Breakdown Information
Moderators Note: This thread is intending to report a problem and its resolution. If you are seeking help or information to help you resolve a problem you would best be served by initiating a thread o...
Forum Discussion
2000 36' Monaco Knight
61,000 miles
5.9l Cummins Turbo Diesel pusher.
Bought this unit (our 4th Class A) in August of 2010. On our 3rd trip from Regina, SK to Calgary, AB, I had a "low water" warning for low coolant. I pulled over and inspected everything and found no leaks, topped up the radiator and continued on. Within 100 miles I had the same low coolant warning. Again topped up the radiator and found no leak. When we finally stopped in Calgary and stayed the night, I crawled under the engine and had a good look with a flashlight. I found that the engine block was cracked (behind the turbo) and had been patched with steel epoxy. Someone had patched the block prior to my purchase. The coolant was evaporating as quickly as it leaked which led to no evidence of a leak. The only reason I was never stranded was that because I was in a RV, I carried enough water to top up the rad and continue on.
Long story short, the Cummins 5.9l blocks stamped "53" are flawed and known to crack. If you are buying a unit with the Cummins powerplant, inspect this closey and stay away from anything with this block.
I have since replaced the entire engine with a factory rebuilt #51 block with 300hp injectors and it now runs like a top. It has very good fuel economy (lows of 10.4 MPG, highest 14.2 MPG) and all kinds of power.
Bob
61,000 miles
5.9l Cummins Turbo Diesel pusher.
Bought this unit (our 4th Class A) in August of 2010. On our 3rd trip from Regina, SK to Calgary, AB, I had a "low water" warning for low coolant. I pulled over and inspected everything and found no leaks, topped up the radiator and continued on. Within 100 miles I had the same low coolant warning. Again topped up the radiator and found no leak. When we finally stopped in Calgary and stayed the night, I crawled under the engine and had a good look with a flashlight. I found that the engine block was cracked (behind the turbo) and had been patched with steel epoxy. Someone had patched the block prior to my purchase. The coolant was evaporating as quickly as it leaked which led to no evidence of a leak. The only reason I was never stranded was that because I was in a RV, I carried enough water to top up the rad and continue on.
Long story short, the Cummins 5.9l blocks stamped "53" are flawed and known to crack. If you are buying a unit with the Cummins powerplant, inspect this closey and stay away from anything with this block.
I have since replaced the entire engine with a factory rebuilt #51 block with 300hp injectors and it now runs like a top. It has very good fuel economy (lows of 10.4 MPG, highest 14.2 MPG) and all kinds of power.
Bob
