Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38
|
02-02-2006, 14:20
Post: #7
|
|||
|
|||
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38
The FC Cat Turbo 3208 is more economical.
R.E. (Ron) Marabito, Dallas, TX 92WB40 --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "Andy Coleman" > > Hello Tom, > > You mentioned fuel economy differences between the PT36 and PT38. > > I might soon be in the market for a 70's to 80's Wanderlodge. > However, the motor choices are confusing! The FC35 with a Cat Turbo > 3208, the PT36 with a Detroit 6V92, and a PT38 with an Detroit 8V92 > are all similar sized coaches. Performance (225 HP to 475 HP) is > obviously very different. > > With the high price of fuel these days, do any of these motors stand > out in fuel economy? If they are all similar, I guess the more > powerful 8V92 is the way to go! > > Anybody know? > > I'm so happy that I found this group! > > Andy Coleman > > > > --- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, Tom Warner > > > > Ron there might be other considerations but then maybe you considered > > them and/or had information that I did not see. For instance, > > unless I absolutely knew what the maintenance history of both coaches > > were and the price that will be finally paid for each including taxes > > and registration fees if there are some ( realizing they had a max > > budget of $50-75K) that would leave somewhere in the range of > > $60,000 not including taxes. > > > > I would go with the coach that fit in that budget IF I knew : > > > > 1. The tires were all servicable and had a DOT date of less then 5 > > years and had some assurance that they had not been abused by running > > over/or under inflated or run over curbs. . > > > > 2. You had service records for the coach to ensure it was regularly > > maintained and not sit for long periods of time. > > > > 3. You consider the fuel mileage. The PT36 with a 6V92 will get > > better mileage then the PT38 with a 8V92. Either one I would have > > inspected by a reputable mechanice to make sure there are no problems > > with the engines. > > > > 4. And lastly use the Vintage birds checklist and go over every > > single item in the coach. That checklist could very well help you get > > a lower price then the owner is willing to go to knowing that there > > are no problems. If everything checks out however you will feel > > better about the price you do have to pay. > > > > Good luck in which ever one you buy. > > > > Tom Warner > > 1982 FC35 > > Vernon Center,NY > > > > > > At 06:03 PM 2/2/2006, you wrote: > > >I've run coaches with both. I would not consider the 6V92 again. On > > >a small coach, it might be fine, but between the two coaches, there is > > >not a lot of weight difference, thus go with the 8V92 for performance. > > >You won't be sorry, unless other considerations are more important. > > > > > >R.E. (Ron) Marabito, Dallas, TX 92WB40 > > >Forum Moderator > > > > > > > > >--- In WanderlodgeForum@yahoogroups.com, "buddyballs79" > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello and thanks in advance for the replies. > > > > > > > > > > > > We're looking at two coaches right now, one is an 89 PT 36 with > the 6V > > > > 330 Detroit and the other is an 87 PT38 with the 8V 475hp Detroit. > > > > Both are the silver editions. The PT 36 has 135k and the PT 38 has > > > > 100k. Since they are both a considerable distance away we were > > > > wondering if anybody has had any experience with these coaches. > How is > > > > the performance of the 36 with the 6V Detroit vs the 38 with the 8V? > > > > Any pros or cons for one or the other? It will be our first diesel > > > > motorhome and we love the look of the older Bluebirds. Our > budget is > > > > $50k to $75k max. > > > > > > > > Thanks again for the help. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >---------- > > >YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > > > * Visit your group > > > "<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WanderlodgeForum>WanderlodgeForum" > on the web. > > > * > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > * > > > > odgeForum-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > * > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > > > <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > > > > >---------- > > > |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Messages In This Thread |
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - buddyballs79 - 02-02-2006, 10:00
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - ronmarabito2002 - 02-02-2006, 11:03
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Scott Peatross - 02-02-2006, 11:27
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Tom Warner - 02-02-2006, 11:27
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Andy Coleman - 02-02-2006, 13:18
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - ronmarabito2002 - 02-02-2006, 14:17
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - ronmarabito2002 - 02-02-2006 14:20
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - mbulriss - 02-02-2006, 14:38
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Tom Warner - 02-02-2006, 14:48
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Jeff Miller - 02-02-2006, 16:47
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - jvredden@... - 02-02-2006, 21:37
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - krminyl@... - 02-02-2006, 23:43
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - orbitalsolutions - 02-03-2006, 06:20
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Mike Hohnstein - 02-03-2006, 07:03
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Scott Forman - 02-03-2006, 10:31
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Scott Forman - 02-03-2006, 10:33
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - orbitalsolutions - 02-03-2006, 12:23
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Henry Jay Hannigan - 02-03-2006, 14:55
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Mike Hohnstein - 02-04-2006, 03:41
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Jim Owens - 02-04-2006, 05:04
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Jim Owens - 02-04-2006, 05:12
Performance of a PT36 vs a PT38 - Henry Jay Hannigan - 02-04-2006, 09:24
|
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)