Any school bus mechanics out there?

[bvanetten]

I'm contemplating converting a school bus into a RV/toy hauler. They seem to have quite a few drivetrain setups. Does anyone have any opinions on the good and bad of the different offerings? I've seen them with



5. 9's

DT360

DT466

3208

Detroit 8. 2



Most all of them have an alison auto of some sort, very few sticks. Also, opinions of the bus's in general would be welcome also.

 

[nps]

The 5. 9 is the only inline 6 of the bunch. You already have one - why look farther? It has all the same issues as a CTD Ram, but they are well known.



I think the others are all HEUI (don't know about the Detriot) and have a well known set of issues too.

 

[EKlem]

The 5. 9, 360, and 466 are all inline 6 engines. Before 1995, the internationals were mechanical injection, very similar to your cummins. The 360 is the same size as the 5. 9 and both are kind of small for a school bus size application. The 466 is sized about right for most school buses and it has proven to be a great engine. We were just looking at school buses recently and chose a 466. Given the choice, I think that a 466 would be a really good engine to choose.



I don't know much about the 3208 or the 8. 2. The 8. 2 is referred to as the fuel pincher and it is supposed to be gutless and not worth fixing. The 3208 seems to be a fairly good engine although, make sure that you get one with a turbo because people with the naturally aspirated ones seem to complain about power all the time.



If you are looking at newer buses, you may also run into the t-444 and vt-365. These are the 7. 3 and 6. 0 powerstroke engines with international programming. Both are V-8's but seem to do okay in the buses. If you are going with an international engine, I would recommend a 466.



I hope this helps.

 

[LSchulz]

Agreed. I would find one with the DT466. If you are pre-1996, then it's a mechanical engine, 7. 6L inline 6. Very similar to your Cummins, just bigger. Hands down one of the best medium duty engines out there.

 

[bvanetten]

Ok. Good info. As much as I love my 5. 9 I too was thinking it was a bit small for a 48 to 72 passenger school bus. I wish I could find one with a 8. 3 Cummins, that would be a no brainer. Good to know that the 8. 2 detroit is something to stay away from.

 

[JUeckert]

i have bought and sold a few school buses,as well as owned a many a two ton truck. hands down the 466 engine is your best bet. of all the engines listed the 360 and the 466 are the only ones sleeved. the 3208 is a good one,but it's gettin out dated. the only problem with the 466 buses is that you will generally pay more for them. the 8. 2 is fine for bus apps,but havin owned 3 of them in two tons,it would be the last on my list. never really had to many probs out of them,but they are more complicated to work on,and are getting like the 3208,outdated. the 5. 9 and the 7. 3 engines do well,in same hp rateings you will get a bit better performance with the 7. 3[t444e,powerstroke] and they are extremely popular. unless this thing will be used a lot,or see a lot of mountainous terrain,the 5. 9 or 7. 3 will serve you well. if max reliable power is your need,go with the 360 or 466. unless you really need the room, try to hold out for a shorter 48 passenger type bus,less weight,less of a pain to drive. also if you attend auctions you will likely find that buses equipped with carpenter brand go cheaper[usually]and blue birds go the highest. one last note,while your shopping try to look for buses with bud type wheels,these are easier and cheaper to repair/replace. odd you mention the subject,i will be attending a bus auction tommorrow as a matter of fact!

 

[Evan A. Beck]

Ok. Good info. As much as I love my 5. 9 I too was thinking it was a bit small for a 48 to 72 passenger school bus. I wish I could find one with a 8. 3 Cummins, that would be a no brainer. Good to know that the 8. 2 detroit is something to stay away from.

I have worked on a bunch of buses, so here's my take on it...



Yeah, the 8. 2/8. 2T Detroit is a pile of junk. Its inherently a bad design, and was one of Detroit's first offerings in the 4-cycle market. Its biggest downfall is an open-top block design, and small (14mm) head bolts on the early models. Eventually they changed the design to incorporate 15mm bolts with a new torque spec. Seems to hold up better, but still problematic. Injector timing and rack adjustment are extremely critical.



The 5. 9 is way too small for a bus, thats for sure -- even in 230HP trim. Most 5. 9 bus engines are rated at 175 or 190 HP. The 8. 3 is better, but good luck finding one in a bus. Extremely rare. If I were you, I would try and find one with the DT466 or DT466E. Both are great engines, and capable of excellent power. Personally, for daily use, I like the DT466E. Its clean, quiet, and has gobs of low-end torque. The mechanical 466 is good too, but a little rough around the edges.



In a small to medium sized bus, the T444E is a superb option. It too is a proven performer, and delivers good economy and performance. Some older models have the IDI 7. 3L, which is also a good engine. A little underpowered, but handles the load well. Efficient too, and very easy and cheap to work on.



Newer buses can be found with the Cat 3126 (C7). Good engine, decent power. But repairs are expensive, as with any Cat engine.



Stay away for the 3208/3208T Cat. Its 10. 4 liters of slow, ineffecient iron.

 

[blacksheepdiesel]

The 5. 9 Cummins is the engine I would go for. I bought a new 66 passenger Frieghtliner/Thomas in '99 with the 5. 9/Allison combo. This engine was the ISB so it had a VP44 on it. Also had air brakes, air door, and air ride rear axle, wow, did it ride nice! The 5. 9 always had plenty of power, never had to put my foot to the floor. I installed RV275's to increase fuel mileage and it did help with that and the power increase was huge. Drove it for 5 years then sold it as I moved on to something else. Would not hesitate to get the 5. 9 again and would prefer it over any of the engines mentioned previously in this thread.



