| Author | Message | ||
| R TERRY (207.230.142.240)
Rating: N/A |
Phoenix is a BIG place! Yet, apparently not big enough for the Salvage Yard on Wheels. For the past 9 months I’ve been trying to find someplace in Los Angeles, Jr., to park it and resume my full-time status in blissful RV heaven. Ok, living in the SYOW is more like the opposite of that, but it is home. Remember, for some of us, “Home is where the bus is.” (I think I quoted myself here.) I finally found a park willing to consider having the old 4104 on the premises. What they don’t know is, the picture of the SYOW that I showed them was heavily doctored on the computer in PhotoShop. Does that sound like a recipe for failure to you? At some point I am going to have to drive the monster into the park and… and… beg for mercy. Einstein would never have bought this bus. Obviously, I’m no Einstein. The first day of ownership, two authorities on buses told me it was worth half what I paid for it. Shortly thereafter, I had spent as much on repairs as I had paid for the miserable thing. That’s your basic double-whammy. And it only got worse from there. It’s a long, dreadful story that many of you are familiar with and continues on to this day. But, boy, has it been fun!! Essentially, the bus was not worth fixing up, so, I just bought another bus. And then another bus, and another bus… et cetera… until I became aware of my mental illness. Consequently, from the outside anyway, the bus has remained in the same condition as when I first laid eyes on it. Replacing all the skin, most of the windows, the entire floor, the bumpers, running lights, all the rubber parts and seals, baggage bay doors and hinges, and on and on, just was not practical. In fact, so beat up was this bus, I decided not to drive it to the 2001 Bus Conversion rally in Laughlin, NV, for fear of ugly-ing up the convention. (I actually saw a bus there in worse shape than mine. Was I dreaming? That gave me a shot of hope: I was not alone in the world! I cannot relate to a $650,000 Custom Prevost, but that thing was… cool!) What I need is a good magician, an illusionist, someone who seemingly can turn a pumpkin into the Royal Carriage. The park manager is going to be expecting a bus that looks strikingly similar to that bogus photo I showed him. Is it possible to sprinkle a little "magic dust" on the bus and get the VIP credentials necessary to gain entry into the park? I doubt it, but it’s worth a try. My “magic dust” came from Home Depot and Wal-Mart in the form of spray paint, metal polish, car wax, carburetor cleaner, Simple Green and more metal polish. For several days I found out why I don’t own a 1968 Corvette: Keeping it spotless would just kill me! On the SYOW, TLC has to be dished out in humongous doses. It’s murder! Surprisingly, as each treacherous half-hour passed and another little section of the bus got the “magic dust” treatment, that part of the bus looked remarkably better! Ok, go ahead and say it: Well, duh-h-h! Understandably, I didn’t expect too much. But as time went on, and I became a physical basket case in the process, the bus began to show signs of life. In its own way, it kind of said, “Hey, look at me. Maybe I’m not so bad after all.” After three days of a massive application of elbow grease and masking tape, the "pumpkin" seemed a lot less like a pumpkin. There’s still more work to do, at least another weekend’s worth. Up close, there will be no way to conceal the harsh reality of 50 years of ravaging abuse. I can’t do anything about that. Right now, I just want it to pass the 10-foot test. The way I see it, from 10 feet way, polished and prettied-up, it has a much more Royal look. Hopefully, it will be Royal enough for at least one RV Park. I found myself staring at the bus, pleased with the improvements, being kind of proud of that big ol’ goofy rascal. Hell, it runs real swell, drives equally well, and “takes a lickin’ and keeps on tickin’”. That’s pretty remarkable. For now, the Salvage Yard on Wheels is my best bus. RT | ||
| FAST FRED (65.154.176.90) Rating: N/A |
"I cannot relate to a $650,000 Custom Prevost," Agreed ,, tube framed instead of aircraft monocoque construction , "Stainless steel" that needs frequent buffing to look OK , instead of anodized aluminum that takes care of itself, slushpump trannies that give 6 mpg instead of 9+ with a stick, Powered "steering" with DEAD feel , so its a suprise if you slide off the road in slush, I too wonder if therere would be EVER be ANY Prevo conversions if the factory wasn't so desperate to move then that they floorplan them for 2 years for FREE! Complements of the Canadian Taxpayers! Real Coaches for Real Conversions!! FAST FRED | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (198.81.26.45)
Rating: N/A |
"...slushpump trannies that give 6 mpg instead of 9+ with a stick..." ...I know you are not talking about an Allison with a lock-up converter Fred. Because if you were, you'd be wrong. Again. Brian | ||
| James Maxwell (Jmaxwell) (66.81.53.202)
Rating: N/A |
Just part of that "they don't build 'em like to use to" mentality. Well, thank God for that! That slush-pump Prevo has abt. double the HP & torque of that DD 71 that Fred is in love with, and you don't have to get knee joint replacements every 25k miles from driving it! | ||
| FAST FRED (65.154.117.159) Rating: N/A |
Most folks with any vehicle or vessel expereience know that acceleration and hill climbing are a product of power to weight ratio. I climb hills as fast with a 22,000 -24,000 lb conversion as the tube framed SS clunkers that run 44000 lbs and need to drag an extra 2 tires and axle to stay sort of legal, and not bend in half. At half the fuel flow to boot! Early GM had heavy clutch pedal pressure , air boost was tried and failed , so the MOUSETRAP , a simple spring unit was designed (thanks GM) and its like driving a car. IF anyone (cept those 2 speed VS2 folks) would care to post their SLUSHPUMP fuel milage (ours is log book /fuel recipts documented at over 9 mpg ., with 10 on rare occasions) It should make interesting reading. Folks that have gone down to auto from stick in the same coach would be great! POST your MILAGE & distance, The fun begins!!! FAST FRED PS with almost doubble the fuel use and roughly the same sized tanks , the trip times to run 1000 miles would be loads longer from the fun of socalizing while stopping twice as often to fill the fuel tank, and empty the walet. FF | ||
