Why Did CAT Stop Making Truck Engines?

[@Dustrunnersauto]

If you guys enjoyed the video, please SMASH THAT LIKE BUTTON. It helps the channel out a huge amount and helps KZbin put the video in front of more people. Thanks for watching 😬

[@shadowopsairman1583]

DEF

[@mattsnook1723]

Of course the EPA doesn't care about emissions, they care about money. Same as every other alphabet soup agency.

[@Back_door_bandit_98]

Because Cummins makes a better engine…. I’m just playing Any C engine is a good engine just stay away from Paccar and Detroit.

[@shohagchoudhury65]

@@shadowopsairman1583 . ,

[@JLCmike4014]

Government always knows how to ruin a good thing. The old mechanical 3406 is still one of the best commercial engines to ever exist in my opinion.

[@deborahchesser7375]

That’s a fact the ol 425 was bulletproof

[@JLCmike4014]

@@deborahchesser7375, damn right it was! Ain’t nothing like a caterpillar engine.

[@robwhite3241]

heck our 1693 is still running strong after 50 years.

[@JLCmike4014]

@@robwhite3241, sweet. We had an old GMC school bus at a previous job with the 3176 and that was never in the shop besides for routine maintenance.

[@markclark5770]

My dad still talks about around this area people would pull A caterpillar engine out when they were due for an in frame overhaul or the injection pump failed and replace it with Cummins or Detroit due to the astronomical cost of repairs. Cummins could be rebuilt for $100.00 per cylinder. Many old cat engines met the scrap heap early on down south

[@kurtisgraham3313]

When Paccar introduced their own motor, they told Cat that they would still install Cat motors, but Cat had to do all the engineering/design work for installing the motors at Cats expense. That along with losing market share to the new Paccar motor helped drive the nail in the coffin. I sold my 03 Peterbilt with a perfectly good 6NZ Cat when I ordered a 14 Pete with the ISX500 Cummins. All other drive train components the same, and went from a 379 to 389 which is the exact same body style. The difference is a mile per gallon less (5.4 verses 6.5). Add on having to pay for dpf, poorer performance, and very expensive repairs for sensors, dosers, gate valves, and God knows what else, plus adding for down time, and you you understand our frustration. Now they are trying to push "eco tires" that cost more, wear quicker, and don't increase fuel mileage one bit. Who the hell comes up with this crap? Government people with no brains. That's who.

[@Dave-dh7rt]

The eco tires sound like a joke. Im sure reducing the rolling resistance on something by 2% that weighs 80,000lbs will make a BIGG difference lol

[@robertbell525]

Elections have consequences. The people of America get what they voted for.

[@melvinrexwinkle1510]

@@Dave-dh7rt .2 miles per gallon now is about 4000 bucks a year.

[@garethifan1034]

@@Dave-dh7rt If you were paying EU Diesel prices..every penny would count

[@MidlandTexan]

Yes, it is all on the government, infiltrated by anti-capitalist ecofascists these past 55 years...

[@abrahammadera6505]

We need for "CAT" to make engines again for over the road trucks.Dont kill a good thing thats been proven it works.

[@zythr9999]

It didn't work too well when installed in a NABI Transit Bus

[@ttun100]

I worked at the Caterpillar plant in Pendergrass Georgia that was chosen to assemble the variable valve actuators for the ACERT engines. It was suppose to be the future of the plant, it wasn't. With the ACERT's failure and the 2008 recession, the plant closed in 2009.

[@ProbablyTooLoud]

CAT motor was one of the best diesels ever made.

[@wilson2455]

in the 1960's, when smoking was also considered 'cool' and asbestos was deemed 'safe as houses'.

[@teessideman.8253]

After the cummins nta 855 european big cam I agree.🇺🇲🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@antoniononame3037]

7.3 power stroke

[@zythr9999]

LOL

[@kingsleygarrison8483]

Still is the best 3406 c all the way

[@peteheyde7999]

As a retired OTR driver for 40+ years, I can tell you that your account of why Cat stopped selling road engines is spot on dead nuts accurate. From 1994 until 2014, I was driving for the country's largest private fleet and we were testing Cummins, Detroit, Volvo and Cat engines side by side. The first 3 engine manufacturers went with the EGR setup. Exhaust Gas Emission Recycle valves, better known as EGR valves, meet emission standards by putting exhaust components back through the engine. This is regarded as a contentious issue because putting "dirt" back into an engine will invariably shorten engine life and although it statistically resulted in engines meeting emissions standards, it also DECREASED fuel efficiency. I seriously don't understand how an engine can burn more fuel but pollute less. It seems like the government the wants us to believe a lot of things that don't make sense. In any event, Cummins, Detroit and Volvo opted for the EGR method. Cat had a huge canister in the exhaust system that we were told worked like a heavy duty catalytic converter. We were also told that the Cat engines DID meet emission standards, but the EPA mandated that Cat HAD to follow suit and use the "dirty" method. I can't comment on the warranty issue that Cat was allegedly having, but in terms of division profit percentage, that 10% figure alone would justify the truck engine discontinuation. Regardless of the actual causes, I was impressed by the fact that Caterpillar in effect "flipped the bird" to the EPA. Let businessmen, engineers and technicians do what they do best: make a good product at a fair price and profit from that. Conversely, the government is inefficient, wasteful, overbearing and technically ignorant. As such, it would be much better for us all if the government would get the EFF out of everyone's way and allow America to ROAR again!

