piston compressor timed as well
I can confirm I work on ISL-G(natural gas variant) and detroit series 50 and the isl has timed air compressors. We use both single and double piston versions
The single piston gets timed and same with the double on the isl. It's so stupid.
ISB and ISC requires it also
I've put probably one hundred ISC and ISL air compressors in without timing them
They even have timing marks for the signiture series engines, also not required
@@Dilanom - Good points. This is nothing new. Decades ago Cummins would change the timing for the air compressors on various 855's. I worked for Cummins at the time, and we just ignored the bulletins, because the new settings did not make the slightest difference.
I worked in engine test at Cat. In my opinion the 3406 mechanical 425 to 475 hp were excellent engines.
Have to agree the C7S or Cat Sucked was Crap .Cat pretty much Shit the Bed on ALL of their Emission Engines the SDP So DisaPointing was No Prize either and the 3208 that had the Exhaust Recirculation manifold on the left manifold with the tube that went up to the intake manifold was a real peach too We used to get School Buses towed in that quit running, pull the air cleaner and the intake would be Totally plugged with soot. I worked for a Cat Dealer in California in the Truck Shop for 31 years from 82 to 2013 saw A Lot of stuff that made you Scratch your Head and say WTF.
Acutely the removable sleeve is used because the engine can be rebuilt anywhere.
In any remote location.
Cummins had engines, with timed air compressors, too.
Emissions garbage on the SDP was a joke, as it was. And had nothing but IVA issues with a MXS, too.
Have you had a good experience with SDP's that have had the emissions items stripped off?
@@electric7487 haven't ran one personally. But, a friend of mine has one that's been deleted. Don't think he's had any trouble with it at all, other than air compressors junking out on it. On #7, I think now.
You are absolutely right had all those problems until the customer got frustrated and asked for it to be removed
5:30 Having the HPCR pump timed is actually fairly common in the automotive world. On my VW their explanation was that it matched up each pumping stroke to an injection event. I've also heard that it's done for harmonic/NVH reasons.
"However, doing the test you get another f...injector that just says it is not responding properly!"
That was close... 🤣
"I'm gonna tell you right now what motor I'm talking about"... [proceeds to give serial numbers for the motors]...
What I’ve seen of the ARD head, it’s very similar to the Deutz T4i burner system for their 6.1 and 7.8 engines which are also quite problematic.
Spray all the fuel into the exhaust, that’ll fix the emissions!
Don't know the model engine that was in the truck, but I went to a new company as a driver in 2007 and they had a brand new truck with the latest EPA-approved engine. That truck spent the first two years of its life being in the shop a minimum of every other week, took them over 6 months to finally track down the first problem with the DPF where the DPF heater/injector/burner whatever wasn't machined properly which is why it was clogging constantly, it wasn't getting anywhere near hot enough to burn off the residue. That was just one of MANY problems with the DPF system and a few other issues with the engine. What a nightmare. At least it had a lot of power and drove well on the rare occasions when it was working properly.
Been waiting for this. Thank you sir!
When I worked at Cat, I remember folks talking about the incredible vibration the tier 2 engines made.
On Cummins, I know isb 6.7 so probably all of them, it tells you in the service manual to time the air compressor to the engine, but I’ve installed them without timing them and it didn’t cause any significant vibration
I always liked the troubleshooting steps for the EPA07 engines....replace shit until it can run a regen without problems
These are a joy. Worked on one in a ford f750 chassis. Always thought the 3176 was junk.
I'm not even a Cat man myself but in Australia the 3406B had incredible torque rise in it's time even more than a 350 Cummins. The 3208 was called a throwaway engine. The 1693T was ahead of it's time with overhead cam, impressive power but a bit thirsty. But torque comes at a price, look at these tractor pulls and the whole engine get's ripped off it's mounts.