| Phil (204.89.170.126) Rating: N/A |
It ain't the trans, its the weight. My Monaco (oops, not a bus) with a Cummins/5 speed Allison at 21,967 (last scaled) pounds towing a 2500 pound trailer has averaged 9.84 MPG over the last 30,000 plus miles. The few miles I put on without the trailer it gets close to 11 MPG. The converter is locked up any time after second gear. Glad I don't have to shift, I save that for the motorcycles in the trailer!!! | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.57)
Rating: N/A |
It appears to me there should be a glut of Allison Transmissions out there, take outs from people that changed from an automatic to a stick for that pie in the sky mileage and stuff. I rarely see those ads, in fact see constant requests for changing from stick to automatic! Sombody is wrong here. | ||
| rodger in WA (64.70.24.67) Rating: N/A |
Fred, for a knowledgeable guy, you sure appear biased in favor of GMs. In all due respect and for the benefit of the newbies that take posts on this Board to be gospel, I beg to differ with most of your statements. Here's an example: My coach is a '76 Prevost Champion, S41 (35' no tag) 8V71N, Allison MT644 (4 spd w/torque conv lock in 2nd gear) GVWR 35K. We typically run at about 32K LB plus tow a 3K LB Honda. To date, we've driven over 40,000 miles coast to coast and border to border. Over 50% of which has been in mountainous terrain. Target cruising speed 60 mph (1800 rpm) Overall mileage: 7.9 mpg. Typical flatland mileage: 8.8 mpg. Regarding SS vs Aluminum skin: The SS skin has never been polished in the 5 years I've owned this bus. An occasional wash job keeps it looking pretty good. Better, I might add than most of the unpolished GMs I've seen. Ride and handling / steering Compared to the 4104 and 4106 I've driven, our Prevost is quieter, rides and handles better. My power steering allows excellent road feel and is a lot easier to manuever in tight quarters. than non-powered steering. Auto trans vs manual: The former owner spent over $12K to retro the auto tranny because stomping/holding the clutch was too tiring for him. With my old knees, I'd have the same problem with a manual. In a pinch, my wife or others can drive my coach. | ||
| DaveD (142.46.199.18)
Rating: N/A |
My automatic MC-8 is a dream to drive compared to the motorhomes I've had. It's smoother, quieter and more stable. As for mileage, with the 40 ft coach, I get mileage as good as I got with 24 ft and 30 ft motor homes (7-8 mpg typically). FWIW Dave Dulmage (MC-8) | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.28)
Rating: N/A |
Obviously Fred has had some very poorly tuned stainless steel buses with automatic transmissions to base his opinions on, perhaps he will share the model numbers and year of these buses, so the rest of us can avoid them. I never saw a stainless steel bus you had to buff frequently, in fact you never need to buff a stainless steel bus. Sure would love to know just what kind that was. | ||
| Sam Sperbeck (204.248.119.254) Rating: N/A |
Hi Don, My wife has had a set of stainless steel cookware since college that has never been polished except on the inside after I burn something on. The outside shines just like new, and I'm quite sure they have seen harder use than the stainless on a bus conversion. I think, as Paul Harvey would say, Freds reach exceeds his grasp sometimes. Thanks, Sam Sperbeck La Crescent, MN | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.56)
Rating: N/A |
Sure Sam, but the bus Fred owned obviously had some inferior grade of stainless, for him to have buffed it "frequently". We all need to be aware of this brand, so we can avoid them (and their slipping gas guzzling automatics). | ||
| Johnny (4.174.112.38) Rating: N/A |
"That slush-pump Prevo has abt. double the HP & torque of that DD 71 that Fred is in love with" Lugging about double the weight...and there's PLENTY more available in a 2-stroke Jimmy. I seriously doubt an 8V92 is breaking a sweat at 450HP, or an 8V71 (or a 6V92, for that matter) at 375-400HP. "and you don't have to get knee joint replacements every 25k miles from driving it!" Well, that's solved easily: float-shift. Unless you're stopping, there's no reason to use the clutch. | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.210.241)
Rating: N/A |
Hello folks. Let's play nice and return to being helpful to others and ourselves. When we are comparing fuel economy amongst something like 60 years of bus technology evolution, we need to consider a few variables. aerodynamic drag weight of the vehicle efficiency of the engine combustion state of tune gearing speed driven driving style flatland or climbing air temperature tire pressures auxiliary loads on the engine type of transmission Aerodynamics, (and the related issue of speed) is an awful big card to play. The 35 footers typically have smaller frontal areas than the taller 40 footers, and the taller still newer equipment, like the Prevost H3-45. But then the newer equipment starts gaining in more efficient combustion and enough low end power for overdrive gearing. From middle history, it was widely held that with the MC7,8,9 in revenue operation that the 4 speed manual transmission got you 1 mpg better than the 740 automatic. Popularly, hired drivers were instructed that safe mileage was considered 500 miles for auto, 600 for manual. And fuel economy decays with winter temperatures. High school physics teacher didn't tell us about the complicated variable of incomplete fuel burn, leaving us bedazzled with the simple truth about denser charge. In the current modern age, the gap in fuel economy between the new 6 speed Allison World B500 auto transmissions and the seven speed manual that has typically been the optional stick, has narrowed to the point that the continuing, yet smaller,savings with the stick, will be wiped out in the clutch repairs that come with inexperienced hired drivers. And inexperienced they will remain, with the pay being stagnant for 15 years. Many of the potential wheel holders can't be trained to double clutch properly, so the fleets are overwhelmingly ordering automatics to control expences. And the congregation says....? happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.17)
