[sgiitk]

Originally Posted by silversteed

It's not wrong, and I agree to what you said. I was pointing out the flawed statement that only Volvo has a "true bus chassis", which they claim can be achieved only by having the engine at the rear. Volvo does make FE buses too.

Also, I may add that a bus needs to have far less power than a truck. Otherwise, how would they have managed to convert Diesel Buses into CNG Buses with the addition of a simple kit. CNG injection, Spark system, and highly lowered compression. The power loss of 50% would have crippled them.

[Zed]

Originally Posted by satyaanveshi

They had pretty good ride quality too, even on the last seat. Not as good as the Volvos, but still way better than the older buses without air suspension

On smooth roads - yes. When things got bumpy you'd get tossed 3-4 feet in the air if the driver didnt slow down these air-buses sufficiently. Ive experienced this every time I had a last row seat aboard an 'air bus'. In fact it was pretty much the norm that families seated in the last rows would request swapping seats with men sitting in the front rows on account of the women and children finding it hard to adjust to the frequent 'yumps' - to borrow a rallying term.
I vivdly recall an instance where an elderly lady seated in the last but one row started bleeding from a cut in her forehead when she was ejected from her seat, when the bus when over a speed breaker, and came into contact with the overhead storage shelf.

[Ashley2]

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Sorry to disappoint you AshokLeyland2 sir,

Do reply only to post and do not find any kind of expansion for my user name.

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

.... Nothing has changed till date, that is my perception, please feel free to enlighten everyone.

Since you have told its only your perception there is nothing wrong, as every one have their own perception on various things.
And I am in no mood to enlighten.

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Oh No, not just KPN, every other private operator used that term which was actually associated/belonged to an airplane manufacturer. Even in those 'Air Buses', it was impossible to sit in the last 4 rows. I still do not understand people introducing SILLY catch phrases and milking the public.

Unfortunately many people's perception were slightly in favor of the so called Air Bus and so every operator started to use the name.

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Yeah, wonderful, for the munuswamy and the kandaswamy and all the wonderful drivers out there. In what way does it affect me as a normal traveler whether the bus is auto or manual ? I am very sure KPN would have started jacking up the price of tickets saying that their bus is 'Auto Bus' now.

Wish you read the posts completely before throwing away replies. No one spoke its of betterment to passengers. I was speaking of bringing new technologies brought by KPN and that definitely includes AT/AMT.

No way I have compared the Air suspension with Weveller / shackle suspension nor the front engine bus with rear engine. Everything deserves its own value for the money.
If you prefer travelling in Volvo no one stops you, or until you grow up you have much better option of riding your bicycle.
But dont try to reply so generically, pointing so many questions that too with out knowing any kind of basics in CV space - how it has migrated.

I was solely speaking in the advancement in the suspension technology and other modifications made in making a separate chassis for passenger and goods application and its all in the history. For giving such a reply you have dragged a lot and I am still waiting..

[esteem_lover]

Originally Posted by Ashley2

Do reply only to post and do not find any kind of expansion for my user name.

Point taken sir, you already sound like a Mod, only that you do not understand the basic rules of the forum. I am in no way trying to demean you or your knowledge here.

Originally Posted by Ashley2

Since you have told its only your perception there is nothing wrong, as every one have their own perception on various things.
And I am in no mood to enlighten.

Thank you Sir Ashley, now we will also try to understand your "moods" before posting.

Originally Posted by Ashley2

Unfortunately many people's perception were slightly in favor of the so called Air Bus and so every operator started to use the name.

would it also be pertinent to know that there was no other "comfortable "Volvo like" buses " at that time ? At the same time, in this time and age, why should we try to defend this great "Air Bus" as the only thing that we have to accept or move on ?

Originally Posted by Ashley2

Wish you read the posts completely before throwing away replies. No one spoke its of betterment to passengers. I was speaking of bringing new technologies brought by KPN and that definitely includes AT/AMT.

I thought that this thread was for the betterment of passengers, not chicken !!!! And no way KPN brought any new technologies, it was their sources (Ashley) that brought the so called technologies that KPN lapped up.

Originally Posted by Ashley2

If you prefer travelling in Volvo no one stops you, or until you grow up you have much better option of riding your bicycle.

Again, I am sorry sir, I do not intend to be scathing here, I got drawn into this thread only because of some comments of you suggested that Ashley had already brought all the necessary comforts for the passengers (and also the chicken) by way of "Air Buses" and "Auto Buses" and that we should be very happy with that, whatever the other companies bring were looked down upon, then why bother if it is a truck or bus chassis ? I have no idea what's going on here !

[aravind.anand]

Wow! I amused by the ride quality refinement and comfort offered by a multi axle Volvo. This is a definite improvement over the single axle Volvo buses. Is the multi axle version really much more powerful than the single axle bus? Is there a way we can get the specs of these buses? I was blown away at the speed this massive bus zipped through the highway. The driver overtook other trucks, buses and even Innovas with aplomb! Was taken aback during my most recent journey.

