91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Topic: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome? (Read 2807 times) previous topic - next topic

91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

August 22, 2014, 08:35:21 pm

Ok Guy's looking at a 91 or possibly 92 Grand Villa ,6V92 Detroit. You guy's that have owned them what kind of fuel mileage could I expect?

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #1 – August 22, 2014, 09:01:18 pm

Welcome Stump,

We just bought a 92 u300 Grand Villa after owning a Eagle Bus for several years, about 2months ago and love it the fit and finish on this coach is Great. Ours has the 6v92 DDEC and 4 speed Allision, on our trip home pulling a 2013 GC jeep we got around 7.5 to 8 mpg.
There will be others that will chim in here on this Board with a lot more on the ball than me

So ask away.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #2 – August 22, 2014, 09:51:26 pm

Thanks ,It is a 40' Grand Villa Unihome,6v92TA 4 speed Allison ,I talked to my 2 stroke buddy and he said Good engines just don't overheat them. And he'd clue me in on Tune ups etc and procedures etc. I do all my work on my 95 peterbilt wit a series 60 in it. I am just wondering if the 2 stroke would be affordable for me to actually use as far as fuel mileage ,vs cost etc,etc crunching numbers, and thinking. I truly appreciate you guy's input. Thanks

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #3 – August 22, 2014, 11:46:44 pm

I figure about 8.5 mpg on my '91.

Significant differences between a '91 and '92 (respectively):
96" wide body vs. 102" wide body
300 vs. 350 horsepower
rear radiator with conventional belt driven fan vs. side radiator with hydraulic fan
600 series transmission with retarder verses 700 series with a Jake Brake on the engine
Manual air leveling vs. HWH computer controlled air leveling

The larger 350 horsepower engine will get worse mileage mostly because you won't be able to not use the extra horsepower (no free lunch). A '92 or later will have a slightly larger frontal area in regards to air drag. And I suppose they will be slight heavier too with a larger transmission and wider body.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #4 – August 23, 2014, 12:33:54 am

Our '93 is 350HP, has just over 80K on it now. We live in the mountains where everything is up or down. The last owner pulled a construction trailer with steel on it from NC to OK on a regular basis. Electronics don't lie. It has burned 11,358 gallons for an average of 7.9 MPG as of several months ago. East Coast or Mid-West will get 10 MPG if you keep the speed down and even better if driving 50 mph.

There is nothing visible on the display but I was using a polarizing filter and it shows a mark in the photo. About 30 more specs on the next few pages on the display.

Andy, what MPG did the Eagle get? 8V-92TA?

Pierce

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #5 – August 23, 2014, 02:20:19 am

The 350/1050 93's were much more fun in the mountains. Bring a smile to your lips

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #6 – August 23, 2014, 08:01:57 am

Quote from: JohnFitz – August 22, 2014, 11:46:44 pm

I figure about 8.5 mpg on my '91.

Significant differences between a '91 and '92 (respectively):
96" wide body vs. 102" wide body
300 vs. 350 horsepower
rear radiator with conventional belt driven fan vs. side radiator with hydraulic fan
600 series transmission with retarder verses 700 series with a Jake Brake on the engine
Manual air leveling vs. HWH computer controlled air leveling

The larger 350 horsepower engine will get worse mileage mostly because you won't be able to not use the extra horsepower (no free lunch). A '92 or later will have a slightly larger frontal area in regards to air drag. And I suppose they will be slight heavier too with a larger transmission and wider body.

Thanks for that information I am still learning the differences in the model after looking at the pictures real close It is definitely a 91 I do not see the radiator louvers on the side. also the center white strip on the grill is not as wide as one I saw in picture. I am guessing that would help differentiate the 102' vs the 96''. Is the rear radiator not as desirable as a side mounted? Beam alarms spec sheet says it is a silver model 92 series engine ,so In 91 it was 300 hp and then it went to 350 in 92? Can it be tuned to the 350 hp setting and still be cooled? I'm still looking and learning.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #7 – August 23, 2014, 08:44:20 am

I have a 1990 U280 36' with 3208T Cat engine, 250 hp. It gets between 9.5-10 mpg at 75 on I-10 in Flat Texas. It would probably get better if I could keep my foot out of it! You have to pay attention or it tries to creep up to 80. You sit so high up that you don't feel the speed. These are great coaches, you can't go wrong with any of them. We just upgraded to a U320, so our beloved Grand Villa is about to go up for sale, but only if we can find it a good home!