Rating: N/A |
Sometimes Buswarrior, correcting misinformation can be very helpful to those misinformed. Two questions for you though: Are the 7 speed manual trannies requiring double clutching? Just curious. I would have to assume the mileage figures you furnish for manual and automatic difference, is based on transit type bus use, not over the road use, right? If not, then there must be different gearing or tuning to account for the loss of mileage in the locked up Allison. | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (69.68.102.7) Rating: N/A |
While the instructions may have been popularly given to drivers that range with an automatic would equate to a considerable amount less than a manual, that does not mean that it was necessarily factual. Remember for years it WAS true about automatics, but once they came on the scene the word about the advantages of lock-up converters got out slowly. Plus, a bus in revenue operation can be expected to make any number of stops along it's route... But a manual vs an Allison with a lock-up in an identical coach over long distances at highway speeds? 500 miles vs. 600 miles? I'd like to see some hard facts to believe that. Brian | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.210.241)
Rating: N/A |
Hi DonTX/KS. The seven speeds are non-synchro. First is in close to the driver's seat and you need the front seat passenger to help pull it out into 7th! As for the fuel mileage differences, I'm curious too. Perhaps... when in revenue service, buses typically don't run for great distances at steady highway speed for as long as they sometimes tool around town or come off the highway, and accelerate back on again to stop for the biological needs of the passengers. Perhaps the mix of driving is what drags the auto mileage down? Typically the MC7,8,9 ran 3.7 differentials regardless of tranny type. Greyhound went automatic with the MC8's and then went heavily right back to manual with the early MC9 for what we were all told was fuel economy reasons, and they do a lot of long distance inter-city running. We need a GM or Allison engineer to come and rescue us! happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| ChuckMC9 (Chucks) (66.167.165.31)
Rating: N/A |
Buswarrior, can you elaborate on this please? ..will be wiped out in the clutch repairs that come with inexperienced hired drivers...can't be trained to double clutch properly, so the fleets are overwhelmingly ordering automatics to control expences. As an inexperienced, not for hire, bus driver, I thought doubleclutching was more related to non-synchro and didn't know it had much to do with the health of the clutch. I have discovered that I can shift just fine without doubleclutching (easier up than down) and had assumed that if I could do that, then why bother with dcing? So am I overlooking something important? Hurry, answer this now, before the girls get their knickers all twisted up in the next round!  | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.210.241)
Rating: N/A |
Hello ChuckMC9. Sorry, I should have been more detailed. Poorly trained or unskilled drivers slip clutches on take off, feeding fuel and clutch together and fail to smoothly match road speed to gear speed when changing gears. These all contribute to premature wear and destruction of the clutch mechanisms and wear surfaces. And the quality of the candidates... well, double clutching and gear changing and fuel pedal and not crashing is too much to do at once for too many potential "drivers" these days. RJ Long has written an article on dead pedal starts on the BNO website which is well worth a read. And if the unskilled driver tries to shift gears without the clutch, they grind the edges off the gear teeth, and in extreme cases, twist the shaft in the bottom of the tranny so the gear sets can't slide back and forth to change gears or break the shift forks that slide the gearsets on the shafts. Eventually, with a little grind, the gears can't hold themselves together, and the tranny jumps out of gear while you are driving. Ironically, it gets easier to shift without the clutch as you wear the teeth edges down, since the gears pull apart easier. To say nothing of the lurching and noises that the passengers are subjected to when the driver doesn't quite get it right. An automatic transmission has a higher initial outlay for a fleet owner, but it's pretty hard for a driver to do anything routine that would harm it. So, pay now, or pay later uncontrollably and have the bus out of service. Now, as to whether you want to use the clutch or not: You only have to push the clutch in as far as it takes to pass the friction point. I've heard some oldtimers call this "quartering the clutch". You don't have to push it all the way down. Also, there are assistive devices that you can add to your linkage, if they aren't already there, or adjusted properly, to reduce the amount of pedal effort required to push the pedal down. FastFred isn't kidding: if properly equipped and adjusted, a bus can have as light a pedal as an automobile. I drove one enlightened company's newer MCI 102D with the lightest clutch that I had ever driven in anything! What a ride! Few buses are equipped with these from fleets. Owners preferred a heavy pedal, worrying about drivers resting their feet on the clutch pedal between shifts, "riding the clutch" which allowed the clutch to slip and burn while driving along. Using the clutch for every shift means that the spinning gear teeth only have their own mass to rub against each other if you haven't got them spinning exactly the same speed. If you shift without the clutch, one of those gear sets has the force of the weight of the coach behind them up from the wheels and driveshaft, the other has the engine attached, so something is going to get shocked when they bang together. The clutch helps the gears slide together without that force behind bashing the teeth. Shifting without a clutch has more to do with laziness and machismo than good economics. And as we all know, machismo has a way of making fact out of fiction over time. All depends how one wants to try and prove that one is a man.... fathering some off-spring is the only way I know of that proves for sure that "it" works! Gear jamming has a certain amount of self fulfilment to it, I suppose...? Why bother teaching yourself how to do something that is abusive to the transmission? Who has come on here and publicly admitted he ruined a transmission? What tranny shop will encourage you to drive it properly, or tell you straight up how you broke it? We only get partial info when machismo is in play. Keep your tranny in good shape for sure. Use the clutch and let those gears slip together without the force of the road and engine pounding simutaneously on the edges of the teeth. happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| R TERRY (207.230.142.240)
