vanwill52

Consider taking the motor to a motor rebuilding shop and have them evaluate it. Many are repairable.

Vito, ask Paul Whittle about modifying the relay wiring so that your driving lights stay on all the time. I've forgotten the simple details, but he did that for my coach and now the driving lights are on anytime the "Driving Light" switch and the ignition switch are on. I replaced my Hella driving lights with some inexpensive multi-LED driving lights for off-road vehicles. They are extremely bright (white light) and easily aimed. Never have anyone flashing their bright lights at me, but they provide more light, better aimed, than my headlights. No, I do not know if they are legal, nor do I care.

Bob Nodine was my first "Guinea Pig" to test out the Watts link stabilization concept. He gave me enough engineering measurements from his coach to make the very first front Watts link installation. The rest is history. Bob is one of the sharpest technical contributors to this forum. When certain folks on this forum post something, I read what they wrote even if it does not apply to me. Bob is one of those folks, along with a handful of others. As Bob previously stated, the best way to check the adjustment of your TRW steering gear is to use one hand on the input shaft of the gear and the other on the Pittman arm. DEFINITELY not necessary to disconnect the drag link. Adjust the pinion engagement screw until you feel zero lost motion. And as often stated, since the rack gear into which the pinion mates is purposely cut on an arc (high in the middle) it is important that you have the steering gear near-perfectly centered when making the adjustment. It's not rocket science, nor is it difficult. But if you adjust to zero lost motion when the steering gear is not centered, you will feel a slight "tight spot" when you are driving with the steering gear centered.

I wonder how many others besides myself are humbled by the many talents you have displayed. And I used to think I was fairly handy...

Dennis, it is difficult to tell from the picture, but it appears you have one of those shower hoses made to LOOK like they are in a stainless steel sheath but actually are completely plastic with no metal component. There are several manufacturers of shower hoses that are a flexible elastomeric tube sheathed in a VERY flexible all-stainless cover. You have certainly corrected your issue, but you might find that you like one of these stainless steel hoses better. They would not kink in your application and are a great deal more pleasant to use.

Fantastic write-up! Thanks. Perhaps there are huge variations in different hydraulic repair companies. I hope some of you are as fortunate as I was. My system on a 2000 Dynasty was an HWH. I used a shop near me in Sanford, NC. I disassembled the cylinder and took the end cap and piston/rod to them. They replaced the end cap wiper and seal, and the piston seals. Total cost was about $15. I reassembled the cylinder myself.

Smells like something that involved Paul Whittle, one of our electronics/software/programming/music/electrical wizards...LOL Paul also helped me (translation--HE DID IT) update my sound system in my old 2000 Dynasty. Now my multi-amped, powered-subwoofer system with upgraded speakers can pound out Pandora's "Blues Guitar Masters" to satisfy even an audiophile. Thanks, Paul!

Some of the Frigidaire brand dehumidifiers include a pump to pump the condensate out. About $300. Free shipping. Amazon. https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07Z5Q7M3N/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

We are blessed on this forum with several truly techincally competent contributors. Dave Pratt, Chuck B, Frank McElroy, Ivan K, Paul Whittle, Scotty, Tom Cherry, and many others come to mind. On ANY forum, there will always be "crusty old curmudgeons" and basically crotchety, unpleasant, negative old farts. When we have someone like Paul Whittle, a software engineer of outstanding talent and considerable business success, who devotes a large amount of time to developing products that solve long-standing problems that previously had no solution (at ANY price)...and which do not have a snowball's chance of returning to him even his development costs, I think it is truly petty that ANYONE might question the price of the products such a person provides, MUCH LESS the motivation for their contribution. If you think YOU can develop a comparable product at a much lower price, by all means--DO SO! I'm betting that among all our hundreds (thousands?) of members, not one will step up and offer even a second-rate solution to the toilet controllers Paul Whittle is offering, or the new camera adaptations. And being the inquisitive fellow that he is, don't be surprised if he comes up with several other software/hardware solutions for otherwise unsolvable problems. Please don't be part of the legion of cheap-skates who whine even about the price of diesel fuel! When one amongst you provides an elegant solution to a problem that previously had no solution at ANY price, REJOICE that we have members willing to devote the time to help their fellow Monaco owners. I have no need of either an electronic toilet controller or an upgraded rear-view camera. But I assure you that if I did, I would not hesitate to contact a fellow Monacoer who had researched and produced the item I needed. No, this message is not "aimed" at any one particular person. I'm just humbly suggesting that you appreciate some of the truly talented people on this forum who can help you with a difficult problem, even when it almost surely will not profit them.

