The Hazards of Buying a Used Bus or: has my Karma gone sour?

[dburt]

My wife is pretty good about allowing different projects, as long as they run and are mobil. I may have a hard sell on taking the DT466 out and leaving the Ward bus for a greenhouse. But maby I could sell her on the idea of it being a guest house?? Or a storage unit?? Around here you have to pay close to $4,000 for a 40-ft shipping container to use for storage, so it would be cheaper and somewhat mobil also! I have the skills to do a conversion, but I don't know if I have the ambition to do it like I had when I was 30. It seems better and easier to sell them both and look for that ideal bus and avoid all that hard, messy, greasy work and skinned knuckles. Been there, done that, many times!!

[brian]

At 56, I know what your talking about. My bus has a Cat and if I had a dt466 sitting around I'd put it in, though I'd probably be drawing Social Security by the time I got it anywhere close to running.

My remanufactured 3208 has 60k on it, probably good for another 250k. So far, I drive it when I need to mow under it. The cost of driving it, let alone converting it, will be a challenge for me in this new economy. I too would buy another bus--but my limit is 1, so I'll just keep plugging along.

Buses are cheap now--so buy the best, (but you already got two!)

[dburt]

I am looking at 57 next month, Wow- where has the time gone?? If I am going to ever get anything done in the way of a conversion I better get cracking at it soon! I would like to find a rear engine DT466 flat nose bus, but I cannot seriously look until I sell at least one and probably both buses. Most of the buses I see on EbayMotors are back east, just too far to be really feasible. And If I just get one sold and not the other, I will just have to live with it. It's rather funny and ironic that in my younger days I would have just taken what was at hand and made it work well with nary a thought about all the different options. Now I agonize over and ponder all the different avenues and ways to getting something done, so much so that I actually hinder progress sometimes! Something is to be said for youth and ignorance perhaps, just bull your way through it! Does old age or experience make us worry more, be extra cautious? Or do we just lose alot of our drive and ambition? Or both of the above?

[stuartcnz]

Buses are cheap now--so buy the best,

How much cheaper are they than before they became cheap? Just asking out of curiosity, not knowing the american bus market.

[Rudy]

I am 56 as well. I think drive and ambition may be something, that if you always had it, you never really ever lose. The problem is that the mind says yes, but the body says, you gotta be kidding me. Also, as a youth, one's responsibilities were way lower.

[dburt]

Stuart- American buses were higher priced a couple or three years ago before the economy began to tank over here. I would say that a good rear engine Thomas is maby 1/3 to 1/2 of what it costs three years ago. The more common, lower or middle line buses are sometimes even less then 1/2 price of what they sold for three years ago. Ie: A good, low mileage (98,000 mile) 1998 IH Amtran rear engine bus recently sold for $1,500 when it should have brought about $3,500. Of course different regions of the US have thier own pricing differences, but on the whole it seems that bus prices are down due to the poor economy. Vintage Crown buses seem to hold thier value well, and there are not many of them available any more so there are exceptions to the dropping prices, but mostly accross the lines there is a real dip in prices right now. If you have the money it is a good time to buy a bus.

Also right now there is a real drop in the very top of the line used Prevost coach buses and RV converions. A mid-90's low mileage Prevost coach factory RV conversion can be bought for about $125,000. This is for a coach that cost about $6-750,000 new. A new one is about $900,000 or even up to $1.5 million. Of course the new ones have slide outs which is very popular now, and the older ones don't so that may be part of the reason they sell for much less then you would expect. Still, if a person had an extra $125K to throw around right now, you could get one sweet top of the line Prevost (real bus type chassis) luxury motor home.

Rudy- you are right about the drive and ambition. My brains says we are still 30, but the body says no way! So the body seems to win out more often then not. But the brain can still have pipe dreams of artful and artistic rolling homes with stained glass windows and lots of vintage oak interiors, with hand cut wood shingles for siding, with The Band or CSNY playing on the cassette tape player. (Maby my brain is stuck in the '70's.)

[Mark R. Obtinario]

I am now almost 52.

I have a daughter that is 14-months.

Any discrectionary time or $$$ are now dedicated to her.

So converting anything at this time is a non-starter.

One thing I posted earlier about engines needs a little clarification.

What I would deem barely sufficient HP my brother-in-law would consider overkill.

He lives in Michigan where hills are low and not very steep.

I live in WA state just off of US12/White Pass Highway. It tops out at 4500' with several grades of 6%+ for more than a couple of miles. Grinding up the steep parts @ under 25MPH is no fun for you or the string of traffic stuck behind you.

I think what I am trying to say is always purchase the best you can find.

But if you never plan on traveling through mountains you won't need the high HP engine or the heavier/more expensive transmission behind it.

A bus with the IHC 6.9L/7.3L/T444 or Cummins 5.9L/ISB engine will get the job done more than adequately in most cases.

[stuartcnz]

Mark, what sort of HP are these engines putting out at the axle? When I was driving trucks I found 420/430hp fine if I wasn't doing much hill work, but when doing long runs with plenty of mountain work I didn't like anything less than 500hp. That was also pulling around 44 metric ton though and working to deadlines.

