OK, my existing engine is getting feeble and they're not very good in the first place. It looks like it'll be time to change it out for a N. American engine soon.
What I have now (and what fits in the engine compartment) is a 42 - 44" long, 6 cylinder inline 4-stroke diesel. A good thing is that it has a short driveshaft from the flywheel of the engine to the transmission, so a custom shaft with a flange to match the engine on one end and one to match the transmission on the other will be easy.
I guess that what's the best thing will be 4/6 cylinder engine, good service/reliability reputation, reasonable parts availability, reasonably available (truck/bus used parts sources), 4-stroke diesel; about 210/235 HP at a 1900 RPM cruise. It would probably be good to avoid the usual "electronic vs reliable" wiwi match but it may be a factor that we can't avoid. The "front end" of the existing engine is right at the vehicle sidewall/engine compartment so I'm afraid that we're practically limited to the 42-44" length overall.
http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=O680LeftEnd.jpg (http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=O680LeftEnd.jpg)
http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=000_0436.jpg (http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=000_0436.jpg)
Any (CAT, DD, etc.) suggestions?
If all you need is 230 HP, wouldn't some lighter, cheaper engine, such as an International Navistar engine, or a 5.9-liter Cummins (In the truck version, available up to 225 HP. You do NOT want the Dodge pickup version for this application!)
I will be out where our buses are parked in a few hours. I can measure the 5.9 in our skoolie for you. How high can you go?
Bruce,
Is your present engine left- or right-rotation? Don't some older British double-deckers such as Bristol FLF Lodekkas have left-turning Gardner or Bristol engines? If you have a dropped-center rear axle it could get interesting!
Just wondering.
John
Hey Bruce,
If you could find a nice CR92 Honda and didn't mind the high rpm, you would really be in business. If not, then how about on of the 4 stroke Detroits? Series 50s are becoming plentiful and cheap. The 60 Series is top of the line in my book! Can you use either?
S60 won't fit in the space he's got and its way overkill for the power he's looking for. A DT466 would be a great match for the power he wants but maybe a hair too long at 45". I can't find a physical dimension on a T444e right now but it should fit easily in that length - width might be an issue if that's tight. The T444e is the International version of the Ford Powerstroke so there's maybe millions of them out there - 100s of thousands for sure. No problem getting that power out of it reliably.
I wouldn't put a Cummins 5.9 in there. I would look at the Cummins 8.3 thousands have been built. For the money I would look at the Detroit Series 50 takeouts from the transit buses.
Series 50 would work in length I don't about height those engines are taller than they are long like 5 inches
Quote from: luvrbus on February 17, 2012, 02:53:37 PMSeries 50 would work in length I don't about height those engines are taller than they are long like 5 inches
I can accept a lot of height. I'll measure the crankshaft centerline to top of engine cover (it's a fiberglass "bubble" cover, so if necessary, it would be pretty easy to modify or extend). The engine compartment front to back (i.e. to accommodate the width of the engine since it sits transverse) is pretty wide, too.
What about the reliability of the S50; if the balance shafts are rebuilt, are they dependable? Are there non-electronic S50's? I'm pretty sure that my engine turns clockwise -- right-hand as seen looking at the flywheel. Are there "marine" conversions (camshaft etc) if the S50 needs to turn in the non-normal direction?
I'm pretty sure that a guy who parks next to me in the storage lot has a Gillig with an S50 that he's parting out for "mechanic's lien" prices.
I've been thinking that a smaller (i.e. not as big as an S60) "bus" engine is going to be a better bet than a big pickup engine. Am I right about this? It seems to me that the low end torque, reliability, RPM range, and fuel economy for something like an S50 will be better for what I need than something like a Powerstroke, right?
Thanks for the info
For a bus, you need a heavy duty engine such as a Detroit. It will pull your 20 to 30 000 lbs bus all day, day after day and not break a sweat. And when it gers tired, you can rebuild it and put another half a million miles on it.
A pick up engine, such as the Powerstroke, is a disposable/throw away engine that would be struggling at it's limit all the time. We pull a 18000 lbs horse trailer with one in a F350, and it just doesn't hold up.
