Hello all,
I am imagining myself with a bus conversion and wondering a few things.
I see roof raises mentioned on MCIs but I don't see them mentioned for Prevosts. Is this because Prevosts are higher/taller inside?
I am about 5'10" and my wife is 5'1". We would be living in a bus full time, not just for vacations. So, in your experience are unraised MCI 9s and 12s comfortable?
Also, the MCIs that are newer, I don't recall what they are called, are they taller inside that a 9 or 12.
Thanks so much for your insight on this.
Seb
My wife and I have lived in our non-raised MC9 for the last 4+ years.
We too considered a roof raise briefly but realized the cost was double what we paid for our running bus shell. Frankly, we didn't have the money to pay someone to do it. The seller if the bus said he'd do it for 10k. We also didn't have the skills or space to do it ourselves.
I've never wished the roof was raised. Sure it would be cool to have higher ceilings and to be fair I've never been in a bus with a raise. I'm 6' tall and we didn't add insulation under the floor so my head has at least a few inches in the back.
Those are my thoughts.
It's your bus and if you have the cash or know how you probably wouldn't regret raising the roof. That being said, there's lots of other stuff you could do to your bus for the time and money.
One good point about a roof raise is you can spray 2 inches of foam,the lighting can be better (more choices) and you can duct the AC and heat with roof top AC units,plus the 2 inch floor slope from back to front on the MCI 9 is a real pain to deal with.Buy your self a DL or DL3 with the series 60 and be done with
A 102C3 came from the factory with a taller interior (A roof raise) than any previous MCI built...
I faced the same dilemma with my Eagles. I am 5' 9", and my wife fits under my chin, so the 6' 2" Ceiling in the Model 05 or 10 Eagle is just fine for us, but we have relatives that are 6' plus, and they have to duck the A/C's and polish the ceiling the rest of the way. I say tough, but my wife says we should be more accommodating, so I develop plans to raise the ceiling on my Model 10, which is a finished Entertainer Coach from Senator Coach. Not an easy task, plus having a wider coach and longer coach would solve the problem and end any desire to get bigger, because there is nothing bigger than a 45' raised 8 1/2' wide coach. So, I got a good deal on a 45' Eagle with a Series 60, and I'll part with the Model 10, someday. ::) MCI wise, follow Cliff's advice.
We raised the roof in both of our coaches. First one 9" second one 8". Would absolutely never live in a coach without one. For so many reasons my fingers don't have the time to type out. If you're planning on fulltiming, do it.
AS Clifford said, just buy a 102C3. 6'10" headroom and 102" wide. I have a transit that is this also, and it feels SO much more spacious and open then a standard 8 or 9. Good Luck, TomC
Hello all,
All good information, thanks.
I think I found some info that Prevosts are about 6'5" inside, dose that sound right?
Seb
Quote from: Sebulba on June 13, 2019, 11:12:20 AM
Hello all,
All good information, thanks.
I think I found some info that Prevosts are about 6'5" inside, dose that sound right?
Seb
Same as MCI, you can't just broad brush 20 years worth of H3-45. There have been little changes over the years.
Also, the conversion shells are quite different from the seated coaches.
Tricky business when we're talking inches...
Happy coaching!
Buswarrior
DL or DL3.
Jim
Quote from: Sebulba on June 13, 2019, 11:12:20 AM
Hello all,
All good information, thanks.
I think I found some info that Prevosts are about 6'5" inside, dose that sound right?
Seb
A Prevost XL seated coach is around 76" tall and XL motorhome shell are built to 83" and 86"
Aahhaa, so shells are taller than seated.
Thanks
Seb
Quote from: MagnoliaBus on June 13, 2019, 04:50:47 PM
A Prevost XL seated coach is around 76" tall and XL motorhome shell are built to 83" and 86"
Don't be roof raising just for insulation purposes...
In the greater scheme of things, windows lose the heat, not the roof.
An "economical" living quarters (which is shades of gray) requires significant window reduction, a windshield/driver/stairwell isolation plan as well as increased depth of spray foam insulation all the way around.
And the cost of all that will buy you a lot of HVAC energy.
Thowing more HVAC BTU into a stock coach gets you just as comfortable a lot quicker.
Lots of choices to be comfortable, that's why we all roll our own.
Happy coaching!
Buswarrior
Quote from: Sebulba on June 13, 2019, 06:59:51 PM
Aahhaa, so shells are taller than seated.
Thanks
Seb
Not always The H Pervost VIP the motor home shell the floors are lower and the bays are smaller ,the MCI motor home shell was too ,spray foam the roof :o remember we have winter also,any place you can insulate a bus is money well spent
The spray foam also has the added benefit to firm up the body and quiet the interior.