Rating: N/A |
Who started this thread, anyway? I guess I am not without an opinion here; I own a 4-speed Spicer and an Allison whatever-the-heck-it-is Automatic. These come in the 4104 and the 4905, respectively. Having had zero experience behind the wheel of a full-sized motorcoach—an ex-Greyhound—, I was initially at a huge loss as to how to shift the g*dd*mn thing. No amount of explaining it—all two minutes-worth—prepared me for the humiliation of miles of gear-grinding. Back then, I would have paid someone to shoot me for blundering into a stick-operated rig. At that time in my naive life (naïve: a word you can't look up in the dictionary unless you already know how to spell it), I thought I could drive anything. But more than anything, I found out that I was still not too old to learn new tricks. Driving the 4104 became a challenge that I was determined to master. All it took was a truck driver to show me how to not use the clutch to shift gears. Well, now I know it can be done either way equally well, it's just a matter of preference. There was never an issue about how much leg pressure it took to operate the clutch; it was often easier to push than the clutch in my '69 Dodge pickup. Frankly, the whole bus was easier to operate in every aspect than my old truck. Perhaps I should pay somebody to shoot me for buying THAT beast! After I got the hang of it, the word "automatic" never entered my mind while driving the 4104. That is, it didn't until I got stuck in slow-moving, stop-and-go traffic. This is where the automatic lays waste to a stick-shift. This is where you could CARE LESS about any miles-per-gallon issue! And if a traffic jam continued on for any length of time, you would, right then, gladly trade your house for an automatic, and/or give up sex. Fair trade. However, I do like getting 10 MPG in the 4104. That's only a few MPG less than my truck. (I should hire someone to shoot my truck.) The 4905 is a different story. In the best of conditions—low elevation, flat road, no wind—, it barely gets 6 MPG. This is where I remind myself that if I have to worry about MPG in a bus, I should not be IN a bus. (That's the old saw: "If you have to ask how much it costs, you can't afford it!". That advice is moot when you become an NBA player.) An automatic transmission in a bus does one thing exceptionally well: It takes all the sweat out of driving the bus. Just sit back and relax, enjoy the ride, be King of the Road (…or Queen of the Road. Of course you could be both, depending on how you dress.). And if you get stuck in traffic, go ahead and laugh your head off at the poor sucker with the worn out leg, wrestling with the clutch while he drives for 10 miles in first gear. But don’t forget, you’ll be laughing at me driving my 4104. I got news for you, though: I enjoy driving it! It’s fun. Shifting is good. Makes you think you’re doing something. Which you are: You’re amusing yourself. Big bus, big shifting, lots of fun. Don’t worry: I know these things. RT | ||
| RJ Long (Rjlong) (66.229.97.200)
Rating: N/A |
Let me pass on some real world experience from my days of working in the charter bus industry. We were required to fuel our coaches when we returned to the yard after a trip, so I have lots of notes in my old log books regarding fuel usage. At the time I worked for this company, it had 4106s, 4107s, 4108s, 4905s, MC-8s, MC-9s and a couple 102A3s. All the GMs were stock 8V71 4-spds, all the MCIs had HT-740 Allison automatics with either an 8V71, 8V71T or the 6V92TA, with the exception of the 102s - those had 8V92TAs with HT-740 Allisons. All were MUI engines, there were no DDECs in the fleet at that time. One of our most frequent runs was the Friday nite leave > Sunday evening return, Fresno > Reno gambling junkets. This trip averaged about 615 miles, composed of about 400 flat valley freeway, 15 around downtown Reno, and 200 or so going up and over the 6% grades of 7,200' Donner Summit on I-80. From my log books, I found the following info: 6V92TA MCIs used an average of 95-100 gallons 8V71 MCIs used an average of 100-105 gallons 8V71T MCIs used an average of 105-110 gallons 8V92TA MCIs used an average of 90-95 gallons For the GMCs, the only ones used on this run were the 4905s, and they averaged 80-85 gallons. There is one fluke trip, however. I was assigned one of the newest MC-9s for this run on a hot July Friday. 10 minutes onto the freeway, the A/C failed (compressor threw a rod!!). Stopped at a McD's, called Dispatch, and was assigned the only bus left at the time, which was also the oldest unit in the fleet, a 4106. The tour escort and I left the group at McD's w/ the manager's blessing, returned to the yard, swapped buses & luggage, picked up the 35 folk waiting for us, and off we went w/o another glitch, arriving just 45 minutes late. (Interesting little side note: the group LOVED the "old bus", and we had a great time!) My log for that trip shows 611 total miles on 68.5 gallons of fuel. You can do the math. Buswarrior makes a point I'd also like to elaborate upon, and this, too, is based on my experience in the industry: A coach that made a straight run from Fresno to Dodger Stadium in LA for a game, and then a straight return, ALWAYS got better mileage than the same coach going on a shopping trip to all the LA outlet stores that are located relatively close to the stadium. That running around town would drop the overall trip mileage anywhere from 1.0 - 1.5 mpg, depending on the amount of stops made and the ensuing idle time w/ the A/C on. Oh, and btw, at the transit agency I worked at, our 40-foot Flxible "New Looks" with the 8V71/V-730s and 4.10 rear axles got 3-4 mpg in daily revenue service. As the saying goes: "Your mileage may vary!" FWIW, RJ PD4106-2784 Fresno CA | ||
