[amitpunjani]

Hi Bhpian's

Lately i have been seen alot of buses with rear engines on Road. Infact all the buses built by Volvo's, Kinglong or that matter Mercedes are rear engine.
I would appreciate if somebody could put a light on this, what advantages a rear engine bus would have when compared to front engine buses?

Thanks

Amit

[McLaren Rulez]

Guessing only, but there is less noise overall in RE buses from what I've experienced. Not entirely sure why it is so though. Also, buses are RWD so engine at the back gives less power loss and more traction too.

[neoonwheels]

May be minimum loss of power in case of RE buses? Do not need to have long shaft and then differentials etc. Just a guess.

[amitpunjani]

Hi

But what i don't understand how well are the Rear engine buses compliant with the alternate fuel (CNG buses) as front engine buses have an advantage of natural air cooling as well. Being the engine in rear i think there is hardly an scope of natural air coming in.

[Technocrat]

Well the biggest benefit is that they are less noisy & create more usable space in front than at rear.

The Volvo & other buses these days are Turbo Diesels So they are really not that much impacted when placed at rear.

[gpa]

The rear engined Volvo buses also permits a larger luggage compartment between the front and the rear.

Apart from being lower on the decibel levels as Technocrat mentioned, I feel that the rear engined bus has a lot more grunt as it transmits all of its massive torque directly to the rear wheels.

[sgiitk]

The biggest benefit of the rear engined buses is that the floor of the passenger compartment can be much lower. Far easier to get on and off.

Also, the current buses on the truck chassis, have an engine far more powerful than required (that is why they could stand up to the power loss in the diesel to CNG conversion). The springing etc. is very different.

[kpbhatt]

Cant this be discussed in the commercial vehicles thread ? Mods please merge

[kuttapan]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Also, the current buses on the truck chassis, have an engine far more powerful than required (that is why they could stand up to the power loss in the diesel to CNG conversion). The springing etc. is very different.

First of all, when did buses start appearing in the Indian car scene?

And which model would that be, from Leyland/Tata? The max power of any of these buses would be around 125bhp, give or take 10bhp. How can these be called more powerful than required? Especially when you consider Volvo buses which have 250 or so(don't remember) bhp.

There used to be a time when buses used to be built on Comet(truck) chasis, but those days are long gone. From Leyland, the Cheetah/Viking series are built especially for buses. Tata also used to use common chasis in 1210/1510 series for buses and trucks, but I am sure they would have bus specific chasis as well(the Hispano globus is what comes to mind, but I am sure there are others as well).

Have you been reading many Malayalam dailies?

[ajaysurfs]

As already discussed, Noise - vibrations are far less in a RE bus, as the propeller shaft doesn't run all along and the noise/smell is not carried over to the passenger cabin (through air) as the bus moves forward.

[Mpower]

Originally Posted by ajaysurfs

As already discussed, Noise - vibrations are far less in a RE bus, as the propeller shaft doesn't run all along and the noise/smell is not carried over to the passenger cabin (through air) as the bus moves forward.

This is the biggest advantage IMO. The long prop also kills the cargo area. RE buses have huge cargo bays that go from one side to another.

In a city bus the passenger compartment can be brought down like sgiitk says to make it a low floor bus...... since cargo bay is not necessary.

[for_cars1]

Originally Posted by gpa

The rear engined Volvo buses also permits a larger luggage compartment between the front and the rear.

Apart from being lower on the decibel levels as Technocrat mentioned, I feel that the rear engined bus has a lot more grunt as it transmits all of its massive torque directly to the rear wheels.

Originally Posted by sgiitk

The biggest benefit of the rear engined buses is that the floor of the passenger compartment can be much lower. Far easier to get on and off.

One of the major benefits from the passengers perspective is a rear engined bus eliminates the bumpy ride at the rear.(experienced by the rear passengers in a front engined bus). The weight of the engine stabilizes the rear and it doesn't jump up tossing everyone at the back when going on humps.
So rear passengers enjoy a (relatively) fatigue free travel.

[HKS]

The biggest advantage of the RE is the CG. The centre of gravity of the car could be lowered with the help of RE. As the front engine will have to be placed higher than the rear engine, thus reducing stability and there are less losses and weight reduction too, because of no propeller shaft.

[asethi]

Originally Posted by kuttapan

And which model would that be, from Leyland/Tata? The max power of any of these buses would be around 125bhp, give or take 10bhp. How can these be called more powerful than required? Especially when you consider Volvo buses which have 250 or so(don't remember) bhp.

250 bhp? dude volvo buses are 400+ bhp! That's the reason they are faster than the fast cars on the highways!

[nitrous]

Originally Posted by asethi

250 bhp? dude volvo buses are 400+ bhp! That's the reason they are faster than the fast cars on the highways!

I dont think so.
Can someone post the complete tech specs of the Volvo B7R?