BINGO! An intelligent, HONEST response. If you want your coach to ride THE SMOOTHEST IT POSSIBLY CAN over expansion joints and tar strips, TAKE YOUR SHOCKS COMPLETELY OFF, as I have done to satisfy my engineering curiosity. If you want "porpoising" control, install the stiffest shocks you can find...and accept that they will rattle your teeth over small road imperfections. If you have a grasp of the compromises that the current state of mechancial engineering (shock design) MUST make between rebound control and ride smoothness, make your choices approptriately. But don't be among the TOTALLY CLUELESS who think that if they buy the top-of-the-line "shock absorber" their coach will ride like a Greyhound Bus and rebound like a Porsche Carrerra. I know that sometimes I come across as gruff on this subject, but if you have ANY understanding of physics and Newtonian mechanics, you KNOW that the shock which "rides like velvet over tar strips, but quashes porpoising" DOES NOT EXIST!!!!!! You choose what is most important to you, and if you have technical expertise, you purchase the "shock absorber" (rebound damper) whose performance most closely approximates your performance expectations...smoother ride OR better rebound control. If you DO NOT have technical expertise, you will simply succumb to whatever advertising BS you see. There ain't no free lunch. I was once advised by the greatest technical authority that ever existed on this forum that the wandering, "road wild" behavior of my 1993 Dynasty was simply because it needed new shocks. Even though, as a mechanical engineer (and auto mechanic from 13 years old) that made no sense to me, I did it anyway. I replaced ALL my shocks with "Bilstein Comfort" shocks. RESULT? Coach rode rougher, but wandering did not decrease one iota. So many folks who give "reviews" of a particular shock could not change those shocks THEMSELVES if their lives depended on it. They are techincally clueless. Their reviews frequently begin with, "I HAD my shocks changed at XYZ RV service..." The folks who are capable of changing the shocks themselves are the ones most likely to give an honest, impartial review of the results...they spent the money to buy a replacement shock and installed it themselves. They KNOW what they are expecting from the new shocks. And why do so many otherwise intelligent folks post a review of a particular magic "XYZ" shock and claim it cured everything from wandering, rough riding, and porpoising...all at the same time...WHEN MILLENIAL-OLD PHYSICS GUARANTEES IT COULD NOT BE TRUE? Why? Because if you fell for the advertising hype that made you choose a mega-bucks shock, human natures GUARANTEES that you are not likely to say, "I foolishly spent my money on those shocks." To keep from looking foolish, you will defend your purchasing decision. If you want HONEST opinions about a variety of subjects (not just shock absorbers), look to the folks on this forum who have "real world, under-the-coach, greasy fingers" experience, NOT credit card experience. That won't necessarily be the folks who post the most often. It will be those folks that EVERYONE reads WHATEVER they post...Because they have a history of providing valuable advice. Think...Ivan, Bob Nodine, Dave Pratt, Frank McElroy, Scotty Hutto, Walt Heathcock!!, and many others whose names might escape me at the moment. Believe me, folks, there simply ain't no such thing as a magic shock absorber that "glides over tar strips and expansion joints" but "quashes porpoising". If you disagree, let's talk about the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy.

Frank, you are a great resource for this group. Thanks for all the time and effort you've put into helping ALL of us. Merry Christmas! Jesus is the reason for the season.

If you have an access panel over top of the instrument panel, OR your coach has one of those Lift-Up dash coverings, it is fairly easy. Look at your ignition key nacelle. There may be a tiny pinhole about the size of a paper clip. Insert a paper clip and you can withdraw the lock cylinder and key. Look for a YouTube video--there are probably dozens of them. Once the lock cylinder is removed, you purchase the special tool to unscrew the nacelle from the ignition switch...or struggle with it until you get it unscrewed. Usually one multi-pin connector is attached to the back of the ignition switch. Remove that connector and take the ignition switch to any auto parts store to match it up. Many Monaco's used a Chevy truck ignition switch from the 90's(?). Someone may chime in with a part number. You can reuse your key and lock cylinder--they do not come with the new ignition switch normally. IMHO, the reason this is such a common failure item is that Monaco ran too many loads through this switch, much as they did with the headlight switches. Many members have added relays to reduce the total load on the switch.