| R TERRY (207.230.142.240)
Rating: N/A |
After reading Buswarrior's once again excellent dissertation, I am compelled to clarify one thing: I use the clutch when shifting. Although I did get the hang of shifting like a trucker and thought it was pretty fun, I was unable to un-train myself; the ol' clutch pedal went up and down automatically without my permission. The transmission in my 4104 is not automatic; just my leg is. RT | ||
| ChuckMC9 (Chucks) (66.167.165.31)
Rating: N/A |
OK, one more try if you please. I wasn't referring to the practice of not using the clutch at all, but rather of 'regular' clutching (in, shift, out) vs. doubleclutching. (in, out, neutral, in, shift, out) Is the pause to let the clutch out in neutral during a shift of value in aligning engine speed with road speed, (a step that seems to just come naturally to me without doing this) or just a way to rest your leg muscles for a second or two? Or...? | ||
| Phil Dumpster (24.16.243.37) Rating: N/A |
Letting the clutch out during double clutching when upshifting is done to slow down the rotational speed of the input shaft of the transmission. Because of the mass of the clutch friction disk, it will continue to spin for quite some time if you just let the clutch out. You CAN upshift a crashbox without double clutching, but you'd have to wait perhaps 10 seconds for the input shaft of the transmission to slow down to the appropriate speed before shifting into the next higher gear. Do that going up a hill and you'll probably end up going backwards before you get the chance to shift. In a synchronized transmission, the synchronizers do the work of matching input to output speeds for you, so all you have to do is step on the clutch and move the gearshift. Without synchros, you have to this using the engine. That's why you let off of the throttle when upshifting, but rev the engine when downshifting. In the former case, you are using the engine to slow down the input shaft, in the latter case you are using the engine to speed up the input shaft. | ||
| FAST FRED (65.154.176.44) Rating: N/A |
" I enjoy driving it! It’s fun. Shifting is good" RT, at least has this hobby figgured out. What need of a fine intereior if it isn't FUN to GO ? Some folks get so wraped up in twinky lights and heated corrian toilet seats that they forget the PURPOSE of converting a coach. Using it! Works for me, FAST FRED | ||
| TWO DOGS (65.177.145.204) Rating: N/A |
I love my stick shift..other people love their automatics,it would be a boreing world if everybody was the same..have you ever noticed the BEAUTIFUL artwork on some of those railroad cars...seems a shame I can't find an artist to do a mural.... | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.43)
Rating: N/A |
Just park it on the railroad tracks Two Dogs, the painters WILL come (and maybe a choo choo also) | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.43)
Rating: N/A |
RJ, as usual your figures and comments were well presented, but in the comparison what you REALLY said was that a light weight TWO axle bus gets better fuel mileage than a heavy weight THREE axle bus. Shucks, I already knew that. Tranny choice might have had nothing to do with it. | ||
| RJ Long (Rjlong) (66.229.97.200)
Rating: N/A |
Don - Hmmmmm. . . Wonder if that could be one of the reasons you owned a GMC?? LOL 8^) RJ | ||
| Sam Sperbeck (204.248.119.254) Rating: N/A |
Hi Buswarrior, You said, "Using the clutch for every shift means that the spinning gear teeth only have their own mass to rub against each other if you haven't got them spinning exactly the same speed. If you shift without the clutch, one of those gear sets has the force of the weight of the coach behind them up from the wheels and the driveshaft, the other has the engine attached, so something is going to get shocked when they bang together" Are you confused about what a clutch does? A clutch doesn't disconnect the driveshaft from the output shaft and gears of the transmission as you imply in the first sentence of the above paragraph, it only disconnects the engine, so you still have "the weight of the coach behind them up from the wheels and the driveshaft" I think I know what you were trying to say, but it would help if you actually said it. Sometimes, when I read Fred's posts I think I know what he is trying to say, other times I think, "Is this guy _______?" (You fill in the blank) And then he makes another post and removes all doubt. LOL Thanks, Sam Sperbeck La Crescent, MN | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.38)
Rating: N/A |
You sure pick up on things quick RJ, for an old bus guy at least. Never could figure out why adding a 5000 lb axle assembly to increase your load carry capacity that SAME 5000 lbs made any sense. Guess that is why Eagle bit the dust, and the happiest Eagle owners are those who removed the "dumb" axle. Guess the stainless is too heavy for the MCI types to ever try that? Does anybody know of an MCI that has had the dumb axle removed? | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.38)
Rating: N/A |
If you want some up to date information, from a pro or two that drives a hundred thousand miles a year - you might read some here. Notice that the automatic transmission gives 10% INCREASE IN FUEL MILEAGE. Darn, I keep hearing it works the opposite from people that don't own one and never tried it. http://www.arvinmeritor.com/media_room/MATS2003/Fact_and_Background_Sheets/SP0358.pdf | ||
| Sam Sperbeck (204.248.119.254) Rating: N/A |
Hi Don, MCI made two axle buses, the 96A2 and 102A2 I know for sure from the Round Up (of used bus equipment) in National Bud Trader magazine March 2004 issue. I also remember seeing a picture of a two axle MCI9 in the same magazine sometime in the past, so, yes MCI made two axle coaches. I don't think it was a case of the manufactures wanting to put the "dumb" axles on their buses, it was a case of the laws requiring it. Thanks, Sam Sperbeck La Crescent, MN | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.64)
