The Diesel Stop banner

3408 Cat

128K views 43 replies 31 participants last post by  wrrn73 
#1 ·
I was wondering if any of the trucks (over the road) came with these engines? I seen a old 1980 379 Pete show truck with one in it for sale in a truck paper. It had a old air shift 6x4....I think tranny. Can't remember what brand of tranny it had though. Tim
 
#3 ·
Pig is what I heard of them too. Did they ever come turbo'd?? Then they would really sound like a big PSD.
 
#4 ·
yes they come turboed, although you will see alot of them on boats and fishing fleets.

They do sound cool in a tractor tho. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
#6 ·
Drove a manure spreader with one of these critters in it. Non turbochared but boy would it sling the cow dung.

The spreader was an early 80's with an International Chassis

Johnny
 
#7 ·
Yes the one thats in the paper is turboed with straight exhaust...six inch chrome pipes!!! What a exhaust note!!! Tim
 
#8 ·
I've always wanted one of those with a turbo in a tandem/tri-axle!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif
 
#40 ·
Most of you never drove one let alone in the mountains out west. They were beautiful machines that never came down more than 3 gears on even the Montana mountains. As for no Jake Brake, they had something better: A retarder but none of you would know about that, either. Mine was a twin turbo and had all the power I ever need with a 15 speed transmission. Yes, they got 5 miles mpg but if you want to drive big chrome trucks out west, what do you expect? You pick up a double order and the 120,000 GVW meant nothing to that engine.
 
#10 ·
I don't think the lack of a Jake stopped sales.
Unlike the Cummins (where the Jake could send you through the windshield), Jakes were worthless on all Caterpillar engines at that time.
Flip the switch on a 3406, and all you got was a little chuggin', but no brakin'.

Not until recently has Jake and Caterpillar really made some strides to get some retardation.
 
#11 ·
I had an 1980 KW cabover with one, mine had a "brakesaver" it was worthless also.

I had a 15 over with 3:55 rears. Had real looooong legs but the harder you ran it the more it ate up the fuel.

MPG's in the 4's were pretty common, very hard to get it into the 5's

Neat looking though, I think thats all the guys who still run them like them for, chrome them up and open the hood, big WOW factor if nothing else.

Unless they are worked up real good my 600 Cat humiliates them, plus I can do it without collapsing my fuel tank /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cool.gif

3408 DI was rated for 450 HP and 1400 ft lb's, really not alot by todays standards
 
#13 ·
I imagine the 3408 could be turned way up though, being a simple mechaincal CAT.
 
#14 ·
I remember about 10 years ago, we had a trucker with a 1000 cubic inch Mack V8, at least that's what I over heard.

I remember saying that it would rattle itself to pieces. Any of you guys know anything about a Mack V8? All I really remember about the truck is that it was a conventional cab with a really really boxy nose on the front end.

Wish I had a pic, I never was into Macks.
 
#15 ·
The 3408, had two versions, in the 70's it was a precup IDI engine, then they turned them into DI engines both obviously came with mechanical injection pumps. Later they were made HEUI engines like our PSD's. I don't think Cat offers the 3408 in Construction equipment anymore, The D9T, 631/637G, and the other machines that used it, have inline 6's in them now. The C18 I believe. The old IDI 3408's had an awesome mean sounding exhaust note to them. If you ever see a CAT 631D or 637D scraper running, you should listen to the exhaust sound sometime, they have the IDI 3408 in them. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smokin.gif


Mack had two V8's back in the day, one was a small V8 made in the 70's not really know for being a great engine, and the other was the E9. It was/is 998 ci, first introduced as a 400 hp in the early 80's I believe, then a 450, and then a 500hp in 1985. Which was the big kitty of its day, cat was still at 425, and I think Cummins just introduced the "lowflow" 444. They were offered in Mack over the road trucks until 1998 I think, then Mack took them out of truck because of emissions. The engine was still basically all mechanical injection. I was told they are in some of the older Military tanks two of them a 750hp each. It was a what i feel a good engine, but it had weak head gaskets, if you had one cranked up it would blow the gaskets, if you weren’t careful. We have one in a 88 Superliner, and the superliner with a stock pump setting will walk all over our 500 cummins, and both 550 cats. Never had a chance to run against a 600 before...but I'd think the 600 would take it. Fuel use was'nt to bad, it would burn the same amount as the 550's with similar loads 115k to 120k, if I ran with them, if I wanted make a point and pass them on the hills, then it was noticed at the pump when we'd refuel. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
#16 ·
Thanks for the information Jeremy. I do remember that Mack tractor having a real bark to it's exhaust note.

I do remember now that this particular Mack had a Super Liner emblem on the nose. I wonder if this engine was used in the European market as well like the CAT motor?

I do know that Mack was bought up by Renault a while back.
 
#17 ·
Yep, Mack V8 head gaskets, not enough bolts holding the head on.