[@JC-gw3yo]

As with the stolen election, the government doesn't give a shit about people... It is all about control

[@tardonator]

Basic pollution regulations are fine, but the government has absolutely NO business telling private companies HOW to achieve those targets. Let companies innovate their own new technologies to meet emissions.

[@fuckjewtube69]

Government is inefficient, wasteful, overbearing, and technically ignorant. That is one of the truest most accurate things I've ever heard.

[@dnomyarnostaw]

Yeah, just ignore the serious health issues of machine operation.

[@robertbell525]

As a nation we got what we voted for.

[@edmundsmith7199]

A slight correction: ACERT came out in 2004 for model year 2005. It actually worked quite well, with many engines running a 1,000,000 plus miles without overhaul. It was EPA 2007 for the 2008 model year that saw the problems begin. Only about 22,000 SDP and an equal number of LEE were produced before they pulled the plug.

[@lfcfan4557]

I run with a 2007 C15 ACERT on a 2008 389, and it has 1.2 mill without an overhaul, but, I had the dam DPF crap deleted in 2011. All I did is to change the six pack @ 1 mill, and just last year did a PDI single turbo conversion, and keep changing oil @10K or ASAP.

[@justin423]

Caterpillar is working to introduce diesel engines that use ducted fuel injection to keep their off-road engines compliant with the convergence of emissions standards.

[@JayFude]

I had a pre-ACERT engine, and my buddy had one of the ACERT garbage ones. My engine... I miss that big beast. Sure, it got crap mileage, but I could top Mt. Eagle at 55, fully loaded out.

[@war_moose5814]

I had a 3126 CAT in my lobster boat. Was a great motor for a 35 foot F/V

[@gregparrott]

Interesting story. Thanks! It's too bad that a similar fate befell International Harvester. Their gas, 340 cubic inch V-8 was an excellent motor in pickup trucks and moving trucks. Not a lot of horsepower, but lots of low end torque, excellent reliability, and surprisingly good gas mileage.

[@barrettmills856]

You mean 304 and 345

[@gregparrott]

@@barrettmills856 Yep, I meant the 345, not Chrysler's 340. Back in the early 1980's, I owned an 18,000 lb GVW IH enclosed moving truck (a used Uhaul), with the 345 V-8. Fully ladened, running ~50 to 55 mph on flat ground, it got almost 10 MPG., phenomenal for something that heavy and non aerodynamic.

[@gregparrott]

@Dartgame 340 Interesting. That suggests perhaps the particular plugs it used were poorly made, or there was a very localized pre-ignition issue centered at the spark plug.

[@prestonbogart2492]

It wasn't a 340 but a v345 and as far as mileage I had one and about the best it would do is 8mpg but all the power you needed for that size of a truck

[@gregparrott]

@@prestonbogart2492 You're right - 345. But for mileage, I bought a well used '69, IH, Uhaul moving van, 18,000 lb GVW. I got around 8 MPG highway (50 to 55 MPH, as I wanted to make sure it survived the trip) over a 2000+ mile trip cross country, even with it absolutely packed to near its weight limit, PLUS pulling a car trailer with a car. I was astonished at how good the mileage was. The only other vehicle which similarly astonished me was a '69 Mercury station wagon with a 2 barrel 390 V-8. With over 100k miles and essentially zero maintenance by the owner, it got 19 MPH highway - damn good for a friggin' land yacht.

[@tedwrigt9945]

The small Co . I work for has been forced by California to scrap 2 perfectly good completely reliable trucks and replace them with these smog monstrosities (1 freightliner, 1 mack) that constantly breakdown. I'm losing so much wages waiting for the truck to come back from the dealer (avg 2+ wks) I'm thinking of calling it quits after 35 years. Between POS smog equip & elogs I can equal money at the local gas station. $18 hr to start.

[@tubester4567]

Then you might get robbed by a criminal. We need truck drivers right now.

[@mustangracer5124]

35 Yr. diesel mechanic here and EX commyfornia resident... we were forced to do the same.. the 'old reliables' were trashed for new twinkle bunny computerized sh!t piles.. never a day without needing to analyze the data ports of the new crap.

[@hebson21]

Why is there a new vid on this every couple weeks? Basically, it takes a lot of time and money to design and build a new engine. The gov promised cat a period of time say 8 years where emissions regulations would be the same, but they kept going back and changing their mind. Every politician wants to be more virtuous than the last, so it went from 8 years to 4 and down to 2 year intervals. Making it not financially viable for them to keep redesigning only for it to be redesigned once production started. Long story short, gov ruins everything with red tape and will burn down your house for a crumb of good publicity.

[@Prestiged_peck]

The new 3.0 duramax has post DPF EGR, and I think that's an awesome idea. They could likely meet emissions for years to come with a hybrid system on the current emissions engines, and simply optimize the current emissions systems rather than adding new ones, like adding a post DPF EGR system, and using an extra injector for the regen cycle.

[@anthonyduke2481]

That is what the EPA 07 CAT engine did. It was called CGI

[@markclark5770]

Ironically off road applications are going to the same air quality standards as on highway. One has to question how long CAT will be anything other than A brand. They are going down the same rabbit hole Deere has. Slapping their stickers on A competitors product.

[@lamarzimmermanmennonitefar5269]

I think Deere still has the 4.5 and 6.8l powertech

[@curtisnoble.]

