History of 8.3L Cummins

[JRGN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spike45 Jr, Yours being a much older iteration of the venerable C8.3 is why the turbo was mounted differently. Does not make any difference in performance. That engine family has always had the exhaust manifold on the left facing the front of the engine (fan end, not flywheel end). For you, the fan end is facing out toward the back thus the exhaust is on your left (driver side).

Gary, the coach has the radiaror on the drivers side and the exhaust exits the passangers side, but as far as the motor can I expect a long life expecenty for this motor, Thanks again Jr.

[spike45]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRGN Gary, the coach has the radiaror on the drivers side and the exhaust exits the passangers side, but as far as the motor can I expect a long life expecenty for this motor, Thanks again Jr.

What I am going to say next will make somebody mad but I must say that IF I had a diesel motor home, I would much prefer the C8.3 to the later ISC or ISL. Before the rest of you start to rip your clothes and scream 'heresy!', those engines are good designs but they have one major flaw in my book....they have a damn computer controlled fuel system. If there is one think I do not need is one more damn computer and I am a very computer literate guy.

Plus, repairing a Bosch in-line injection pump is cheaper than the new high pressure common rail fuel systems and earlier pump systems that are sensitive to low fuel pressure. The current crop of ISL 400 and 450 are more like factory built racing engines compared to the C8.3.

Now for more heresy. After having owned one diesel powered car, I really do not want another diesel engine in my life! Too much money to repair when they eventually fail as everything does. I might add that the avatar I use is my 1994 Chevy pickup with the 350 small block. It now is heading toward 347,000 miles on the original engine and drivetrain. Not pulling high HP, regular oil changes (running 7 quarts not 5) and do not flog it, AND just plain blessed in that it has been a very good truck. They do not build the new 'anything' like the older versions. Everything nowadays is built with cost reduction (not price reduction) in mind, including your newer engines.

[JRGN]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spike45 What I am going to say next will make somebody mad but I must say that IF I had a diesel motor home, I would much prefer the C8.3 to the later ISC or ISL. Before the rest of you start to rip your clothes and scream 'heresy!', those engines are good designs but they have one major flaw in my book....they have a damn computer controlled fuel system. If there is one think I do not need is one more damn computer and I am a very computer literate guy. Plus, repairing a Bosch in-line injection pump is cheaper than the new high pressure common rail fuel systems and earlier pump systems that are sensitive to low fuel pressure. The current crop of ISL 400 and 450 are more like factory built racing engines compared to the C8.3. Now for more heresy. After having owned one diesel powered car, I really do not want another diesel engine in my life! Too much money to repair when they eventually fail as everything does. I might add that the avatar I use is my 1994 Chevy pickup with the 350 small block. It now is heading toward 347,000 miles on the original engine and drivetrain. Not pulling high HP, regular oil changes (running 7 quarts not 5) and do not flog it, AND just plain blessed in that it has been a very good truck. They do not build the new 'anything' like the older versions. Everything nowadays is built with cost reduction (not price reduction) in mind, including your newer engines.

Thanks Gary for the information, it is always great to have someone of your knowledge who dosen't mind to share, so far it seams to be a good motor since I use it to pull my 24' enclosed trailer, it is no race car but it does fine and still gets approx: 12 to 14 MPG, Thanks jr.

[wrhjr3]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRGN Hi, been watching this thread and wanted to know some of the info that is passed in this thread involving the 8.3, what I have is a 1989 Monaco Crown Royal with the 6cta8.3 but I noticed that the turbo on most 8.3 are on the upper drivers side of motor but mine is located on the bottom lower drivers side, by the oil pan area, any go or bad about this ? Thanks Jr.

JRGN:

I,too, am a new owner of a 1989 Crown Royale 36 with the 8.3 and 4 speed allison. I'd sure like to set up to compare notes because I pretty much lnow nothing of mine.

[bounder39]

It should not matter where the turbo is as long as it has no leaks and makes the proper boost. I have a 1996 Monaco Dynasty with the cta 8.3 300hp and the boost tops at 23. I have heard when the Banks stinger is added it runs as high as 37 but I like mine just the way it is. If your getting the proper boost and it seems to run good without overheating then don't let it bother you where they put the turbo. I have seen some of the military versions of this engine they put the turbo behind the engine and those engines run alot more hp then ours. Hope this helps. Bye for now Ric





I,too, am a new owner of a 1989 Crown Royale 36 with the 8.3 and 4 speed allison. I'd sure like to set up to compare notes because I pretty much lnow nothing of mine.[/QUOTE]