Thread: Back again...

I figure its based on "Super Cruiser HD P-LV719R"

Screenshot 2024-01-03 185349.jpg

Bet it's dear to run.
I'll make some enquiries, if you're seriously considering it, Pedro.

240K on speedo, low K Jap import, has had recent injector service, and compression on all those cylinders were "good"
fuel rate towing a DMax is 28L per 100.
Which is 3.5 kays per litre.
Which is about what the BSL got...

Any observations on fuel runs with late 80's coaches?


Owner ( who is just up the road in Waikerie) says it had a service 5k ago, also new front brakes then, a Pit inspection found rears were good. Next set of filters come with it.

Did you catch up with Digger while you were there?

Originally Posted by Pedro_The_Swift

Any observations on fuel runs with late 80's coaches?


Owner ( who is just up the road in Waikerie) says it had a service 5k ago, also new front brakes then, a Pit inspection found rears were good. Next set of filters come with it.

How long's a piece of string?
European: Scania, Volvo, Mercedes, MAN.
Will be amongst the best, but Merc rating is based on very small equine species.

USA: Cummins, Detroit, Caterpillar.
Cummins L10 and M11 will be up with the Euros, but I think the Merc engineers rated the L10's horsepower. N14 is a great engine but would never be considered for an economy run in this segment.
Detroit Series 60 are very economical but getting old, parts are dear and can be hard to find. Don't even think of a V6 or V8 Detroit unless you own an oil well or two.
Caterpillar 3208, an honest plodder but getting rare. Cat haven't made road transport engines for about ten years.
Japanese, Hino entered this segment earlier than their Asian competition, but all Japanese engines seemed to rely on large cubic numbers to achieve respectable horsepower figures for the advertising brochures. Reliable, yes, overengineered, yes, torque, all talk, is there a word for torque in Japanese?

There are so many variables contributing to economy and at 15~20 tonnes those variables are so much wider than they are with smaller vehicles. The greatest influence on economy is driving style but uncontrollable factors such as terrain and weather are also major considerations. Anyone who has driven a truck across the Nullabour or Barkley knows that there is always a headwind, regardless of which way they are driving.

For this segment, 10~12 litres @ 200~250 hp seems to be the sweet spot, others may have different opinions.
I'd like to see some input from Tins, he has more experience than me.

Dunno if you do FB, Pedro... Log in to Facebook


My experience here is mainly with the Swedes, and Detroit two bangers. Detroits sound awesome, for as long as you can pay for the fuel. Mostly they also had crash boxes, which can be tiresome if you don't have the experience.

The Scania 93 series are cheap to run ( relatively of course ), but quite underpowered. The 113 are better. ( the 9 means 9 litre, 11 logically means 11 litre. The 3 is the series. ) Fuel is about the same if you drive sedately, as the bigger engine has to do less work for the same result. Straight six, good torque. Scania engines had individual heads for each cylinder, which can make some repairs cheaper. Scania gearboxes from that era were pretty reliable, way better than the fancy later ones. Never tried an auto. If you choose to buy one they were sent here as a complete chassis kit. The coachbuilders varied hugely. IMO if you could find one from NorthCoast or MotorCoach you would be happy, regardless if Scania or Volvo.
MAN and Benz have reduction hubs, which could be getting expensive to fix these days, but don't quote me.

I agree with Ian re the Japanese offerings of the era. Spent a week in a Hino in Thailand ( in true Thai fashion it was badged as a Volvo,, but the badge was the only Ovlov part on it ) and it was gutless and rode terribly. Something else the Swedes do oh so well is the ride. Airbags all round, and they handle well also.

Unless you go heavy I would avoid the Tag axle variants. They have pros and cons, but seem to me to be an unnecessary complication for a motorhome. But again, that's down to the weight.

These are just some quick thoughts. But if I was going down this route I'd pick a Scania, with the body from the builders I mentioned if I could find one. The 113 would have had around 320-350 HP depending, the 93 maybe 230-270. I can't help with actual fuel figures as I wasn't paying....

Originally Posted by V8Ian

Mercedes, MAN.
Will be amongst the best, but Merc rating is based on very small equine species.

Merc, MAN, peas in a pod.