[teamveevee]

Originally Posted by binaiks

Do you still prefer compare the two buses? If Yes, I have no comments. I'd have a comment only when the comparison is equal.

No, we are not comparing the buses. We are comparing the need. Do we really need all the bells and whistles. I think BMTC did the right thing here, and we should appeciate the management for this.

[Trapezio]

I understand both your posts completely Binaiks. I agree with your comparison too.

Its good that finally someone in BMTC realised that all cannot afford their Volvo services.

The logic that Marco AC buses will eat into Volvo services is the crucial clue. Obviously people will find the Marco AC buses + low fare combination better than Volvo AC bus + high fare combination. Isn't that the same as VFM? At the end of the day the normal travellers are the judges here.

The point is we cannot compare a Marco and a Volvo like a Porche 911 Turbo vs Lamborghini Gallardo test in Autocar UK.

Also again on the Marco AC not being allowed to eat into Volvo routes, I wonder isn't BMTC ruthless in its policies to make profit? I mean this is a state sponsored organisation for people's sake and they purposefully does not offer cheaper options in Volvo routes? That reminds me of Microsoft actually! Once I had to stay in Raja Rajeshwari Nagar in Bangalore as a student. I remember that since it was a new layout BMTC establised a depot and filled it with Pushpaks (their premium service till some time before). That was the end point and all including students simply didn't have any other option. Hey aren't they trying to make profit simply by muscling their passengers.

I am not surprised that BMTC makes profits. But I hope other metros do not blindly follow their policies.

Anyway...

Tata does offer Marco in 250 hp. I know it from the company brochure itself.

Tata has publicly said that they have not made a single paisa profit from this city bus business. As of today they are bleeding money on that. They plan that the rapid technology acquisition in the process will help them to compete with Mercedes/Scania/Volvo (the global leaders in that order) in international market. That is also one reason that Marcos are so much more cheaper. If I understand right, Marco offers every individual feature (operator can specify, if he does not thats a different issue) except for kneeling suspension. Instead Marco offeres 7 ground clearances! Also they say kneeling suspension will be quite expensive to maintain in the long run - it is logical since its more complex. Also its not that popular an option in international markets. Here with Volvo we cannot change anything in the package.

But perhaps Binaiks have more specific info on feature to feature comparison of Tata and Volvo.

I agree with teamveevee here. We should compare the needs. This is not a Porche vs Lambo question!

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by Trapezio

Tata has publicly said that they have not made a single paisa profit from this city bus business. As of today they are bleeding money on that. They plan that the rapid technology acquisition in the process will help them to compete with Mercedes/Scania/Volvo (the global leaders in that order) in international market. That is also one reason that Marcos are so much more cheaper.

Should that matter to us? If Tata decided to sleep for decades without much improvement in technology/passenger comfort and suddenly wake up with Volvo's entry then that's their mistake. Let them pay the price for missing the opportunity.

[Trapezio]

Originally Posted by kiku007

Should that matter to us? If Tata decided to sleep for decades without much improvement in technology/passenger comfort and suddenly wake up with Volvo's entry then that's their mistake. Let them pay the price for missing the opportunity.

Thats a very simplistic view.

Do you really think that if they came with a 40 lakh city bus in 70s we all would have lapped it up? That was a different era. Also Indian manufacturers still struggle (I mean literally) to get global component manufacturers to supply for them.

Also they have woken up before Volvo's entry. This Marco Polo was not made overnight by a stroke of luck. It took them six years to do that.

Volvo is able to offer that thing at 80 lakhs for just a hundred units per year because their main market is Europe. An Indian manufacturer will go bankrupt even if he is at par with Volvo in technologies with at max 800 units a year. This is simple business reality.

If making buses and trucks was so easy why didn't Volvo make a India specific bus or truck till now? After all they are here for ten years and all this sales is happening right under their nose!

They had to chase first Hero, then Eicher to get a foothold! Why do you think they did that if technology is the only issue here?

[hvkumar]

Entirely agree with Trapezio.

Indian bus manufacturers Tata and Leyland have come up with several innovations - looks like some here have short memories - whether it is vestibuled buses, rear-engined vehicles, multi-axled trucks, and so on. In no other South East Asian country do local companies rule the roost the way they do in India.

Volvo's history in India is nothing to write home about - what happened t their FH12 and FM7 trucks/ tippers - who buys them any more? Getting corrupt STUs to buy a few luxury buses? Has anyone seen their financials - they must be bleeding money despite charging exorbitant prices for buses who have features which we can do without.

The main market for buses were (and still is) is the STUs and the largely State-owned city bus companies, all of whom have severe fund constraints and rightly so, bought buses that served the basic purpose of transporting poor people from A to B. State funds are best used for providing janata public transport and not in subsidising the rich going around in expensive Volvos and Mercs.