I would have thought 200/250hp would be suitable for a bus.

[dburt]

The DT466 IH 6cyl turbo diesel engine in my '83 Ward/IH FE bus is rated at 210 HP. The bus has a GVWR of 33,000 lbs. The non-turbo 3208 Cat V-8 engine in my '81 Thomas RE Bus is rated at 205 HP and the bus has a GVWR of 36,000 lbs. Both buses are goverened to about 55-58mph and are coupled to Allison 643 4-spd auto transmissions. The Ward/IH bus rides on 10.00X20 tires, and the Thomas rides on 11.00X20 tires.

[Mark R. Obtinario]

The IHC 6.9/7.3/T444/T444E came in various HP ratings with the most common in the 180 HP neighborhood.

The Cummins 5.9/6BT/ISB came in various HP ratings with the most common in the 190 HP neighborhood.

180-190 HP is more than adequate on the flat but as you pointed out, when you get on the big hills you discover how much you are missing.

Both engines can be "pumped" up to over 300 HP but reliability becomes an issue as well as heat.

The IHC 6.9/7.3/T444/T444E has also been used in Ford light duty trucks and is basically the same engine. Ford "pumped" the engine up to compete against the Dodge/Cummins and GM/Duramax. As a result, the same engine that turns in 500K+ miles in IHC medium duty trucks and buses with very few problems has a tough time making 100K miles in Ford light duty trucks without problems.

The same thing has occurred with the Cummins 5.9/6BT/ISB that has been used in Dodge light duty trucks. Dodge "pumped" them up and ended up with frame cracking, transmission problems, and reliability issues that just never come up with the same engine in medium duty trucks and buses.

Again, going back to my point (wherever it went), purchase the best bus for you.

What is best for you will not be best for anyone else. Only you can decide what is best for you. It may mean selling what you have already in order to purchase something different. But in the long run, trying to make a silk purse out of sow's ear never has worked. No matter how much $$$ you may pour into it.

[Mark R. Obtinario]

In regards to HP/Torque ratings, most engines in a class are similar. But similar does not translate into equal performance.

The DT466 has only come as a turbocharged engine. I have seen HP ratings as low as 160 HP for it and as high as 300 HP. Most school buses have the 210 HP version.

Cummins has made several inline 6 engines available in school buses over the years. While the older C-series (C-160/170/180/190) were good in their day, a newer B-series 5.9L is a much better engine with better fuel mileage with higher HP. And a newer C-series 8.2L is even better.

The Cat 3208 came only as a non-turbocharged engine with the top HP rating about 210 HP.

The Cat 3208T came only as a turbocharged engine with the top HP rating 325 HP. Most school buses have the 250 HP version. Cat still supports the 3208 but like everything else that is Cat gold, you need lots of gold if you need anything to keep them going.

The IHC 9.0L V-8 came only as a non-turbocharged engine. It was a stop gap design and was supposed to be an economical alternative to a big gas engine back when IHC still made gas engines. When gas cost twice to three times what diesel cost it made sense. Now with gas costing less than diesel, not so much. It is most commonly found in 180 HP versions although I have heard some have been pumped up to 210 HP. It is best left to be used as a boat anchor--parts are becoming very difficult to find. Difficult=$$$$.

The Detroit Diesel 8.2L four cycle V-8 has become a bit of step child for Detroit. It was designed to replace the -53 series 2-cycles in medium duty use. As such, it was pretty much identical in ratings as the 6V-53. The most common HP rating was 180-190 HP. I have been told that some were turbocharged. I have never seen one. Since they had some problems with head gaskets I would think upping the intake pressure would increase the head gasket problems. Very few engines were ever used by anyone that didn't have a GMC/Chevy chassis so there never were very many of them out on the road. As a consequence, parts are becoming very difficult to find. Difficult=$$$$.

Probably the worst diesel boat anchor of an engine that was foisted off onto the school bus world was the Cummins 555 V-8. In marine use or genset use it was a pretty good engine and lasted next to forever. In automotive use it tended to grenade itself in less than 100K miles (when I say grenade I mean catastrophic piston through the side of the block kind of failure). Why exactly I have never really known. But this many miles down the road, most have been repowered to something else with the Cat 3208 being the most common repower. It was usually non-turbocharged and rated at 180-205 HP.

I haven't mentioned any of the gas powered engines that have graced the engine compartments of many buses over the years simply because in this day and age of $3.00 per gallon gas you really don't want to have an engine in a bus that will get you up to highway speed that gets less than 4 MPG.

Probably the best school bus engine ever put on the road was the IHC SV345. Even with an automatic they would turn in 6+ MPG on a regular basis. But top speed was limited to about 55 MPH on the flat and any hill really slowed you down.

The IHC LV478 would really move you down the road but 3-4 MPG was considered pretty good.

The Ford 534 V-8 would pass the IHC except for the fact the Ford only went half as far on a gallon of gas.

And if you want to talk about a real monster engine, a Crown or Gillig with a Hall-Scott would and could still blow the doors off of anything on the road. But you are still talking about less than 4 MPG.