JC
Quote from: garhawk on February 17, 2012, 12:04:55 PM
Hey Bruce,
If you could find a nice CR92 Honda and didn't mind the high rpm, you would really be in business.
Yeah, I would mind the rpm - I'd have to go to a 30:1 rear axle! Hope you and Gloria are OK. BH
Quote from: Zeroclearance on February 17, 2012, 12:49:07 PM
I wouldn't put a Cummins 5.9 in there. I would look at the Cummins 8.3 thousands have been built. For the money I would look at the Detroit Series 50 takeouts from the transit buses.
8.3 would be my choice as well.
I think a good question to ask is how many more miles are you going to put on your bus? A good Cummins ISB 6.7 with common rail fuel injection will be the smallest and easiest to install. They are available up to 325hp and 800lb/ft torque. The 6.7 has a projected engine life of around 400,000 miles-which is actually longer then most Detroit 2 strokers could go before overhaul.
I agree that the Cummins 8.3 mechanical with inline fuel injection pump is just about the most reliable medium sized truck engine ever built. I believe they were available up to 280hp and 860lb/ft torque. The newer ISC with electronic common rail fuel injection is available up to 370hp and 1050lb/ft torque. The larger 8.9 liter ISL, which is the same block is available up to 450hp and 1250lb/ft torque-which is also the highest the Allison 3000MH will take. The ISC/ISL are a projected 500,000mi engine before overhaul.
The Series 50 is a very reliable engine that can put out up to 350hp and 1,100lb/ft torque. The only two bads about it, you have to run soft engine mounts because of the higher vibration at idle, and the two balance shafts need to be replaced every 300,000 miles, whether they need it or not. A marine version was not made, nor an industrial version. The S50 was used in buses, and Freightliner's FL106. The S50, like the S60, is a projected 1 million mile engine.
International's 466 is good (stay away from their V-8's-to many were bad to find the good ones), but I don't like the fact that the front cover on the 466 has only one little gasket separating the water from oil.
Stick with the Cummins 6.7 liter ISB (which I think is plenty of power and rated up to 50,000lbs in truck use), or the ISC/ISL Cummins 8.3/8.9, which both are rated up to 65,000lbs. Good Luck, TomC
Quote from: opus on February 17, 2012, 08:00:41 PM8.3 would be my choice as well.
Here is the item on the first page on the 8.3 liter engine:
"Engine Specs-- The 8.3 diesel is a four-stroke internal-combustion engine and has 540 propshaft horsepower at a maximum rate of 2,600 revolutions per minute." That's *way* more horsepower than I need -- or that my transmission will handle. (But that's a marine engine.)
On the other hand, another website says that the engine, as a 1994 mechanical 8.3L model is available with-- horsepower 210 225 & torque@1300rpm 605 660 (respectively) I'm confused. 210 or 225 hp at about 600-650 lb/ft of torque should work fine, though.
Also, a website lists the Cummins ISB 6.7 -- hp @ rpm/350 @ 3013; Peak Torquelb-ft/ 650; GovernedSpeed/ 3013 RPM. Again, way more power, torque and RPM than will work for me.
TomC - is the Cummins ISB 6.7 with common rain fuel injection an "electronic" engine?
Many thanks - please keep the info coming. BH, NC USA
The 540hp version is for marine use only (key here is "propshaft horsepower" as in propeller for a boat)-there's no way you could have a big enough radiator to cool that. The other is more accurate. That's what's nice about he electronic engines-they are much higher rated. But you can't beat the reliability of the mechanical engine. Good Luck, TomC
A Google search isn't helping me ... are there "non-electronic" early-model-year versions of the Series 50 engine available on the "used engine" market?
The reason I suggested the 8.3 is because you can still get 1995 models that are non-electronic. The ones that are in school buses are 250hp. This would be a straight forward transplant, so long as you have room. I would surely stay away from any electronic engines, whatever you do.
Quote from: Oonrahnjay on February 18, 2012, 08:09:09 AM
A Google search isn't helping me ... are there "non-electronic" early-model-year versions of the Series 50 engine available on the "used engine" market?
Series 50 and 60 engines are electronic only. There is no mechanical version like the older two stroke.