Keep up the good work, Tata Motors and Ashok Leyland

[kiku007]

@ Trapezio - That's an detailed reply, thanks! But

1. Could you please clarify if the Marcopolo is an entire Tata effort? Doesn't it have anything to do with marcopolo from Brazil? Pls correct me if I'm wrong.
2. Nobody wanted a 40L City bus/60L intercity bus in the 70s;they wanted it in the 21st century, volvo sells them and people buy it
3. Apart from about the cost, can we raise anyother flag against the volvo? (We hear fire scare in Tata buses in Delhi)
4. In what way does the volvo buses doesn't suit the Indians that they need a Indian specific vehicle?

@ hvkumar - The Govt is for the rich and the poor. Same way their STUs are for all classes. What is wrong in providing subsidised first class comfort public transport to the masses who are anyways paying the taxes?

P.S: With all due respect to Tata and AL for their innovations, from a commuter point of view the Volvos rock and I'm ready to pay the extra buck for that. In a globalised world we still can't be protective about our homegrown manufactures. Times have changed and they better keep up with the times. Tata did change their passenger car business afterall!

[Trapezio]

Originally Posted by kiku007

@ Trapezio - That's an detailed reply, thanks! But

1. Could you please clarify if the Marcopolo is an entire Tata effort? Doesn't it have anything to do with marcopolo from Brazil? Pls correct me if I'm wrong.
2. Nobody wanted a 40L City bus/60L intercity bus in the 70s;they wanted it in the 21st century, volvo sells them and people buy it
3. Apart from about the cost, can we raise anyother flag against the volvo? (We hear fire scare in Tata buses in Delhi)
4. In what way does the volvo buses doesn't suit the Indians that they need a Indian specific vehicle?

@ hvkumar - The Govt is for the rich and the poor. Same way their STUs are for all classes. What is wrong in providing subsidised first class comfort public transport to the masses who are anyways paying the taxes?

P.S: With all due respect to Tata and AL for their innovations, from a commuter point of view the Volvos rock and I'm ready to pay the extra buck for that. In a globalised world we still can't be protective about our homegrown manufactures. Times have changed and they better keep up with the times. Tata did change their passenger car business afterall!

1.
Marco Polo is not a bus manufacturer! They make vibration free bodies on chassis supplied. If you supply a LP 1510 they will do the job for you. But the main technical challenge is the chassis. Thats why we have ten times more body builders than chassis manufacturers.

2.
Volvo buses are great. There is no doubt. But it does not make a Tata any less great for the asked price. Also it does not mean that Tata/AL can be wished off just like that.

3.
Apart for the cost can anybody raise a flag against a Rolls-Royce? Does that mean that we keep buying them for public usage? So obviously price is a factor right? And not a small one too?

4.
I was speaking about Volvo Trucks and Buses company in India. They have been claiming India specific products from the last ten years. Where is it? It definitely can't be the 500 citybuses they make. Thats not enough to ferry our rich around (assuming that Volvo buses are for the rich as you implied)!

Why are they relying on a technologically backward Indian company in the local market if they are so ahead in technology?

There is no question of protection here. If you are willing to travel on these Volvos its good for you because they provide amazing comfort.

But as an enthusiast (not as a average commuter) I was trying to understand why certain things are the way they are.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by Trapezio

1.

But as an enthusiast (not as a average commuter) I was trying to understand why certain things are the way they are.

True and I agree to this.

BTW the mention on Volvo for the rich was from hvkumar.

[kadri007]

[quote=kiku007;1635515]@ Trapezio - That's an detailed reply, thanks! But

1. Could you please clarify if the Marcopolo is an entire Tata effort? Doesn't it have anything to do with marcopolo from Brazil? Pls correct me if I'm wrong.
quote]

Yes its the same Brazil company, Tata has tied up with them and these buses are manufactured in Tata Motors Hubli plant in Karnataka.

[Trapezio]

Originally Posted by kiku007

True and I agree to this.

BTW the mention on Volvo for the rich was from hvkumar.

Apologies...

Didn't mean to point you personally.

[kiku007]

Taken in the right spirit dude

I sincerely wish that the Indian manufactures offer the benefits of their acquisition abroad, say for eg. Tata-Daewoo. It's really cool to see those MAN trucks on the highways

[kadri007]

When BMTC launched its Volvo services in Bangalore. It was targeted at car commuters. The intention was car users take the bus and reduce the traffic on road.

I think the different service offerings coming from BMTC or any others is largely focused at reducing traffic and increasing comfort levels of commuters.

Now you have a choice on what to choose as per your budget and requirement.

[teamveevee]

Thank you so much Trapezio for your comments,

Originally Posted by kiku007

2. Nobody wanted a 40L City bus/60L intercity bus in the 70s;they wanted it in the 21st century, volvo sells them and people buy it

We are not complaining about Kallada, Sharma or Shama buying Volvo buses. We are talking about loss making state owned transport corporations buying 80 L buses for city transport.

The Govt is for the rich and the poor. Same way their STUs are for all classes. What is wrong in providing subsidised first class comfort public transport to the masses who are anyways paying the taxes?

Govt is for rich and poor, agree, but as a middle class citizen, the tax i am paying is not to provide subsidized transportation to the rich, but to improve the road infrastructure etc. that benefits both rich and poor.

from a commuter point of view the Volvos rock and I'm ready to pay the extra buck for that.

