Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-03-2022, 11:56 AM   #1
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 4
Another Newbe...

Hi y'all! Were getting ready to retire. Looking for a bus to convert. We stumbled accross a 2009 IH RE 42 foot ex military bus with 44K actual miles. The old bus is super clean with zero rust. We were all set to purchase, however i was reading up about the engine and got cold feet.

The bus is powered by a DT466. Everything I have read about these engines are great, until 2007. Apparently they added Def and an egr valve. They renamed the engine a Maxxforce DT. From what I have read these things can be s real pain in the butt. Everything from egr valves breaking off and damaging the engine to def systems malfunctioning.

My first thought was to buy the thing, do a delete, have the ecm reflashed, and enjoy that low mileage engine for many years.

What are everyone's thoughts? Thanks!

Gcsprayjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 12:40 PM   #2
Bus Nut
 
Dbacks2k4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Iowa City, IA
Posts: 642
Year: 2006
Chassis: IC CE300 (PB105)
Engine: DT466e @245hp | Allison 3000PTS
Rated Cap: 66
I run a party bus fleet of mostly dt466e's from 2001 to 2008.

The ones prior to 04 are super simple to work on and have no egr or emissions. The diagnostic software is free if you buy the cable. Replacement turbo and injectors are cheaper than the newer versions.

The 05 to 07s are my favorites. Still easy to work on and egr is only emissions control. Easy to delete and requires no ecm reconfig... Doesn't even throw a check engine light. The free software works on these too. Slightly more expensive parts.

The 08 (now sold) was a maxxforcedt. Pile of junk. Lots of issues beyond emissions (egr, dpf and if newer than about 2010 Def). Harder to delete as it's tied into ecm. Diagnostic Software requires an annual subscription to use.

Gotchya with any delete is most shops can't or won't touch it. A delete on an 05-07 is easy enough to undo if in a pinch.
__________________
TSLABUS Build thread:
https://www.skoolie.net/forums/f11/j...ert-38328.html
TSLABUS YouTube Channel:
https://youtube.com/@thetslabus
Dbacks2k4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 01:24 PM   #3
Bus Nut
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 404
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Bluebird Mini-Bird 24'
Chassis: Chevy P30
Engine: Chevy 6.2L Diesel
Obama pushed through the 2008 EPA regs that required diesels to add DEF into the mix, as well as a bunch of regulations on the manufacturer that will cripple or destroy anyone trying to yeet the emissions controls out.

I don't touch anything newer than 2008 if I have to, and now we're getting at the point where those are all essentially requiring a complete rebuild, if they aren't considered some kind of 'classic'.
Albatross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 04:26 PM   #4
Bus Geek
 
musigenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,995
Year: 2003
Coachwork: International
Chassis: CE 300
Engine: DT466e
Rated Cap: 65C-43A
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albatross View Post
Obama pushed through the 2008 EPA regs that required diesels to add DEF into the mix, as well as a bunch of regulations on the manufacturer that will cripple or destroy anyone trying to yeet the emissions controls out.
Obama had nothing to do with the relevant EPA regulations here, unless he's a time traveller or something. I think you meant to bash "Commiefornia" and/or Bill Clinton, not Obama.

Quote:
In December 2000, the EPA signed emission standards for model year 2007 and later heavy-duty highway engines, with a phase-in schedule over 2007-2010. In addition to emission standards, the rule included ultra-low sulfur (15 ppm) diesel fuel regulations.
Table 1 in my linked document shows the changes in EPA standards that affected our beloved school buses. 2004 saw the introduction of new HCa+NOx standards that Navistar met with EGR. 2007 saw the introduction of more stringent particulate matter (PM) standards as well as more stringent (and separately-tested) HCa and NOx standards. Navistar met the 2007 standards with the renamed MaxxForce DT (introduced in 2008 ) and things went downhill from there.

Some diesel engine experts advocate only getting engines from 2003(ish) or earlier (pre-EGR) while some think engines from before the 2007 standards took effect are also OK. Nobody thinks MaxxForces are a good idea.
__________________
Rusty 87 build thread
musigenesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 05:05 PM   #5
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 4
Is it feasable to swap to a different engine? Or a 2007 or eariler DT466? This bus only has 44K miles on it and runs perfectly right now.
Gcsprayjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 05:08 PM   #6
New Member
 
Join Date: May 2022
Posts: 4
It sounds like there is no good fix for them? Is it feasable to swap engines to a pre-2007 DT466? This bus only has 44K miles on it. I really like the idea of starting of with such a clean lightly used bus.
Gcsprayjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 05:24 PM   #7
Bus Nut
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 404
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Bluebird Mini-Bird 24'
Chassis: Chevy P30
Engine: Chevy 6.2L Diesel
well, you have the room for it, as well as the suspension, so a drivetrain swap is definitely possible... but whether or not you in particular want to do that is a different question entirely.
Albatross is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2022, 05:35 PM   #8
Bus Nut
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 404
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Bluebird Mini-Bird 24'
Chassis: Chevy P30
Engine: Chevy 6.2L Diesel
Quote:
Originally Posted by musigenesis View Post
Obama had nothing to do with the relevant EPA regulations here, unless he's a time traveller or something. I think you meant to bash "Commiefornia" and/or Bill Clinton, not Obama.

Table 1 in my linked document shows the changes in EPA standards that affected our beloved school buses. 2004 saw the introduction of new HCa+NOx standards that Navistar met with EGR. 2007 saw the introduction of more stringent particulate matter (PM) standards as well as more stringent (and separately-tested) HCa and NOx standards. Navistar met the 2007 standards with the renamed MaxxForce DT (introduced in 2008 ) and things went downhill from there.

Some diesel engine experts advocate only getting engines from 2003(ish) or earlier (pre-EGR) while some think engines from before the 2007 standards took effect are also OK. Nobody thinks MaxxForces are a good idea.
You are correct, I miss-spoke. My bad.

I still say that the EPA is a problem in and of itself, as they largely serve as an anti-competitive body largely to prevent newcomers from hitting the market. The rules they put into place, as well as other regulatory bodies largely serve to keep those corporations that already exist in place while not allowing new companies to emerge.

And I say this from the perspective of a company working on a solid-fuel turbine generator where our baseline product has a 99.5% efficiency rating on the burn without catalytics or electronics. Our product would not be allowed on the market because it lacks a number of the 'safety' and 'efficiency/cleanliness' add-ons the EPA and other bodies like to see... But trying to add them in would require de-/down-tuning our product so that equipment could be fitted. And that's without even mentioning the $50K price tag for the test itself.
Albatross is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.