I think that myself, Craig French, and Bob Nodine have spent more time, money and effort on the subject of the value of different "shock ABSORBERS" than all other members of this forum COMBINED. As Bob Nodine said, "shock absorbers" DO NOT 'ABSORB' SHOCKS". Anyone who thinks differently is simply lacking understanding of physics and Newtonian mechanics. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 'SHOCK ABSORBER' THAT ABSORBS SHOCKS!!! The name "shock absorbers" is from the 1930's A-model Ford days. Shock Absorbers were misnamed from Day One. They should have been called "rebound dampers". If you think that a "magic device" can prevent your tires/wheels from transmitting a road irregularity (bump) from your antique straight-axle front end design motor coach to your driver/passenger seat...then by all means, purchase it and write glowing reviews of how some “magic” shock both "smoothed" your ride and "improved" your "handling" (rebound control). If both those things happened, it happened ONLY BETWEEN YOUR EARS!!. Yes, I meant to be BLUNT and say that your reviews of "smoother ride" COMBINED WITH "increased rebound control" from your mega-buck shocks are bulls**t and you should do other coach owners a favor and keep those glowing IMPOSSIBLE reviews to yourself. Yes, I understand that you spent 2-3 times for your shocks as necessary. But don't feel like you have to justify your foolish decision to everyone else who may be thinking "magic" shocks can cure every ailment their coach has. Is it possible for a "shock absorber" to both improve rebound control (improve "handling") and ALSO provide a "smoother" ride? NO. NO. NO. NO. Make your choice, folks---you either opt for improved rebound control (with accompanying harsh ride) or you choose smoother ride (less banging from tar strips and expansion joints). There ain't no "free lunch"!! You can't purchase a "magic" shock that "absorbs" shocks and "rides sooo smoothly". If any "knowledgeable" person has told you that the "mushy' feeling you get from your steering wheel as you drive down a straight, smooth interstate highway can be cured by a set of "magic" shock absorbers, put up your BS antennae. It ain't gonna happen!! If you are even moderately technical, consider this-- "shock absorbers" can ONLY function if they are being COMPRESSED or EXTENDED. What do you think they are doing if they are not moving at all (along a straight, smooth interstate highway)? HELLO! How could they POSSIBLY help your coach stop wandering when they are doing NOTHING? As I said earlier, I’m sure I will be the object of much flaming, especially from the folks who spent mega-bucks on “miracle shocks” and are technically clueless. But for those of you that have not made the “follow the herd” decision to purchase expensive shocks, and have technical expertise, PLEASE stop following “the herd” who are clueless.---YOU HAVE AN ANTIQUE STRAIGHT-AXLE COACH. NOTHING IS GOING TO MAKE YOUR COACH RIDE LIKE EVEN THE MOST PRIMITIVE IFS (Independent Front Suspension) coaches. YES, we have a good, high-end coach from TWENTY YEARS AGO. Can it compete in ride quality with even mediocre quality IFS coaches? NO!! But stop thinking that if you spend mega-bucks on “shock absorbers” you will get any improvement in “real, justifiable, technically provable” results, except between your ears. It ain’t gonna happen. Wanna improve your coach’s “handling”? Fix the design flaw. Don’t apply a “Band-Aid” “snake-oil” fix. Is there any hope? Yes, Watts links and cross-bars will work wonders for your coach’s DRIVING experience. But they will NOT make it ride like a Greyhound bus. For that, you need to remove ALL your shocks…and install IFS. How do I know this? Because I am only one of a tiny collection of folks who have TOTALLY REMOVED ALL their shocks and gone for a test ride. Did the coach wallow a SMALL amount it curves? YES. Was the change from before with shocks installed major? NO! So, for all you folks who PAID a shop to install your new mega-bucks shocks, I’m happy if you are happy. I’m happy that my coach rides and “handles” (ZERO wandering) as well as its design allows well. I can offer one bit of advice concerning shocks. My experience has proven that the price of shocks is vastly high. In much experimentation, I have determined ONE truth—REAR shocks have a much less PERCEIVED ride “quality” than FRONT shocks. If you want to reduce the “Walmart wobble” when you enter a curb, choose a stiff shock for your rears. I installed a set of Bilstein REGULAR (not “comfort”) shocks on the rear of my 2000 Dynasty (non-tag). It reduced the wobble considerably, without degrading the ride “smoothness” at all. But what do I have in the front? Cheap, mushy, worn-out Monroes. And I bet I never even notice the tar strips that beat your teeth out. OK, let those who have spent their whole month’s SS check on high-dollar shocks fire up their keyboards….