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #8 – August 23, 2014, 09:02:04 am

Old Faithful (88, 300hpCAT) in 50K miles 65-72 got an amazing 9.2 from WI, ND, SD, WY, TN, AL, NE, KS, IA, CO, MT, IL, oops, KY, MO, OH, VA

Our 94 in 2000 mi 8.3 gets 8.8 and in 2000 mi I tuink that is low

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #9 – August 23, 2014, 09:44:53 am

Pierce,

The best i ever got on the Eagle was 7 mpg and that was on the flats in southern Arizona. She was on the heavy side while full timing at 38,000 lbs. 6 mpg was the average.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #10 – August 23, 2014, 10:24:06 am

I have a 1991 U300 with 6V92TA and I get as high as 10 mpg with the cruise control set at 60 mph, even through the Appalachian mountains. I don't pull a toad and my coach is a 36' with minimal water in the tanks while traveling and not much cargo, cuz I travel alone. The difference in total fuel cost is kinda small between all the various models, especially if you don't travel much. You should concentrate instead on the expensive stuff, which is the cost of initial purchase, parts, and repairs... Which brings me to a very important point.

Before you purchase a 1992 or newer U300, or any other coach with a side radiator, be sure to search this forum for keyword "hydraulic" and read all the stories.

The deciding factor for me was the huge difference in cost. The 1992 and newer model costs almost twice as much as the 1991 and older model just in initial purchase price. This isn't including the thousands of dollars needed to overhaul the obsolete and failure prone hydraulic motors and pump.

The hydraulic drag on the 1992 and newer coaches probably eats up all of the extra 50 horsepower, especially when combined with the extra frontal area and weight of the wider body.

The extra 6" of body width on the 1992 and newer model is wasted in the hallway instead of the bathroom where it's really needed. The chassis isn't any wider, they just made the body overhang past the wheels, which looks silly.

The 6 speed transmission on some of the newer model coaches probably won't shift into high gear until you reach about 65 mph. The coach will probably achieve its highest fuel efficiency at about 60 mph. The 6 speed would be wasted on my coach because I always drive at the most fuel efficient speed, 60 mph, which wouldn't even be high gear.

The 4 speed transmission in my 1991 isn't strong enough to handle more than 300 hp, so turning up the power would be unwise from a reliability standpoint. My coach already out climbs every other coach I've met on the road, especially on steep high altitude climbs, so performance improvements aren't needed. The two cycle 6V92TA has multistage compound turbo-supercharging and DDEC computer control. It's still making 300 hp with no smoke or loss of power regardless of the altitude. I drove mine up over 10,000' last summer and couldn't believe the performance. It's completely different than today's four cycle engines with small single stage wastegate turbochargers. The new coaches smoke worse and worse as the altitude increases. They start out with as much as 600 hp at sea level but end up losing a huge amount of power by the time they reach even 7,000' elevation. I didn't meet any coaches at 10,000' but I'm sure the performance difference would be much more drastic up there. The million dollar coach with a huge Cummins that attempted to pass me on a steep climb at 7,000' barely kept me in sight. I just walked right away from him, still on cruise control and my transmission only downshifted one gear. He was trailing thick black smoke but I wasn't smoking at all. My turbocharger was screaming loud though. As the altitude gets higher the thinner air allows the large non-wastegate turbocharger on the 6V92TA to reach a higher rpm where it really screams. Normally I never hear my turbocharger at low altitude unless I have my head stuck out the window to back into a campsite or something.

My 1991 model has a hydraulic retarder, so at least some of the 1991's did have a retarder. I've never driven a coach with a Jake Brake but I suspect this really shouldn't be much of a factor in your decision. As long as the coach has some way to hold itself back on steep downhill grades, other than burning up the brakes, you should be okay.

Manual air leveling is such a minor point. It's supposedly more reliable and less expensive to repair according to what I've read on this forum. I've heard people say there are situations you can handle with the manual air leveling that the automatic leveling won't allow you to do but I don't know the particulars. I didn't pay attention. We're talking about saving you a minute or so that it takes to level your coach manually when you stop somewhere. Don't spend an extra $20,000 to save yourself a minute of time.

If you buy a 1991 or older U300 with a rear radiator you MUST change out the fiberglass radiator fan for a new nylon fan before it explodes and takes out your radiator leaving you stranded in some little town for two months and costing you a couple thousand dollars in repairs. Don't ask how I know this. Change out all your belts at the same time of course and use Gates belts. Carry your old belts with you as spares if they're still in good condition. Congratulations cuz you now have the most efficient and reliable cooling system. Just say no to hydraulics... and fiberglass!