I don't recall the spec on roof height of the DL3 but I'm 6'2 and have plenty of room to run a 2x3 stud across the ceiling flatways, do a finished door opening and not worry about hitting my head so there's that. Insulation would be nice but I'm not tearing up a perfectly good ceiling to get it.
Jim
Yes, I really like the idea of the spray foam for insulation.
I was watching a video about how Marathon converts. It seems they insulate the outside of the roof, I assume with foam, and then cap it with an outer cap. That is ingenious.
Seb
Quote from: chessie4905 on June 14, 2019, 03:52:55 AM
The spray foam also has the added benefit to firm up the body and quiet the interior.
There are many persons doing a spray foaming business on Facebook Market place. I was suprised how many. Just search insulation on there.
The idea of capping the roof sounds interesting, wonder how they do the ends?
For heat, any device that shades the roof is a benefit. Solar panels come to mind.
Jim
I thought so too. They didn't go into detail, but it seemed that's what was said. I imagine the cap is a cap with the ends integrated.
Seb
Quote from: Jim Blackwood on June 14, 2019, 10:59:29 AM
The idea of capping the roof sounds interesting, wonder how they do the ends?
For heat, any device that shades the roof is a benefit. Solar panels come to mind.
Jim
There is very little discussion about insulating the exterior roof for those concerned about the loss of interior height due to the insulation. It seems insulation covered by a shell would work fine. Seems a whole lot less work and cost than a roof raise.
Not a new idea as there was a special MC5, Dave has one, that were deployed in the Middle East, that added external material for added insulation.
Attaching a second roof over the existing one may be more trouble than it's worth.
I could see doing it if you were going solar, but then I have no intention of living in the bus in the cold, so leaving an air gap between the roof and the solar array should improve things without the need for extra insulation. Done right, a rig like that could be built with deployable panels that also serve as the awning. Of course, we're all still waiting on inexpensive but efficient solar panels that hold up to the environment.
Jim
Quote from: Jim Blackwood on June 15, 2019, 08:37:25 AM
Of course, we're all still waiting on inexpensive but efficient solar panels that hold up to the environment.
Jim
There aren't many reports of current tech solar panels having durability or reliability issues.
No matter what you decide...more BTU heat and Ton of AC increase will be spent. A little more cost less than a roof raise.
No matter how many windows you eliminate...you still have the windshield...note: more cooling.
More cooling/heat is always welcome.
unless you are 6' 3" and wear heels...then maybe raise the roof. :)
This means zip if you have bushels of cash :)
Roof raises are that expensive to do and you don't need a engineering degree to do one
I think a roof raise would be a good idea in a coach that is short, or already has issues with the sides, and where a set of raised caps are readily available. But when you can buy a coach under $10K that doesn't need one and is more modern in a good many other ways, to me it doesn't make sense. My DL3 will remain unmolested. But if you do feel the roof raise is necessary, first and foremost be sure you are competent in your welding skills. If there is any doubt at all, take a trade school welding course. That will hone your skills to the point of competence at least. Then study the use of triangulation in construction methods so you can apply it to your plans. To say engineering skills are not needed isn't exactly accurate because the designers and builders of those coaches certainly didn't take that approach. You could very easily compromise the upper structure to the point where it could be unsafe. Sadly the average person is not blessed with an innate sense of how to estimate structural strengths and weaknesses. Lifting the roof adds leverage, and leverage creates stresses that the existing structure was never meant to handle. So to be safe, additional reinforcement is needed in key areas. Do you know how to do that? Do you know what those key areas are? Additional members to triangulate and carry those stresses are a real good idea, as are gussets in places where they can be added.
Lots of roof raises have been done but just because a roof hasn't fallen down doesn't make it safe. You don't want to be the test dummy for this one.
Jim
Quote from: Jim Blackwood on June 16, 2019, 07:58:36 AM
I think a roof raise would be a good idea in a coach that is short, or already has issues with the sides, and where a set of raised caps are readily available. But when you can buy a coach under $10K that doesn't need one and is more modern in a good many other ways, to me it doesn't make sense. My DL3 will remain unmolested. But if you do feel the roof raise is necessary, first and foremost be sure you are competent in your welding skills. If there is any doubt at all, take a trade school welding course. That will hone your skills to the point of competence at least. Then study the use of triangulation in construction methods so you can apply it to your plans. To say engineering skills are not needed isn't exactly accurate because the designers and builders of those coaches certainly didn't take that approach. You could very easily compromise the upper structure to the point where it could be unsafe. Sadly the average person is not blessed with an innate sense of how to estimate structural strengths and weaknesses. Lifting the roof adds leverage, and leverage creates stresses that the existing structure was never meant to handle. So to be safe, additional reinforcement is needed in key areas. Do you know how to do that? Do you know what those key areas are? Additional members to triangulate and carry those stresses are a real good idea, as are gussets in places where they can be added.