Quote from: opus on February 18, 2012, 08:30:50 AMThe reason I suggested the 8.3 is because you can still get 1995 models that are non-electronic. The ones that are in school buses are 250hp. This would be a straight forward transplant, so long as you have room. I would surely stay away from any electronic engines, whatever you do.
Thanks, that's good info. I've been doing a lot of Google searching on the 8.3; it's definitely up in the top contenders. I haven't looked around at what's out there but I'm hoping that there may be some ~1994MY school buses going at near-scrap prices.
Appreciate the help and effort, BH
I've never heard of a non electronic, mechanical S50 or 60.
JC
Quote from: lostagain on February 18, 2012, 11:15:40 AM
I've never heard of a non electronic, mechanical S50 or 60.
JC
Yeah, that's what I thought and I'm impressed with the fuel efficiency gains that electronic engines give but ... I just don't think that I'm up to the challenges of installing all the electronics, as well as the trouble and expense of diagnosing through plug-in computers, etc. Not to mention some of the maintenance nightmares that some people have seen in service. But that's why I asked the question, to gather info for when I need it. Thanks for the input.
What size bus do you have? What type of driving are you going to be doing? 5.9 could possibly be a very good option, depending on your use. Your fuel mileage would be better too.
Too small an engine can give worse mileage than a larger engine in some cases. When the Dodge Dakota crew cab came out the bigger V8 gave better mileage than the smaller V6 because the V8 wasn't struggling with the extra weight.
Quote from: opus on February 18, 2012, 12:39:11 PMWhat size bus do you have? What type of driving are you going to be doing? 5.9 could possibly be a very good option, depending on your use. Your fuel mileage would be better too.
I'm planning to get a good weight on my bus in the next couple of weeks but it's a rather unusual configuration, it's a 33-foot British double decker. Weight before I started conversion was about 18,000 pounds but it pushes a fair amount of air. I'm planning a good amount of highway miles but I'd be happy with a cruise speed of 57 - 59 Mph. The current engine is rated at 150 Hp but I'm guessing that it's not making nearly that much now; my open-highway Mpg has been about 12.
I'll have a good look at the 5.9; were they used on medium-sized school buses prior to the introduction of "electronic engines"?
Thanks for the comments. BH
That Cummins 6.7 that TomC mentioned is sure looking good to me.
Quote from: Oonrahnjay on February 18, 2012, 09:15:43 PM
I'll have a good look at the 5.9; were they used on medium-sized school buses prior to the introduction of "electronic engines"?
Do a search on ebay for "Cummins school bus". The 5.9-liter ISB Cummins was very popular in Ford, Freightliner, Bluebird and International school buses. Ours that we use with our youth group is a Thomas body 28-passenger with a standard transmission, and came with an intercooled turbocharger. These are very faithful, non-electronic engines. Parts for them and people who can work on them abound. It came standard in 175-225 horsepower. On some versions, raising the horsepower is as simple as sliding a fuel pressure plate a tiny distance forward.
There is also a Dodge version, which was designed for their pickups. It puts out more horsepower, but much less torque, and is electronic and has a bunch of smog stuff added. I am sure you do NOT want that version.
Being a double decker we dont have to worry about you wanting to do 70mph zipping around. Your current engine is 150hp, I think the 5.9 would be a great replacement, and the most inexpensive of all. It should be a "hook it up and go" swap.
Yes, the 5.9 was used on a lot of school buses. They also used the DT466 but the Cummins is much better with fuel economy and can be had cheaper.
I am assuming this is an older vehicle?
A L10 Cummins mechanical or electronic will serve you well Bruce and they can be bought at good prices I work on the 8.3 and 5.9 in the school buses here I'll pass on those lol
Quote from: opus on February 19, 2012, 07:42:11 AM
Being a double decker we dont have to worry about you wanting to do 70mph zipping around. Your current engine is 150hp, I think the 5.9 would be a great replacement, and the most inexpensive of all. It should be a "hook it up and go" swap.
Yes, the 5.9 was used on a lot of school buses. They also used the DT466 but the Cummins is much better with fuel economy and can be had cheaper.
I am assuming this is an older vehicle?
