[binaiks]

Originally Posted by silversteed

But what I do not understand is, if there really is such a rule, then how is Volvo able to sell its 8400?

The Volvo 8400s were exempt from relevant sections of Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules 1989, by a notification issued by the Transport Department. Here is the gazette notification to this respect.

There were multiple "violations" of the rules - including backward facing seats, non provision of a full length partition for the driver (which is a must for Stage carriages), non-standard seat layout, etc.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by silversteed

I'd read that in Kerala, there is/was a rule that the front door should be behind the front axle, and for that reason, KeSRTC had to modify the bodies of one entire batch of buses.

But what I do not understand is, if there really is such a rule, then how is Volvo able to sell its 8400?

Originally Posted by binaiks

The Volvo 8400s were exempt from relevant sections of Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules 1989, by a notification issued by the Transport Department. Here is the gazette notification to this respect.

There were multiple "violations" of the rules - including backward facing seats, non provision of a full length partition for the driver (which is a must for Stage carriages), non-standard seat layout, etc.

Is it fair to call them "violations" when the rules are not being updated with the evolving motor vehicles, transport needs, passenger safety and comfort etc.?

However why the Volvos were exempted and another batch of KeSTRC buses had to be modified is a open question.

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

This is more a marketing thing than technical thing.

"Run down the competition before throwing it out".

I was asked to clarify what I mean by this in a PM. :-D

We have always seen this all over - it called "giving a dog a bad name before killing it". Highlight minor problems with something you do not like; and then run it down. I guess this is what is happening with AL. Somebody does not like AL.

So minor problems get highlighted. And major issues get swept under the carpet.

Paradoxically, we saw it in the spectrum issues - the corrupt get away scott free, while a lady who was doing a legitimate (lobbying, at least in other countries, is legal) business is behind the bars. It is paradoxical because it is Tatas which is at the receiving end in that case.

Originally Posted by silversteed

@Ashley2, what was the issue that the MTC found with the Marcopolos? Is it regarding the positioning of the front door?

I'd read that in Kerala, there is/was a rule that the front door should be behind the front axle, and for that reason, KeSRTC had to modify the bodies of one entire batch of buses.

Not sure that such a rule exists in KL. Cannot recall reading it. May be, my memory is plain bad. Will check and get back in couple of days. Almost all TVS - Irizar built bodies had their front doors in front of the front wheel. And several continue to do so.

But what I do not understand is, if there really is such a rule, then how is Volvo able to sell its 8400?

Not just the Volvo - all SLF / LF buses have the front doors this way.

Originally Posted by kiku007

Is it fair to call them "violations" when the rules are not be updated with the evolving motor vehicles, transport needs, passenger safety and comfort etc.?

However why the Volvos were exempted and another batch of KeSTRC buses had to be modified is a open question.

Very valid questions.

One rule that is seldom enforced in KL is the one regarding seat width and spacing between the seats - legroom.

[silversteed]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Not sure that such a rule exists in KL. Cannot recall reading it. May be, my memory is plain bad. Will check and get back in couple of days. Almost all TVS - Irizar built bodies had their front doors in front of the front wheel. And several continue to do so.

Not just the Volvo - all SLF / LF buses have the front doors this way.

I know that Exclude SLF from the list though.

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Very valid questions.

One rule that is seldom enforced in KL is the one regarding seat width and spacing between the seats - legroom.

That's a plain fact. I remember travelling in a Palakkad-Thrissur (private) bus which actually had 2+2 arrangement but an additional single seat was added to each row on the right making it 2+3. And on that fateful day, there was some checking in the Palakkad town, and they were charged for overloading, violating permit and many other offenses. One cop actually got inside the bus and had a peek. The bus would have had at least 55 people sitting IIRC. It was the regular size Viking, and not a 12M. Happened 3-4 years back

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by silversteed

...a Palakkad-Thrissur (private) bus which actually had 2+2 arrangement but an additional single seat was added to each row on the right making it 2+3. And on that fateful day, there was some checking in the Palakkad town, and they were charged for overloading, violating permit and many other offenses. One cop actually got inside the bus and had a peek. The bus would have had at least 55 people sitting IIRC. It was the regular size Viking, and not a 12M. Happened 3-4 years back

Heheh. This is common on long distance (FP, LSFP, express) buses. The vehicle is 2x2 when registered; 2x2 when the annual "test work" is done, and 2x2 when inspection happens. Whiel on on the road, it always 2x3.

Taxes are on basis of seats, so this is common.

OTOH, in short distance, city service buses, reverse happens - vehicles will have 2-3 seats in 2x3 configuration. This particularly true in older vehicles, where one of condition for grant of permits when competition was there for the permit was nubmer of seats. Once the vehicle is on road, the seats would vanish or one or two seats would face the side. This gives more standing room.

Explanation - long distance passengers would not want to stand, and short distance would not care about standing.

[julupani]

@BaCkSeAtDrIVeR
Do you mean to say that TML does negative marketing directly targeting ALL in anyway??

I completely doubt this, especially considering the fact the numbers that TML is garnering compared to ALL. And please lets not make such baseless and most likely proofless comments. Lets stick to a discussion of products and not get into any discussion about how ethically companies are run or not.

[binaiks]

Originally Posted by kiku007

Is it fair to call them "violations" when the rules are not being updated with the evolving motor vehicles, transport needs, passenger safety and comfort etc.?

IMHO, it is "fair" to call them a "violation" of the rule. The KMV was recently updated - especially following a fire accident in Kerala. The rules were modified to ensure that there is a full width metal partition between the driver "cabin" and the passenger section, and that the battery should not be placed inside the passenger section.