As far as I know all the 6V92TA engines used by Foretravel were "silver" versions that have aluminum valve covers. The older ones with stamped steel valve covers were the ones that leaked oil, so don't even worry about that if you've been reading it on the internet. I've never seen any oil leaks on mine. They all have DDEC too so don't worry about being able to tune the "rack" because you won't have that system. That's old information.

In all fairness, I'm a huge fan of two cycle Detroit Diesels and that's really the only reason I bought my coach. You're probably not an engine fanatic like I am, so unless you really love high altitude climbing performance you shouldn't let the two cycle engine be a factor in your decision. The two cycle engine can be very difficult to start in cold climates due to the straight 40 weight motor oil it requires. You may need to run the engine heater a while to get it to start in the winter depending on the temperature where you are. You might be able to get a four cycle diesel to start under the same conditions without running the heater at all.

I went through this same coach search and decision making process a couple of years ago. Call me if you need information or send me a message and I'll give you my email address. I'm a national park ranger in Acadia on the coast of Maine and I seldom have a signal but I'll respond to messages as soon as I can. If I don't know the answer from my own personal experience I'll be truthful and tell you I'm only speculating. You need accurate information when making an important decision like this.

Scott Cook
(615) 482-7650

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #11 – August 23, 2014, 10:32:25 am

Quote from: stump – August 23, 2014, 08:01:57 am

Is the rear radiator not as desirable as a side mounted? Beam alarms spec sheet says it is a silver model 92 series engine ,so In 91 it was 300 hp and then it went to 350 in 92? Can it be tuned to the 350 hp setting and still be cooled? I'm still looking and learning.

Yes, the ECU keeps it at 300hp because of the cooling. There is plenty of room on the rear side for an aux. radiator or could mount a couple in the nose. Rear radiator makes engine access much harder but on the side radiator models, the hydraulic fan pump and motors rob 30hp and mpg from the engine and can be trouble if one component goes bad on a trip. The 96 inch model is lighter and does not push as much air so gets better mileage. Be aware of the rear radiator fan issue (just needs replacing). A Detroit dealer can flash the EEPROM up to the EPA on road limit of 350hp for that engine.

Should be able to find a nice 96 incher for under $20K with a 102" at $20K or more depending on mileage and inside/outside storage.

Bob,

The largest of the new highway Detroit Diesels DD16 are 16 liters and generate 2000 ft-lbs torque. Not to be outdone, the Volvo diesels are king at 2300 ft-lbs. Think they own Prevost now.

Pierce

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #12 – August 23, 2014, 11:31:00 am

Engine access is a non issue with regard to the radiator. There's nothing back there that you need to get to. While I had my radiator removed I specifically looked for items that I should service while they were easy to reach before I replaced the radiator. There's nothing back there that I needed to get to. The other mechanic helping me looked at it too and said the same thing... so we just put the radiator back in.

The oil is what needs to be heated up to get the two cycle engine to start in cold weather. Sometimes I have a tough time getting mine started even with the block heater on because it only heats the water, not the oil, which is down in the pan. Trying to crank thick 40 weight oil when it's cold is very difficult, even if the engine has warm water in it. I'm probably going to install a plug type oil pan heater the next time I change the oil. I probably won't use the block heater anymore after that.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #13 – August 23, 2014, 11:48:26 am

Rear radiators in the newer Rv biz are notorious for packing with debris from the road so keep an eye on the issue. Cleaned a lot of Foretravel rear radiators myself on trades.

Gunk and a pressure washer carefully used worked well on fairly new used models.

Prevost used to use as some other buses also used a manual drive for the side radiator. Gears. No hydraulics.

New I think are hydraulic driven two speeds at minumum.

My 97 and the rest of the Rv biz went to a variable speed cooling system. Piloted wax capsule was country coaches pitch.

In line six cylinders high torque engines longer blocks and easier service access and EPA rules probably necessitated the side drive.

Much better to show prospective customers the easy service access without the radiator in the way.

Lots of ladies had objections when they found out the mechanics working in the engine bay had to do it from the bedroom itself. Serious objections.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #14 – August 23, 2014, 12:14:04 pm

Quote from: stump – August 23, 2014, 08:01:57 am

Thanks for that information I am still learning the differences in the model after looking at the pictures real close It is definitely a 91 I do not see the radiator louvers on the side. also the center white strip on the grill is not as wide as one I saw in picture. I am guessing that would help differentiate the 102' vs the 96''. Is the rear radiator not as desirable as a side mounted? Beam alarms spec sheet says it is a silver model 92 series engine ,so In 91 it was 300 hp and then it went to 350 in 92? Can it be tuned to the 350 hp setting and still be cooled? I'm still looking and learning.