If there are enough people like you who are ready to pay extra bucks, i dont have any problem with that. But the fare should be enough to cover the cost. But the news paper reports tells a different story. Right now, There are not enough people like you who are willing to pay extra bucks for a premium city service.

[kadri007]

Originally Posted by teamveevee

Thank you so much Trapezio for your comments,

We are not complaining about Kallada, Sharma or Shama buying Volvo buses. We are talking about loss making state owned transport corporations buying 80 L buses for city transport.
Govt is for rich and poor, agree, but as a middle class citizen, the tax i am paying is not to provide subsidized transportation to the rich, but to improve the road infrastructure etc. that benefits both rich and poor.
If there are enough people like you who are ready to pay extra bucks, i dont have any problem with that. But the fare should be enough to cover the cost. But the news paper reports tells a different story. Right now, There are not enough people like you who are willing to pay extra bucks for a premium city service.

One more reason for City Volvo's running in losses is they are not being utilized efficiently. If you visit the BMTC Volvo Depot near Hebbal in Bangalore at around 6/7. You can find many buses parked after finishing the trip.

Which means when commuters wait for the buses, there are no buses. Also i have seen these buses keep changing thier time. Hence people dont rely on it. There is no advertisment on the routes or the timings.

Many times the traffic controllers themselves have no idea when the bus is coming.

I feel it will take some time even for the goverment to realise it and stream line it.

[BaCkSeAtDrIVeR]

Originally Posted by kiku007

2. Nobody wanted a 40L City bus/60L intercity bus in the 70s;they wanted it in the 21st century, volvo sells them and people buy it

Up to 1987, when the new Motor Vehicles Act came in, charging differential fares was unthinkable. It was very regulated market then.

In the context of a regulated market, innovations brought in my AL (AL was more innovative back then than Tatas) where revolutionary.

How many know that Ford had tried to enter the Indian Heavy vehicle segment in aroung 1980? They failed for several reasons; one of them being India was not prepared for the synchromesh gear box.

What is wrong in providing subsidised first class comfort public transport to the masses who are anyways paying the taxes?

Most States levy stratospheric taxes, levied at per passenger per quarter rates on "stage carriages" - that is what the city service buses are called legally.

In Kerala, it is Rs. 600/690 per quarter - see MVD, Department

There is a thread by Samurai on his woes registering his M&M jeep; I had posted the KA rates in that thread - cannot find it right now.

Originally Posted by Trapezio

1.
Marco Polo is not a bus manufacturer! They make vibration free bodies on chassis supplied.

As I understand the heavy passenger vehicle business, this appears to be the general trend all over the world - somebody third party builds the body according to the specifications of the operator.

One should re-read the small print in most news releases - bodies for Volvo buses are built by "foo" and "bar" builds bodies for Mercs,,, etc. Even Tata's bodies are built by an independent entity - the ACGL, which however is a JV between Tatas and Goa.

Bus body building is essentially a fabrication job - bending some MS angles / channels / rectangular sections, etc, putting aluminium / GI sheet over it, and painting the whole setup. Even seats are fabricated by the builder, unless in case of luxury / push back seats, which are sourced from Harita Grammer, a TVS group JV. Again, in case of high end vehicles, several components may be sourced from outside - like hydraulic door closers, etc.

Why are they relying on a technologically backward Indian company in the local market if they are so ahead in technology?

See above.

But I doubt that any of the organised bus body builders in India can be called technologically backward.

Originally Posted by kiku007

I sincerely wish that the Indian manufactures offer the benefits of their acquisition abroad, say for eg. Tata-Daewoo. It's really cool to see those MAN trucks on the highways

+1 to that. Even AL has some good looking offerings outside India.

IMHO, it is high time that manufacture of heavy GOODS vehicles is compulsorily brought under the organised sector. Safety is at a premium when the bodies are built in the back yards of the vehicle owners. Just look for a "run under" bar on 10+ tonners, which have custom bodies; while MCVs/ LCVs have them.

Originally Posted by teamveevee

We are not complaining about Kallada, Sharma or Shama buying Volvo buses. We are talking about loss making state owned transport corporations buying 80 L buses for city transport.

Actually, subsidies for public transport is good; from a social PoV, but to be able to claim a transparent, honest, and straightforward taxation policy, you need to levy less taxes on public transport.

BTW, I heard that the windscreen of the Thiruvananthapuram volvos cost 1.5 Lakh. Add another 50K to it, and you will get an entire body fabricated on any other chassis.

Edit:-

Assuming a 75Lakh tag for Volvo buses, and each bus runs 250 KMs per day, cost of interest per vehicle PER day @ 15% per annum works out to a whooping Rs. 3,125.00 per day, or Rs. 12.5 per kilometer.

For a typical hatch costing 5L, the interest per month works out to Rs. 6,250/- per month; and if the owner commutes 20 Kms one way, the interest component per KM of commute is Rs 5/-.

That is a good reason to disfavour the high capital cost vehicles for city commutes.