I have been looking for a mid 90s used tandem axle dump truck. I never new much about AutoCar and wasn't looking at them. After talking to 3 AutoCar owners lately that love their dumps, I started including them in my search. I found a 97 ACL64B that was an original dump with all the specs. I have been looking for (46K rears, lockers, heavy or double frame, etc.). It only has 200K miles and is in excellent shape. However it has an engine and transmission that I have absolutely know knowledge about. The engine is a Volvo 12 liter (VED12) @ 385hp with a Volvo 12 speed transmission. The rear end is a 3:56 ratio (I was looking for 4:11, or higher if it had a OD transmission). Does any one out there have any knowledge of this engine and transmission - what are the pros and cons? How would the 3:56 gears be with this motor and trans. - is the motor torquey and/or does the tranny have a low hole 1st gear? As you can tell I haven't driven it yet as it is about 1500 miles away from me. The price is right. I just don't know how good the engine and tranny are. The max. GVW would be 54K to stay under the Fed. limit for fuel tax etc. Any info. would be appreciated. Thanks, Bob
The truck is fine its the engine is expensive to repair and the transmission is very expensive. If the truck had Cummins power and a Road Ranger transmission I would go for it. Because it has Volvo power and Volvo transmission makes this truck not very desirable. They make a conversion kit to get rid of that rotten Volvo transmission. One of the local o/ops did that with his Volvo truck tractor. It was cheaper to buy the adaptor kit and used 13 spd than it was replacing the factory Volvo transmission. The company that had the local lumber yard here had a Autocar crane truck it was a tough old truck it had 3406 Cat with 18spd.
I think the Autocars are sometimes priceyer (thats not a word right?) then a compareable Mack. The RDs are usually eaiser to find so they tend to be the cheapest when talking about used 90s modle dump trucks. However I think from what my limited experience is, they are just like the Mack R-RDs, not pretty, not comfortable, but rock solid realiable. You still see alot of older Autocars used by NYC, Newark, Jersey City waste management companies or scrap yards, as roll offs, or packers
Thanks for the quick replies. What really got me looking at them was after talking to a guy driving one I met at a fuel stop. He has a dump truck company with 3 Petes, 2 Kenworths, and the AutoCar. He was driving the AutoCar (mid 90s) because he liked it best. He bought it a few years back as a used dump and raved about how reliable, comfortable, etc. it was. I also have found them to be pricey, but this particular one was priced good. Maybe because it was Volvo in the engine and transmission dept. and all the other ones I have seen have Cummins or Cat, and Fullers. I think I will pass on this one because of that, and I am not too hot about the 3:56 gears. Thanks again, Bob
Probably a good one to pass on. In some ways it isn't a "real" Autocar as you noticed by the Volvo parts. Not the Volvos aren't good trucks, but it isn't going to be like the older Autocars that others have told you about. As far as I can tell Volvo is only keeping the Autocar name around for the recognition. The only choice between newer Volvo/Autocars seems to be preference of badges on the trucks. My uncle had an 84 Autocar tandem boom truck with a 400 cummins and 13 speed. He said it would gross 80k, but because it was spec'd so heavy it cost a lot to repair. He said it handled so well for a truck with a 20ft bed that he could weave through traffic like a car. When he sold it one guy with a 210hp Ford looked at it. My uncle told him that the Autocar had lots of power compared to his truck and he would love it. He said, "I know, you blew my doors off with it the other day":bouncegri
Mack is very expensive for parts too being all parts are genuine mack so U joints cost more transmissions cost more. For us when you need parts for a mack you need to order pretty well from mack. Some of my prefered trucks are L-9000 Fords and the old A model KWs I drove mosltly Fords its actually what I learned on. Allot of people say oh its just a rotten POS Ford. Well the old 9000 Fords can carry the same amount of weight as a KW or any other brand. The Ford snub nose makes the truck very manueverable we have gotten 222wb Fords into places another truck couldn't go. The old Fords seem to climb out of areas where other trucks have troubles. The trucks I drove are 400 Cummins power 13spds sure half the engine is in the cab which makes it a little warm in the summer time. Drove one International not one of my favorite trucks to drive it was a rattle box. It was 2 stroke detroit power it was 6v92 power it too has 13spd behind it. The Autocar trucks were never too popular out here on the West Coast mostly Ford Kenworth and International.
Autocar like Diamond T and Diamond REO There is pro's and con's on everything you use! That why there are more than just KW's and Pete's! Mack is a good truck, but if you need a part you have to find a Mack Dealer. I have found R models to be a size 44 regular, which is small tee shirt size! The Ford L series 8000 and 9000 have a little more room. Especially with the tilt and telescopic column in them! KW's I have had to get the smaller wheel put on. I fit in the Mack CH and Granite series. The 97 Ford LTL 9000 (non Sterling) has the engine sitting forward as there is less of a dog house then the L8000 and L9000. In mine there is a 3406 Cat @475 Hp with an 8LL and 46000 Rocks (not Eaton’s) @ 433:1. I won't be the first one to pull in after a good 3 plus mile highway run, but 0 to 55 my times are as good as a loaded pickup! And that’s with a gross weight of 75000 plus! This goes to prove HP = economy!