I'm fast looking like the bad guy on my FD. We are looking to add a truck, a tanker/pumper. It is kind of flirting with the need/want line, but we are hoping to possibly extend our ISO rating radius with the addition of a second tanker, plus our current second pumper is a 1977 Ford with a Forstner 750. Problem is the only trucks in our price range are 2-strokes, electronic L10s, or a Cat 3116. As an added poke in the eye, they are also single drives with super single tags. If you are thinking about going offroad, they get stuck in the middle of the road. Of the three engine possibilities I listed, which one is the best of the worst? The Cat is a 1995 model.
I can't speak to the electronic part of the L10, but I run mechanical L10s as spreader trucks and they are tough as nails.
I actually wonder if the 2-stroke might be the best choice, if it is set up the way you need. All fire trucks from that era were 2-strokes, it's just the way it was. Still might be enough old guys around who remember them, standard configuration. L-10 would have been rare but probably still well enough understood by modern mechanics. 3116 is an odd duck of an engine and going the way of the dodo bird I suspect. Also small displacement.
Well, I haven't received confirmation on the L10, but being a 1994 rated at 320 horsepower, i am *assuming* it's an electronic L-10. It's in a Spartan pumper. The probable engines in that hp range are L10, N14, or C8. 3. I've never seen an 8.3 in a fire truck before 2007, which would be the dreaded CAPS pump.
An 8.3 is way more engine than a 3116, a 3116 is competitive with a 5.9. An L10 isn't even the same league. Personally, I think the 2 strokes should go the way of the dodo. There's way worse engines than a 3116, especially for a tanker that gets less than 1,000miles a year, and hopefully isn't blown out to 350HP? The 3116's at 100Hp did fine, the trucks at 170HP did fine, but I know they pushed the limit in boats and fire trucks, fire truck engines surviving longer than boat engines at high HP. Not like you're climbing long grades, and if you buy it from a place without hills, I'd think a 3116 would be fine. It will have gotten just enough load to be broken in, pumping is easy, and I know which engine I'd want idling for hours on end. Pain to do anything to the injectors, but if it's running good now you'll probably never need to touch it.
How hard would it be to pull the tag and make it a tandem? Probably depends on room under the pumper, but it would be worth a look. I'd want some tandems so you could get offroad to fight a brush fire, a cut off runs about 2,500-$3,000 around here.
The 3116 is rated at 300 hp.
CO, I have the same reservations on the tag.
I have both 3126 and 8.3's, and the 8.3 has a little more torque, but I don't think its a lot. 3126 is a 7.7 liter, in my crane its set at 300 or 330, allison 5 speed. That rig weighs around 57,000. Its no speed demon, but its not bad. Everyone kind of hates on the 3126's, but I haven't had a lot of trouble with mine. Injector cup o-rings and a rear main seal. Its got a bad engine oil leak right now, but its on my list to fix.
Probably l10 Two stroke will always run as long as it starts
After doing a bit of research, it appears that the M11 made it's debut in 1994. Anyone have any experience or secondhand knowledge on the early ones? Better than the electronic L10, or the same problems?
L10 celect looks exactly like a m11
YIKES! but if they didn't climb hills with it, it probably didn't do 300HP for very long. The 3116 is about the weight of a 5.9 and 6.6L, the 3126 is 7.2L. I've driven a 3116 in a 93 spartan in some moderate hills 200-400' elevation change. Engine's never been touched that I know of.
I own a m11 also, its better than the 8.3 or 3126 power wise, good to around 70,000lbs (mines in a daycab tractor). If you get to 80,000, it kind of struggles. Been reliable for me. In a late 90's international with a super 10.
The 8.3 is a very good engine in all years it was made, and I don't know that the CAPS pump was any more troublesome than anything else from the era. I am no fan of the HEUI Cat or 3116 myself.
I would go for the L10 if given those options. The 3116 would be a good option if you’re hauling rose peddles!
Biggest issues with M11, L10 celect is oil leaks at the top end. Not a bad engine. 8.3 good engine 3126 is a flip of the coin, 3116--well it's a 3116. 2 strokes are for weed eaters and chain saws.
As long as the L10/M11 does not have the STC fuel system they are an excellent engine. The oil leak Truck Shop is referring to is from the rocker housing gasket to the cylinder head. I have had a few apart that were leaking quite badly as a result of the bolts that hold the rocker housing/intake manifold to the head were very loose. when I reassembled them I Loc-Tited the bolts and several years later they are not leaking.
