Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > Commercial Vehicles


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 24th October 2009, 21:40   #1711
Senior - BHPian
 
hvkumar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 7,369
Thanked: 3,354 Times
Default

How are these AL KSRTC buses different from the China-made LF buses supplied to DTC?
hvkumar is offline  
Old 24th October 2009, 22:47   #1712
BHPian
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Thrissur
Posts: 187
Thanked: 99 Times
Default

i ll say the design surely looks welcoming..especially when compared to the low floor buses running at Tiruvanathapuram. and as Binai said i too dont think this one is a normal 10.3m panther chassis....and also the livery looks warm too.

any idea how many of these have reached AL stable at EKM?
urzdeepu is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 08:05   #1713
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KOCHI
Posts: 367
Thanked: 81 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
Thanks a lot for the scoop. This bus is based on a new chassis developed by Ashok Leyland - this one is 12M in length, compared to 10.8M of Panther. I believe the engine is the higher hp version from Hino (heard it would be a 230hp engine).
Interestingly, the features you mentioned are 'compulsory' for JNNURM deals. I think it was a better decision to go with metal finish, than those ugly FRP ones. The FRP ones tend to get dirty quicker, and are pretty flimsy.
Can't comment on the finish until I get to see it in person. Veera usually makes good bodies - but you never know the kind of pressure they were under to deliver these buses to KSRTC.
The body design is the standard design being used these days by Ashok Leyland. The Suvarna body has a different shape of windows (in terms of dimensions).
Yes, Binaiks i know those features are part of Jnnurm specifications, but still just mentioned.
The "Panther" is 11.07m long and not 10.8m. The engine seems to be 165HP HinoBs3. Its not a bigger engine.
FRP is widely used in Volvo and Marcopolo buses which are in no way inferior. Please do not compare it with the ones used by local body builders.
A comparably model is the new Tata Marcopolo RE LE bus given to BMTC. And some media reports earlier said these(AL KSRTC) cost Rs.27L a piece. At this cost, the fit & finish quality is not as expected from Veera, whose Tourist buses are extreamly good. Even Tata Marcopolo does have lots pressure, but they do not compromise on quality. This is what i tried to highlight. AL while supplying fully built buses, should have ensured that quality of body fit & finish is at par with its competitors. Its about product positioning & image in the market, when foreign players are eating into AL share.
The design of the bus is excellant, but with better fit&finish it could have won more hearts among public. As of now we have not come across fully built AL buses under Jnnurm with similar designs. The ones given to APSRTC, CTC, WBSTC, CSTC etc are different. The AL DTC bus is a china product assembled by AL with Cummins gas engine.
Transsenger is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 09:56   #1714
Senior - BHPian
 
binaiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KL-47 // KA-51
Posts: 1,726
Thanked: 823 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
FRP is widely used in Volvo and Marcopolo buses which are in no way inferior. Please do not compare it with the ones used by local body builders.
A comparably model is the new Tata Marcopolo RE LE bus given to BMTC. And some media reports earlier said these(AL KSRTC) cost Rs.27L a piece. At this cost, the fit & finish quality is not as expected from Veera, whose Tourist buses are extreamly good.
I honestly doubt if FRP is used anywhere inside a Volvo bus. I wouldn't comment on the "quality" of the interiors of a Marcopolo - I had experienced it, and I would not rate it any better than those put together by local bus builders.

The new bus given to BMTC is an AC variant, and you are comparing it with a non-AC variant - in short, comparing a bus worth about 45 lakhs to one, which according to you costs, 27 Lakhs . How fair is this comparison?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
Even Tata Marcopolo does have lots pressure, but they do not compromise on quality. This is what i tried to highlight. AL while supplying fully built buses, should have ensured that quality of body fit & finish is at par with its competitors. Its about product positioning & image in the market, when foreign players are eating into AL share.
You can't comment on Marcopolo - compromising or not on quality - unless one sees it in person. The first version of Marcopolo given to BMTC were horrible, and I had seen the bus breaking down on the very second day of run. I guess this talks a lot about quality.

I would rate the finish of these buses - purely from the images - as equal to the FE SLF buses given to BMTC. I'd reserve my opinion until I see these beasts in person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
The design of the bus is excellant, but with better fit&finish it could have won more hearts among public. As of now we have not come across fully built AL buses under Jnnurm with similar designs. The ones given to APSRTC, CTC, WBSTC, CSTC etc are different. The AL DTC bus is a china product assembled by AL with Cummins gas engine.
This is the first RE SLF bus sold by Ashok Leyland under JNNURM scheme. Only KSRTC & UPSRTC have ordered RE SLF buses, and the first of this lot is for KSRTC.
binaiks is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 10:32   #1715
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kottayam
Posts: 1,081
Thanked: 153 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
This bus is based on a new chassis developed by Ashok Leyland - this one is 12M in length, compared to 10.8M of Panther.
Definitely much better than the current KerRTC Ananthapuri fleet. It will be interesting to see how easy to maneuverthis 12 m beast through the narrow streets of Thiruvanthapuram with out a dedicated bus lane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
The body design is the standard design being used these days by Ashok Leyland
Not sure what is meant by standard. From the pictures i have seen, APSRTC, Calcutta, DTC and KerRTC, BMTC all looks very different from each other.