The thing is If cat brought back the C15 with the full emissions. It would absolutely sell like a wild fire. And all the Cummins, Detroit ,mx13 and A26 Volvo engine equipped trucks would drop in value ridiculous amount. But I doubt Volvo group. Daimler. Would put cat back into their trucks.

[@nou8257]

Cat equipment you are buying the name mainly over the machine its all branding now

[@guyforlogos]

None of the engine manufacturers today can build a reliable on road engine that meets current emissions. The brain trust we call our government sets laws with unobtainable goals. Not a single Diesel engine in the market has an emissions system that works properly and doesn’t damage itself in its everyday use. The systems are horrible, the tech is absolutely terrible. They purposely set these these laws in motion to kill the internal combustion engine. Their goal is to put these companies out of business so they can implement fairy dust and unicorn piss powered trucks (or electric) like our electrical power grid can handle that.😬

[@curtisnoble.]

@@guyforlogos that’s why there’s emissions engines with million plus miles with no rebuild 🙄

[@453tye65e65e65e65]

At my work, we will stick with CAT C15 6NZ's (last of the good truck engines) and trucks with emissions deleted.

[@Prestiged_peck]

They'll end up completely shut down for running equipment with the emissions removed.

[@Prestiged_peck]

@Dartgame 340 considering down here in west Texas, probably the emissions delete capital of the world, we have inspectors paid by the government that go to rig sites and measure emissions on every diesel engine there, might be less of an IF and more of a when.

[@Stongray67]

No shut down the EPA they are a uesless

[@trueamerican7034]

Second hand info but CAT didn't seem to be interested in the light duty truck market which I believe basically funded Cummins emission and power technology on a smaller scale without needing to deal with large expensive engines first. Look at Cummins, over 1000 lb/ft of torque from 6.7 litre engines

[@qrs3658]

Give us a part 2. informing us on what cat present situation is...i.e are they planining a comeback, are they working on emmisions products, etc etc

[@calvinrenard6863]

The old 3406 A model cat was one of the best engine's ever built.. hands down .....

[@erkinalp]

Contemporary electronically-governed version is known as C15.

[@kwabenabudulartey7003]

Yes here in my. country Ghana and Africa, we only know about CAT and nothing else. Especially, the 3406 b which has no control board (brain board) and does not give us any electrical problems.

[@climjames1677]

The fuel consumption was one of the things truckers complained about. They loved the power.

[@GrayD1ce]

The rebuild cost also makes people cry, then again Cummins rebuilds are getting more than the truck is worth

[@john-sutton-tn]

As a current Cat tech for the past 22 years. It was explained to "us" that Cat killed the ORTE program from emissions related. Couldn't keep their "cat" engine power and prowess while meeting emissions standards. The ORTE program was a small part of the company overall.

[@greggoett]

CAT just didn't hire the VW emissions engineers.

[@theblackbear211]

You can also thank the emissions regulations as well as the mileage regulations for all the improvements in automotive fuel and ignition controls I find it amusing how many people in the US complain about their own government regulations without realizing the rest of the industrial world has regulations too. Complaining about meeting a difficult standard when other companies are somehow managing is really just blame shifting. CAT truck engines are small potatoes for CAT - they put their money in one technology, and then walked away when it didn't pan out. Some of us remember the problems with cars in the early 1970's when early smog regs came in. Engines have been forced to improve.

[@phuturephunk]

Yeah, this is where I'm at as well. All the other players in the market managed to make this work. Cat bet big and missed. It happens. In a way it's academic though. It seems like the movement over time with Caterpillar has been to cut cost and concentrate on their really heavy industry machines.

[@theblackbear211]

@@phuturephunk Absolutely - 20 years ago they were branching out in the marine market as well, but then they partnered with MAK for the larger engines and seem to be pulling away from many of the smaller lines. Heavy equipment is truly their bread and butter, so it makes sense to focus on what they do best. All over the world, engine makers are struggling to find the answers to increasing demands to get cleaner running engines.

[@clydeacor1911]

Improvements?? I have a 2002 Dodge Cummins that is tuned to the same horsepower and torque as a new Ram Cummins my 2002 gets 28 MPG on the highway, my buddies brand new Ram Cummins gets 13 and 14 on a good day. You burn twice the fuel so you have to produce and transport twice as much fuel to do the same thing not to mention you have to mine for metals and manufacture all of the emissions equipment and replace it when it does go bad. The engines also don't last as long which means more mining and production of parts. Now after all of that pollution caused by all of that production tell me which is cleaner 🤔?

[@eurobrowarriormonk7182]

we are against the rest of the world being tryannical governments also. with government regulations the world is poorer everywhere

[@borla4491]

Caterpillar said "fk it, we're sticking to off-road applications" , due to too much stringent emissions laws for on-road diesels.

[@gerardorodruiguez5928]

At least they were already big time with heavy equipment so they could leave without much loss, many couldn't. But i found it funny and interesting how CAT reacted to the EPAs constant new bull crap standards because they weren't too worried about pulling out of the market, like they didn't have to play nice like the others.