From a retired US farmer... had the crap non turbo 3208's in New Holland combines.... rattle traps. junk,,, Now in 2022 I dont know a farmer that doesn't want a late 3406 or 6NZ, anything pre DEF in a old ass farm simi... LOL.... F this DEF shit, theyre farm trucks... and nothing pulls like a 3406!!!! Marine cam them and you have reliable 800HP...
@@paulpence8895 I remember a company I did a little bit of work for in the early 90's had a 3208 in one of their trucks, it ran ok, but idled at a really low RPM like 450 or so, and would really roll heavy coal when you got on it. Not much power, but it was pretty quiet.
@@paulpence88953406s both B and E made me good money.
2007-2012 was a horrible time period for Diesel engines. All my stuff is pre-emission and older, or low enough hp that it’s not required. However, the technology has come a long way in this last decade. I’m comfortable enough that I might buy a new diesel pick-up next year. Those new Cummins X-15 engines are pretty impressive too.
Is Al Gore still flying around the world in his Jet engine airplanes?
This is the case with LOTS of new engines and transmissions nowadays! PURE HELL!
Yeah. I’m glad I’m retired. Don’t have to work on this shit anymore. Old school all the way.
Absolutely correct. Worked on several of these in the army at a CRC (component repair company). These damned things had STEEL pistons and the bores would get out of round and were not rebuildable. We threw out ALOT of these for that reason. Another was the oil cooler cracking and letting coolant into the oil. Was a total nightmare
Army trucks dont have DPF ....yet, but the issued inherent in the C7 are still there. Namely the engine is not rebuildable. C7S issues with the electronics seem more tuning related since each fuel injector is programed individually to the ECM. The 3116 wasnt without its issues, but the c7s are a flawed engine for heavy duty use.
I never understood Cat's "throwaway" engines. I was familiar with the 3208. Guys running dump truck and dump trailer on our road crew were running them. They were underpowered in that application but were fairly reliable for a few years until......
LOL
I saw a lady dump a def bottle into the tank of her 7.3 excursion
I've heard of common rail pumps being timed to the engine, I don't see why either, but the official excuse is to have the pulses of the pump output being timed with when injectors fire.
Engine harmonics are a lie. Bwahahahah
nice! -- QUESTION -- So we are looking at a 2005 Alfa See Ya Motorhome with a C7 CAT. Since it was made before 2007, does that mean it is better? Has only 38k miles. (We will never be rebuilding this as it is a RV so not worried about the lack of sleeves), How was the 2005 engine?
2007 emission laws are like what happened in 1980. To gas engines..
Ill wait for 08/12 emissions to hit cars
@@truckman63 Got my $100 on a CyberTruck. Shock my world!
i worked alot on the c4.4 and c6.6 those are nightmares!
thanks for that....as always, interesting and informative!
the 3208's had no liners either........... these small 'throw away' engines have been around for a while............
Your right but they ran fine and didn’t give much trouble.
That is correct it out survived all the rest of the competition for that particular. He was incorrect about being the only engine to time the air Cummins your recommended to time the air compressor crankshaft in relation to the engine crankshaft. In our repair shop we rebuilt more 3208 cats in our three state area. They were like rebuilding a big V8 gas engine. Board them .020 and then.040 and then on the third overall we would install a dry sleeve. Very inexpensive to bore and no cylinder liners leaking water we're jumping around in the block. They are still used in our area a lot but there's no triple nickel cummins's or 6V53 Detroit's around either
Don't know how it came out that way. He was incorrect on the 855 Cummins it was recommended to time the air compressor crank in relationship to the engine crankshaft
Dang….I just picked up a short bus today with a C7S. 😞😞😞
Your absolutely right!! All of them were expensive junk! They won’t pull a greasy string out of a cats ass.
Hahaha
🤣🤣🤣
How do you get a greasy string into a cat’s arse in the first place?
I’m looking at a class A Rv with the c7 how do I look and see if has the c7s. The coach was made August 2005???????
Any help would be appreciate
?????