Good points. Yes, I have no fantasy that I'm creating an Aston Martin sports car here - more like a Daimler limo. One issue that I have is that the current Leyland O-680 engine (O = "oil" i.e. diesel; 680 cu in.) is known to respond to Tender Loving Care from people who know the ins and outs of its fuel injection system. My bus was used by a UK school bus operator before I got it -- it may have been "turned down" to restrict the RPM's (for reliability and to limit speed). I can keep it maintained but I don't know details on how to tune it so that it's putting out max power/that its mechanical condition allows it to make now. Therefore, I don't know exactly the mix of whether it's putting out about 150 hp, and if not because it's becoming worn or if because it's "tune limited". But if it is putting out a real 150, if I'm going with a replacement engine, I will want to add 50-60 hp because the current performance is pretty uninspiring (also, I can't imagine that it will pull any big grades on an Interstate at a reasonable speed). So, I worry a little about the 5.9 being a little short on power and it's basically a "pickup" engine, isn't it? I don't want this to be a changeover that's "a dollar short"; if I'm going to do it, I want a reasonable improvement in the result.
Quote from: luvrbus on February 19, 2012, 07:49:09 AMA L10 Cummins mechanical or electronic will serve you well Bruce and they can be bought at good prices I work on the 8.3 and 5.9 in the school buses here I'll pass on those lol
Thanks, Clifford. I'll add that one into the mix. I have a friend who has one in a Leyland bus; I've tried to find a spec on the length of that engine on Google and nothing shows up. Will that meet our ~44" length spec?
The best scenario in my opinion would be to keep the engine you have, if at all possible. Can you have someone that is a good diesel tech check it out and see if it can be made to please you? Surely there has to be a Leyland forum?
The 5.9 displacement is half of what your engine now is. I guess all I saw about your engine was the hp and not the displacement.
Bruce, I know you don't want a electronic engine but the Gov is selling some new 330 hp C-7 Cat engines in Huntsville Al that will work nice in your space right now they are at 1000 bucks each they will probably sell for around 4 grand lasts one did not a bad price for a 30,000 dollar new engine complete
Thanks, Clifford. I'll do a Google search on that. 330 Hp is a bit more than my transmission and drive shaft is designed for - any way to limit that kind of Hp? Also, would I have to source that "electronic components" (ECM, readouts, etc.) separately?
Appreciate the help, BH NC
Just so everyone is clear about the length restriction that I'm working with here, this is a diagram of the engine layout on my bus:
http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=EngLayout.jpg (http://s45.photobucket.com/albums/f60/oonrahnjay/Bus/?action=view¤t=EngLayout.jpg)
(https://busconversionmagazine.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi45.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff60%2Foonrahnjay%2FBus%2FEngLayout.jpg&hash=335fd51616fc0ada7501904f090e7eb2dc69c63e)
As you can see, it's a crossways mounted engine, going into the transmission which has a 90-degree output into the drive shaft.
You can drop the HP Bruce I think standard is 220 hp and they come with the ECM ,starter,alternator and air compressor
good luck
Quote from: luvrbus on February 22, 2012, 11:40:40 AMYou can drop the HP Bruce I think standard is 220 hp and they come with the ECM ,starter,alternator and air compressor
good luck
Thanks so much for your help. 220 Hp (and about 550-580 Ft/lb of torque) will fit about perfect on the transmission and other parts of the drive train. Appreciate it, BH
The Cummins 5.9 liter mechanical/electronic and the 6.7 liter electronic are both the same block size. The 5.9 liter with the inline mechanical fuel injection pump (run from the rotary electronic fuel injection pump) is the most reliable. You can easily get 250hp and 520lb/ft torque. The 6.7 liter electronic can go as high as 325hp and 800lb/ft torque, but-it is relatively new-probably not to much in the way of junk yard availability. The 8.3/8.9 liter, can be gotton with a full Jake brake. Any of these engines can have an exhaust brake added also (but not in addition to the Jake Brake). If you can find a mechanical 8.3 liter with the inline fuel injection pump-that would be my choice. Good Luck, TomC
Quote from: TomC on February 22, 2012, 11:21:13 PM
The Cummins 5.9 liter mechanical/electronic and the 6.7 liter electronic are both the same block size. The 5.9 liter with the inline mechanical fuel injection pump (run from the rotary electronic fuel injection pump) is the most reliable. You can easily get 250hp and 520lb/ft torque. The 6.7 liter electronic can go as high as 325hp and 800lb/ft torque, but-it is relatively new-probably not to much in the way of junk yard availability. The 8.3/8.9 liter, can be gotton with a full Jake brake. Any of these engines can have an exhaust brake added also (but not in addition to the Jake Brake). If you can find a mechanical 8.3 liter with the inline fuel injection pump-that would be my choice. Good Luck, TomC
Thanks, Tom; is the 8.3 8.3 overall length within the 42-44" maximum that will fit? Once source says that it's 44.5" which should work OK but there isn't much info on these "out of date" (i.e. pre-electronic) engines.