Trent

 

[amsoilman]

Ok. Good info. As much as I love my 5. 9 I too was thinking it was a bit small for a 48 to 72 passenger school bus. I wish I could find one with a 8. 3 Cummins, that would be a no brainer. Good to know that the 8. 2 detroit is something to stay away from.

I drive a 2000 model "Blue Bird" All American (84 passenger) with the Cummins 5. 9L engine, and it is a very powerfull unit. Have had Lift pump failure around 75,000 miles, but it is driven hard on a daily basis, as I haul K-12 kids,as well as many extra runs.



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[JUeckert]

just got back from the auction,average prices are as follows. late 80's ih buses with 6. 9/7. 3 engines were in the 7 to 900. 00 range,which is about normal. ford buses of the same vintage with the 8. 2 were in the 6 to 800. 00 dollar bracket. 90 to 94 model flat nose bluebirds with the 5. 9 were in the 2200 to 3000. 00 dollar range. 89 to 92 model ih's with the dt 360 were 29 to 4200. 00 dollar range. ih 9. 0 liter equipped buses were in the 5 to 800. 00 dollar bracket. oddly out of nearly 50 buses there were only two with the 444e in them,both had 200+k on them and still brought over 2500 bucks. my only purchase was a slightly wrecked flat nosed bluebird with a 5. 9, 150. 00 bought it! it will save me nearly 1500. 00 by just takeing the tires off it and putting them on one of my dump trucks,having a spare 5. 9 laying around is iceing on the cake. overall prices were a tad high,depending on model and condition,lots of schools are holding on to newer stock,and even buying used in some cases to save money. lots of buses are going across the border as well. after talking to other bus buyers,anything with a 466 in it is bringing a premium regardless of condition,and there were none in the auction today. regardless,even at truck salvage sales,those little engine's are getting high dollar and hard to find because they are getting bought up. .

 

[bvanetten]

JUechert,



That's some good info. What kind of damage did the Bluebird have? Have you ever seen a 8. 3C in one? I've heard that some did. Thomas rear engine flat nose comes to mind.



Flat nose is the route I want to go. Speaking of flat nose... JUeckert, which config (the front or rear engine models) go for the most?

Evan, From a mechanical/maintence point of view do you prefer the front or rear engine models?



Everyone that has recomended the 5. 9 equiped ones, your preachen to the quire here I love my 5. 9 but... We are talking about a 35ft bus that will be converted to motorhome use. That means alot of extra stuff (weight). Add a trailer with a couple of quads and a built suzuki 4x4 and long hill climes and I think it will be a bit small for the challenge. No?

 

[amsoilman]

JUechert,



That's some good info. What kind of damage did the Bluebird have? Have you ever seen a 8. 3C in one? I've heard that some did. Thomas rear engine flat nose comes to mind.



Flat nose is the route I want to go. Speaking of flat nose... JUeckert, which config (the front or rear engine models) go for the most?

Evan, From a mechanical/maintence point of view do you prefer the front or rear engine models?



Everyone that has recomended the 5. 9 equiped ones, your preachen to the quire here I love my 5. 9 but... We are talking about a 35ft bus that will be converted to motorhome use. That means alot of extra stuff (weight). Add a trailer with a couple of quads and a built suzuki 4x4 and long hill climes and I think it will be a bit small for the challenge. No?

I can tell you in our fleet (over 225 buses) there are several of them that have the 8. 3L Cummins "C". ALl of our buses are of the flat nose type, and only 2 of them are the IH, and 3 are Thomas. The majority are "Blue Bird".



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[Nate]

I drove an 8. 3L powered bus for a while. Blue Bird flat nose. It was ok, but nothing to right home about. Floor it after a stop and about when it got to speed it was time to stop again.

 

[JUeckert]

the flat nose blue bird i bought was a front engine job,[which if given the choice i prefer over rear engine]. damage was minor in my opinion[bumper/radiator/one window,[hit a pole]got lucky with this one for the price. had people trying to buy parts of it before even leaving the auction. as for rear mounts i have aslo seen them with 555 cummins engines and 466 engines too,just not too common.

 

[bvanetten]

What about the rear engine models do you not like. I was leaning toward the rear engine ones because of the potential extra space you might get between the frame rails where the transmission and drive shaft would have been in a front engine model.

 

[JUeckert]

bear in mind i have not turned a wrench on either [front or rear engine mounted flat nosed ones]but i have crawlled over both just looking. seems like to me the front engine would be easier to service and have less of a potential cooling issue. when i speak of service,i mean pulling the transmission or engine if the need arise. i spent some time today lookin under my bus,trying to see the best route for pulling the engine. i have seen them pulled from the front with little trouble,but after removing the dog house from the floor,i dare say i believe the engine can be pulled up thru the floor and brought out thru the ent doors. as for under vehicle space there is actually quite a bit of hollow area under the bus for building compartments if need be. proably about 3x20 down either side. only downside i could see of the front engine would be a little noise and maybe some heat,but the dog house does a good job of preventing both. if you are interested in buying a bus,this is typicaly the time of year schools sale them off. going thru a bus broker or a dealership will cost at least double if not even more. i have seen buses bought at auctions for 3 or 4 k,and then resold for 10k. depending on the demand for a region,it can actually be a very profitable buisness to be in.