Mack CF: The Flawless Truck?

[x635 4,066]

Many of us apparatus buffs love the Mack CF's, and have had the privledge of working or operating one, including myself.

However, people complain about just about every brand out there. At the time, and I am speaking specifically of Mack CF's with the body built by Mack, were there any issues or major complaints? Also, who was the dealer for the Hudson Valley?

The Mack CF I have experience with (the former Ardsley Engine 165- 1979 Mack CF), was probaly and still is one of the most well laid out and easy to operate and maintain chasis's I've ever seen. The only issue was body cancer (rust). Note the chasis and truck were completly built by Mack. That truck, had it not outgrown the need for space, and with a refuurbishment, could still be in service today.

[mfc2257 464]

I have had the privilege of working off of a Mack CF and can say that it was always up for the job. Although reliable I always found the factory Mack engines to be weak. There is one other rig that I have worked off of that I put in a class at the top with the CF and that is the American LaFrance Century. Every other rig may be more comfortable, faster, quieter, etc, but those two were the best I ever worked off of or drove!!!

Disclaimer: I own a B Model Mack and am a huge fan of all things Mack!!!! But a Century Cab LaFrance with an 8V72 got the blood circulating vs a CF Mack with a Maxidyne

Edited March 15, 2012 by mfc2257

[MESS11FOREVER 246]

Alof of different Mack chassis's but mostly CF models

Edited March 15, 2012 by MESS11FOREVER

[EdAngiolillo 61]

I've always joked if I ever hit the lottery, I'm going to buy and refurbish a CF and/or a B series pumper.

[FFPCogs 863]

I've never really heard many complaints about any Mack rigs other than body rust and the CF is no exception. Versatile and durable the CF line is truly an iconic American fire truck if there ever was one. It's a shame Mack got out of the fire truck business as I'm sure a version of the CF would still be in widespread use if they were available. A testament to the design's longevity is the fact that there are still a number of in service CFs out there, here's a few that I know of.

Although not an all Mack rig my FD still operates this 1986 Mack CF as a frontline piece and the rig is easily up to the job, I guess because she's built...well "like a Mack truck".

The fleet of the Noroton Heights VFD near me consists almost entirely of CF rigs save the Rescue.

http://www.nhfd.us/Apparatus.html

The CF moniker has made it's way back into the fire service lexicon with Pierce's latest design, but that's a thread in itself.

Cogs

Edited March 15, 2012 by FFPCogs

[xchief2x 79]

Our 1984 CF was a great rig, it ran great, pumped great and we never had any major problems mechanically. But like others have said body rot was the problem. I have been led to believe that ours was one of the last rigs completely built by Mack and the last one built completely by Mack was for Stony Point FD. We had a 62 Mack and if you compared the bodies on both Mack really didn't make any improvements to body construction, the doors were exactly the same.

[sfrd18 360]

Mack CF: one heck of a rig, built to last. They were both reliable and durable. And, not to knock any Pierce fans out there, but it is also the only CF!

And Cogs, I've seen Noroton Heights fleet and they're all in mint condition, and all frontline too: 2 Engines, 1 Quint, and 1 Tanker. Their Rescue is a Mack MR I believe. They also used to have a sort of "mini-snorkel", like Chicago's Snorkel Squads, but the snorkel boom was removed some time ago and now it's their tanker I believe. Also, Darien had 2 Mack Engines and still have a Mack tanker(not CF though). Their Mack CF tower was refurbed by Seagrave and is one of two(including Pelham Manor) Seagrave single-axle rear re-mounts. Still, there's nothing like a Mack!

[ptwatson 82]

Retired Eastchester Engine 28 which was a 69 CF. She served 40 years from 69 to 2010. In the late 90's she was refurbished when the jump seats were enclosed. The encloser made riding in the jump seat incredibly loud. She had a sister which was originaly Engine 27 then became Engine 30 when the 86 Mack became 27 later Engine 29. Eastchester also had early 1970's Mack CF's which were Engine 29 and 31. They served until they fell apart and were replaced by the American LaFrance Eagle pumpers around 2000

Edited March 15, 2012 by ptwatson

[ptwatson 82]

Retired Eastchester Engine 28 which was a 69 CF. She served 40 years from 69 to 2010. In the late 90's she was refurbished when the jump seats were enclosed. The encloser made riding in the jump seat incredibly loud. She had a sister which was originaly Engine 27 then became Engine 30 when the 86 Mack became 27 later Engine 29. Eastchester also had early 1970's Mack CF's which were Engine 29 and 31. They served until they fell apart and were replaced by the American LaFrance Eagle pumpers around 2000

I found pics of all the EFD's Mack CF's at http://fdnytrucks.com/files/html/otherstates/Westchester/Eastchester.htm

Edited March 15, 2012 by ptwatson

[spin_the_wheel 460]

My Dept. would have still been all Mack without a doubt. Here is a pic from 1989. All first due units were Mack CF cabs except for 1 1975 Maxim!

