2013 CASCADIA DD15 ULTRASHIFT VS VOLVO 670 ISHIFT
- Thread starter Paul S
- Start date
30
We have both and are moving away from Volvo, just too many problems, as a matter of fact Penske is switching out 3 Volvo's this week for Freightliners as they cannot afford to keep them on the road. But I will say 2 out of 9 Volvo's that are in the fleet have no problems at all. I was a big Volvo fan for years but just cannot keep going with them.
20
We have 6 Volvo's with the D13, 5 with I-Shift doing amazing, worst truck gets 7.29 mpg US and the best just over 8mpg. We have a 7th with the cummins ISX, best it has seen has been 6.75, however only 160,000kms so we hope to see some improvement. Our volvo rarely see a shop and when they do it's just software upgrades. 1 of the original 5 has seen the shop for parts, that's it.
30
Have they lightened the Volvos up in recent years? The biggest complaint I kept hearing is that they're a heavy truck. Macks, on the other hand, seem to be the lightest trucks on the market. Of course, it also depends alot on how you spec them. I've always had a preference for Macks for flatbed work. They are a compact no nonsense truck. Tare weight is so important.. love to see it down around 28000 lbs (truck and trailer).. So many out there now that are 32000 lbs and up and can't handle the 30% of loads (in the US) that are over 48000 lbs.
20
I have the Cascadia Evolutions in 2015, 2016, and 2017 models with the DD15's at 455 HP, and DT12 auto-shift transmissions. The "Evolution" moniker denotes the all Detroit drive line which includes the front axle, engine, transmission and rear drives. I have 4 working dry vans and 1 working a roll-tite. All are getting high 9's for fuel mileage ... that's miles per Canadian gallon. Weight-wise they're running about 19,500 lbs, driver in, and full of fuel. Personally, I wouldn't buy any other truck.
I also have 1 Peterbilt model 579 with a Paccar MX-13 engine and an Eaton Ultrashift transmission. It gets almost as good fuel mileage as the Freightliners and has a beautifully appointed cab and bunk which is nicer than the Freightliner offering. Downsides to the Peterbilt are cost of acquisition, and maintenance. Peterbilt's can only be serviced reliably by a Peterbilt dealership ... and their knowledge base is generally quite low when it comes to electronic engines (even their own), and considerably expensive.
I also have 1 Peterbilt model 579 with a Paccar MX-13 engine and an Eaton Ultrashift transmission. It gets almost as good fuel mileage as the Freightliners and has a beautifully appointed cab and bunk which is nicer than the Freightliner offering. Downsides to the Peterbilt are cost of acquisition, and maintenance. Peterbilt's can only be serviced reliably by a Peterbilt dealership ... and their knowledge base is generally quite low when it comes to electronic engines (even their own), and considerably expensive.
30
10
The picture is a few months old now but the fuel mileage with the Volvo is always 8.8 mpg or better
As for issues..in over two years now the truck has been down for a total of 6 hours due to breakdown. One was an engine oil temp sensor and the other a Def related sensor.
There's 3 Cascadia here..all of them have had numerous sensor issues and substantial time lost at the dealer.
None of them can match fuel mileage of the volvo.
As for transmissions.. having driven both I prefer the I-Shift by far. Smoother shifts and seamless transfer from auto to manual mode when needed in bad conditions or the mountains.
As for issues..in over two years now the truck has been down for a total of 6 hours due to breakdown. One was an engine oil temp sensor and the other a Def related sensor.
There's 3 Cascadia here..all of them have had numerous sensor issues and substantial time lost at the dealer.
None of them can match fuel mileage of the volvo.
As for transmissions.. having driven both I prefer the I-Shift by far. Smoother shifts and seamless transfer from auto to manual mode when needed in bad conditions or the mountains.
Attachments
2
Our Cascadia experience was not a good one. Not only did the trucks have various issues that resulted in considerable downtime, but we found that the service at certain Freightliner dealers in the GTA was really bad. In addition, we have had several drivers try both the Cascadia and the 670 on the same run and without exception they have preferred the Volvo's performance and smooth ride. They especially complain about the jumpiness of the Ultrashift compared to the iShift when backing up slowly. Finally, I find the interior of the 670 to be more sleek and modern than that of the Freightliner (I like the convertible bed/table). So least for now, only Volvo's are coming into our fleet.
30
So Paul it goes without saying you probably did not learn a lot as owning trucks is just a coin flip on how they perform, one comes off the line with nothing but problems and the next one nothing but problems.