Hino Diesel engines have timed air compressors and fuel pumps. The fuel pump bolts to the front of the compressor and they are timed together and then timed to the engine when installed
Hino J08 you also need to time the air compressor due to the fuel pump being driven through it
So is the C7 Heui a good engine? Have an 05 F650 with the Cat C7, 266k miles, that I’m looking to purchase. Based on your video, I would assume it is the Heui.
I agree with you 100%👍🏿however I Still would take c7s over a Maxxforce 7 🤣🤣🤣😅 pure JUNK... Thanks for the video Sir
Ah Maxxforce 7 also 6.4 Powerstroke.
Maxxforce 9 is just as bad. A customer of mine had one in a 2012 4400. In 2 years, we replaced both turbos, both intercoolers, several injectors, egr cooler, fan hub, head gasket and after all that dropped a valve and took out the piston
@@garyquade1975 lmaooo
Never had a medium duty truck engine except a Cummins that was any good been buying them for business since the eighty's.
The DT 466 corn husker was the best still is 7L ever.
Every one copied it was very popular had a very long production run.
Agreed....things were bulletproof
Sounds like caterpillar butchered the emmisons and tried to make their own common rail fuel system instead of going with BOSCH common rail system like cummins paccar Detroit and others. I did my apprenticeship at a caterpillar dealer and we were brainwashed to think that everything cat does is the best and is far superior to all others. Well 15 years later in the diesel equipment world I have my own opinions now. The fact that this company isn’t putting money into on highway engine development or electric drive systems is really a bummer. On the heavy equipment side of their company I feel like as Caterpillar became bigger they just bought other companies products and slapped their name on it. Like forklifts, electric drive haul trucks and small construction equipment. Caterpillar used to pride them selves on how everything in their engines and equipment was made by them now that’s a different story.
Every engine from C9.3 up now IS a Cat engine. All under are other makes. C7.1, C6.6, C4.4? Perkins. C3.3, C3.8? Kubota. C3.4? Fiat.
The C9.3 was a big pile of crap for some time.... spun lifters, failed pumps, dropped valves....
Though yes, the C7S series was a booger.
Kinda how Ford butchered the International. I’ve had 6.0s and my current 6.4…. All were deleted immediately and tuned. Guess what, never been in a shop for failure. My 6.4 has 247k on it and has been tuned 250-350+hp tunes for 246k. It’s a f450 and tows daily. Had to replace a transmission in it…. (4wd brake boosted launches on a 350 tune) is the best thing for stock transmissions.
All in all, the EPA is cancer on the diesel world. These engines can be amazing and provide plenty of service for you $60-200k rigs, but they won’t rest until batteries have replaced everything
The 3406 was really the only great engine cat ever made. The rest range from "meh" to d333 level of suck.
Agreed! That engine was very flexible, in terms of repair. And was a million mile engine.
The 3412E is allmighty, we've had these screaming away in Drill Rigs for 30-40 000 hrs & hardly even put a spanner on them. 3306, 3406, 3412 are my favorites
@@danielwatson1815 I agree
We had 20 c7 cats in our fleet of 110 buses, they accounted for 95% of our work.
We had 4 C7 and 10 3126s. The C7s occasionally caused some work.
The Cummins were the biggest problem after the VT365s. We had one 5.9 Cummins in a blue bird that hit all of 300,000 before it threw a rod through the block.
All the Cats we got rid of at 350-400,000 still running.
Back in high school I was the kid who hung around the buses. When I was around, the 3126 and C7 seemed pretty strong as an observer, and I rarely seen any of the buses I followed with them on the side of the road waiting for Currie or Classic to show up. However, when EPA2007 became mandatory, they disappeared from new builds, and more Mercedes and Cummins made their way, while the International VT365 and Shitforces kept being bought by cheap conglomerates like First Student and kept grenading, blowing turbos and getting antifreeze in the oil.