In my area, if you need to take any tanker/pumper with tandems off road you need a walking beam suspension. Several departments have the gov't surplus military rigs. We need one, but no room in the firehouse.
The powers that be decided tonight to pursue the 8V-92TA truck. And, they want me to fly down to Indiana and check it over. Anyone know what year they started putting electronic engine control on the 2-strokes?
We had about a 1993 that was a 6V92, DDEC 2 and I understand those mostly all came with aftercooler and bypass blower, very good and torquey setup, would start above 2000 RPM and lug down to 1400 RPM no problem. I think it was 350 or even 400 HP, fire breathing emergency equipment rating.
This one is a 96 that is rated at 500 hp. https://www.fentonfire.com/equipment/1996-pierce-pumper-tanker-2000-2500-t1291/
First year IIRC was 89.
Pierce is/was top of the line at the time. I think it is a solid combo if you can find someone to work on the engine, still, if needed. Ours had a trans retarder on it, it was known for breaking down expensively so I had Jakes put on the engine, wish they had just built it that way from the get go. Not like a 2 cycle is going to win any quietness contests anyway. The muffler was the size of a water heater so it was not too noisy I thought. Not real effective on a 2 cycle either but it is what it is.
Price seems awful high for something that old and a big tanker should not be in demand though. Also an awful color.
Fire equipment is always high. Curious about your comment on demand for a tanker.
Every township around here has a large tanker like this. Some have 2. I'm not in a super remote area, but fire hydrants are miles apart. Most of the townships have draw stations set up on local lakes because there are more lake access points than hydrants to pull from.
That's an insane price! I could buy two 80 bbl oil field water trucks for that and find big pumps and put them on for that. Just make sure you find a mechanic that actually knows about two strokes. Everyone can work on them and they are easy but they won't be right and last a long time without someone that knows.
Being as our county has no water district and most everyone on a well the use of ponds or access to creek pools is where the FD gets their water here. Have a dedicated pumper and two tankers where can call up adjoining county for their extra tanker to help on larger fires, Mutual Aid scenarios happen most of the time here.
That does seem high for the age, but there aren't that many used pumpers with that much water. Our local FD has a rural engine that carries 2,500g and a tanker pumper w 3,500g, but those weren't cheap either! Easy to find a used 2,000gallon tanker, or a pumper, but not both. Let me know if you're interested in a 90 something IH 2,000g with a 466 and allison, older tank though, probably cheap and soon. here's a 1,000g pumper coming up, LEAKS A LITTLE COOLANT, but if you call and tell them you're with a FD, they'll tell you everything they know. https://bid.wisconsinsurplus.com/Public/Auction/AuctionItemDetail?pageNumber=WddRnDis30ojx01x46RicQ==&pageSize=WddRnDis30ojx01x46RicQ==&AuctionItemId=tXqx73pah1H+tLhUeg4DPA==&AuctionId=Cic1f4rgIyl+vrf/3yUMiA== and here's one that sold that might have worked for you, don't list the gallons, but 40,000#? https://bid.wisconsinsurplus.com/Public/Auction/AuctionItemDetail?AuctionId=Euj3R6rS/6coaReuY505kA==&pageNumber=pf6Q+hJtdeleDd9FfYpy9w==&pageSize=O5OaPaZE1XrTjGtTQItkaw==&showFilter=iBcS+4ptjknZQtCojbueqQ==&sortColumn=C9SY4KX74WJIILYqur0bmw==&AuctionItemId=MsxU1UcMbMQiBoPISMWRoQ==&Filter=28iLnyTvLmy8/hPPi3DcdQ==
My experience is only in the West. Fire trucks of that age typically go for under $10k, often less than $5k in good condition from their departments, just aged out. They want all the bells and whistles, nobody wants anything old. Out here, tankers (we call them tenders, tankers are airplanes that drop retardant) are usually more like a logging water truck than a fire engine. Probably because they need to be more compact than that behemoth that can do everything, and we don't have prairies. But the department will typically buy one new and they do not get a whole lot of miles because most fires are handled with engine tank water. So they are not sold off until they are really old. And there is not a lot of demand for used ones because they do not cycle for sale often. So that is why I thought that one was big bucks. Who else is bidding for it? Around here you see them sit and sink into the mud until the paint falls off.
