BusTalk Forum Index BusTalk
A Community Discussing Buses and Bus Operations Worldwide!
 
 BusTalk MainBusTalk Main FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups BusTalk GalleriesBusTalk Galleries   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

'Another 60 BRT Story'
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> Surface Transit - Western United States
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:49 pm    Post subject: 'Another 60 BRT Story' Reply with quote

On my usual homebound run from the office I found myself waiting for a light on Wilshire Boulevard at San Vicente in Beverly Hills this afternoon.

Bopping along at a pretty good clip on San Vicente were two Nabi 60 BRT's signed for route 920 - 'Not In Service', and probably heading for the Transit Center at Pico Boulevard.

You'll notice that I used the term 'bopping' because that's exactly what they were doing with their rear units actually bouncing up and down!

I would have to say that passengers riding in these rear sections could well suffer a bit of nausea to say the least.

Now I know what the LACMTA driver that I met a few weeks ago meant when he told me that there were plenty of suspension troubles with these buses!

According to the same source, Nabi is doing very little to fix the problem.

Photo below thanks to BleuMCO and borrowed for educational purposes only to illustrate the equipment mentioned.

Mr. Linsky - Green Bus Lines, Jamaica, NY

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cyberider




Joined: 27 Apr 2007
Posts: 501
Location: Tempe, AZ

PostPosted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kind of reinforces our opinions about the new buses. All show and no go. Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AZNABIman



Age: 38
Joined: 15 Oct 2007
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chicago also has been having major problems with the suspensions on their NABI artics. Somehow I think that this could be a major design flaw. I've been on New Flyer D60LFs and while they are more "bouncy" than regular 40 foot buses they certainly aren't bad.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AZNABIman,

Personally, I think LACMTA is putting WAY too many eggs in one basket with the 60 BRT.

If there are major problems (ala the Flx. 870's) they're going to be without buses and, this time, I don't think the likes of Washington's DC Transit will be there to help! (they're the ones that lent NYC 150 buses during their crisis).

Never very clever to put so much into something that really hasn't been proven!

And what makes matters worse is the fact that Nabi isn't exactly jumping to solve the problems!

We'll have to sit this one out and see what happens.

Mr. Linsky - Green Bus Lines, Inc., Jamaica, NY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DE60LF




Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 142
Location: Albuquerque, NM

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This clearly shows that the New Flyer makes better articulated buses than NABI. However, New Flyer doesn't produce a CNG articulated bus, so NABI is basically LACMTA's only choice. Emissions laws in southern California don't allow TA's to purchase diesel-powered buses anymore, even if they are ULSD or diesel-electric hybrids. I even asked New Flyer why they don't make a C60LF, and they stated that the market for such model is too small, and that development is better spent on improving the DE60LF. However, if New Flyer made a GE60LF (gasoline-electric hybrid), I wonder if LACMTA would be interested.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
inkybus



Age: 38
Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Victorville, CA

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This question was asked in another thread, but would a gas- electric have the torque to move such a large bus? A diesel engine makes about twice the torque of an equivalent sized gasoline engine, so there should be some way to make up that, possibly in the gearing of the transmission.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
DE60LF




Joined: 03 Oct 2007
Posts: 142
Location: Albuquerque, NM

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

inkybus wrote:
This question was asked in another thread, but would a gas- electric have the torque to move such a large bus? A diesel engine makes about twice the torque of an equivalent sized gasoline engine, so there should be some way to make up that, possibly in the gearing of the transmission.


I have heard that the GE40LF actually runs fairly well. In fact, I have heard that it accelerates faster than the DE40LF. The GE40LF uses a Ford Triton V10 engine. However, such technology is untested for a 60-foot articulated bus, and may not generate sufficient torque for a bus of its size.

Also, NABI is not the first manufacturer to offer an articulated bus in CNG. I believe that several European manufacturers have offered this technology for several years now. Neoplan USA has offered a CNG articulated bus for a very long time as well until their collapse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
inkybus



Age: 38
Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Victorville, CA

PostPosted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now that you mention it, when I lived in San Bernardino I rode one of the three prototypes of the GE40LF and I do remember almost getting thrown out of my seat when leaving a bus stop. Thinking about it more, I think the torque is the result of the electric motor and not the gas engine, as motors have a high starting torque. It may be possible, if you use an electric motor with higher output, and possibly have the engine direct feed the batteries only instead of assisting the motor part of the time...

Sorry, I'm kind of rambling here... Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that you might also want to consider the gearing of the rear end in any equation regarding torque regardless of the means by which power is transferred to it.

Gear ratios play an extremely important part not only in acceleration but in the handling of the weight that is exerted on the drive axle.

Using Cadillacs (of yore) as an illustration, when a trailer package option was selected the gear ratio was entirely different than what was offered in the standard rear end.

Of course, the transmissions and suspensions were also beefed up simultaneously.

There is really very little reason why alternate fuels will not work as well as gasoline or Diesel on artics if the drive train is engineered correctly.

Mr. Linsky - Green Bus Lines, Inc., Jamaica, NY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
inkybus



Age: 38
Joined: 20 Nov 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Victorville, CA

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

True, but you can only adjust the gearing low enough before you limit the top end. That may not be much of a problem in NYC, but here in SoCal where transit buses run 70+ mph there is a limit on how much you can adjust the gearing to compensate for the low torque of a gas engine.

Hmm, maybe this discussion should be moved here: http://hopetunnel.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=656&highlight=

I guess it's up to the admin. Cool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

inkybus,

Actually, this forum is O.K. because we are discussing Artics.

You make a good point with the extent to which ratios can be adjusted to accomodate both low and high speed operation.

Living here in L.A. myself, I notice that a great many transit routes do take to the freeways during some part of the runs and find it necessary to open it up so to speak just to keep up with traffic.

I think this is the main reason that GM years ago always suggested 4 and 5 speed manual transmissions on all OTR coaches which gave the driver far more control over the gear box and the transmission of power to the rear end.

Today, most OTR coaches come equipped with automatics but I don't think the concern is as much with get up and go as it is with top speed performance.

I guess you can't have both and get up and go is more important on transits.

Mr. Linsky - Green Bus Lines., Inc. Jamaicxa, NY
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
james123



Age: 39
Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I get some good points through this forum.....thanks.@
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Tue Jan 26, 2010 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

james123,

Glad we could be of assistance to you.

As an unofficial welcoming committee of one here at BusTalk, let me just do that and say that we very much look forward to your valued contributions.

Welcome aboard.

Mr. 'L'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OCTA3053




Joined: 04 May 2007
Posts: 22
Location: Wilmington, CA

PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 1:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

after all the 45ft CompoBuses arrive, MTA isn't going back to NABI.
There's still quite a ways to go.

MTA are recieving the 2010 NABI 45C.05s. This involves bus # 8300-8359, which will go down to Division 18. With this being said and done, Division 15 in the valley are recieving some of the 6300s from Division 18. Not sure about D8.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Mr. Linsky
BusTalk's Offical Welcoming Committee



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 5071
Location: BRENTWOOD, CA. - WOODMERE, N.Y.

PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting!

If LACMTA isn't going back to NABI, where are they heading?

Whatever they're doing or about to do is a wise choice only because I think they've already put too many eggs in one basket with NABI!

Not that I have anything against NABI - I think their 45 C's are great looking but I'm leery of the 60 BRT's that I see are already beginning to fall apart at the seams (and I mean the seems between the front and rear sections!).

We'll just have to wait and see what happens.

Regards,

Mr. 'L'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BusTalk Forum Index -> Surface Transit - Western United States All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group