| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
american busing 2
Advanced Member
322 Posts |
 Posted - 03/26/2003 : 12:54:48 PM
|
I have a question for you people. Why did bus makers start making buses that have rear engines? I was always thinking about and now I want a anwser. Thanks alot 
Driver for LaidLaw Transit Services
We carry the nations future.
WE ARE GOING TO WAR WITH IRAQ |
|
|
Rich
Top Member
United States
5768 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2003 : 1:20:07 PM
|
They are heavier duty, have larger windshields, no loud sounds near driver, more engine options, more overall options, better on hills... that's all I can think of right now.
---
School Bus Photos and Links: http://www.schoolbuscentral.com |
 |
|
|
PHW
Top Member
USA
1345 Posts |
Posted - 03/26/2003 : 1:29:12 PM
|
Put a rear engine and a conventional bus side by side. Look at how much of the length of a conventional is taken up by the engine compartment. Look at the rear engine bus and see that the seating extends over where the engine is. Overall the rear engine configuration will have more rows of seats than a conventional the same length. Thus you get more seating with a rear engine type.
PHW
Child Check For Life |
|
|
|
BusFreak
Top Member
USA
798 Posts |
Posted - 03/27/2003 : 8:15:04 PM
|
Lets not forget to mention that a rear engine is better ballanced, and the engine is in the back where the drive wheels are, and therefor doesnt require a long driveshaft which would heat up the floor of the bus.
|
|
|
|
rltinkey
Senior Member
USA
140 Posts |
Posted - 03/28/2003 : 10:43:36 AM
|
I would like to take a shot at this, I am not an engineer but I do know that there is a better power ratio ie. more horse power. The power gain is achieved because there is no transfer power loss because the drive line has been eliminated.
Some of the characteristics of having a rear engine bus is more seating capacity, less tail swing because of the longer wheel base. Response and handling is good. I truely enjoy driving rear engine buses when I have the oportunity to do so.
What we need is to get a (TIC) or mechanic in on this to give a more detailed expanation of rear engine bus design.
Ray The Bus Guy...
|
|
|
|
BPS_Driver
Advanced Member
USA
259 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2003 : 06:16:12 AM
|
A rear engine has many pros and cons.
I persoanlly prefer the rear engine model over any model today for many reasons.
The safety features such as a larger windshield, unobstructed entrance compared to the FE transit models, the less noise from an insulated engine compartment, field of vision is much more enhanced, turning radius is magnificant and of course the capacity is a plus.
The cons though are also impacted when deciding which model to go with. Price is obviously much higher, engine defects while in motion may not always be known until you physically get out of the unit or until another vehicle lets you know- fuel line leaks is a popular one.
Last but not least it all goes back to the common phrase- you what you pay for. Spend more get a better bus. Spend less- good luck.
23 Million safe deliveries a day by all of us |
|
|
|
80-RE4
Top Member
USA
5700 Posts |
Posted - 03/30/2003 : 1:20:31 PM
|
I'm not sure why they started making them, but I'm glad they did. I have an RE. It is so quiet in the front. I have driven an FE before, for a spare, they are loud and give me a headache, I wanted to toss the engine out the door. The Re's also have a much wider stair way, not a spiral one like the FE's. FE's also accumulate more dirt in the driver area because it's harder to sweep out.
I'd rather drive an old RE than a brand new FE.
I love my Amtran RE ;-) |
|
|
|
Gary E. Davis
Active Member
USA
39 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 10:34:53 AM
|
I do not really know, but I cannot see paying an extra $10,000.00 for a bus with the engine in the rear. Everything listed above is true to a point. Take 10 grand and times it by 80 and that is a lot of money for really what? If we had all the money I still do not think I would. That would buy a lot of education for our kids.
gary
Gary E. Davis |
|
|
|
80-RE4
Top Member
USA
5700 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 6:27:55 PM
|
Gary are you serious it really cost 10 grand more for a rear engine bus?
I love my Amtran RE ;-) |
|
|
|
Buskid
Top Member
USA
3368 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 6:36:52 PM
|
quote:
Gary are you serious it really cost 10 grand more for a rear engine bus?
Well, when I was out looking at brand new buses, a conventional was priced around $48k, and the rear engines started from $60k. So, yes, there is a big price gap between the two.
Crown Supercoach - The “Royalty” of Pupil Transportation |
|
|
|
thomas86_a
Top Member
USA
4413 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 6:49:01 PM
|
Trina, what were those conventionals that were around $48k? Were they pretty basic because I know our conventionals were quite a bit more than that and our HDX was no where near $60k.
The Thomas M2 Conventional- Coming to a bus yard near you in 2004! |
|
|
|
Buskid
Top Member
USA
3368 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 7:49:46 PM
|
quote:
Trina, what were those conventionals that were around $48k? Were they pretty basic because I know our conventionals were quite a bit more than that and our HDX was no where near $60k.
The $48k bus was an IC CE with a DT466, Allison 2000, air brakes, air door, standard headroom, non-tinted windows, white roof, Indiana specs.
When I asked about the IC RE, I was told by this particular dealer that the prices on a new unit start at $60k. Of course, that would be a very basic bus, probably with a T444E, Allison 2000, hydraulic service brakes, etc.
I gave the dealer a list of the specs. I wanted on the IC RE, and he's working up a quote for me right now. Whenever I get it, I'll let you know what it comes out as.
FYI: The IC RE-300 that was at the STN trade show last July cost over $80k. Wow! 
Crown Supercoach - The “Royalty” of Pupil Transportation |
|
|
|
B. Busguy33
Top Member
USA
3444 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 8:09:37 PM
|
quote:
Well, when I was out looking at brand new buses, a conventional was priced around $48k, and the rear engines started from $60k. So, yes, there is a big price gap between the two.