That truck doesn't look like I would take it on a gravel road, let alone off road. Just from the description I would be very leery about the steel tank. Tank life will depend somewhat on local water quality. My department has a water truck with a purpose built 2500 gallon square plastic tank. 8" dump and drop tank, and gas drive pump to refill attack trucks. Its a single axle LN9000 with a dt466.
The main reason that fire pump apparatus(pumpers) are retired is that after 10 years they are de-rated from their original gpm rating as per NFPA standards. At least thats the way it was when i worked on fire trucks 25 years ago. So basically in order to meet fire dept requirements, a 25 year old pumper may only be used as an emergency back-up to a newer full rated NFPA pumper. So, thanks to insurance companies and lawyers for that. Thats why old fire trucks usually are donated to other countries (south america)or sold for scrap. Tankers may be kind of a grey area depending if it has any other equipment mounted on it like a monitor(cannon)
I am not aware of any NFPA standard that derates GPM or anything like that. 20 years ago I was pump testing units that were 20-30 years old at the time and they were passing the tests, Ford 534 and Detroit 8.2 engines. Eventually it got to where the 8.2 205 HP could not provide the rated 1250 GPM because it was getting weak but NFPA allows you to re-rate for 1000 GPM in that case. They were actually pretty generous in doing that, nowadays standards would be written that you have to scrap all your fire trucks and buy brand new ones when that happens.
Well you just said they were de-rated from 1250 to 1000gpm. Maybe after i worked on them(25 years ago)the NFPA standard changed or some fire departments just peddled the bean counters a line of crap(and me too) in order to get new equipment. It wouldn’t surprise me
They do derate, the nuke would buy those derated units, have them recertified for non-civilian captive fire brigade where were good at rate for another four years, then would trade up again.
I meant if it would not pump 1250 GPM at the pump test, then it was acceptable to call it a 1000 GPM pump. But if it still passed 1250 then it was 1250 no matter how old. I was only working on them 15-20 years ago but I doubt there was ever anything that made it easier, they only ever make things harder.
Also i think ULC(Underwriters Laboratory of Canada?) also had input on the pump ratings and maybe that was also part of the de-rating due to the physical age of the pumper
56, what can you [or anyone else, lol] tell me about 2-stage pumps? We don't have any high-rises, we do have a couple of tower dryers with standpipes but they're all under 100'. I know the transfer valves can get sluggish, but is there anything to be concerned about if we just leave it in volume all the time?
We never had any 2 stage pumps nor knew any departments that used them. All low rise stuff here. I think, like relief valves, that they can get sluggish when left to sit in dirty water for years and never operated. I would be sure that they got operated at least once a week if they exist. You would not want something to get stuck in the intermediate position and cause a complete loss of pumping. I would avoid them if possible, more to go wrong. They seem like maybe an old fashioned solution to low HP engines of the old days. A lot of modern equipment pumps a lot of PSI with the engine just at idle on a single stage. But if the rig that fits you has a 2 stage pump in good condition, I would not shy away from it either.
The company I drove for bought a number of tractors with the 300 L10 when they first came out. Quite a number of problems with cooling and head gaskets for the first couple years but once Cummins worked the bugs out they were rock solid. They got close to 3mpg more than the 300 855 blocks we were running previous. They also has 3 tractors with the 6V92 and I actually got to like them. Nothing like the 71 Series, much smoother, quieter and a little low end grunt. I could stay with the Cummins powered trucks because I knew to keep it revving. They were as reliable as the L10 too. I can't say I've ever heard anything good said about the 3116, but I have no experience with it.
The pumpers i worked on were all single stage. I can’t tell anyone anything about 2 stage. Maybe try a watrous or hale website if they’re still around
When we have grass fires all the oilfield water trucks donate time and haul water for them
Working at a water department today, got me thinking. I think one major reason why no 2 stage pumps is that every occupancy that would require high pressure around here is also served by hydrants. They can be upwards of 100 psi. So the water department is the first stage and the pumper is your second stage.
If you're still looking: https://bid.wisconsinsurplus.com/Pu...MAdw4fXV00Q==&filter=ajBmiK+33KkMkTDWtuuLmg==