A lot of people are poo-pooing the mechanical 5.9, but I wouldn't rule it out. I know more than one person with the "bad" pickup engines in dodge dually's pulling 3 car slant trailers which puts you in the 25K weight range for hundreds of thousands of miles without issues at way more than 59mph. While they are not OTR truck engines, they will do what you are asking, especially since you aren't going to be turning it up at all. I borrowed my friend Dan's Dodge pickup to go get a bunch of stuff from the military surplus place in Ogden UT (my dually has a 502 and gets 8 empty, 7 loaded). I was over 18K with truck & trailer & stuff, never had to shift out of 6th on the grades, pulled at 70, and got 10.2mpg loaded which he said was the worst he's ever seen economy-wise.
Quote from: Uglydog56 on February 23, 2012, 10:11:59 AMA lot of people are poo-pooing the mechanical 5.9, but I wouldn't rule it out. I know more than one person with the "bad" pickup engines in dodge dually's pulling 3 car slant trailers which puts you in the 25K weight range for hundreds of thousands of miles without issues at way more than 59mph. While they are not OTR truck engines, they will do what you are asking, especially since you aren't going to be turning it up at all. I borrowed my friend Dan's Dodge pickup to go get a bunch of stuff from the military surplus place in Ogden UT (my dually has a 502 and gets 8 empty, 7 loaded). I was over 18K with truck & trailer & stuff, never had to shift out of 6th on the grades, pulled at 70, and got 10.2mpg loaded which he said was the worst he's ever seen economy-wise.
Thanks, Rick, that's a good recommendation. I'll consider it but this is a job that I only intend to do once. Thanks, BH
I'm not a crazed fan of the 5.9, but I have one in my rollback. A 12 valve P-pump mechanical 5.9 with 300,000 + miles. I'm running the 280 HP Torque plate, Hybrid HX35 turbo with HX40 compressor housing and wheel. The fuel rate has some adjustment on those engines and I have set mine to run 34 PSI of boost and 1200 degrees on the exhaust temp on a long hard pull (according to all information I could find that is the safe maximum) . My truck weighs 16,000 lbs empty, it's usually loaded (one way) with 6000 lbs, 10,000 is not uncommon. It does great with 6000 lbs, OK with 10,000 lbs. I occasionally move 8x8x20 shipping containers that weigh 5000 lbs, they fell like 10,000 because of the wind drag. I always get between 10 and 11 miles to the gallon. I just wanted to pass along my experience. I thought about putting 2 of them in Prevost instead of the Series 60.
Ken
The main difference between the normal 5.9 liter truck/bus engine and the 5.9 that was installed in the Dodge pickup, is the Dodge 5.9 has a smaller oil pan to lower the engine down. The extra oil of the normal truck/bus engine would be advantageous. Good Luck, TomC
Quote from: TomC on February 23, 2012, 03:16:05 PMThe main difference between the normal 5.9 liter truck/bus engine and the 5.9 that was installed in the Dodge pickup, is the Dodge 5.9 has a smaller oil pan to lower the engine down. The extra oil of the normal truck/bus engine would be advantageous. Good Luck, TomC
If I were to go with the 5.9 and the best price was on a Dodge 5.9, would the bigger oil pan fit right on it?
To add to that, I would try and find a 12 valve engine.
I just measured a Series 50 that have in my shop. It's 44 inches from the front of the fan to back of the engine, that doesn't include the bell housing. I took the same measurement on 5.9 and it's 40 inches.