[@dzee7936]

What I learned from this video by quoting and paraphrasing your narrative: 1. Rewinding the clock back to 1990 (32 years ago), emission standards were put in place on Diesel engines requiring 1994 models meet those standards. 2. When new emissions standard went in place in 2002, Cat rejected them and instead paid a fine to not change. 3. It wasn't until 2007 (17 years later) that things got much tougher. (Wow, somehow others responded in time, but Cat didn't see this coming) 4. Cat decided to use a very different emissions system (ACERT) than everyone else. 5. Cat made a huge investment in ACERT betting it was superior to EGR for emissions and ultimately it wasn't. 6. All systems had to be certified by the EPA to meet the emission standard. (This is not simply a matter of writing a check. It must meet the standard.) 7. Cat had tons of warranty issues with ACERT-equipped engines. 8. They lost market share, mostly to Cummins. (no doubt because who wants to have your engine in the shop rather than using it?) 9. Those two things made it barely profitable to build on-the-road truck engines. 10. 2010 standards would be even tougher (and apparently they hadn't yet met the 2007 standard). 11. In 2008 they announced they would leave the market in 2010 and team up with Navistar. You then clarify they didn't simply switch to ECR because it didn't make financial sense. It might fix emissions but not market share loss and warranty costs for ACERT engines. Everything about this says Cat went out of business because of bad choices and delays while their competitors stepped up. Had Cummins followed this path, making the same decisions and suffering the same effects of warranty costs, reliability issues, and market loss, they would have been out of business instead. Conclusion? Emissions standards resulted in Cat's exit from the on-road-engine market. If that were true, why are their competitors still in the market?

[@johnsnow5255]

They made a mistake, cut their losses, and are doing quite well in Marine and Oil & Gas.

[@el1161]

Exactly my takeaway. Other companies could innovate, compete and meet emissions standards. CAT could not.

[@kevindouglas2060]

A few years back I had a temporary job driving for a company that only bought new trucks to expand their fleet. The old trucks were rebuilt rather than replaced. Sometimes I got to drive very old trucks. Even though they were maintained on a high level. I can't believe a truck with millions of miles on it would be better than when it was new. However they drove exactly the way I remember. Much better than any of the new trucks. Many had cat engines in them but all of the old ones ran much better regardless of who made the engine. It's not just the engines though even the old dashboards and controls were more logical. The old trucks were simply better. Of course none of the old ones have those damn auto shift transmissions. For those of you who don't know what that is. It's an attempt to make an automatic transmission out what would be a manual by replacing the controls with a computer that shifts it very poorly.

[@ivanaslan24]

Eh , idk Kevin, my Mdrive on my Mack truck works amazing, no problems shifting, it's like it can read my mind, also got a Volvo with ishift and X15 manual. I'll be honest with you, I'll choose the new automatic over manual and day.

[@jesseamaya4413]

Glad to I aint the only one who thought the auto shift transmissions blew chunks. Rough shifting pieces of crap.

[@dwightlooi]

CAT did actually adopt an Exhaust Particulate Filter and EGR in 2007. The problem was that they sucked. The R-Heads which is used to raise exhaust temperature to burn off the soot in the EPF keeps failing. Part of this is because they only had 3 years to get their EPF shit right, whereas the competition had been doing EPF for 7~8 years at that point. They also did EGR in 2007 and their EGR system is actually quite good -- it draws "clean" air from after the EPF rather than dirty air from the exhaust manifold. But, they kept the variable intake valve duration system which means their engine is more complicated than the competition. Ultimately, the 2008 recession and the lack of profitability on the commercial truck engine line lead to the executives cutting their losses and pulling the plug on this part of of CAT's portfolio. Because the decision was made to exit the market about a year and half into the 2007 emissions compliant engine line's life cycle, the R-head system was never fixed because additional engineering investment in a dead-end product no longer made sense. -- It's a sad story of environmental extremism killing our own industry.

[@ourv9603]

Many decades ago in the last century I was a simi truck mech. I remember hearing that John Deere was trying to get into the truck engine market. I heard from a driver he was at a truckstop when another driver proudly showed him his JD truck engine. Supposedly this engine had a lot of horses. More horses than the average truck engine. But, I never heard anything about it after that so I guess it did not fly. !

[@calvinrenard6863]

A guy was probably referring to a 60 series Detroit a lot of truck drivers or Clowning Around in calling them John Deere engine

[@groofromtheup5719]

You are forgetting a major factor. Remember "back in the day" when truck engines had split power ratings? All the engine companies set their engines to produce more power and therefore more pollution when they were using cruise control. They were all very open about it as well. The thinking was pollution was more harmful in cities where there were more trucks, but you wouldn't use cruise. after the fact, the EPA made this a retroactive problem. Part of the settlement was that the 2007 and 2010 standards were moved up beyond where they were originally planned to be implemented. another part of it was a monetary fine. That fine was based on the company's ability to pay instead of levels of pollution. Cat as a company was fined much more since they had their 90% of the company paying for the fine picked up by the 10% of the company. That's gotta hurt.

[@SireDragonChester]

Yeah I wish CAT would come back. I’ve been playing a lot ATS lately and I’ve using Zee’s engine sound mode. His C16 sound so much better and made me do some research about CAT and why they got out of the business for commercial big rigs trucks and quit around 2008 to 2010.

[@dereksmith5019]

My last truck , a Kenworth , was powered with a C-15 450 hp. , never ran out of power with the 18 speed . But my favourite was a 3460 425 hp , it was in a Western Star . Did a lot of T& P with that truck , pulling black top in the mountains of B.C. It pulled really hard from 1100 revs .

[@flyingdutchman4794]

As a diehard IHC partisan, I gotta admit: Never do business with an outfit that thinks it can cost-cut its way to profitability. That's what screwed the old IHC into the ground back in the 1980s

[@gamingbigfats3934]

My dad has a 2000 Western Star with CAT engine. It has 3.4 million kilometres (2,000,000 miles) . All he replaced was a turbo and injectors. Best engines ever build.

