Yahoo Message Number: 13256 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13256)
In the months that I have been researching the subject of full time MH living one thing that I am confused about is the fuel consumption of various engines.
I started out on the Bounder Diesel groups and noted that the typical fuel milage claimed by owners is around 9.5MPG to 10.5MPG with most claiming about 10MPG. This is with the Cummins 5.9 liter ISB engine.
It appears that there is quite a difference in the various engine's efficiencies as I see numbers quoted on this group of 7.5MPG to 8.5MPG are common. One person posted that he was having difficulty selling his coach at what appeared t be a fair price. I looked at his listing and noticed that the stated MPG was 8. That alone scared me away.
My questions is this: How does the larger 8.3 Cummins, either mechanical or ISC or other large engines compare to the smaller 5.9 or ISB when it comes to fuel economy? It appears way out of proportion.
Oliver
soon to be full timing
(if only she would sign those darn papers)
Yahoo Message Number: 13257 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13257)
Oliver, all of life is a trade-off. If you want high mileage, stick with a light coach and a small motor. If you want luxury and the power to move it, go to a heavy coach with a big motor.
The 8.3 in any of it's variations is MUCH more powerful than the 5.9 in any of it's models. The fuel efficiency is not out of line and I think your numbers a pretty much on target.
If you want a lttle more power than a 5.9 but are not willing to drop to 8 MPG with the 8.3........you may want to look at a coach with the Cat 7.2 liter. Right about in between the two Cummins.
George in Birmingham, AL
Allure 31038
MH
of
typical
8.5MPG
his
and
or
Yahoo Message Number: 13260 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13260)
From: "Oliver" HealerOliver@...>
(snip) My questions is this: How does the larger 8.3 Cummins, either mechanical or ISC or other large engines compare to the smaller 5.9 or ISB when it comes to fuel economy? It appears way out of proportion.
'98 36-ft Intrigue, C8.3 Cummins (mechanical), RVSEF measured loaded weight: 26,200 lbs, towing a 3,200 lb toad = 9 to 9.5 mpg at ~60mph.
Dick (& Geri) Campagna
'98 36' Intrigue #10571
Mfd: 11/97
Yahoo Message Number: 13261 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13261)
Oliver,
Lets put this in perspective.
7000 miles / 10 mpg = 700 gallons @ $2.00 per gallon = $1400.00
7000 miles / 8 mpg = 875 gallons @ $2.00 per gallon = $1750.00
Buying a coach that can cost 100's of thousands of dollars I'm not going to sweat $350 for basically a round trip between coasts.
If fuel prices go down the difference diminishes, fuel goes up it increases.
I just bought my coach a couple of weeks ago now. I didn't base my buying decision on MPG / fuel costs. I was much more interested in getting a solid, comfortable, quality coach.
Good luck with whatever you decide.
Michael
'01 Intrigue #11224
Yahoo Message Number: 13263 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13263)
Oliver
We have owned three coaches.
The first a Winnebago gasser that got 6.0 mpg, was low quality and was blown off the road by every truck that passed me.
Second we owned a Safari with the 5.9 that got 10.0 mpg and was a big step up in quality and ride but woefully underpowered.
Now we own a CC with the 8.3 and get 8.0 mpg, great ride, terrific road control, quality is perfect. We have traveled about 11,000 miles in the year we have owned it and have used maybe 20% more fuel than the Safari but 25% Less than the Winnebago.
We are not full timers but if we were I would prefer the CC to either the Safari or the Winnebago. Good Luck.
Mike and Marg Keogh
98 Intrigue 36 #10538
00 CRV
Yahoo Message Number: 13270 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13270)
You said it right.
Don't sweat the small stuff
Yahoo Message Number: 13272 (http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Country-Coach-Owners/conversations/messages/13272)
Oliver,
If you are going to worry about mpg, you don't want a motorhome. Motorhomes were made to be driven and if you are going to sit somewhere because of low milage then you should buy a trailer. They still get poor milage but they can sit for long periods of time with no side effects. MPG varies with driving habits and the weight of the unit. I can get an extra mile per gallon if I drive 55 mpg on flat ground, but who drives along 95 at 55 all the time. It is really hard to compare mileage on engines, everyone gets something different, depending on how and what they drive.
Bill G. 2005 Magna #6425