I don't mean to recommend a 5.9 for you, looking at the front of your bus you have a lot of wind resistance to overcome. Probably even more than me when I'm hauling a container because I have the truck hood. I just wanted to put the information out so it help you make a decision. I think the 5.9 would be working very hard for you all the time not just half the time like in my case. I would probably want something with more HP and torque.
Since I have my list handy here's the list of wires you need up front (vehicle harness) for a Detroit III or IV.
Check engine Light, Shut Down Light, Shut down override / diagnostic request, Service brake released, Park brake released, Cruise Resume / Accelerate, Cruise enable, Cruise set / coast, Clutch switch, 3 for your throttle (best if twisted), Ignition on, Tachometer output, Engine brake low, Engine brake medium, a twisted pair for the diagnostic port and you'll need a speed sensor input into the ECM. I don't think I left anything out. It would probably be about the same for any electronic engine. Now that's too bad is it??
Edit - Don't forget about the room needed for the charge air cooler any late model diesel needs it. A stacked system like the transits use maybe a little thinner.
Ken
Quote from: Hard Headed Ken on February 23, 2012, 05:32:17 PM
I just measured a Series 50 that have in my shop. It's 44 inches from the front of the fan to back of the engine, that doesn't include the bell housing. I took the same measurement on 5.9 and it's 40 inches.
I don't mean to recommend a 5.9 for you, looking at the front of your bus you have a lot of wind resistance to overcome. Probably even more than me when I'm hauling a container because I have the truck hood. I just wanted to put the information out so it help you make a decision. I think the 5.9 would be working very hard for you all the time not just half the time like in my case. I would probably want something with more HP and torque.
Since I have my list handy here's the list of wires you need up front (vehicle harness) for a Detroit III or IV.
Check engine Light, Shut Down Light, Shut down override / diagnostic request, Service brake released, Park brake released, Cruise Resume / Accelerate, Cruise enable, Cruise set / coast, Clutch switch, 3 for your throttle (best if twisted), Ignition on, Tachometer output, Engine brake low, Engine brake medium, a twisted pair for the diagnostic port and you'll need a speed sensor input into the ECM. I don't think I left anything out. It would probably be about the same for any electronic engine. Now that's too bad is it??
Ken
Yes, Ken, I do have a large (and very flat) frontal area. I have recently completed some big jobs on the bus (generator, water system tank install) and I need to get an uptodate weight on it (before I started removing seats, doors, etc. it was a bit over 18K pounds).
The list of items is a bit daunting but unless there's a particularly trickly part of installing or calibration, it doesn't look like things that can't be overcome.
I have always thought that the 5.9 in pickup trim wouldn't be up to what I need but actually, it would be nice to be proven wrong. My current transmission internal gearing and rear end means that a replacement engine should not make more than about 2200-2250 Rpm at cruising speed - this is another factor and my impression of the pickup engines is that they're tuned for a wider powerband and more Rpm's.
It's very kind of you to measure engines for me; this is one of my most important factors. Many thanks for all your consideration on this, BH
That rear engine setup is quite strange-but English engineers are known for that. Having a sideways engine with a 90 degree output shaft to the rear end is strange. Also the drive shaft driven from the front of the engine to the otherside for the radiator fan, is another strange one. What are you going to do-are you keeping the transmission? The Series 50 will run at your RPM. The 5.9 is rated to cruise at 2100rpm and red line around 3400rpm. Good Luck, TomC
Bruce, fwiw that engine sold for 8,600 the alternator is worth 4g 21 more coming up
good luck
Quote from: luvrbus on February 24, 2012, 05:34:29 PMBruce, fwiw that engine sold for 8,600 the alternator is worth 4g 21 more coming up
good luck
Yeah, I'm watching them. At those prices, they're gonna go fast and for high prices.
d
Do not get on often anymore,but did you not say the fly wheel turns clockwise??==left hand rotation motor right??
Quote from: gg04 on February 25, 2012, 11:50:23 AM
d
Do not get on often anymore,but did you not say the fly wheel turns clockwise??==left hand rotation motor right??
I'm pretty sure that's right. I'm out of town this weekend but I'll go check in a day or two. Thanks, BH