One quick question to the experts, what is the logic of one door at the front and one in the middle (in place of the one at the back in current KSRTC buses). In this configuration, where will be the ladies reserved seats? Front or back.
teamveevee is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 12:55   #1716
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KOCHI
Posts: 367
Thanked: 81 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
The new bus given to BMTC is an AC variant, and you are comparing it with a non-AC variant - in short, comparing a bus worth about 45 lakhs to one, which according to you costs, 27 Lakhs . How fair is this comparison?

You can't comment on Marcopolo - compromising or not on quality - unless one sees it in person. The first version of Marcopolo given to BMTC were horrible, and I had seen the bus breaking down on the very second day of run. I guess this talks a lot about quality.

I would rate the finish of these buses - purely from the images - as equal to the FE SLF buses given to BMTC. I'd reserve my opinion until I see these beasts in person.
This is the first RE SLF bus sold by Ashok Leyland under JNNURM scheme. Only KSRTC & UPSRTC have ordered RE SLF buses, and the first of this lot is for KSRTC.
Binaiks, i agree that BMTC Marcopolo is an a/c version of Tata RE bus. But if the a/c is removed, you will have open windows (like DTC green buses) in it. Nothing else would change.
The Marcopolo given to BMTC for trails could have been a demo bus and not a brand new one. Breakdowns can occure due to variety of reasons, which we are not sure!
I am not comparing a 45L bus with 27L one. But trying to say that AL should have brought a better bus at par with competition. The cost is not the issue, because if it was KSRTC would have choosen AL A/c RE Low Floor bus which was given for demo to KeSRTC with all features of premium bus rather than 80L Volvo. (That one was displayed during Bus Expo @ Bangalore a few months back. A blue bus, DTC type).

I never said the bus is bad.!...but felt it should have been something more that usual BMTC SLF stuff, specifically it being a RE bus! I very well know that there are lots of factor behind the curtain. Simply i was not that happy when i examined this bus since my expectations on AL was high!!!
Transsenger is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 14:52   #1717
Senior - BHPian
 
14000rpm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, MI
Posts: 1,865
Thanked: 584 Times
Default

spotted this mega trailer on a Volvo FH12 tractor.
Attached Thumbnails
Commercial Vehicle Thread-gps_028.jpg  

Commercial Vehicle Thread-gps_029.jpg  

Commercial Vehicle Thread-gps_030.jpg  

14000rpm is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 16:02   #1718
Senior - BHPian
 
binaiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KL-47 // KA-51
Posts: 1,726
Thanked: 823 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
It will be interesting to see how easy to maneuverthis 12 m beast through the narrow streets of Thiruvanthapuram with out a dedicated bus lane.
AFAIK, this bus would be operated on high-density routes, on main roads. In Ernakulam, these buses would be mostly running on highway routes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
Not sure what is meant by standard. From the pictures i have seen, APSRTC, Calcutta, DTC and KerRTC, BMTC all looks very different from each other.
I would like to remind you that KeSRTC buses are rear-engined, while all the other operators' buses are front-engined. How on earth would both look alike, especially when the front-engined version needs to look into the ventilation needs of the engine.

BMTC did NOT purchase Fully-built buses from AL, but they bought the chassis and got a body built on it. The DTC ones are CNG Powered - rear-engined. Those buses do look exactly like the KeSRTC ones.

The Leyland buses purchased in other cities (FE SLF) are of the same design. (Check new buses of MTC Chennai, WBSTC, etc)

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
One quick question to the experts, what is the logic of one door at the front and one in the middle (in place of the one at the back in current KSRTC buses). In this configuration, where will be the ladies reserved seats? Front or back.
IIRC, this is a part of the newly introduced "Bus Code". This is intended to provide wider entry/exit way to the bus, compared to narrower entrances, if it were to be placed after the rear axle.