Yes grill is one indicator. The other is bumpers: '92 and later will have bumper integrated into front and rear cap fiberglass. '88-'90 have stainless bumpers. The '91 has a painted white plastic bumper. The rear tires are close to flush with the sidewall on a 96" coach, and are inset more on the 102" units. The 102" definitely has a roomier feel inside, but won't really add more functionality.

The rear radiator has a hard time getting good air flow through it; it's starved on engine side with chassis, body and engine all competing for space in front of it. It also can get blocked with oily soot that gets picked up by air passing over the drive train. And as previously mentioned it's harder to access the engine. On the plus side the fan drive is very simple and carefree as long as the old fiberglass fan has been upgraded (as already mentioned). It has a air clutch that is actuated by a thermostatic air valve in one of the thermostat housings.

As far as upping the HP to 350 on a '91 or earlier: It's a no-go for three reasons:
1. The 600 series transmission is at it's limit at 300 hp
2. Rear radiator is at it's limit for cooling and Foretravel installed the biggest one that will fit in the back as it is.
3. DDEC horsepower changes are password protected and the DD dealer told me they wont do it even before I had a chance to ask.
All of the above can be modified/worked around but I don't think anyone ever has because it's just not practical when you can just upgrade to a newer coach.

You asked about desirability: yes, side radiator is more desirable but here's my opinion on that whole subject: newer is always better but cost more in upfront and maintenance wise. Newer is usually heavier. Weight is your primary penalty with MPG. If you want to tow a lot of weight you'll want the U300. There are other models that are in the low 20K lbs. that get great mileage, but you won't want to tow your 6k lb. pickup with them. Newer will have more gadgets and more things controlled by electronics. Some of these things don't seem to add value like the HWH leveling: will save a minute each time you level, take away some manual control, and subject you to maintenance of 12 air valves, an electronic brain, level sensor and a keypad. Intellitec lighting control is another one - although the feature came much later than the time period you are considering. It's a fancy switch to tell a microprocessor to turn on a light - a switch to turn on a switch. How long will spare electronics be around for these 20 year old coaches? Understand manufactures add these items to convince existing owners to upgrade to the newest models and to compete so prospective buys don't say "well SOB now has this "feature", why doesn't Foretravel ?" I worked at Country Coach for a short period and the name of the game was adding features and/or floor plans to get existing customers to upgrade. The function of the owners club is keep owners loyal to the brand since you have to be an owner of that brand to participate in the club and people don't want to give up their friends just to change brands.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #15 – August 27, 2014, 03:27:01 pm

I love my 92 U240 with CAT 3116 and the six speed transmission. I get 9.5 without toad and not really worrying about speed but generally run 65-70 on interstate. Biggest complaints are the propane generator and lack of an exhaust brake or retarder. I use the generator while driving for A/C (a must in FL) and am always looking for propane. Two weekends ago went to Orlando to spend the weekend at Ft. Wilderness. Tried to fill up at Flying J (propane plant broke down) and Campingworld (wouldn't pump in the storm...or drizzle they were calling a storm). Get there at check in to find out they have no ability to fill anything other than a BBQ grill tank. As the WH runs on propane...had to leave and search for it. Found it at the campground in Kississimmee, which is a tourist trap strip of highway near Disney World (think Pigeon Forge vs. Gatlinburg). What a PITA! I'm actually thinking about selling the old girl but if I ever buy another coach it will be a Foretravel DP BUT NOT ONE WITH A PROPANE GENERATOR.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #16 – August 27, 2014, 04:08:01 pm

Here in Texas propane is no problem. Can get your tank filled almost anywhere. My 1990 U280 holds 100 gallons! About $400, but I only have to fill it about once a year or so. I don't mind my propane generator at all. It's quiet and there is not much exhaust fumes.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #17 – August 27, 2014, 10:09:41 pm

We have a propane generator in or 91GV and I think it's great for a lot of reasons. Only problem I've had is starting in cold weather and a little ether fixes that problem. What is your main complaint with propane?? Thanks and have a great day ---- Fritz

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #18 – August 27, 2014, 10:14:21 pm

It is harder to find especially when I really need it. If the largest and most spectacular campground I've ever seen doesn't have it available...that really says something.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #19 – August 28, 2014, 12:09:49 am

Quote from: Kemahjohn – August 27, 2014, 04:08:01 pm

Here in Texas propane is no problem. Can get your tank filled almost anywhere. My 1990 U280 holds 100 gallons! About $400, but I only have to fill it about once a year or so. I don't mind my propane generator at all. It's quiet and there is not much exhaust fumes.