PS: All my future road travels will always have a preference for the multi axle Volvos

[binaiks]

Originally Posted by aravind.anand

Wow! I amused by the ride quality refinement and comfort offered by a multi axle Volvo. This is a definite improvement over the single axle Volvo buses. Is the multi axle version really much more powerful than the single axle bus? Is there a way we can get the specs of these buses?

Truly speaking, there isn't any great improvement in Multi-axle buses over single axle buses - especially the newer Multi-axle buses. Their suspensions are much harder than the single axle ones. The best ride quality is offered by Mark1/2 B7Rs.

Single axle buses come with two engine options: 7 litre, 290hp and 9 litre, 340hp. Recently, the Volvo 9100 "Asia Bus" was launched with a 7 litre, 240hp engine.

Multi-Axle buses currently come with a 9 litre 340hp engine. Volvo would commercially launch their new 14.5m long 9400PX, with a 11 litre, 380hp engine.

[ramzsys]

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

At the same time, in this time and age, why should we try to defend this great "Air Bus" as the only thing that we have to accept or move on ?

It can be a preference over soft vs a little stiff ride. I, for example feel sick in the wavy ride of the Volvo, so i prefer an AL airbus.

AL had this harsh engine sounds, but with the turbocharged engines, engine sound had been deadened to a considerable level: BS III engine sounds are comparable to car engines!

Even in a Volvo, the engine is pretty audible in the last row of seats.

Maybe, i-shift is a better engineered word than leymatic(''autobus'')

[teamveevee]

Driving into future: Ashok Leyland

The bus market in India — which saw 98,673 units (including big buses and small ones) sold in 2011-12 versus 92,754 in the previous year — is undergoing a significant transformation. Earlier, travellers in India primarily considered cost as the fundamental determining factor in the decision-making process of which bus to board. Now, comfort, along with safety and reliability is a priority, says Abdul Majeed, analyst with PwC India, which explains Volvo’s rise to prominence in the luxury end of the spectrum. The key driver for all of these is technology, something that industry observers say both AL and as its competitor Tata are not up to speed with, at least vis-a-vis their global competitors.

[Autokrat]

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Again, I am sorry sir, I do not intend to be scathing here, I got drawn into this thread only because of some comments of you suggested that Ashley had already brought all the necessary comforts for the passengers (and also the chicken) by way of "Air Buses" and "Auto Buses" and that we should be very happy with that, whatever the other companies bring were looked down upon, then why bother if it is a truck or bus chassis ? I have no idea what's going on here !

I thought the debate was about whether volvo's claim in India about having a so called "true bus chassis" is really true. Sorry to say the further on the debate started to sound more like a one to one argument.

I wish to make a point that the implied meaning in volvos talk calling front engined buses as "truck chassis" sounds more of a clever talk since this hides the fact the volvo continues to manufacture and sell Front engined chassis in other markets like South America (that too with leaf spring suspension). Pl check out the pic below which was posted by me earlier.

In India they chose the segment of luxury high end buses since in the regular bus segment they probabaly realised they cannot compete with established players like AL / Tata on price.

To the question of why AL / TATA have not agressively pursued this segment - I believe this has something to do with the economics of investment Vs returns as the luxury bus segment where volvo dominates constitutes only about 2% of the total passenger market. Even MAN has chosen to enter the bus segment starting with a FE version.

[esteem_lover]

Originally Posted by Autokrat

I thought the debate was about whether volvo's claim in India about having a so called "true bus chassis" is really true. Sorry to say the further on the debate started to sound more like a one to one argument.

I am sorry, NO, the topic started was about how Volvo changed the way we look and took after bus travels. Maybe some people veered OFF topic to include that, which is fine.

Ashley or AL might have all the technologies in their bag (if some of you say so), but they did not unleash them until they were threatened. Even when they were truly challenged, they have failed to come up with a truly competitive challenge to the VOLVO. Maruti (a Govt company) was challenged with a plethora of brands and cars, but still holds sway over the competitors, not by way of lower technology leading to lower costs, but way of equal technology at a competitive price. Ashleys and Tatas have had a much longer run in India than Maruti and their competition is much much lesser, if they cannot wake up now, they never will.

[Autokrat]

Originally Posted by esteem_lover

Maruti (a Govt company) was challenged with a plethora of brands and cars, but still holds sway over the competitors, not by way of lower technology leading to lower costs, but way of equal technology at a competitive price.

it would be worth noting that Maruti "SUZUKI" is still present only in the massmarket segment and the premium segments (10 lakh plus) occupied by audi's bmw's mercs and so on. Maruti went beyond the 800s and the 1000 once Hyundai, Ford and GM came in. Like Volvo, BMW could make a similar claim that our's is a true car with the safety and comfort features which the Alto's or the Wagon R does not have.

To sum up the AL's and the TATA's are the Alto's and Wagon R's & the Volvo is the BMW. IMHO there is a need and space for both in the market.