The Ladies seat, according to usual KSRTC norms, would be at the front. (According to KeSRTC specifications, the ladies seats in all 'double-door' buses would be at the front)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
The Marcopolo given to BMTC for trails could have been a demo bus and not a brand new one. Breakdowns can occure due to variety of reasons, which we are not sure!
The ones given to BMTC were brand new buses - they were run using temporary numbers, and were never registered. I had traveled in one of those Marcopolos, and the TATA engineer traveling along the bus did confirm that the bus was brand new.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
The cost is not the issue, because if it was KSRTC would have choosen AL A/c RE Low Floor bus which was given for demo to KeSRTC with all features of premium bus rather than 80L Volvo.
Do you mean to say KeSRTC did not purchase the AL RE ULF AC bus because it was not at par with "competition"? If that was the case, why did KeSRTC not try Marcopolo. KeSRTC did not take a trial of the Volvos as well before purchasing them.

KeSRTC was never offered a trial of the RE SLF buses that it has now purchased - what was the basis of this purchase?

FYI, the AC RE ULF bus that was provided to KeSRTC for trials had all the bells and whistles of a Volvo (minus some complications) - it looked good, was well finished and had a very powerful engine (it was powered by a 230HP BSIII Hino Engine. I believe that is of J Series).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
Simply i was not that happy when i examined this bus since my expectations on AL was high!!!
Now, this is a fair statement. Could've stated it earlier.

Last edited by binaiks : 25th October 2009 at 16:06. Reason: Minor edits - spellings
binaiks is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 16:20   #1719
Senior - BHPian
 
hanmust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Calicut
Posts: 2,480
Thanked: 96 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 14000rpm View Post
spotted this mega trailer on a Volvo FH12 tractor.
Dude, its not FH12, but its FM12!
hanmust is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 19:56   #1720
Senior - BHPian
 
14000rpm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester, MI
Posts: 1,865
Thanked: 584 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hanmust View Post
Dude, its not FH12, but its FM12!
i stand corrected. thanks.
14000rpm is offline  
Old 25th October 2009, 21:02   #1721
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kottayam
Posts: 1,081
Thanked: 153 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
AFAIK, this bus would be operated on high-density routes, on main roads. In Ernakulam, these buses would be mostly running on highway routes.
I assume still the bus has to go thru some part of the city. Otherwise there may not be any passengers. KerRTC drivers are notorious for cutting you off while overtaking.

Quote:
BMTC did NOT purchase Fully-built buses from AL, but they bought the chassis and got a body built on it. The DTC ones are CNG Powered - rear-engined. Those buses do look exactly like the KeSRTC ones.

The Leyland buses purchased in other cities (FE SLF) are of the same design. (Check new buses of MTC Chennai, WBSTC, etc)
True. That is exactly what i said, there is no "Standard". Defenitely WBSTC buses looks different, Not seen MTC ones


Quote:
The ones given to BMTC were brand new buses - they were run using temporary numbers, and were never registered. I had traveled in one of those Marcopolos, and the TATA engineer traveling along the bus did confirm that the bus was brand new.
You cannot judge the quality of the bus just based just one incident, with out even knowing exactly what happened. Lot of things changed during the past one year. I have seen many broken down Volvos on the road too.

Quote:
Do you mean to say KeSRTC did not purchase the AL RE ULF AC bus because it was not at par with "competition"? If that was the case, why did KeSRTC not try Marcopolo. KeSRTC did not take a trial of the Volvos as well before purchasing them.

KeSRTC was never offered a trial of the RE SLF buses that it has now purchased - what was the basis of this purchase?
.
Again, they should have tested Marcopolo and any other competing products before deciding on this one. Why it did not happen. You know exactly what happens behind the scene. Having said that, i am NOT saying that Marcopolos are better quality than the AL buses KerRTC procured, or that KeRTC made a bad choice.
teamveevee is offline  
Old 26th October 2009, 12:05   #1722
Senior - BHPian
 
Ashley2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NH7
Posts: 2,092
Thanked: 1,439 Times
Default

I would like to add these points:

