Last of the C8.3 versus the first of the ISC 8.3??

[fighterpilot]

1997 Monaco Dynasty with the C8.3 300 versus a 1998 with the ISC 8.3, 330, both 38 feet and otherwise comparable. I accept the HP difference. Is there enough difference otherwise in the engines, in terms of reliability and maintainability to warrant choosing one over the other? My preference leans towards the old 12 valve mechanical 8.3 rather than taking on the early ISC 8.3s. But maybe it isn't that big a deal. I have scaned all 900 posts in the Cummins Engine forum and nothing jumps out at me, but figure I would consult the experts that have been there and done that. Thanks

[FormerBoater]

The C8.3 12 valve is a remarkably simple engine. Think of a big old farm tractor and you can envision the simplicity.

There are quite a few who opine that the C8.3's got better mpg, I do not have a clue as to whether that is true or not.

From my experience (4 years, 30K miles of ownership), the C8.3 is truly bullet proof and has never given any trouble.

I do believe that using an additive to enhance the lubricity of ULSD is prudent with these older diesels. Cummins has even debuted fuel filters using nano-technology recently that add lubricity agents to today's fuel and is recommended for their electronic (ISC, ISM etc.) engines due to the 15 PPM sulfur fuel that we use today.

The only problem with the C8.3 that I have ever read about was lift pump failures due to the lower lubricity level of today's fuel vs. the LSD (500 ppm sulfur) that was the state of the art when the C engines were initially designed and produced for OTR use.

All things being equal, I favor the C8.3 but that is strictly due to my non-objective opinion based upon how excellent the C has performed for us.

Also, any diesel mechanic can work on the C8.3 without the use of a computer or codes to diagnose the problem.

DaveS
1998 American Eagle 40EVS
C8.3 325 HP w/960 lbs of torque
Allison 3060 six speed transmission

[fighterpilot]

By the absence of posts on this one should I assume there really isn't any consensus that I should consider an early model, electronic, 8.3 a deal breaker. Not that big a deal, I hope. I believe the 1998 Monaco Dynasty I have under a "hold" situation will have the electronic 8.3 when it arrives at the dealer due to the circumstances of it being a 1998 with the roadmaster chassis. It is my understanding, since Monaco owned roadmaster at that time frame the Chassis is probably a 1998 as well, not a year earlier mode,l hence would have a 1998 engine, therefore high probability it will be the ISC version of the 8.3.

All the things Formerboater says makes sense to me but I may not have a choice so was wondering if I should hold out for the mech. 8.3, even to the extent of passing on a reasonable coach at a decent price? Thanks

[BirdDoggin]

Not sure what your mechanical back ground is, but an example of the difference between the two 8.3 engines can be done maybe in a way more familiar with you.

The all mechanical 8.3 Cummins is like a small block motor with points.

The ISC 8.3 Cummins of that time is like a small block motor with points and vacuum advance.

Bullet proof, lots of parts available and mechanics with tons of knowledge. I wouldn't make the choice based on 8.3 Cummins generation's of motors you are comparing, but on what house/chassis portion of the RV you prefer.

[fighterpilot]

It appears most of the Dynastys of that era have a floor plan that works for us. Sofa bed and dinette. Would prefer booth dinette to sleep the grandkids but won't get that in the Dynastys of the time frame that had the generator slide out as well. Will try to replace freestanding dinette with a booth. The 8.3, diesel slide out generator, are hard requirements. Must be able to sleep 6 somehow, as I said willing to replace free standing dinettes with a custom booth if necessary. Even with the two sofas would replace one with dinette in effort to seat belt inthe grandkids if we want to. Not sure what year they started with the slide out, front mounted diesel generator but suspect 1995 or 1996. Winne Luxor had one in 1995.

The responses, or lack thereof, to the which engine questions seems to indicate not a big issue in this area, so will press on with open mind.

Some of the posts on the maintainability of the non supported Roadmaster Chassis begs the question. Maybe need to reconsider Monaco and look at the Spartan chassis makers. Still want the generator slide out and the cummins 8.3 engine however. Thanks