Lots of roof raises have been done but just because a roof hasn't fallen down doesn't make it safe. You don't want to be the test dummy for this one.
Jim
It is a mute point anyways people like roof raises or they don't like BW says we all roll our own,there is not much holding the roof up to start with above the windows
And there's plenty of examples of natural selection taking place amongst the abandoned projects scattered across the landscape.
They weren't too interested in listening... not much point in typing too many words of advice.
Either you got it, or you don't.
Internet seems to embolden the least capable...
Survival of the fittest
Happy coaching!
Buswarrior
Well said.
I appreciate all of the insight. I have learned a lot from all of the comments on this thread ( not to mention, the entire forum )
My conclusion. I like to not feel cramped. If and when I aquire a bus I will probably try to find one those that are higher from the factory. It does that the newer ones are in this category. Maybe one that is raised, but I will scrutinize well.
Thank you so much for all of your insight and knowledge. The pool of information ( and opinions) never ceases.to amaze me.
As an aside I watch YT videos about bus conversions. A lot of them are skoolies and the tone a quality of that content is, well, embarrassing at times, compared to the solid insight here.
Kudos
Sebp
Quote from: buswarrior on June 16, 2019, 09:08:41 AM
And there's plenty of examples of natural selection taking place amongst the abandoned projects scattered across the landscape.
They weren't too interested in listening... not much point in typing too many words of advice.
Either you got it, or you don't.
Internet seems to embolden the least capable...
Survival of the fittest
Happy coaching!
Buswarrior
A number of us feel that the DL or DL3 is the best deal going in a candidate for conversion. I would go even further and say that '94 represents the near ideal choice, up to whenever they upgraded from the DDEC4. Many, many pluses in those buses, from headroom to drivetrain to width and it just goes on and on. Currently the price is right. Fleet owners are selling them off and bargains are out there. For example, my '95 cost a bit under $7K delivered to my door with a 135K mile engine, aluminum wheels, aux heater, working OTR air, 14.7L Series 60 4 stroke, B500 6 speed auto, good batteries, and pretty decent tires. It has kneel and rear raise too, and the restroom had been removed already. Now that deal doesn't come around every day, you have to put in the time to to find them. But it's a heck of a beginning.
Jim
? who installed the 14 L in your DL3,the 14L didn't come on the market till 2000-2001 you have a good setup,you have a typo I think (12.7L}
Last of DDEC III would be desirable in the eyes of the engine guys I know.
1997
The stuff to come online for busnuts beyond that will be the same challenges as the fleet guys faced...
Learning the coping strategies to keep each family of emissions restrictions running will be really important.
Skipping all the way to engines with DEF will be the least painful... they are much better behaved in fleet service.
Happy coaching!
Buswarrior
For me a roof raise was essential.
Raising the roof was not hard at all, but what you have to be concerned about is new front and rear caps.
That is where the expense and time comes in.
But then too I work with metal for a living... ;)
Oops. Yes 12.7 you are right Clifford. Brain fart, it happens. But the point is still valid I think and the 12.7 is a very good engine for that bus apparently. I didn't really want to get into a full interior strip and roof raise so I looked for a bus that wouldn't need it. My approach may be a bit too minimalist for some, but I'm keeping the OTR air and most of the overhead bin storage simply because they are very nice bins and really are as good as anything I'm likely to build to replace them. I don't object to the existing ceiling fabric either, and see no real need to tear out the walls. Anything that is removed must be put back so if it doesn't offend, why remove it to begin with? For now at least the windows can stay and any that get blocked off by the interior, well I could just spray the inside black. I love all the storage space, both overhead and below decks, and the weight capacity is really rather exceptional. There are advantages to a more modern bus, and the MCI from '94 to '97 seems to me to really represent the best bargain of all the things we'd like to have at the right price without too much extra complexity.
Jim
I would go even further and say that '94 represents the near ideal choice, up to whenever they upgraded from the DDEC4.
Debating various DDEC versions is beyond my pay grade but in general newer is better; however, see results from a recent auction on newer coaches that just came out of service so good working/legal condition. Read the thread as there is an image of a driver checklist dated 12/2018.
https://www.busconversionmagazine.com/forum/index.php?topic=33782.msg387049#msg387049 (https://www.busconversionmagazine.com/forum/index.php?topic=33782.msg387049#msg387049)
"Debating various DDEC versions is beyond my pay grade but in general newer is better"
Perhaps, except that once you get into the emissions years, you get into a lot of issues. Learned the hard way.
Pre EGR and DEF is better for making fewer problems for the owner that has to pay for maintenance. 8)