[dburt]

I worked at a Ford dealership in NE Oregon when they first came out with the 6.9 Navistar diesel in '87, and last worked at the dealership when it finally closed it's doors in '07. I was the general manager, worked in sales, and even twisted a wrench or two in the garage. We sold about 25 diesel Ford pickups per month.

Back in the pre-turbo days of the 6.9 and 7.3 we kept ATS Turbo and Banks Turbo in business. We had alot of experience in Ford diesel pickups, and had many customers that had 300,000 plus miles on thier Ford diesels when they traded them in. The most miles I recall was a little over 500,000 miles on a '90 Ford that was used to pull RV trailers around the country for delivery to RV dealerships.

Our customers, mostly ranchers and loggers, had very good success with the IH 6.9, 7.3 and 7.3T engines. Of course if the engine was not given decent maintenance it did not last as long as the well maintained engines.

The 6.0 diesel was a different story. It had lots of problems when it first came out, which doomed customer confidence even though Ford worked out most of the problems before it's demise. The 18 months we sold the replacement 6.4 diesel for the less then stellar 6.0 was not enough time to see if it was as good an engine as the old 7.3 so I can't give much insight on it.

Mark is right about the Dodge 5.9 diesel. The last several years before our dealership went under, it had bought and owned the Dodge dealership accross the street, and I got a couple of years experience selling Dodge pickups with the 5.9 and even a few of the new in '07 6.7 Dodge diesels.
The most miles I ever saw on a Dodge 5.9 Cummins- it was nearing 800,000 one owner miles, the truck belonged to a good friend of mine so I knew it's history. Above average maintenance all of the time, and he drove it like a long haul heavy trucker. He did go through two transmissions, one pump and one rear end though.

Most Dodge diesel pickups had very poor frames, bodies and suspensions and these did not hold up as well as the Cummins. The overdrive transmissions, both manual and auto did not hold up very long either.
It was common knowledge that the 5.9 would last much longer then the Dodge truck.

I have always been a Ford diesel man myself, but in a moment of weakness I thought I would try a Cummins powered Dodge since I sold them as well as the Fords, so in '07 I bought a one ton dually 4X4 6.7 diesel powered Dodge cab and chassis and built my own lo-pro flatbed.

I thought if things went south, I could always sell it and get back in a Ford. Then the business went bust, so I am stuck with a Cummins powered Dodge. So far no major problems, although when it was almost new (under 3,000 miles) it had the computer reprogrammed about 4 times to set things right. It is rated at 350hp in front of the new in '07 HD Dodge 6-spd double overdrive auto transmission.

[stuartcnz]

I can definitely relate to not wanting to up the hp in a given engine. I once had about an eight inch hole blown out both sides of the block, of a cat C12 in an old Kenworth. It was rated at about 435hp if my memory serves correctly, but the mechanic who was sent out to try and get me back on the road said that it was a common problem with the C12 because they were trying to get to much power out of to small of an engine. I too, do not think much of cat engines. Trying to stop a b-train at 44 tons in neutral while traveling at 60mph, because the drive train has locked up, is not a pleasant experience!

I also found that when doing a lot of mountain driving, the higher horse powered engines gave better fuel economy as well as a quicker, more comfortable trip. A case in point was a run that I used to do which normally totaled about nine and three quarter hours of drive time with a 525hp cummins signature series ISX525 in an international eagle, took about an extra hour and more fuel, one time when I did it with a much lighter load in a Hino with a 330hp engine (make unkown), both pulling b-trains.

Just a quick note re hp versus torque ratings. I never really paid that much attention to the torque ratings (I know torque is king with trucks). The ISX525 definitely had by far the highest torque rating of any engine I drove with but that torque was only available between 1300 and 1500 revs. Anything outside of that and it was not very flash. A Western Star that I used to drive had a Detroit (D60?) 500hp engine that while not having anything like the torque of the ISX525, did have good useable torque between about 1200 and 1600 revs, and would still be pulling down to around 900 revs, so I used to do about the same times in that truck as the Eagle. I wouldn't say there was anything in the difference of fuel consumption either.

[busbart]

Hello all of you!

I'm just new here, and reading all this really triggered my interesse.
Actually, i just recently bought a copy of the modern version of "shelter", home work, and i was pleasantly suprised!

I do wonder though, 4 years ago i bought an ex air-force ambulance, the 1989Ford F-350 with the IDI 7.3L Diesel by IH / Navistar. with 4200 Kg empty weight the engine has a littlebit difficulty going up hills.
somebody here earlier has written that there exist aftermarket turbo kits.
I'd like to hear more of it, when it is possible? And maybe somebody out there knows what the maximum Combined weight? (truck and trailer) for a 1989 F-350 dually #11000 Lbs with the given transmission

the Navistar is coupled at a A4OD tranny.

cincerely,

Bart Schiks

[Mark R. Obtinario]

I would recheck which transmission you have. It is more likely the E4OD which is a piece of junk transmission.

While your truck is rated for 11,000 GVW, in reality it is no different from a one ton E- or F-series truck with a lower speed rear end--same engine, same transmission, same brakes, same springs.