Is it possible that you are never completely charging your batteries? Granted, you have new ones so there is only a small chance they are bad. And if I understand correctly you have (8) AGM batteries. Is that correct? In my 2000 Dynasty, I have (8) T-145 batteries (NOT T-105) so I have nearly 1000 AH of battery capacity. It takes a very long time to recharge those batteries if they are even at 50% SOC (state of charge). I don't see where you have said which inverter/charger you have. A popular model now is the Magnum MS2812 which is a pure sine wave inverter. Craig French once went to many coaches at a Gathering, and never found a single inverter/charger set correctly. Most had a factory default load of settings, and none of them was even set to charge at 100% of charger capacity. The ABSORPTION phase of the charging process is controlled by a TIME parameter on the chargers I have seen. A typical default for ABSORPTION time might be two hours. I don't think that will come close to charging your batteries fully. After that two hours, regardless the state of the battery's charge, the charger switches to FLOAT. In FLOAT mode, it might take days to completely charge your batteries if there is even a small parasitic load soaking up some of the FLOAT charging current. You might also have an incorrect BULK charging setting. AGM batteries tolerate a larger BULK charging rate than lead-acid batteries. And surely set the charger to charge at its "100%" rate, and have your SHORE setting at least at 30A, preferably 50A if that setting is available. Perhaps Bill Groves will chime in. He has considerable experience fine-tuning the charging capabilities of his AGM batteries. I suggest these things since you said IN THE PAST your coach could easily go overnight running the fridge. You seem to have changed nothing but the batteries since that time. Perhaps they are simply never being completely charged. As others have noted, a measurement of the current AT THE BATTERY is crucial--CURRENT not VOLTAGE. I have found it invaluable to have a device that will give an accurate SOC of the coach batteries. If you have the Magnum MS2812, you can add the BMK from Magnum. If you have any other inverter/charger, a good choice is the "Tri-Metric" from Bogart Engineering. One thing you will find common in the instructions for all good-quality SOC monitors is that you measure the current AT THE BATTERY, and through the NEGATIVE lead. Good luck! Keep us informed.

X250000! Most folks don't know that it is just as simple as replacing your ($2500) ECM with a "remanufactured" (used) ECM. Each ECM is programmed with the specifics of its application. Never pay for a replacement ECM without getting a copy of the programming specific to your coach.

There are quite a few hydraulics repair companies capable of major repairs (Machining, honing, chrome plating) on hydraulic cylinders. I am all the way on the east coast but there are two near me. Atlantic Hydraulics in Sanford, NC and Capital Hydraulics in Raleigh, NC. Purchasing a new cylinder, even at a high price, is probably your best bet, but if that is not an option, scour the Internet for hydraulics repairs services near you that offer machining and total "build from scratch" services. I believe your cylinders are single acting (retracted by springs), making them somewhat more difficult to recondition, but it might be as simple as honing to the next larger size and making a new piston. I have done that numerous times in my life, but have not had to do it on my present 2000 Dynasty, which has RVA jacks.

I can't find any mention of the year of your coach, but assuming it is an 8.3 mechanical engine, there is a fuel shutoff solenoid that is known to commonly fail. Costs less than $100 and is easily replaced. There is NOT a fuel shutoff solenoid on the electronically controlled engines (ISC, ISL and newer). Not sure, but I don't think there were any significant number of mechanically controlled engines (if any) in Monaco coaches 2000 and later.