1. SLF buses from AL has two floor heights 635mm and 860mm. The former is a RE and the later is a FE configuration.This will further be refered as E+1 and E+2.
2.The one supplied to KeSRTC are E+1 type with 12m buses with H series 6DTI with 167 BHP BS III.
3.AL has a standard for RE buses both E+0 (DTC buses) and E+1 (KeSRTC RE SLF) with design rights from Foton corporation, Beiqi. I would also like to add that this company has no business to do with these buses apart from body design. The complete body is built from AL's state of art Alwar plant which has all the facilities for building complete bus.So kindly do not mention these as chinese buses.(dont view this as a cheap chinese product)
Any + or - related to fit and finese of these buses solely rests with AL and not with chinese company.
3.There exists a similarity between the buses supplied to WBSRTC,MTC, KeSRTC as they are SLF with E+2 step entry.These are built by various body builders with common point as only the head lights been borrowed from AL's NewGen Cabs (insisted by AL).
4.For E+0 and E+1 buses the only appoved supplier so for is only Veera.With complete directions from AL.(even though built by AL in alwar due to time constraints and higher volums few are out sourced to body builders)
5.I would also like to mention that we are often mistaking vaccum formed PP panels to FRP panels. These vaccum formed panels are mostly used in tourist buses as these are costlier materials and has a better look and feel compared to FRP. we can see these materials covering side panels, the portion below the storage racks and even door panels.FRP panels used mostly in City buses. So these material's texture, finish and feel will definetely vary.
6.With respect to KeSRTC going for Volvo B7RLE is because since all the metros are having Volvos (atlest A/C buses )and opting to go for Volvos and its a matter of prestige for them to go for, without even trying them since its been already plying in other cities.
Ashley2 is offline  
Old 26th October 2009, 18:43   #1723
Senior - BHPian
 
binaiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: KL-47 // KA-51
Posts: 1,726
Thanked: 823 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
True. That is exactly what i said, there is no "Standard". Defenitely WBSTC buses looks different, Not seen MTC ones
I repeat - you are comparing apples to oranges.

I would like you to explain how can a company design a front engined bus and a rear-engined bus alike.

My earlier statement clearly said that this body is a standard. Given the fact that this is a rear-engine bus, it is but obvious that the standard is for rear-engine buses. The buses supplied to all other cities were front-engined versions, and all those buses look similar (there are variations - like placement of wipers/front-destination boards, etc).

So, in short, there is a standard. The body shown in the pic is a standard for rear-engine buses, and the ones supplied to WBSTC/MTC is a standard for front-engine buses. Period.
binaiks is offline  
Old 26th October 2009, 22:28   #1724
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kottayam
Posts: 1,081
Thanked: 153 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley2 View Post
I would like to add these points:
Thanks AshLey2. That explains it all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley2 View Post
3.AL has a standard for RE buses both E+0 (DTC buses) and E+1 (KeSRTC RE SLF) with design rights from Foton corporation, Beiqi. I would also like to add that this company has no business to do with these buses apart from body design
Let me ask a stupid question Ashley, Since AL already has a relationship with Irizar, why did they go with a Chinese company for this design instead of using an existing Irizar design. The R&D team of AL/TVS/Irizar could not come up with a body design in time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley2 View Post
6.With respect to KeSRTC going for Volvo B7RLE is because since all the metros are having Volvos (atlest A/C buses )and opting to go for Volvos and its a matter of prestige for them to go for, without even trying them since its been already plying in other cities.
Totally agree with you on this. Does anybody buy a car with out a test drive. When it comes to public money it is okay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by binaiks View Post
I repeat - you are comparing apples to oranges.
Thanks Binaiks, Let us move on. AshLey explained the situation very well.
teamveevee is offline  
Old 27th October 2009, 12:03   #1725
Senior - BHPian
 
Ashley2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NH7
Posts: 2,092
Thanked: 1,439 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
Thanks AshLey2. That explains it all.

Let me ask a stupid question Ashley, Since AL already has a relationship with Irizar, why did they go with a Chinese company for this design instead of using an existing Irizar design. The R&D team of AL/TVS/Irizar could not come up with a body design in time?
I am quite sure its not a stupid question.Even that puzzles me.With Irizar in hand why should AL join hands with another comapny for the same business.I believe the Traingular JV between AL,Irizar and TVS started much early in 2003 or so. But we hardly see fully build buses from this stable. There are few Travels operator in TN like Senthamarai (Contract operator to TCS, Satyam,Ford and TVS) Sri Bagyalakshmi Travels who prefers Irizar bodies. Apart from that mostly they are used for only exports.

But I can very well confirm that AL's is serious about Luxura project and the product is been given in their 2009-10 product matrix.
Can anyone shoot the pictures of APSRTC owned Luxura's. It will be welcome.
Ashley2 is offline  
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
SCOOP : Nissan Commercial Vehicle spotted testing EDIT : Now as Ashok Leyland trammway Commercial Vehicles 40 31st May 2013 11:15
Heavy Commercial Vehicle Sales slowing down. Recessionary Trend? anjan_c2007 Commercial Vehicles 6 7th March 2013 16:20
Volvo-Eicher JV to plan new commercial vehicle portfolio DukeNukem Commercial Vehicles 1 16th September 2012 07:29
The Light and Small Commercial Vehicle Thread kadri007 Commercial Vehicles 136 20th April 2012 09:21
Commercial vehicle dealerships! raj_5004 Commercial Vehicles 1 9th April 2010 17:45


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 20:37.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks