-
Engine size upgrade
-
I am siding with Red. I don’t care how much HP a coach has there is always going to be a truck you have to pass going up a hill. I can go up a hill at the posted speed limit and despite having the ability to do that once someone jumps into my lane and I lose speed and momentum, it takes time to recover the speed, if I can.
In my car I have the ability to climb any hill faster than almost anyone, but despite my car’s outstanding ability to accellerate I am not passing or going up the hill any faster than the car or truck blocking the lane of traffic.
What we all are seeing is as our coaches have evolved we as buyers keep wanting more. We want them longer so we went from 35 to 40 and now to 45. We want them with more bay space so we have the H as an alternative to the X. We wanted more room inside so we got one slide, then two, and now 4. Carpeting wasn’t good enough so we got marble and granite floors, everything I described above adding weight. To keep up with the obesity of our coaches our engines kept getting increased HP and torque. It would be interesting to learn if our present day coaches are better at hill climbing or going 0 to 60 than prior generations of coaches.
Regardless my bus will attain any posted speed limit in the country and on occasion I have hills that have kept my speed down as low as 35 MPH. But out of the thousands and thousands of miles driven the number of miles I have driven at unacceptable speeds is probably less than 100 miles. Most of the hills I have encountered that really tax the ability of my coach limit me to 50 to 55 MPH which is the top of 4th gear, and while I prefer to go faster in the scheme of things I still want to stop better and not go faster. But nobody ever worries about that.
-
Jon,
In addition to the weight additions you described in the newer coaches,, you forgot about the 30′ stackers. When you pull one of these it takes the extra power just to achieve the moderate “safe” speeds.
Just sayin…….
-
More HP more fuel and shorter engine life,I use a ugly word here MCI the J series the best selling bus on the planet comes standard with the ISX_ 12L Cummins set at 425 hp the option is the D13 Detroit set at 410 hp and these things will blow you off the highway passing you, enjoy the ride
-
Luvr, I resemble that MCI remark…
-
Hmmm, just checked the Newell site.
Newell’s weight: 63,300 Prevost X-3 weight : 55,500
So, the Newell has an effective HP advantage of 5% and effective torgue advantage of 2%. Based on these weights, it looks like the Newell needs the 600 HP. BTW, I can’t believe what it weighs!
While looking at the Newell site I was disappointed in their floorplans. All but one has the rear bath. If you’re not a fan of the rear bath, Newell becomes less desirable. FWIW, until someone shows me how to access the top of the engine, I will never be a fan of the rear bath. I have a walkin closet and floor access to the engine. I know, to eah their own.
-
The 63,300 is GVW not the curb weight on a Newell fwiw the IH-45 Foretravel has the same engine as the Newell with a GVW of 54,400 pounds -
I cannot make the edit work here but all Newells the engine is access is outside the unit not like a bus everything is done from the outside nothing inside
-
Gil, you’re looking at this rear-bathroom thing all wrong… Accessing the top of the engine through the bathroom floor should shorten the work time by eliminating those pesky bathroom breaks… Just kidding.
Mike
-
Horse power burns fuel , torque moves the load . I have had cat motors at 410 hp 1450 torque and moved it to 500 hp to 1650 burned more fuel went back to 430 hp and 1650 torque it was the best , if I had to have a choice it would be more torque not hp. I now have 40 footer at 475 it has all the power you need and can stop it I cris cross the us and Canada six or seven times a year pulling a trailer never a problem going up or down try the hill going south of Vegas on I -15 towards LA
-
Luvrbus,
Yes, the X-3 and Newell weights were both GVW ratings. These are the numbers the manufacturers should be using to determine HP and Torgue. And yes I know they have outside engine access, but it doesn’t appear (and I just looked at Newell pictures again) any more so than a X-3. Although it might be possible to adjust valves or replace injectors from the outside doors, top access would make those jobs much easier.
I should say I see one major advantage to rear bathrooms and that’s being weight distribution. Still, I’m not a fan or rear bathrooms.
-
We left Las Vegas this morning and for those of you who know the I-15 leaving LV going south towards Baker going up the incline to Nipton, I slowed to 40 mph. There is a truck lane and I’m in it.
All I can think of is if I get behind a slow truck I have no reserve power to pass. That big fat Volvo with 500 hp and 1750 lb. ft. of torque sure sounds good and the 600 hp Cummins even a little better with1950 lb. ft. of torque.
I’m going to try and drive both the Prevost and Newell this next week.
MM.
-
MM,
I have never experienced a single time that my ISX 600 was a disadvantage. I have never said, “Gee, I should have gotten a 500.”
You are absolutely correct that more power will allow you increased flexibility when driving. I can tell you first hand that it is very noticable and appreciated.
It’s not a race, it’s about comfort. It’s not bragging rights, it’s ease of travel. I completely realize that the current Prevost configuration is more than adequate but I wonder how many folks would check the box for a more powerful engine option if one was offered *at a reasonable price*???
I’ll never be ordering a new bus from scratch so I will always need to comprmise base on availability in my price range. That’s what I did with our current 06 Signature. It only took two years to find our near perfect coach. I expect it will take longer to find its replacement. Your information gathering is interesting in that you have the ability to build the “perfect bus” but in reality, you still must make compromises.
-
“All I can think of is if I get behind a slow truck I have no reserve power to pass. That big fat Volvo with 500 hp and 1750 lb. ft. of torque sure sounds good and the 600 hp Cummins even a little better with1950 lb. ft. of torque.”
I am just not capable of getting my brain around the concept of why the standard Prevost engine isn’t adequate. All will agree we can exceed any speed limit so it is not the ability to go fast that is the issue. And if through some circumstance we get stuck behind a slow truck we cannot pass because we lack the HP, I wonder if the average user is going to suffer any loss if he has to remain in the slow lane for a few minutes?
And it is not HP, it is torque that decides how fast you climb that hill.
I see a Newell in MM’s future. Too many issues that appear to be Prevost deal breakers from wide center windshield posts to the lack of hill climb ability.
-
Like I said its toqure that gets you up the hill not horsepower , but if you find yourself behind a truck or in the slow lane it’s poor planning on your part most of the time.
-
You guys with the power concerns just need to come back to the 40′ with a 92 series and Gitter-Dun !!!
(that oughta stir the pot)
Log in to reply.