I hear alot of people say the Maxxforce engines are junk. I was wondering what the story is with them. Bad design, operator error, or both? People say they are terrible but they never seem to know what is bad about them. Maybe you truck guys can tell us what your experience is with them.
Used truck dealer tried to sell me one. Said he sends them all to a shop in Arkansas for a delete. At that time he was claiming 20 in mostly farm service with zero problems. The dealer said he wouldn't sell one without the delete.
I wonder what he was deleting? The EGR? I was thinking that engine was oil enough that it did not have a DOC, DPF, or SCR.
The Maxfarce 7,11 & 13 all have their own story. The main issue I had in fleet use was massive, incurable fuel dilution of the lube oil. They would dump ridiculous amounts of fuel during inactive regen. International be like, “Oh’, 10% fuel dilution is totally normal”. Then, I be like, no it’s not. How about all the lead and tin in the spectrography? “Oh’, that’s normal, too. I ditched those things as fast as I could. Even donating them to a University for training purposes, so those trucks could never hurt anyone, ever again. It’s been over a decade since doing business with International because of that. Fine. Hope you can stay relevant , selling low bidder state plow trucks. Because, nobody in the private sector is purchasing your crap.
I'm sure they can work for someone, but if you don't have any of them keep it that way, there also chassis problems too.
It’s a shame, because it’s common to run across clean, low mileage trucks for cheap, but they have those stupid engines. If there was some way to deal with that.
You don't want the chassis for any price
I was given the job of diagnosing and repairing a Maxxfarce 10 with a bad miss-fire. Turned out to be a shorted injector coil which took down a bank of three injectors. To remove the valve cover first remove the trough at the bottom of the windshield the AM/FM antenna then the wiper transmission, remove the breather pipe from the valve cover, remove all seven electrical connectors from the valve cover gasket, then get a big cardboard box and empty out the cab remove both seats the trim at the bottom of the door frame roll the floor mat back and remove the access panel from the firewall. Now you can see the valve cover. Some engines have a coolant charge air interstage cooler mounted on the front of the valve cover. Removing that drain the coolant and fight with some air piping and coolant piping. Remove the valve cover bolts and with a helper move the valve cover back into the cab, next remove the high pressure rail/engine brake, its heavy and requires a second person, next unplug the injectors from the valve cover gasket remove the $700 gasket and discard it. Now you have access to the injectors. check all twelve coil resistance and replace injectors as required. I also talk the customer into replacing the expensive injection pressure sensor and brake pressure sensors and brake solenoid when the cover is off. I don't think you could replace an injector in eight hours.
Unbelievable! good story though to demonstrate manufacturing stupidity. Kind of makes me feel good about our old stuff where you open an engine cover and see.....an engine lol!
Was the fuel dilution because they where using the in cylinder injectors to spray fuel into the exhaust stream to get the DOC temperature up to regen?
It sounds like the typical bad design by an engineer with no connection to the real world. It is too bad because you will see a nice truck for sale and then you see it has a Maxxforce so you just walk away.
There's lots of small trucking companies that almost, or did go broke, with maxforce problems. Trade in the 3 year old truck for a new international, and be down for 6 of the first 9 months they owned it. With the thin margins in freight, there's not many ways back from that kind of a hole. And every manufacturer has issues, but those engines it seemed like no one could keep them running.
I don't know if it was so much that as engineers grasping at straws in the wind trying to meet emmisions mandates. Some of International's pre emmisions engines were legendary . . .
Like the DT466.
For 2010 emissions when all the other manufacturers had to add selective catalytic reduction or SCR or the DEF system Navistar said "We don't need no stinking DEF we can do it with EGR". In 2014 Navistar started building engines with the SCR system. Their customers paid dearly for that decision.
Almost like Cat not needing EGR because they had ACERT in 2002 . . .
Arrogance=Dan Ustian=cause. *
Well, they didn’t call it EGR. They called it “Clean Gas Induction” CGI- because they took it from downstream of the DPF with a ridiculous amount of stainless exhaust system parts. Lol
I searched YouTube trying to find their marketing videos from that time period. They survived by the skin of their teeth and banked EPA credits and paid hefty fines until they could slap EGR on. What a mess.
I don't like DEF, it is a pain, but if you hear of an engine manufacturer, specially bigger engines, saying "We don't need DEF to meet emissions" you know they are running a ton of EGR. EGR and DEF are the main ways to take care of NOx. Both can be problematic, not sure which is worse. I wonder if high rate of EGR is. Alot of engines use both. I like the idea of CAT's CGI. It seems like the EGR components would not plug up as quickly. Maybe it had other problems though.
A legend of getting in there own way they may slow buggers here in the hills!
There wasn't a engine built from 2002 to 2016 that didn't have it's own unique set of issues because of guinea pigging the market. Tossed on the public trying to find the clean end to handle it. Below is the pile of ISX with it's garbage EGR system. There was one area many a mechanic would scratch his head over with EGR issues. The plugged emulsion tubes, those pack full of soot in no time, had to be cleaned every major service by running a piece of wire through to unplug. Cummins said it was cold air on outside causing the plugging so Cummins came out with a set of boots/covers to install--which did nothing. *
I was working for a school bus company back in the late 2000's. They had two brand new Bluebird All Americans with the Cat C7 ACERT. Probably the worst imaginable application for a emmisions engine; putsy grandpa drivers, stop and go with plenty of idling. We very rarely had both buses running at the same time: one was always at Cat . . . A pic of the engine compartment for everybodys entertainment. Almost as fun as a fire aparatus or motorhome . . .
Fiat X 1.9 will beat that on any day from the 70's.
Owned several. Reliable engines but never in the powerhouse column. The ones I had were single axle trucks - 2 dumps and 1 flatbed. The newest one was a 2003 and all manual transmission - 6 Plus 1. The 2003 had a locking rear axle that damn near made it 4x4.
International makes the chassis and the engine and its line the engineers were pissed at each other and didn't talk, there's all sorts of stories of long repair times for simple jobs, bolts that be removed because they hit the frame etc. I did a air governor on a m11 that took like 4 hours and my whole arm inside the truck. The other truck with the same chassis and a max force shot flames out the exhaust and fire around the turbo, that engine locked up
Is it economically feasable, to buy a Navistar with a trashed Maxxforce engine, then just replace the engine with , say a Cummins? Just wondering is the economics would make sense?
Like ford and their belt drivin oil pump
There was actually a kit made to do exactly this in some applications.
I think chevy has done that too
If it was really economical to swap it would have happened, but in most cases by the time X amount of miles have gone by the truck is beyond it's life expectancy. No dealer wants a IH on the lot especially one that has been converted.
No the electronics are not great.i ran I think a 06 with a m11 and it would go down and not start every once in awhile. The engine was deep in the chassis too to even do an air compressor was expensive. Maybe if it wasn't such as a tight design I guess and hook the computer up yourself, and guy the gauges and put your own. I always see the same kind of truck as dump trucks and others, I'm sure they make a truck with more space under the hood. Or cut the rear axles off and use those somewhere, and buy a pre 07 good brand truck and put your money into that.
I’ve ran the numbers, and spent some bandwidth pondering that question, and no. Somebody might have a solution. I couldn’t think of one.
Bandwidth? There's nothing to run, the IH has a sh---y cab, wiring and just plain sour design. The best possible solution is blindfold it drag it out behind the barn and shoot it., then call the local metal rendering plant to retrieve the carcass.
And then Rob it's boots