The company I did co-op for actually imported some 2004-2007 pre-EPA07 Blue Birds with CAT from Quebec, because we loved the reliabilty at the time. Wasn't until the crooked Liberal Party changed the bidding processes for school bus contracts, killing the local firms, that Cummins and Maxxjoke became the norm. Now almost every bus on the road is an IC, and now my previous co-op is buying Visions with gas engines. IMO, EPA04 seems to've been the pinnacle of the post-emissions engines. The right balance between environment and performance, and if maintained right, will run forever. Just from the sound of one running normally. you know they're solid.
The transit system in my city retired all our EPA07 buses before we retired our last 2004 EPA04 buses. Now if that ain't the case to be made to make the entire office piss in a bottle in another lab, Idk what is. what drugs are they on?
Yep, 2007 is why we are plagued with EGR problems. Then, 2010, it gets worse with DPF(DEF) problems. These emissions systems problems aren't just a plague on any particular brand. It's all diesel engines that have this garbage. This is precisely why, when I was in the market for a newer diesel pickup truck than my 99 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins, it had to be a pre-2007.5(Cummins). In December of 2019, I found my current truck, a 2005 Dodge Ram 3500(SRW) 4x4 with the six speed manual transmission(I won't touch anything Chrysler automatic).
The big brother SDP is the worst POS that I had to deal with, Paccar never used the C7S. to fix = Delete
Parent bore is a good way to build a compact and light block, that is also stiff enough to make some power. Cat just did a poor job of it.
The 273 Buda and the 5.9 Cummins would be examples of a successful design.
Had a school bus with one, spent thousands on ardhead work and injectors. Retired it after 40,000 miles. A waste of taxpayer money
40,000 miles on an automotive car engine would be unacceptable, but for a big ol' diesel? That's just sad.
Some ag tractors used them back in 70s 80s . Mechanics who worked on them said they would run for years if you did 2 things . Never run them over 2500 rpm and do a bearing roll every 2000 hours
Gee, all this time I thought the 3208 was Cat's best boat anchor
they are.
3208 IS the best boat anchor
@@danielmontenegro3508 got that right they are a throw away engine no rebuilding
The original one in my truck was mint for a long time, until a rod bering went. I bought one that had been remanufactured by powerbuilt, it lasted a little over a year till it started ticking. Turns out the block was machined to big and a liner they put in a cylinder is moving up and down.
I had a few NewHolland TR combines with 3208s they where great starters and we had no trouble with them
Back when I was a truck mechanic there was a thing I would say. If it starts like shit every time, there's a good chance it's a C7, if it actually starts properly, it's not a C7. Every C7 I have ever worked on, would start, stumble for a few seconds, and then run right. Even when hot.
when you said government regulations...that pretty much explained it all
Josh...I heard you mention that the 3126 was "Parent Bore" (No Removable Liners) is the smaller bore 3114/3116 *ALSO* a liner-less aka "Throw-Away" design?
They are but repairable. Not a huge deal. The 3126 mechanical was a freightliner proprietary because the 3116 was GM proprietary
Please do a video on the c16 cat ..love the content
The MBN, since it replaced the 6NZ.
Only good feature is that the block can be used to build a 6NZ.
I feel the same way about the maxxforce
MaxxForce are complete and utter garbage.
Under powered, unreliable, poor design, poor components, et cetera.
Cummins big cam and n14's with single cylinder air compressors the air compressor is supposed to be times to the engine. It will still work fine if it's not timed but it's to reduce noise/vibration.
Heh there’s a 2005 Ford F750 in a local heating oil company fleet. I drove it and I knew from day one it had serious problems. Lack of power, heavy fuel consumption and smoking. C7. The other older trucks had the 3126 and 3126B and ran great.
Congrats on 100k subscribers! :D
👍👍💪
So if I understand correctly the pre 2007 CAT C7 is a good engine? I used to own a 2006 freight liner m2 and it was a grea t truck it outlived all 4 of my International 4300 with the DT466. I'm in the market again for a medium size truck is the 2006 freight liner c7 good or no?