I'm with Ivan on this one. I have replaced that ignition solenoid contactor twice in eight years on my 2000 Dynasty. Last time I bought one for twice the price that had silver alloy contacts. The solenoid contactor's website promoted the silver alloy contacts for "circuits in which the amperage is low", saying that the silver alloy contacts were more reliable in low-amp situations. The reasoning was that if the current was high, it tended to arc on make or break and kept the contacts "fresh". I disassembled (destroyed) one of the solenoid contactors I removed. Sure enough, the copper contacts looked very fresh but with an oxide layer on them. On a side note, the manufacturer of the solenoid contactor stated in its directions that it should NEVER be mounted with its plunger axis HORIZONTAL, as that tended to cause the contacts not to connect, especially under low-amp situations. Monaco had installed both the solenoid contactors in my front run bay horizontally. When I replaced one of them the second time, I turned them into the orientation prescribed by the manufacturer--dome end upward.

Ray, my engine is an ISC-350. I think it is the first electronically controlled engine found in our coaches. Yes, the wiring diagram shows a "Tach Output" from the ECM, but again, I don't know where it goes. The tach, if it is not TOTALLY driven from the alternator, at least requires that the "Tach" terminal on the alternator be properly connected. I hope Paul Whittle chimes in. He converted his charging system to use the ML-ACR. I THINK he had a BIRD system before. I understand the basics of how the BIRD system works, but before I would spend any time troubleshooting a trouble-prone system, I would simply replace all the electronics and relays with the single ML-ACR component, whose guarantee reads, "We stand behind this product for as long as you own it." Period. The wiring (re-wiring) for the ML-ACR is super simple and inuitive, once you realize the ML-ACR does one and only one thing--It either COMBINES your house and engine battery banks, or it SEPARATES them. And it does so automatically, based on what (if any) charging sources (alternator, inverter-charger, external chargin device) are present. PLUS, the remote control switch you install in place of your BOOST switch, allows you to FORCE the ML-ACR into any state you wish--Automatic, Battery Banks Connected, Battery Banks Separated. And lastly, the "ML" part of ML-ACR is for "magnetically latched"--it only requires milliamps to maintain it in either of its two states. I'm sure I'm prejudiced, since I made this swap, but it replaces a system that folks have difficulty getting diagnosed and repaired with a ONE-COMPONENT device inexpensive enough (less than $200) to carry a spare. I have nearly 1000 AH of (8) T-145 size batteries. And yes, I have committed "Monaco heresy" in mixing battery brands and ages, and have had no issues in over four years, including a trip to AK from NC. I welded a new battery pan and mounted two Group 24 12V batteries on the driver side in the rear of the engine compartment.

Ray, perhaps I am misunderstading your post, but even though my wiring diagrams show a tachometer output on the ECM, the tach will not operate if the alternator does not have a tach output. My engine is a 1999 (engine, not coach) ISC and the ECM wiring diagram clearly shows a tach OUTPUT, but I've not been able to find where it goes in the coach. But if the tach output of the alternator is disconnected, the tach is dead. That was the same on my 1993 with a mechanical 8.3 engine...disconnect tach OUTPUT on alternator, and tach is dead. Both coaches had identical (or nearly so) Leece-Neville alternators. I do not know this from personal experience, but I assume the ECM gets its engine RPM data from the crank angle sensor. Since that would be the most accurate, I have no idea of the reasoning behind using the alternator in any way for the tach. That may have been a Monaco decision as to which output (ECM or alternator) to use for the tach signal. I just know the tach will not operate without a tach connection to the alternator. And a frequent diagnostic clue is that when your tach suddenly stops working, check to see if the alternator is still charging normally. Paul Whittle was among the first to adopt the Blue Sea ML-ACR when replacing his alternator on a 2004? Sig with ISC-525. I believe he replaced the alternator with a Delco-Remy 28si which had a tach output. Perhaps he will chime in about his experience with the tach's accuracy after the swap.