Rating: N/A |
Well Sam, the "law" never required the dumb axle on anything. The "law" says that you can put 10k on a steer axle, 20k on a single rear axle, and 34k on a tandem. IF you make the empty bus heavy enough, then you have little choice but to add that extra axle in order to carry a load of people. Remember though that part of that 14k is already used up by the added weight of the axle! Some cannot even do it with the extra axle. Eagle made some single axle buses also, I cannot recall the model right now, I think it was while they were in Brownsville TX. | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (198.81.26.45)
Rating: N/A |
" I enjoy driving it! It’s fun. Shifting is good" RT, at least has this hobby figgured out. I think shifting is good too... in my car... Fred, you mean because I swapped out my manual tranny for an allison I don't have this hobby figured out? Brian | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (198.81.26.45)
Rating: N/A |
Don, the drive axle on my 96A3 might weigh every bit of 5000 pounds, but I'd be very suprised if the tag axle weighed even two thousand pounds, there really isn't that much to it... So a couple thousand pound for an additional 14k, not such a bad trade-off. Plus, in cases where traction is a problem, I have a tag axle unloader which takes the air out of the tag axle bellows. Although MCI did indeed make 96A2s and 102A2s the drive axle is farther back, so taking the tag axle off an A3 does not make it an A2 and there is a danger of structural damage with the extra weight overhanging the rear of the drive axle. The nice thing about tag axle coaches besides the weight carrying ability... is turning radius, I don't know what the turn radius of the 35 foot GMC's, but at 43" the turning radius of my 96A3 is the tightest I'm aware of for a full sized over the road coach. Brian | ||
| Frank Allen (205.188.116.135) Rating: N/A |
put a v-730 in my 4106, fuel mileage dropped from 10 to 7, overall speed dropped about ten, the 8/71 engine runs hotter and you really have to watch it on a climb, do not know about the other automatics but these are the facts on the 730 Frank Allen 4106 | ||
| TWO DOGS (65.179.192.151) Rating: N/A |
43 inch turning circle...I knew there was a reason to buy one of those things | ||
| Gary Stadler (Boogiethecat) (68.7.217.217)
Rating: N/A |
Hey Don, regarding your comments about automatic trannys getting better mileage...um.... ("If you want some up to date information, from a pro or two that drives a hundred thousand miles a year - you might read some here. Notice that the automatic transmission gives 10% INCREASE IN FUEL MILEAGE. Darn, I keep hearing it works the opposite from people that don't own one and never tried it.") ... you didn't do your homework. What they are talking about is NOT an automatic transmission in the sense that we're used to seeing. The ZF MeritorTM FreedomLine® Transmission has no torque converter and it DOES have a clutch. What it is, is an electronically controlled manual tranny. When you take off from a stop, you use the clutch as normal. But after that the tranny takes over all shifting. It looks carefully at all engine parameters and load/speed/etc, and automatically pulls shifts when needed. Basically It takes over control of the throttle when a shift is needed, it backs off, puts the tranny in neutral, sets the engine rpm to the EXACT speed it would need to be for the new selected gear, drops the tranny back in gear, and finally gives throttle control back to the driver. So no wonder it gets better mileage than a "stick", because it is a stick with an amazingly well trained monkey working it!!!! But it's definitely NOT an automatic as in Allison/slush converter. Cheerio gary | ||
| Sam Sperbeck (204.248.119.254) Rating: N/A |
Hi Don, Are you very sure about that 10K limit on a steer axle? If so what is the point of truck manufactures putting 20K front axles on log, concrete, and dump trucks, for examlple? I have also seen 38K and 44K rated tandems so that leaves a question too. Are the figures you quote perhaps for a semi tractor/trailer combination instead of for a 2 axle or 3 axle truck or bus? I noted that the Liberty Prevost XLII featured in the March 2004 issue of Family Motor Coaching Magazine wet weights were front axle-16,880#, drive axle-21,060#, tag axle-12,960#, total-50,900, with a GVWR of 54,500#. So, either there is something wrong with your numbers or that bus is grossly overweight. Yes, Don, Eagle made the 10S two axle bus from at least '83 thru '85 according to National Bus Trader. Thanks, Sam Sperbeck La Crescent, MN | ||
| Ron Leiferman (Ron_In_Sd) (12.111.217.5)
Rating: N/A |
Don, The ZF that you are talking about is a hybrd stick. It is like the fuller 10 spd autostick. The Fuller you have to use a cluth on take off only. With the ZF there is no cluth pedal at all. It activates the cluth on its own. A number of new cars have this option also, BMW, Ferrari, etc. The TV ads that show the driver using stearing wheel paddles to do the shifting is just a high end auto trans with direct gear selection. | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.81)
Rating: N/A |
Come on guys, you are peeing on my parade! I still feel that a transmission that has no clutch pedal and shifts automatically is an automatic! I never saw a 43 inch turning circle either, but I spent some time in a Reniassance (sp perhaps)MCI with a steerable tag, and I have NEVER seen such a big bus turn so sharply. If you ever had a GMC 4905 you can REALLY appreciate that qualification. | ||
| Dale MC8 (69.19.172.113)
Rating: N/A |
"Eagle made some single axle buses also, I cannot recall the model right now, I think it was while they were in Brownsville TX." OK Don, I'm sure a one axle bus could turn sharper than 43" ;-) | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.211.186)
Rating: N/A |
Thank you Sam. You're right, I should have made another paragraph to flesh it out a bit better. Point to be made, it isn't good for the long life of the transmission gears to bang the teeth together with the clutch engaged. Thanks! happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (65.160.215.64) Rating: N/A |