The guy who used to fix my 3408 worked on a lot of them, could do head gaskets blindfolded /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

If you think about it all the big class 8 trucks had V8's from every manufacturer, no more though.

At least the Cat's and Macks held together, unlike the 903 cummins /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

The Detroits also held together, real leakers though.

Heres one with a "brakesaver"
You can tell by the 2 oil filters.
 
#19 ·
Ummm..... gotta be careful here. Don't want to give all the Dodge Cummins guys something to bash me about. Ha Ha. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

In my opinion, the most prominent problem with the V-8s is vibration. They just don't run as smooth as a I-6 or a V-12. Speaking from the Cat standpoint, they have moved away from all V-8s, where as they used to have the 3208, 3408, and 3508. Now we see various I-6s replacing the 3208 and 3408, and a 32 liter V-12 to replace the 3508. Vibration is a big issue on gensets, and in boats. But there are a lot of 8 cylinder diesel engines out there running strong after many hard years of service. So that counts for something!
 
#20 ·
The V8 tends to break head bolts on the lower corners for what ever reason!The head gaskets wern't as big a problem as was made out to be!
How ever if the liner protrution was set to low it tended to give problems!
The engine was offered up till two years back in The land of Auzzz at 625 HP And also it had been rumored the the army had these jacked up as much as to 1200 HP /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif 4 turbos!

Heres one running @ 2000 HP
http://www.bandagbullet.com/titan%20photos.htm
Check out the V16 Detroit as well!
http://www.bandagbullet.com/
videos are here http://www.bandagbullet.com/dvd.htm
 
#21 ·
Fred,

Thanks. Those were cool pics. I had a crappy day and those made it seem a little better. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
#22 ·
[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion, the most prominent problem with the V-8s is vibration. They just don't run as smooth as a I-6 or a V-12. Speaking from the Cat standpoint, they have moved away from all V-8s, where as they used to have the 3208, 3408, and 3508. Now we see various I-6s replacing the 3208 and 3408, and a 32 liter V-12 to replace the 3508. Vibration is a big issue on gensets, and in boats. But there are a lot of 8 cylinder diesel engines out there running strong after many hard years of service. So that counts for something!

[/ QUOTE ]

Right, I have always said that the way to tell if you had a 6 or an 8 in a truck is to try to back up, if you have to reach out and hold the mirror to stop the vibration so you could see where you are going then you know it's a 6. Every 3208 I have driven has been a nice smooth, quiet motor with a nice wide range, a bit smoky by today's standards but they sure made driving a pleasure.

As far as the Jakes go on the Cat motors, you do have a point there, the problem was that the Cummins had injector rockers which were used to open the exhaust valve for the same cylinder which was apparently a much more efficient way to operate the Jakes than the way they had to do it with Cat which having a PLN injection system had to use the exhaust rockers of other cylinders under the valve cover.

Birken
 
#23 ·
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the lack of a Jake stopped sales.
Unlike the Cummins (where the Jake could send you through the windshield), Jakes were worthless on all Caterpillar engines at that time.
Flip the switch on a 3406, and all you got was a little chuggin', but no brakin'.

Not until recently has Jake and Caterpillar really made some strides to get some retardation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stupid question but, why does a Jake work so much better on a Cummins VS a CAT? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shrug.gif
 
#24 ·
Ok... the guy that was bashing the 903 v8, don't do it around me! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gifI worked on one in school and it was awsome! The other guy that was naming cat engines... you forgot the 3608. Its a monster! Thanks Fred Hemer I've been looking for that site since I was in school. I will never forget the first time I seen it...I almost wet myself!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif Does anybody no anything about a 3066 cat? Tim
 
#25 ·
[ QUOTE ]
Stupid question but, why does a Jake work so much better on a Cummins VS a CAT? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shrug.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not sure if maybe you were posting at the same time I was, but I will condense it somewhat. The Cummins used a unit injector operated by a rocker arm off a cam lobe and that is what opened the exhaust valve. On the Cat they had injector pumps so there was no injector rocker therefore they had to actuate the exhaust valve of the Jake cylinder off the exhaust valve of another cylinder that happened to be opening at the same time. I think it had to do with timing, lift, rate, and maybe the mechaincal strength of the valve train...the injector takes a lot more oomph to move it than do the valves ordinarily so maybe they toned it down some on the Cat.

Then again the 2 cycle Detroits were operated off the injector rocker too but they did not work so well as Cummins either. Maybe that had to do with the engine cycle though. Who knows.

Birken
 
#26 ·
The 3408 was a big gun. I saw a few of them in the Peterbilt 362H wat back. That was the fist high cab Pete cabover. Had to raise the cab to clear a bigger radiator. There were a few big ones in the late 1970's, like the Cummins KT, the Detroit 12V-71, Mack ENDT 988, and 'Big Al', the Allis Chalmers diesel. 450 was a big number then......
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top