Defintely quiet.

Propane is 1 gallon an hour., 100 hours max

Diesel is .44 gallons per hour. 400 hours max.

Your uses sounds like the propane is perfect.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #20 – August 28, 2014, 12:42:23 pm

I just saw this thread and for what its worth we have a 93, 40 ft, U300 with a 6V92, 350 hp. We tow a 2005 Chrysler, Town and Country Van with transmission pump which weighs 4400 lbs. dry wt. but is heavily loaded and our coach is typically loaded to the maximum. It has 160,000 miles on it and according to the VMSPC Silverleaf it gets 8 mpg but based on my fuel/mileage records over 25,000 miles it is getting 6.7 mpg. This does include moderate use of the diesel generator. I drive between 62 and 67 mph in mostly hilly or mountainous areas but the terrain doesn't seem to matter much.

I was skeptical of the Detroit when I bought it and now I think they are great and the least expensive to keep repaired. No complaints on torque or power. No oil leaks as most people think from a Detroit. The Detroit Silver used in the Foretravel is a dry engine.

I have not seen any coach I like as much as our U300. Hope this helps.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #21 – August 29, 2014, 10:50:34 am

I've never experienced any overheating with the rear radiator. I remember climbing steep grades at 60 mph with the dash AC on in 106 degree weather with my 23 year old radiator before I recored it and it didn't overheat. A pickup truck towing a huge fifth wheel camper passed me going up the hill... then pulled over at the rest area at the top of the grade to open the hood with steam spewing out.

Stewart & Stevenson is the Detroit Diesel / Allison service center in Dallas and they told me they can turn up the horsepower on my DDEC for $50. The only thing stopping me was common sense. Their own Allison transmission shop told me the transmission would probably be okay with more than 300 horsepower but I hesitated and didn't let them do it. Allison officially says the transmission is rated for 300 horsepower so I'm sticking with that. I don't need more power anyway, especially at high altitude... You'll see what I mean if you ever take your 6V92TA up to Taos NM.

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #22 – August 29, 2014, 09:22:12 pm

Quote from: RRadio – August 29, 2014, 10:50:34 am

I've never experienced any overheating with the rear radiator. I remember climbing steep grades at 60 mph with the dash AC on in 106 degree weather with my 23 year old radiator before I recored it and it didn't overheat. A pickup truck towing a huge fifth wheel camper passed me going up the hill... then pulled over at the rest area at the top of the grade to open the hood with steam spewing out.

Stewart & Stevenson is the Detroit Diesel / Allison service center in Dallas and they told me they can turn up the horsepower on my DDEC for $50. The only thing stopping me was common sense. Their own Allison transmission shop told me the transmission would probably be okay with more than 300 horsepower but I hesitated and didn't let them do it. Allison officially says the transmission is rated for 300 horsepower so I'm sticking with that. I don't need more power anyway, especially at high altitude... You'll see what I mean if you ever take your 6V92TA up to Taos NM.

Torque is the trans limiting factor. My understanding is the 600 series trans is noemi sold maxed at 780 pound feet of torque.

89's were 277hp/840 torque. Laters like yours are 300/820.

277/840's were faster in a side by side runoff.

Low weight of the unihomes allowed the Allison man to ok the 840 rating.

He was happy when I mentioned the 300hp would solve a lot of marketing issues I was running into.

Buddies would say "but I got me a 300hp in my coach. Haha"

Have them turn it to the already approved then rating of 277/840 IMO

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #23 – August 29, 2014, 09:56:09 pm

Bob,

You may have a point about the transmission. 350 HP comes with 1020 ft lbs of torque at a pretty low 1200 RPM. Not much above a fast idle. That is a long way from a 600 trans max of 780 ft lbs. What were they thinking when they put that transmission in? Do 600s have lockup?

Pierce

Re: 91 or 92 Grand villa Unihome?

Reply #24 – August 29, 2014, 11:30:15 pm

Quote from: Pierce & Gaylie Stewart – August 29, 2014, 09:56:09 pm

Bob,

You may have a point about the transmission. 350 HP comes with 1020 ft lbs of torque at a pretty low 1200 RPM. Not much above a fast idle. That is a long way from a 600 trans max of 780 ft lbs. What were they thinking when they put that transmission in? Do 600s have lockup?

Pierce

Halfway through third lockup occurs. High third and all fourth are locked up.

Had a customer with a twin marine 375hp turbo setup on a 250 hp 3208. 643 Allison. Bill Paige.

Only put his foot in it in high gear. He knew. 95k miles with the twin blowers. No problems.

Car fast. What hills.....

Affiliate Notice