Yep... 43" turn circle, turns on a dime practically... I'd be willing to bet that even with the steerable tag the Renaissance, being 102 wide and 45' long won't turn inside the 96A3, unless the front wheels turn almost sideways. Brian | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.211.186)
Rating: N/A |
I wouldn't put 14000 on an older MCI tag axle.... The pair of them are only good for 6000 lbs put to the road. The tag on the older ones, isn't even a "real" axle, it's two short stub axles mounted to each side of the engine frame rails, with an airbag slung above to make the articulation. (the new ones on the 45 footers is much more robust in design. They are rated for as much on the tag as the steer axle.) With the air turned completely off on the tag axle to two MC8's I've tried, I weighed them at the DOT, and the scale showed me about 1600 lbs, if my foggy memory is correct. With the air turned on, they showed about 3000 lbs bearing down. So, there's some idea for you what the two wheels and their stubby little bits and pieces weigh when they are just sitting there, not holding up their limited share of the bus. happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (65.160.215.64) Rating: N/A |
Buswarrior...every little bit helps I suppose, lucky thing for me, the tag axle in mine, according to the maintenance records, was totatlly rebuilt the year before I got it. Don, I can imagine how amazing it was to see the Renaissance turning so sharp, which is why I was so amazed at the manuverability of the 96A3 when I performed a perfect three point turn within the confines of a 7-11 parking lot. I'm sorry to say that I did a little research and discovered that the turning radius of the 96A3 is NOT 43 inches as I wrote earlier, it's 43 FEET, imagine my surprise! But... happily enough... MCI lists the turning radius of the Renaissance as 43.5 feet. Brian | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.32)
Rating: N/A |
Darn Brian, and here I had bid on every 96A3 I could find, NOW you tell me they won't do it. Gotta go back to the single axle jobs, they are more like a unicycle I believe, shorter turns yet. | ||
| TWO DOGS (65.179.209.143) Rating: N/A |
I bet BERNIE told him it was 43 inches hey...this is getting too long, the wheel bearings on my screen are smokeing | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (65.160.215.64) Rating: N/A |
He He He... You guys are funny. (grin) Brian | ||
| Sam Sperbeck (204.248.119.254) Rating: N/A |
Hi Buswarrior, I'm confused about your above post about the weight of an MCI8 tag axle, could you explain how your method determined the actual approximate weight of the tag? It seems to me that you would have to weigh the bus with and without the tag, and it's hardware, installed to get an actual weight of the tag. I guess your method would show part of the weight of the trailing arms, brakes,wheels and tires, but not the weight of the mounting hardware, air bags, and whatever weight of the trailing arms and pivot shafts was being carried by the drive axle. Your clarification would be appreciated. Thanks, Sam Sperbeck La Crescent, MN | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.83)
Rating: N/A |
On a 4905 GMC, weighing the tag in that method would probably only get about half of the weight of the entire system would weigh if you actually removed it all. I cannot guess on an MCI. | ||
| H3Jim (68.105.107.136) Rating: N/A |
Brian, My H3-41 has a turning radius of 39 ft, one reason why I bought it. Still does nothing for the long wheelbase cutting the corners short though. | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.67)
Rating: N/A |
I did not know the H3-41 turned that small a circle, but now somebody with a 40 foot RTS will come on here now and beat us all I bet. Them suckers turn sharp too. | ||
| Johnny (4.174.103.151) Rating: N/A |
"Shifting without a clutch has more to do with laziness and machismo than good economics" Then I guess I shouldn't mention the hundreds of thousands of miles my uncle has driven this way, with trannies ranging from a Spicer 5-speed to a 15-speed Road Ranger to a T-19 4-speed to a ZF 5-speed? He drives EVERYTHING this way, & I've never heard him miss a gear. His F-250 had over 400,000 miles on the untouched 4-speed when he sold it. | ||
| Johnny (4.174.103.151) Rating: N/A |
"After I got the hang of it, the word "automatic" never entered my mind while driving the 4104. That is, it didn't until I got stuck in slow-moving, stop-and-go traffic. This is where the automatic lays waste to a stick-shift. This is where you could CARE LESS about any miles-per-gallon issue! And if a traffic jam continued on for any length of time, you would, right then, gladly trade your house for an automatic, and/or give up sex. Fair trade." I drive in the Boston area every day, frequently in my 5-speed F-350 pickup. many times, I've been in a traffic jam for miles without touching the clutch or brakes. The trick is to put the truck (or bus) in a gear that lets it idle along at the speed of traffic (usually a 3rd gear idle for me). Give me a manual transmission. Every time, every vehicle, no exceptions. | ||
| Johnny (4.174.103.151) Rating: N/A |
IIRC, legal axle weights are 12,000 steer/20,000 drive/34K tandem. Not certain about a bogey...though for some reason 8000 rings a bell. | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (65.160.215.64) Rating: N/A |
Jim, let me first say that I think the H3-41 is a really beautiful machine, and I'm not such a big Prevost fan. It is not surprising that a newer coach has a tighter turning radius, but your wheels really must turn almost 90 degrees! For a 41' bus to turn within it's own length is pretty amazing... Is your tag axle steerable? Y'know, I'd almost be willing to bet that there is nothing that will beat that kind of turning radius, even an RTS. I wonder if there is anything else out there that turns within it's own length, and I mean anything, bus, truck, car, motorcycle...anything, besides a forklift. Brian | ||
| BrianMCI96A3 (65.160.215.64) Rating: N/A |