[@bljuhl1345]

We’ve devolved, just by making a video to ‘explain it all’ Caterpillars used to be diesels, that means the engine can run without electricity, except for the electric starter, on off switch, headlights, it didn’t need electricity. We drove trucks in the daytime sometimes for hundreds of miles with just enough battery power to operate the turn signals and brake lights. Alternator failure didn’t stop us. Cost effective to drive to a repair shop or home

[@philipjanes]

I wish they would come back into the field. My current Kenworth has a C13 with 1.3 million miles on it. My last one was a C15 with about the same miles. Yes, each one was rebuilt but what great engines. Real work horses.

[@CAPRAQUEENRC]

I miss California Agricultural Tractor engines.

[@garrisonthompson4453]

A partnership with navistar failing? what a surprise there

[@Rookie_One]

The funniest thing about that failed partnership, is that Navistar turned around and sold the designs of their Maxxforce 15 to MAN in Europe....who tweaked it, installed scr on it, and has been making them as the big bore option there ever since their euro6 range came out... Seems like the c15 and the n15 were good engines, but had subpar quality parts, especially since considering that the Man D3876 is a direct evolution of those 2 engines and as far as I know are pretty reliable both in Europe and Australia

[@TellurideS13]

The MAXXForce 15 was based on a C15

[@douglasengle2704]

There are lots of aspect that come into a company deciding to leave an important market. One of the aspects that is talked about is that Caterpillar had determined there was no way forward to reasonably expect to have long term reliable conventional Diesel engines meet tier 3 Diesel emissions starting in 2010. That is in practice is what occurred. All the Diesel manufactures had horribly running tier 3 emission engines that were very unreliable and the Diesel engine manufactures appear to have all been doing software tricks to make their engines to meet emissions during the tests and then change to other settings to provide marginal drive ability by defeating the emission restrictions. It wasn't until unconventional Diesel engines were mandated that use DEF needed for Diesel engines to meet the tier 4 emission standards that Diesel engine were able to have drivability and reliability. Now that tier 4 emissions are in effect for off-road diesel use in the USA and Cat meets these emissions people are wondering what is holding Cat back from certificating their Diesel engines for on-road use. Cummins really seems to have USA on-road Diesel emission system working at a very high level. Cummins Diesel emission system parts are found on the DD series of Detroit Diesel and MX series Paccar Diesel engines according Diesel mechanics. That might have changed, but the reports are when getting a DPF for a DD engine opening the box would reveal a part that said Cummins. Volvo is the only other on-road truck Diesel engine manufacture which is also used under the Mack brand name. International's brand of Diesels highly regarded before tier 3 emissions have largely disappeared without being able to provide a reliable post tier 2 emissions engine. Cummins has in development for release in 2024 an opposed piston 2-cycle Diesel for military vehicles using Achates Power licenses achatespower.com. The OP Diesel 2-cycle should do15% better on fuel economy than any other Diesel on the market with high power density and able to do much better on NOx emissions (down to 10%) of what is currently allowed in tier 4 Diesel emissions. Knowing that the OP Diesel engine is about to be released by Cummins may make Cat reluctant to enter the on-road Diesel market. The release of the Tesla Semi with a fully loaded 81,000 pound 500 mile range test on I-5 shown in the background may now make semi truck manufactures reluctant to put more investment into the limited production USA market of only 200,000 semi tractor sales a year. By 2024 the market demand maybe for a slightly longer range sleeper version of the Tesla Semi provided the $40,000 federal subsidy will apply. The slight of hand Elon Musk was hitting at the Tesla Semi release was the mega charging station for the Tesla semi will have a mega pack Tesla battery storage supporting them allowing solar power supply and the ability to bargain for off peak industrial prices for grid power. That discounted grid electric power cost then would allow Tesla to charge $0.07 kW/h. In California you probably can't get industrial off peak power that low. The cost of the Tesla mega packs probably needs to be sized a good bit above what a Tesla Semi will need due to efficiency losses. With a comfort margin something around 150% of the truck's its supporting. That would cost about as much as another Tesla semi for each Tesla semi it supports. I'd think a lot of the Tesla Semi's can behave very much like Tesla cars in that they sit over night to do a medium fast charge likely using 3-phase power. That should allow off peak grid power use at 100 kW/h per hour or about 2 times the maximum a typical modern house could draw at 200 amps or 48 kW/h per hour. That's still a lot of electrical power. If you've got 3-phase power to your home such as some farms might or your just lucky and its running on the poles you could likely have a Tesla Semi charge at home with a its own power feed and meter.

[@andyharman3022]

Cummins is nowhere near releasing the Achates OP engine for on-highway use. They got into a JV with Achates in 2019 to develop the engine for the US Army in armored vehicles. Any talk about the OP 2-stroke having lower NOx emissions than a 4-stroke is pure fantasy.

[@silversurfer5920]

If the US ever goes to a pro freedom country, which I think can be possible, then I hope to see CAT motors being put back in trucks again. I like other motors too but those older CAT motors are an experience, glad I’ve been able to experience them.

[@zythr9999]

They sure are especially when installed in a NABI Transit bus, The experience is will you make it to your destination.

[@atw4321]

I have a 1999 freighter classic with a 3406 still running it every week

[@davidellis279]

Cat haven’t actually stopped making Diesel engines, they took over Perkins and their engines are now marketed under the Perkins brand alongside Perkins own engines who already owned Rolls Royce Diesels which probably makes them one of the world’s biggest engine manufacturers.

[@tomhaberman4569]

Companies are really pushing for in house brands. Kenworth/Peterbilt are pushing hard to increase the percent of trucks with PACCAR engines. Having said that, Cummins buying Meritor and their joint venture with Eaton Fuller is making a weird love triangle with PACCAR. Meritor makes the PACCAR 40K axles and the Eaton Cummins Endurant transmission (branded as PACCAR TX-12) are in most fleet trucks I see.

[@rosieotis]

Oh, and the CAT CT series truck cabs were fantastic. The Maxxforce-based 11/13 liter engines were troublesome.

[@samsnow13]

Another banger man! Keep ‘em coming!

[@Dustrunnersauto]

Thanks! Will do!

[@sawmillcountry]

I miss 425, 500, and lastly the 600 HP Cats!!

[@wxbgt01]

It was all about PACCAR deciding to build their own engines. The on-highway engine market at that time was extremely price sensitive and Cat was building 400 engines per day for PACCAR and making very little profit. It wasn't so much about emmisions but losing a big chunk of their daily build at Mossville. ACERT did have some problems, too.

[@3116Cat]

Those cat trucks had a international engine with c15 valve covers

[@ManuelFlores-uq3bh]

That’s good they stop because All the time I do PM service at work I always say loose bolts 🤣

[@stevegould1730]

Why? The EPA: destroyer of all things reliable.

[@JC-gw3yo]

Making Chem trails more effective

[@davidreeves2911]

C15 6NZ, the last real CAT RIP managed to get a Century with a C15 6NZ in 2008, said then I would never buy anything with add blue or egr. I parked it in a paddock with 1,300,000 on the clock in 2020 and neither of us has worked since.

[@GetsumJ]

Two of my customers (Warren CAT, Foley CAT) have no problems making huge profits off rebuilds and parts. In a partnership, we actually tested one of their CAT/NAV trucks. It lasted 6 months before having serious issues. The problem with CAT is it's corporate direction and ego driver "We are bigger" approach. They really don't care a lot on quality anymore, but the end customers like Holt CAT are the ones paying the price. CAT needs a corporate change or they will end up much like UPS is.

[@JC-gw3yo]

Big Bud tractors of Havre, Montana is planning to reintroduce a new line heavy duty farm tractors using Cat power exclusively

[@ericgraf1127]

I'm a new driver. But. From what I've driven: Rebuilt no Def peterbuilt. Plenty of power, no issues. Top speed 84mph. Brand new kenworth. Gut less, limited to 64 mph. But acceleration was also slow as a snail. Hard in stop n go or merging. Brand new international. Top speed, 64. Slow acceleration. And I've sent 2 back to the dealer for electronic issues that only the dealer can fix. So far, international is batting zero. I care about the environment. But, open up some lanes to move freight. A strong semi cruising at 70 mph is low emissions. Stuck in gridlock, not so much. Open up bypasses around big cities.

[@verlinswarey507]

I still don’t understand why Cat stopped making engines

[@ericholland8179]

They kept getting E.P.A fines for not meeting the standards so with Truck engines being only 10% of their market they decided to close shop.

[@412hwc]

short answer- they werent changing the engine to make a def system work

[@davidcadamsify]

Dates were off, ACERT came out in 04 when other manufacturers went EGR. DPF was 07, SCR was 2010(which Navistar made the mistake of skipping and going massive EGR)

[@ivanvalverde7018]

The “f*ck it” censor audio sacred me. 6:10

[@jaysen2200]

Def saving the planet one cardboard box and plastic jug at a time

[@ryanhunt7330]

Those squares not square have me all off

[@hanzen5174]

cat should have partnered up with scania

[@paulbriggs3072]

They don't just build marine generators, they are the largest builder of full marine engines in the world including engines for ships of well over 7000 horsepower.

[@Phil-D83]

Should have cooperated with other firms to get the emissions systems going. Bad and misguided management

[@ddversatile]

Cat has t4final engines in off road equipment now so I wonder what’s their reason now

[@fatpatlives1998]

Doest off road engines have different regulations for emissions?

[@groofromtheup5719]

@@fatpatlives1998 yup t4 isn't 1 emission stand. it is several. Off-road t4 is broken up by power. that is why all the small tractor companies are pushing 24.5 hp engines where they used to put a 28hp engine or whatever. under 25hp is pretty loose with emissions. This is also why the next step up that has SCR doesn't have DEF. you have to get bigger before they need to add DEF. Could CAT get back into the On-Road market? yes. Do they want to? no.

[@DayRider76]

I don't get to work on Cat a whole bunch these days, Just move the engine to another truck kind of thing. They made a huge mistake not fighting for it. The downfall is spreading, Those mandates are spreading to industrial to. Companies like Cummins have been stepping up and have great support. Cummins made it easy and affordable to swap out a Cat in almost any application. There is a lot of equipment out there getting rebuilt with the red iron. That's not to say I don't enjoy building around a new twin or compound turbo cat. They are nice.

[@nostradamus7648]

In your opinion who makes the most reliable modern class 8 engine? Cummins or Detroit? I've read Cats are too expensive to rebuild and that's why swapping Cummins killed Cat.

[@DayRider76]

@@nostradamus7648 when you talk reliability, there are a few factors. All of the engine platforms are really roust mechanically, and it comes down to the maintenance, usage and the driver for how well they hold up and how often they need rebuilt. The problems you run into affecting the down time of the unit are the emissions systems. Each one has their own way of doing things and each are equally as bad as the next. Cummins for example, if you have a pto, or your driver insists on idling his truck a lot, The egr system will soot up your oil and wipe out your bearings. Taking a million mile engine down at 300k. The DD's have a very expensive "one Box" that will shut the truck down for any little thing, internal failures of the box are common and it takes months to get a new one. Personally I think the Cummins are better for keeping running and working. Cats are a pain to diagnose, and DD's Take more special attention, but are monsters.

[@DayRider76]

@@nostradamus7648 I need to add a little more context as well that will help shed light on why cat is failing and on the way out. We are a small fleet, 160 trucks, 3 mechanics in the main shop and a few more scattered in other towns. Daimler provides us with the software we need to make repairs on the trucks. Cummins provides us with the software we need to work on the trucks. Cat does not. We are not a big enough fleet and they expect us to send it to the dealer. So F-you cat.

[@michaelsingh4874]

The 3126 cat engine work good in the Ford Louisville and sterling trucks

[@mr_beezlebub3985]

They just didn't feel like it anymore

[@bowez9]

Now was Cat not compliant because the exhaust was too polluted or that they didn't use systems off the approved list? Perfect example vehicle fails visual inspection but passes sniffer test.

[@restlesslifestyle1451]

fabulous video thankyou man

[@juanitofootball94]

Duramax 2.8l

[@tanneratkinson8970]

CAT also produces a lot of engines for military vehicles. C7 and C15 engines are in a lot of military trucks and equipment. But the military doesn't have any emissions equipment on their vehicles so CAT doesn't have to worry about it. Remember it's rules for thee not for me.

[@jamierowe9736]

The trucks in your footage were Australian built cat trucks, right hand drive out of Melbourne, international cabs but had 13 and 15Lt cat acert engines. Australia was few years behind on usa emissions laws. The cab design dident work with Australian dimension laws for multi trailers on long distance work and it was a slow selling truck.

[@crrc4s]

EPA, DEA, IRS, NSA, FDA, and ATF all need to be abolished.

[@22goDpeehs]

99-02 7.3 won. Good video.

[@edwardbenedict4961]

Government screwing over a company.

[@waterishdrake8693]

If instead of investing all that $$ into bs egr and DPF they invested it into maximizing the MPG we could already have 3/4ton trucks running with 30-40MPG. “Cleaner” air while having to burn a lot more fuel

[@wongalex9457]

Government always registered, restricted, make it expensive, nationalize it claim you can effort it and you will can never effort it.

[@JosephArata]

CAT is too proud of their own parts, there are 3 manufacturers of DPF/SCR systems right now, the ones used by Daimler, Cummins, and Volvo for the North American market. Volvo/Mack use their own DPF/SCR 2 box system, Daimler uses an integrated 1 box system for their engines, and the Cummins 2 can system for the Cummins engines installed in Freightliner chassis. CAT could have licensed any one of these systems, but they are stubborn and egocentrically proud about their engineered systems that they wouldn't do that. For the record, Paccar KW/Pete chassis all use Cummins licensed DPF/SCR systems, even with the Paccar MX-13 engine.

[@joshjohnson6163]

We use a ford f800 fire engine for our volunteer fire department it has a cat diesel engine, it'll outlive the truck I guarantee.

[@wymple09]

I know the situation is not ideal with the EPA, but I'm old enough to remember big rigs pouring black smoke out the pipes as if they were burning dirty coal. A million trucks doing that to our air certainly wasn't ideal either. Tech waits for nobody. 2 decades on trucks are still rolling, still making money. If not, they wouldn't do it.

[@dmandman9]

EXACTLY! Nostalgia and rose colored glasses make us forget that. That black smoke looked nice. But it caused a lot of problems and wasn’t good to breathe. I work at a Ford dealership. If a 2008 or later truck comes inside the shop, I can allow the engine to run for a while without anyone noticing. But if I bring an older diesel or a truck with the emissions deleted inside the shop, I have to shut it off IMMEDIATELY, or the guys next to me will start cursing at me for trying to choke them out. I notice that a post 2008 diesel is likely to have a clean tailpipe. It isn’t even the characteristic black and soot coated as with older diesels. Yes, the EPA is a pain . But so is being choked by exhaust and black smoke, especially if caught behind or beside a pre emissions diesel in a traffic jam.

[@JohnCamp]

Ironically though, the older mechanically/hydraulically injected Diesel engines where far easier to convert to run on vegetable oil. But scary smog so make it a computer.

[@dmandman9]

And yes, other companies have adapted and are making money. As a side effect, engines are evidently even more powerful. In times past, I’d hate to get behind a truck even going up a modest grade because they’d almost slow to a crawl if hauling a load. Now they can maintain speed on modest grades.

[@453tye65e65e65e65]

The real reason trucks are still rolling is. There are more older engines still on the road (swamped into newer trucks) and lots of trucks have had their emissions deleted. Also, I hear that trucks over 800HP don't have to meat emissions

[@dmandman9]

@@453tye65e65e65e65 Some delete emissions. But most don’t. Reliability has increased. I admit that The weak point in the trucks we work on is still the Exhaust Temp sensor . That’s the component that can disable the truck . But they are a relatively inexpensive part and easy to replace. But in my experience since 2003, the trucks that give the most problems are those owned by urban cowboys who never Haul anything and drive their trucks around town on short trips. Those who use their f250-550’s as TRUCKS don’t have near the problems as the urban cowboy

[@tylershenenberger8112]

I respect cat for just bowing out unlike other engine manufacturers like cummins making garbage after 2007

[@BobTheBreaker9]

Can owner operators still use a 3406 in trucks if registered in a particular state?

[@glennwill638]

i think the state of california had something to do with it .

[@jeff0nyschuk670]

I am retired from 45 years,,on the road

[@roberth.4108]

i worked for Cat at this time. It was a nightmare. the acert was a disatster and the structure was following Jim West layoffs. it was a shitty horrible nightmare.

[@Jeko_9785]

Awesome video as always, Could we get a 4BT video?

[@Dustrunnersauto]

I have a 4BT video in the pipeline as we speak!

[@nou8257]

Wouldn't that be a short vid since what is there to say "hi this is the 4bt cummins its the same thing as the typical 5.9 6bt it just has 2 less cylinders"

[@Jeko_9785]

@@nou8257 You'll see lmao

[@nou8257]

@@Jeko_9785 Everything i've ever heard on them is what i said its just a 6bt with 2 less cylinders what makes it different

[@Jeko_9785]

@@nou8257 again, wait for the video. lmao

[@buddymac3993]

Love the sound effects ,best part.keep those up,that's a winner???

[@ws-ss8ks]

Not that I support the EPA in general.... but the other engine makers complied. CAT did not. EPA didn't force CAT out, CAT failed to stay in. Ironically, all utility engines in the USA are subject to similar standards so CAT did end up complying with EPA mandates. As a side note, all newer truck drivelines are built around automatic transmissions which requires a dedicated partnership with a transmission manufacturer. Not sure CAT had lined up a proper partnership to make that transition.

[@firsttimediesels6289]

The only downfall of cat is the parts are expensive. Labor cost is high because of their extraordinarily overly complex compound turbo, ard head, cgi, iva, precooler, shotty electronics. The early 6nz cat was the last of the cowboys as i like to say.

[@JF32304]

They didn't want to play the emission regulation game.

[@curtekstrom9531]

Cat was NOT going to Neuter their Engines to meet Highway Trucks. Why I still Maintain a Fleet of Mechanical Cat 3406B and 3408 Cats in my Trucks. No Computers, No ELD, No DEF etc.

[@thespacedpirate]

I can't say I'm too horribly upset that cat quit making engines for trucks. The one cat powered truck in my bosses fleet is constantly breaking and it's not even driven every day. Whereas the 40 year old Cummins powered truck next to it fires up without a hitch after being parked until fire season is in effect.

[@LV-426...]

EPA thank you:((( You killed a lot of engine making in the US. Businesses build, governments destroy. It has always been this way.

[@karlbuttler]

Hi every one, iv'e been a commercial driver for 29 years, and have driven everything here in america except Mack, back in 03 i started Flatbed work with Melton Truck lines out of Tulsa OK where i have lived since, they had the T 660 with 13 speed manual trans, and Cats Big 15 liter with over 500 HP, i was able back then to get a solid 8 mpg, every one in the office in charge of fuel bonus was like, we don't know how your doing this, but keep it up. Less fuel burned, less emissions?! Right? Now we have these Totally CRAP Paccar engines, and they barely get 7 MPG, if your lucky. The two best engines now are DD15, 16, and Volvo, every Volvo engine i had ran strong with really good MPG.......K

[@tomhinch8003]

same reason they stopped making marine diesels , they kept eating liners and injectors

[@iamtheoffenderofall]

Money. Plain and simple.

[@cowthedestroyer]

Waiting for the day when the epa gets gutted i know it will never happen but still emissions is abunch of bull.

[@nou8257]

Epa bullshit is a tool for some rich people to make more money by forcing people to submit to this stupid government agency

[@jameseroh6544]

Breathing is not a bunch of bull. Diesels are a lean burn engine. The problem is the fuel and the fuel delivery. The University of Wisconsin is working on an injector that air and fuel are feed together. If the fuel is better atomized, the burn may improve enough to eliminate EGR and other band aid technology. My wife and I both have Diesel pickups. I also have had a class A license for many years. We are very pro diesel at my house.

[@cowthedestroyer]

@@jameseroh6544 I agree breathing isn't bull you will be fine if you don't deep throat your exhaust you should know this and you should also know the injector crap won't really do anything people have been chasing that idea for years. Burning 30% more fuel isn't a solution for reducing emissions nor should they rule how a vehicle can perform

[@jameseroh6544]

@@cowthedestroyer You must live Hawaii or some other remote location. If a person lives in a valley with several thousand black smoke trucks. It is a problem.

[@cowthedestroyer]

@@jameseroh6544 nah I live in Iowa diesel fumes are not that bad people need to learn up upgrade their intake before putting bigger injectors on but the EPA is the worst thing to happen to vehicles ever. Look at the 12 valve Cummins basically perfection now you have all this after treatment and egr destroying perfectly good engines and trucks all while costing a fortune to maintain.

[@laner989]

You blame the EPA, but the other engine manufacturers did not have a problem with emissions, just CAT. Sounds like incompetent management.

[@chickenbuttdeluxe]

Government said they couldn't meet EPA emissions standards 🤷