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

My Dept. would have still been all Mack without a doubt. Here is a pic from 1989. All first due units were Mack CF cabs except for 1 1975 Maxim!

I see a ford in there, maybe in the center ?

[mfc2257 464]

Looks like a light truck or other utility type vehicle not frontline is he mentioned

[spin_the_wheel 460]

I see a ford in there, maybe in the center ?

Good eye, thats was a flood light unit. I didnt count that as part of first due rigs, it was manned only for working fires or special calls by the IC.

[PCC030664 2]

I always loved these Macks. Some of the places here in FL that had them were Orange County, the City of Hialeah, and Miami-Dade (inherited from a small municipal FD that was merged into M-D). I don't think any are still around.

Phil

Edited March 24, 2012 by PCC030664

[Howard Peiffer 52]

I always loved these Macks. Some of the places here in FL that had them were Orange County, the City of Hialeah, and Miami-Dade (inherited from a small municipal FD that was merged into M-D). I don't think any are still around.

Phil

The City of Palm Coast, Fl. operates these Macks assigned to it's volunteers.

1984 Mack CF688 1750/600

1985 Mack CF688/Hahn 1750/500

1986 Mack CF688/Hahn 1750/500

Photos by Howard Peiffer

Edited March 24, 2012 by Howard Peiffer

[IzzyEng4 427]

The unfortunate thing about CFs is the body rot problems around the front wheel wells. But for durability, they could take one heck of a beating.

[AndyC3J 190]

Our 1984 CF was a great rig, it ran great, pumped great and we never had any major problems mechanically. But like others have said body rot was the problem. I have been led to believe that ours was one of the last rigs completely built by Mack and the last one built completely by Mack was for Stony Point FD. We had a 62 Mack and if you compared the bodies on both Mack really didn't make any improvements to body construction, the doors were exactly the same.

The last Mack CF completely built by Mack was Westbury, NY (Long Island). It was replaced a few years ago with a KME, and is now privately owned by a collector in Pennsylvania.

Somebody mentioned winning the lottery and buying a Mack to restore or preserve. I am one such win away from telling Golden's Bridge (among a few other select towns) to name their price!

[efdcapt115 1,511]

The unfortunate thing about CFs is the body rot problems around the front wheel wells. But for durability, they could take one heck of a beating.

Much of my career chauffeuring engines was spent in Mack CF's. Surprised nobody has mentioned the one inherent flaw that could actually hurt; the steering wheel was too close to the windshield. The thousand scratches on the windshield from guy's rings getting jammed up in there was proof of the pain. This was on the earlier models like E-28 that Pete posted the photos of above.

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

Much of my career chauffeuring engines was spent in Mack CF's. Surprised nobody has mentioned the one inherent flaw that could actually hurt; the steering wheel was too close to the windshield. The thousand scratches on the windshield from guy's rings getting jammed up in there was proof of the pain. This was on the earlier models like E-28 that Pete posted the photos of above.

And that feeling of falling forword with nothing to hold on to in the officers seat !

[efdcapt115 1,511]

And that feeling of falling forword with nothing to hold on to in the officers seat !

Oh that's funny! Yeah that whole bench felt like a potential launching pad. How about the "air-ride" driver's seat...the boing boing up and over bumps in the road. How many times did you crack your head on the ceiling liner?

Not all bad in the interior though. The brake pedal was great, the location of the dash controls made those easy, the battery switch on the side of the driver's seat, all good stuff.

The sliding window between the cab and the jump seats.....

[PCFD ENG58 1,085]

Oh that's funny! Yeah that whole bench felt like a potential launching pad. How about the "air-ride" driver's seat...the boing boing up and over bumps in the road. How many times did you crack your head on the ceiling liner?

Not all bad in the interior though. The brake pedal was great, the location of the dash controls made those easy, the battery switch on the side of the driver's seat, all good stuff.

The sliding window between the cab and the jump seats.....

If you wanted to fix the next crew because they complaned that you did not clean the rig good , you pledged the seats !

[ex-commish 490]

We had a Mack CF also and despite the flaws you couldn't ask for a better pump.

[ptwatson 82]

If you wanted to fix the next crew because they complaned that you did not clean the rig good , you pledged the seats !

Ha ha thats great! Slip slide and away!