Originally Posted by kiku007

However why the Volvos were exempted and another batch of KeSTRC buses had to be modified is a open question.

The Volvos (and SLFs) were exempt, since these buses were built according to AIS 052. This was mandated by the JnNURM funding norms. Since KeSRTC had no option but purchase these buses, and hence they applied to the Transport Department for an exemption.

Now, the question why KeSRTC did not adopt the same design as the TN ones could be raised. However, KeSRTC went for RE models, and a door behind the rear axle is out of question. The JnNURM norms wanted buses to have two doors, and its not good to have two doors between the axles.

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

Not sure that such a rule exists in KL. Cannot recall reading it. May be, my memory is plain bad. Will check and get back in couple of days. Almost all TVS - Irizar built bodies had their front doors in front of the front wheel. And several continue to do so.

I guess the amendments to the KMV only says that the driver should have a full width metal partition. Perhaps this could result in not having a door ahead of the front axle.

Originally Posted by julupani

Do you mean to say that TML does negative marketing directly targeting ALL in anyway??

I guess BSD only meant "someone" does not like AL - that doesn't mean "a company" does not like AL. Back in the mid 2000s, when the new MD of BEST took charge, his first priority was to badmouth AL, and he went in for TATA buses in the CNG segment. (Not that I say the TATAs are a bad product) Now, BEST is back to ALL.

The recent newsreport about "bad products" from ALL is only "a mountain out of a molehill", and it solely intended at badmouthing the product.

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by binaiks

I guess BSD only meant "someone" does not like AL - that doesn't mean "a company" does not like AL. Back in the mid 2000s, when the new MD of BEST took charge, his first priority was to badmouth AL, and he went in for TATA buses in the CNG segment. (Not that I say the TATAs are a bad product) Now, BEST is back to ALL.

The recent newsreport about "bad products" from ALL is only "a mountain out of a molehill", and it solely intended at badmouthing the product.

Thanks - that appropriately sums it up.

[Ashley2]

Originally Posted by BaCkSeAtDrIVeR

I was asked to clarify what I mean by this in a PM. :-D

We have always seen this all over - it called "giving a dog a bad name before killing it". Highlight minor problems with something you do not like; and then run it down. I guess this is what is happening with AL. Somebody does not like AL.
So minor problems get highlighted. And major issues get swept under the carpet.

Originally Posted by julupani

@BaCkSeAtDrIVeR
Do you mean to say that TML does negative marketing directly targeting ALL in anyway??

Thats right said by BSD.
Here we are not speaking about TML but to people who are misleading the forums and hijacking the threads.

Originally Posted by julupani

I completely doubt this, especially considering the fact the numbers that TML is garnering compared to ALL.

This is the exact problem. Just by seeing the numbers everything is concluded and the actual user experience is completely neglected.
Though I have a huge rspect for TM in various aspects it cannot be at the expense of AL's tradition.

[binaiks]

Originally Posted by julupani

My statement meant that if my company had 60+% overall market share, I would definitely not go out and resort to negative marketing.

Why would it not resort to such marketing? (I am not claiming they are, but the question is still valid). It wouldn't hurt if they could garner 65% share by such marketing. And, no company is a re-incarnation of Harishchandra.

As stated earlier, there is no talk of a company trying to malign another company, but a few individuals bad-mouthing a product for their own, perhaps, monetary aims. I guess its time we left this talk here, and proceed with the topic.

[Ashley2]

Looking at last years sales consolidation in trucks segment TM has sold more than last year. But in the bus segment TM has got a lower sales numbers 16850 aganist 15012 last year. But intrestingly AL has maintained its leadership by selling 18837 aganist 15298. My point is its almost known that TM has started mass producing Marcopolos in a larger numbers and all the STU orders are catered with MP only. But as largely cited why was not TM able to over come AL in numbers. I see no reason as how AL is maintaining supremacy over TM

[kamboj]

Mods, please use your discretion in approval.

Talking about TML vs AL, a few years back I had interaction with some AL employees. They described AL superiority over TML in a very funny way (note: This is gender neutral and not intended to offend any gender)

As per them a TATA bus is like a spouse, if you take a great care in handling it, it will serve you well. While AL bus is like a pro*****te it will take all the abuse and still serve you well.

[julupani]

Ashley: Source of your info???

I ask because I have never yet seen any sales figures of TML separating out buses from trucks, either L/ICVs or M/HCVs.

[Ashley2]

Originally Posted by kamboj

As per them a TATA bus is like a spouse, if you take a great care in handling it, it will serve you well. While AL bus is like a pro*****te it will take all the abuse and still serve you well.

That's a consolidation in deed.
But too funny

Originally Posted by julupani

Ashley: Source of your info???

I ask because I have never yet seen any sales figures of TML separating out buses from trucks, either L/ICVs or M/HCVs.

SIAM sales data!

[julupani]

Do the above number's include LCV/ICV buses too or just the MCV/HCV buses only??

Because if its the 2nd option I am not at all surprised. Remember last year JNNURM orders, which is where Tata has had a major advantage, were not as high as previous years. And in the chassis only market, AL has a big lead.

Also if you see in the high HP long range bus chassis, AL has a even bigger lead. It is here that the buses get replaced more often. While with Tata buses, are operated by the smaller operators, not catering to the high end intercity market. Here the pace of replacement is much slower, thus denting the sales of Tata.

Though if the figures include LCV/ICV buses too, then I have to say I am a bit shocked too at the sales figures.

Another possibility, though probability is very low, does Tata MarcoPolo Motors Limited show up as a separate company?? This is because, the Dharwad facility is officially not TML but TMML.

OT: If you have independent data for all the manufacturer's sales numbers, it would be nice to see the figures of all the companies some place.