2014 Pete 386

[Casper]

Looking at purchasing a 2014 386. Low miles, ISX Engine. Anyone else have a 386 or have driven one for any amount of time? Looking for input, pros/cons??

[Rawze]

CON: Significantly less fuel efficient than a prostar or cascadia. 0.3 - 0.4mpg on average. = a cost of several thousand dollars a year in fuel consumption. If a person is trying to be competitive in the market, this may or may not be significant.

You made no mention on the type of freight, operation, etc. or anything that actually counts towards long term profitability. Things like proper rear end ratio, and other specs that could cost or save a person thousands a year, and potentially be the difference form someone who struggles, and someone who does not.

Personally, I like my 8+ mpg prostar (3:55 rears/ISX 871). It is just about the best solution for mostly highway dry-van and refer markets out there, but I understand it is not for everyone. Not everyone is looking for a highway truck. Just something to heavily consider for those who might be reading this thread.

- Making a poor choice with a truck can cost someone a lot of grief and lost revenue if they can't make it into something competitive. Spec'ing a truck for best profitability should be the very first thing a person considers any more in trucking (fuel efficiency for the market your in being #1, all others secondary) ... anything less and your only going to struggle any more, because people like me (or some low-rent mega-fleece) will come along and under-cut your customers and drive you out of the market.


Just some things to consider past what the equipment looks like, no one has to agree.

[Waterloo]

I drove one up in the oil fields, a snub nose 379 was my impression. Did not care much for the mirrors, but all in all, a good truck. That is about all I know, as far as build quality, I have no clue.

The motor is where I would have concerns, are emissions intact? Any service records? Have you gone over the motor, removed the valve cover to inspect the cam? Have the sensors been changed out and the fuel pump gone through and rebuilt or replaced? If everything is still painted factory Cummins red you will more than likely be installing a fuel pump, all new sensors, EGR tuneup and the emissions will need to be gone through, the DPF/DOC and SCR, very pricey.

If the mandate was taken care of, I would be leery of the motor unless someone from here did the work, a trip to NAPA and a Block Test Kit would be in order to see if the head and or liners are still intact.

With any of these used trucks it is a real crap shoot, a REAL CRAP SHOOT. If I was in the market for a used truck, it would be old and non emission or plan on having at least $30,000 in the bank to have the motor in framed, even with low miles. Carbon packing is your enemy, especially if the truck has been idled for any amount of time. Is there a working APU on the truck, that would be a good sign.

[Casper]

(09-22-2019 )Rawze Wrote:  CON: Significantly less fuel efficient than a prostar or cascadia. 0.3 - 0.4mpg on average. = a cost of several thousand dollars a year in fuel consumption. If a person is trying to be competitive in the market, this may or may not be significant.

You made no mention on the type of freight, operation, etc. or anything that actually counts towards long term profitability. Things like proper rear end ratio, and other specs that could cost or save a person thousands a year, and potentially be the difference form someone who struggles, and someone who does not.

Personally, I like my 8+ mpg prostar (3:55 rears/ISX 871). It is just about the best solution for mostly highway dry-van and refer markets out there, but I understand it is not for everyone. Not everyone is looking for a highway truck. Just something to heavily consider for those who might be reading this thread.

- Making a poor choice with a truck can cost someone a lot of grief and lost revenue if they can't make it into something competitive. Spec'ing a truck for best profitability should be the very first thing a person considers any more in trucking (fuel efficiency for the market your in being #1, all others secondary) ... anything less and your only going to struggle any more, because people like me (or some low-rent mega-fleece) will come along and under-cut your customers and drive you out of the market.


Just some things to consider past what the equipment looks like, no one has to agree.

Thank you for your input..
Here are the particulars on this truck.
It 'was' fleet owned, drivers did not sleep in the trucks, but stayed in motels (researched the company and asked questions), Engine is ISX15 500HP CM2350, 18 speed, 3:36 rears, low pro 22.5, 48" mid roof sleeper. I operate a flatbed in the mountains of SC, NC, GA, TN and AL mostly regional work, hauling between 76-80K one way, empty return. According to the Cummins report the DEF dosing valve was replaced at 12,143, Campaign-Relief valve at 92,146 and the Fuel Pump Tippets at 188,439. It has a Red Oval Warranty for 1 year or 125K miles included in the price of the truck. 260K miles/6700 engine hours. I've been in a 379 for the past 12 years, but it's time for a change. We ran a RigDig on this unit also, nothing of interest.
I asked for Cummins service records to see what this brings up as well.

[Casper]

(09-22-2019 )Waterloo Wrote:  I drove one up in the oil fields, a snub nose 379 was my impression. Did not care much for the mirrors, but all in all, a good truck. That is about all I know, as far as build quality, I have no clue.

The motor is where I would have concerns, are emissions intact? Any service records? Have you gone over the motor, removed the valve cover to inspect the cam? Have the sensors been changed out and the fuel pump gone through and rebuilt or replaced? If everything is still painted factory Cummins red you will more than likely be installing a fuel pump, all new sensors, EGR tuneup and the emissions will need to be gone through, the DPF/DOC and SCR, very pricey.

If the mandate was taken care of, I would be leery of the motor unless someone from here did the work, a trip to NAPA and a Block Test Kit would be in order to see if the head and or liners are still intact.




With any of these used trucks it is a real crap shoot, a REAL CRAP SHOOT. If I was in the market for a used truck, it would be old and non emission or plan on having at least $30,000 in the bank to have the motor in framed, even with low miles. Carbon packing is your enemy, especially if the truck has been idled for any amount of time. Is there a working APU on the truck, that would be a good sign.

I really appreciate all the input and tips. I'll be putting eyes on this unit this week just to see where we stand on it. As to the APU, no there is no APU, but the engine hours are showing at 6700. The company that owned the truck previously, put their drivers up in motels, so the idling would have been done while dropping hooking, traffic, etc. (If the transportation manager at the company is honest....one never knows).

[Rawze]

3:36's is totally a turn-off for me.

You say your going to be in the hills a lot with it, and heavy half the time. Your going to hate those rears, its goign to feel like a big dog turd, and sucking fuel unnecessarily because of those terrible rears.

- if you end up with that truck, do yourself a favor right up front ... replace the rears with a set of 3.79's instead of continuing to torture that engine. Can likely be done for about $4,500 ~ish with a set of weller remans.

the ISX will last its longest and perform its best at the 1600 - 1650 rpm range, and pulling hills at high boost levels with the engine turning below 1400 is downright abusive to the liners. Spec the rears so that you can pull the steep hills between 1500 and 1800 rpm range, keep that rpm up there, and engine will last a long time. otherwise your looking at an inframe by the time it gets to about 560-580k miles with an operation like your describing and those tall engine abusing rears.

[Casper]

(09-22-2019 )Rawze Wrote:  3:36's is totally a turn-off for me.

You say your going to be in the hills a lot with it, and heavy half the time. Your going to hate those rears, its goign to feel like a big dog turd, and sucking fuel unnecessarily because of those terrible rears.

- if you end up with that truck, do yourself a favor right up front ... replace the rears with a set of 3.79's instead of continuing to torture that engine. Can likely be done for about $4,500 ~ish with a set of weller remans.

the ISX will last its longest and perform its best at the 1600 - 1650 rpm range, and pulling hills at high boost levels with the engine turning below 1400 is downright abusive to the liners. Spec the rears so that you can pull the steep hills between 1500 and 1800 rpm range, keep that rpm up there, and engine will last a long time. otherwise your looking at an inframe by the time it gets to about 560-580k miles with an operation like your describing and those tall engine abusing rears.

Thank you for your input and advise!!

[Waterloo]

Ditto on those 3:36 gears, I have the 3:42 in mine, and they are terrible if you have to pull any sort of hill, much less a mountain. My only saving grace is that I pull light loads, anything over 20,000 pounds and I am in a world of hurt trying to keep the rpm's up so as not to lug the motor. The truck you found sounds pretty good, I would consider it if the motor and emissions checks out, but I would have the shop you are buying it from install some 3:55 or better yet in your case, some 3:70 gears if you are going to be in the mountains the majority of the time. Then I would take it to Mr Hagg and fix it for good.

[Lonestar10]

3.70s and 13speed .73 OD is in this area

1400rpm - 60
1500rpm - 65
1600rpm - 70
1700rpm - 75 MPH