My vote for the worst cat engine would have been the 2007 and newer C15 Acert engine with the DPF. I was buying a 2008 Freightliner Classic that had that particular engine in it. That damn thing spent more time in the shop and than it did on the road. I nearly lost everything because of that damn engine. Years later I found out there was a class action lawsuit against CAT over those engines. The only engine that I've seen be equally as bad, was that MaxForce abomination the International put out a few years ago. There was also a class action lawsuit involving that engine.
I rebuilt an ISL last year that required timing on the air compressor, didn't know CAT did that too
If I recall correctly timing the compressor was only for noise reduction. I know for sure on the Cm2350 ISX15 the compressor used to be timed but the service manual was updated and it is not required to be timed anymore
Adept ape 3406 5EK on the lowest engine brake setting what cylinders are firing?
Generally on the electronic Cat engines the low setting fires the cylinder 3,4 compression brakes (solenoid 1). Medium is 1,2,5,6 (solenoid 2) even though it's actually 2 solenoids and high is all cylinders.
Adept Ape thank you buddy!!!
I have a question....I have a 1998 topkick with a 3116 / 6 speed man. Engine is going bad. Can I replace it with a ,3126 without to much modifications.
I wonder how much the C7S cost the taxpayers, if every single injector needs replaced on every single school bus.
My school district payed over $32k over 40 thousand miles before we finally shut the otherwise good bus down. Thank God it was the only bus with this engine in our fleet
I liked Cats reliability a long time ago, but I didn't like Cats idea of always making parts that take a special tool. GREAT VIDEO Thanks William Orange county, ca.
How was the 1160 cat engines? And can you put a turbo on them?
In my opinion 2006 is the year the diesel engine died. I see how much worse the newer automotive diesels are since then. They're so fragile and have so much just waiting to go wrong with them.
We can all thank Al Gore and the EPA for that one.
The sad thing is, the C7S is probably STILL more reliable or just about the same as these modern emissions trucks. My next truck will either have a 3406 or 6NZ C-15 in it. I'm ready to go back to an engine when it "just worked" without any 5k+ parts for keeping the stealerships/repair shops and Commiefornia rich.
You just KNEW it wasn’t gonna be the C-15 (6NZ), or even the 3406E.
Ssaurabi Redneck, the 6NZ version is widely regarded as one of the best diesel engines ever made. Certainly the best electronic engine.
The only other C-15 was the MBN (the ‘bridge’ engine that had the first emissions garbage). Same block, garbage added on.
The C15 (BXS/MXS/NXS) ACERT were/are good engines but had/have the emissions junk.
Note the difference between the C-15 and the C15 ( no ‘-‘ between the C and the 15).
C-15 are a 14.6L engine, C15 ACERT are a 15.2L engine.
Nice thing about them is you can use the ACERT crank and pistons in a 6NZ to make it a 15.2L stroker with extra power/torque. The ACERT pistons are a better design, and are stronger, too.
@@elijahrobinson2362 f
Wow! Back when I was working at a yellow dealership during the infancy of the ACERT rollout, it was a mental battle seeing the shear number of warranty claims and repairs everyday. The C7 always made me mad during those times because the base engine was a good product with the exception of the cheap run of piston rings. However, the early HEUI system literally crippled these engines and many CAT owners lost faith. Even my boss of 38 years called the SAP serial numbered C7's the "Sorry Ass Product" I am old school but understand that the emissions technology is needed. It is just sad to see the result of engineers scrambling to meet the regulations numbers and in turn creating a product that end users cannot afford to operate or use to produce profits of their own. Thanks for the great channel!
Did they move on to Navistar to design the Maxxforce?
I would bet money on a hard yes.
Talk about the CAT C7.1 and new CAT industrial off-road engines