Although I am in the camp that advises rebuilding your existing alternator, if you can get one that is the EXACT same part number, that would surely work. There are two issues with replacing the alternator. #1 is if you have a DUVAC (remote voltage sensing) alternator. #2 is the tachometer output. #1--The DUVAC alternators were only necessary on the earlier coaches which had a solid-state isolator. To charge properly, the alternator had to "reach around" the SSI and read the ACTUAL voltage AT THE BATTERY. That was the function of the additional wire that ran from the alternator directly to the battery terminal. Without that remote sensing, the alternator would see the voltage on the input side of the SSI and adjust charge rate accordingly. The charging voltage AT THE BATTERY (output of the SSI) would be about 0.7 volts LOWER. Therefore, the charging voltage AT THE BATTERY would never go as high as needed to fully charge the battery or to charge it reasonably quickly. The additional sensing wire (the feature that makes the alternator DUVAC) remedied that problem. #2--The replacement alternator required a tachometer output signal. IFF you replace the trouble-prone SSI with a setup like the Blue Sea ML-ACR and make a direct connection from the alternator charging terminal to the battery, you no longer require a DUVAC alternator, but still need a tachometer signal. One knowledgeable alternator rebuild shop I talked to said the tachometer output signals were all similar, since regardless what pulley was on the alternator, if the system was properly designed, all alternators would spin at similar RPM, and that if the tachometer required calibration it could be easily done at the tachometer itself, or in some cases, on the alternator. He said he had never seen a variation of more than 10%. I've never verified the tachometer adjustment he described, but several folks have replaced their SSI and installed a non-DUVAC alternator. One of those folks is Paul Whittle, who was the originator of the ML-ACR swap. I believe he replaced his alternator with a Delco 28si, which had a tachometer output. Once that swap is made, should you ever need an alternator, there are lots of choices available that will work perfectly.

There have been quite a few instances of cracked outer and/or inner skylight material due to using the wrong sealant. That happened to me before I learned that non-approved sealants would cause cracks. But ALL the skylights are simply too thin to be adequately sealed by screws alone, even when the screw spacing is quite close. On both my Dynasty's, I TIG-welded TWO aluminum frames about 2" wide and the shape of the outside of the skylight. One was 3/16" thick, the other was 1/8' thick. The 1/8" thick frame got screwed to the coach roof with the correct sealant under it. That one smoothed out the roof imperfections and gave a smooth, hard surface for the skylight plastic to sit on. I sandwiched the inner and outer skylights between the two aluminum frames with screws about 1-1/2" apart and the correct sealant. That was a permanent fix on both my 1993 and 2000 Dynasty's. For the 2000, I was unable to locate the inner skylight, and used a flat sheet of 1/8 polycarbonate. On the 2000, that fix is about seven years old now.

Luckily, you are one of a tiny minority on this forum that feel that way. Most everyone else seems happy to bend over backwards to help their fellow RV owner.

My 2000 Dynasty came with an Ozite (polyolefin) carpeting material as the ceiling covering. It was glued to the plywood ceiling panels and was dingy from Day One. I cut it out around all the outside edges with a box cutter and pulled it all out. I replaced it with FRP wall panels from Lowe’s that were bright white with a pebble pattern. Glued it into place and used the moldings supplied to join sheets. Around the edges I put quarter-round molding. Getting the panels installed was quite a job, but adding the moldings was not difficult. It was a major upgrade! https://www.lowes.com/pd/48-in-x-8-ft-Embossed-White-Wall-Panel/1000174771

It seems it is usually easier to find the outer skylight than the inner one. When I replaced the ones on both my 1993 Dynasty and on my present 2000 Dynasty, I was unable to find the domed inner member. I replaced it with a plain flat sheet of polycarbonate about 1/8" thick. Unless you are quite tall, that will probably serve you well. Almost all of the skylight failures I have seen began near the screws. The outer shell is simply not mechanically strong enough to squish down the sealant between each screw without an obvious "dome-shape" between them. For both my installations, I welded together a sub-ring and a cover-ring from aluminum flat stock. The lower one I made from 3/16 thick aluminum and it served to bridge the imperfections in the roof and present a smooth flat surface to mount the skylights on. The top one was 1/8 thick. Sandwiching the two layers of skylight between the two layers of aluminum made a bulletproof fix. Be sure to use sealant that is approved for use on acrylic or polycarbonate. I know from painful experience that the wrong sealant will begin propagating small cracks very shortly. The sandwiched assembly has been on my 2000 Dynasty for seven years. Sorry, I have no pix available here now. I am in Dillard, GA enjoying Paul Whittle and his group of kit-car enthusiasts as they carve up the twisting roads.