Johnny, Boston's infamous traffic snarls have in the past been due to bottlenecks at critical points in the city, I've been in enough of them myself. Creeping along in a traffic jam with a stick shift is fine when cars are moving all the time, but it gets to be a pain in the a** when you go from 0 to 35, back to zero, then 50, then 0, then 15, then 30... for hour after hour like I did when traveling through New York last May when road construction caused a four hour long traffic jam. At one point it took me an hour to travel less than a quarter of a mile. Zero to 5 mph then stop, over and over and over. Brian | ||
| Derek (24.85.245.203) Rating: N/A |
Actually there are a few... The MCI Renaissance at 45.58' total length turns in a respectable 43.5'. The other MCI's don't do so well (102D3 and 102DL3). They're 41' and 45', respectivly, but only turn in 44.7', and 47.0' circles. The Prevost H3-45 (2004), at 45.0' length is VERY close to turning within itself, at 45.7' turning circle. The Prevost H3-41 (2004) does a little better, at 41.0' long it will turn in a 40.7' circle. Now the Prevost XLII surprised me. The 2005 model claims to have a 41.8' turning circle with independant suspension, 45.5' without. That's quite amazing for a 45' coach. 56° Steering angle, for those keeping track. Also, I'd just like to throw in that the MCI 102 coaches, and the Prevost H3 have the driver sitting at the same height. The difference is that the H3 has taller cargo bays, which makes life a lot easier for the drivers loading luggage. The downside is that the H3 is slightly shorter inside the cabin, about 5" or so. I remember someone brought this up a while ago, and I wasn't sure so I checked for myself, but it was too late to answer the question. And Brian, as far as I know, the Prevost does not have a steering tag. Perhaps someone will correct me on this. They do however have tag unloaders which help the turning circle quite a bit. | ||
| Geoff (Geoff) (66.238.120.14)
Rating: N/A |
A 40', 102" RTS has a turning radius of 39 feet at the wheels. I often do U-turns on 4 lane streets (w/shoulders)-- I did one in Kayenta, Arizona last month and the Indians stopped what they were doing to see my bus and toad do a pivot in the middle of town! --Geoff '82 RTS CA | ||
| TWO DOGS (65.179.201.234) Rating: N/A |
I can pull my bobcat on a 8 foot wide trailer & turn around...almost as good as the mci | ||
| Carroll (68.155.49.185)
Rating: N/A |
...and Elmer Fudd once said "Automatics are for wimmin" and bumper sticker of the day "Real men can drive Automatics" | ||
| TWO DOGS (158.254.225.169) Rating: N/A |
AND.......you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him float on his back | ||
| Buswarrior (Buswarrior) (64.229.209.231)
Rating: N/A |
Hi Sam. In weighing the tag axle with air on and off, my original curiosity at the time was what the potential weight transfer might be if you really got in deep and needed the traction for the drives. The unloader switch on the driver's side instrument panel only partially unloads the axle, still keeping some air in the bellows. Prevost's modern system actually raises the tags off the road, giving total benefit to the drives weight wise. Of interest, the system uses a brake chamber and a lever to lift it clear of the road, concurrently with dumping the air in its bellow. You are correct, my original experiment does not show the entire weight of all the pieces, it just shows the "left overs" and the difference is what the tag actually carries, which is quite small in an unloaded bus. Now, fill the holds solid with bundles of weekend newspapers, put 47 people and their luggage up the stair.... might be interesting to see what the tag does to help? happy coaching! buswarrior | ||
| Rick Cribbins (66.190.246.81)
Rating: N/A |
Hi I'm new, so bare with me. Fred, back in your early post, what did you mean by this? "IF anyone (cept those 2 speed VS2 folks) would care to post their SLUSHPUMP fuel milage (ours is log book /fuel recipts documented at over 9 mpg ., with 10 on rare occasions)" I'm looking at buying a bus with a VS2-8, so I want to know more about them. Is this the worst trany for fuel economy or something? Thanks, Rick Cribbins | ||
| Tom Caffrey (Pvcces) (65.74.65.65)
Rating: N/A |
Rick, from what I've heard, that is one of the most economical automatic transmissions available in a vee drive. The main problem as I see it is that to get the best results might require a differential change, depending on what you are starting with, and it is a discontinued transmission, so parts and service could be a problem, at least from Allison. Don TX/KS reported very good mileage with this unit in a high geared setup. Hills can be another matter, though. One problem is when you try to slow down too much going downhill, the torque converter lockup drops out, giving very little braking effort from the powerplant. I think Fast Fred was only asking OTHER automatic owners for comparisons in fuel consumption because he already knows that the VS2 can do pretty good. For what it's worth. Tom Caffrey PD4106-2576 Suncatcher | ||
| Rick Cribbins (66.190.246.81)
Rating: N/A |
Thanks for the info Tom! I think I need to buy some books about this stuff! | ||
| DonTX/KS (66.82.9.26)
Rating: N/A |
Parts and service from Allison do not exist, as they sold all the rights to another company, Williams Detroit Diesel Allison, that has supported the VS2 (and other Allison products) by parts manufacture for years. You can see this information at the following site: http://www.wwwilliams.com/compinfo.htm As with any automatic with lockup converter, when you get down to about 20mph I would suspect in the setup you are considering, the lockout changes back to torque converter, and the Jakes become pretty useless. A bit interesting when it happens, but most people can take over with the air brakes at that point, which are quite sufficient to stop or control the bus from 20 mph. If I were considering the Flx, I would prefer a set of lower numbers for a differential ratio, but then again, I cruise the flatlands, and prefer to run in the RPM range DD intended their engine to run to obtain more economy. This automatic is perfectly capable of shifting down when it needs to on a hill, so why not let it? |