Just to add to Trina's post: If you want to figure out how much an FE bus would cost, the price range would generally start in between those two price ranges.
quote:
I gave the dealer a list of the specs. I wanted on the IC RE, and he's working up a quote for me right now. Whenever I get it, I'll let you know what it comes out as.
Not to be nosey, but I would also be curious to find out what you get for your quote. I would also be interested to find out what specs you put down.
Specs usually make a lot of difference in bus prices. I remember reading a post awhile back that mentioned going from a 210 hp DT466 engine to a 230 hp version costing about $3,000 more. That's in addition to ordering the bus with an Allison MD3060 transmission!! Figure another couple of grand for that transmission. Also, I think the extended side-skirting and storage compartments cost another few thousand dollars as well.
quote:
FYI: The IC RE-300 that was at the STN trade show last July cost over $80k. Wow!
If I were to ever buy an IC RE-300 with the specs I want, that bus would be it +/- a few of the specs it had on it. This bus was a really, really nice bus for $80,000. It had CA specs.
Among the options were: a DT530 diesel engine, electronic retarder, blue seats, blue ceiling, blue driver's seat, Bostrom air driver's seat, air brakes, air door, Rosco Eurostyle mirrors, LED lights, extended headroom, 2 side emergency exit doors, 84 passenger capacity, tinted windows, fog lamps, a white roof, among other things.
It is interesting to find out the price differences between the same type of bus from two different bus manufacturers with the same specs.
Edited by - B. Busguy33 on 04/13/2003 8:12:30 PM |
|
|
|
Buskid
Top Member
USA
3368 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2003 : 8:22:31 PM
|
Hi Bob,
Don't worry, you're not being nosey about the price thing. The salesperson I worked with has been in and out of town a lot, so I'm unsure of when he'll get around to working on my quote. As soon as I have a chance to speak with him again, though, I'll let you know.
Most of the specs. I put down are the same ones I listed for you when we were putting together our spec. sheets earlier this school year with a little variation — I spec.'d a 72 passenger IC RE-300 with a DT466, Allison MD3060, air brakes, air doors, standard headroom, white roof and not a whole lot more. When we get a chance to talk again off the forums, I'll tell you more about it.
BTW, storage compartments alone add $3k to the cost of the bus on a Blue Bird. I asked our operations manager at work how come a lot of the new buses we got in didn't have storage compartments on them, and he explained to me how much they added to the final price of the bus. That really surprised me.
Crown Supercoach - The “Royalty” of Pupil Transportation |
|
|
|
Steven A.Rosenow
Top Member
USA
1926 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2003 : 04:08:42 AM
|
Well, the rear engine diesel school bus (if that's what you are referring to) was an afterthought of improving handling and capacity - as well as reducing maintenance downtime and costs in the transit style school bus. In the mid-fifties, Gillig Corporation introduced the very first rear engine diesel school bus and within five years of its introduction, it became an industry leader in sales due to the popularity of it and due to the ease of maintenance.
That's one of the rear engine transit's major advantges. On a rear engine, the engine and all components are readily available and within easy reach. An engine replacement or overhaul is made easy because the engine can be lifted out without having to dismantle the bus to do so. On a front engine transit, most of the entire front fascia has to be removed just to even gain proper access to the engine. This is in addition to the fact that servicing front engine transits is made more difficult by the cramped engine compartment, whereas a rear engine transit's engine compartment is more spread out and spacious.
As for handling, it puts the weight on the tires that need it - the drive tires. A front engine bus has greater traction difficulties because the weight distribution isn't where it should be. A front engine bus also has greater difficulty pulling steep or long grades over a rear engine.
The other advantages have already been pointed out, I.E. enhanced forward visibility with larger windshield, unobstructed entry, etc.
 
http://www.geocities.com/gilligcoaches/ http://www.teamtwintowers.org/
|
|
|
|
Thomas Ford 85-16
Top Member
USA
4177 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2003 : 07:38:27 AM
|
quote:
Trina, what were those conventionals that were around $48k? Were they pretty basic because I know our conventionals were quite a bit more than that and our HDX was no where near $60k.
The Thomas M2 Conventional- Coming to a bus yard near you in 2004!
Our Thomas FS65s cost about 50K each, with the transits being around 60K each. We've been with this dealer a long time, though, so prices are somewhat low. Detroit's HDXs were 90K each to give an example of a nicely equipped bus. Many of our conventionals which are averagely spec'd are around 60K each. My 85-16 was originally 48K, but that was back in 1985.
Stop at: http://buses.thesummit.biz
This is an industry where people brag about their times for 60-0, not 0-60. |
|
|
|
B. Busguy33
Top Member
USA
3444 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2003 : 7:01:32 PM
|
quote:
A front engine bus has greater traction difficulties because the weight distribution isn't where it should be. A front engine bus also has greater difficulty pulling steep or long grades over a rear engine.
Spec'ing a Front Engine bus correctly can help alleviate some of these problems to a degree.
You could spec an engine and transmission adequate to the size and weight of the bus to improve performance going uphills and spec a rear-mounted fuel tank to help with traction on the rear wheels. These options, of course, add to the price tag.
|
|
|
|
Thomasfan89
Top Member
USA
1155 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2003 : 1:39:38 PM
|
quote:
You could spec an engine and transmission adequate to the size and weight of the bus to improve performance going uphills and spec a rear-mounted fuel tank to help with traction on the rear wheels. These options, of course, add to the price tag.
I believe a rear fuel tank is standard on the Thomas EF and the Blue Bird AA FE. I've seen it on all the ones in our area. The IC FE is the only one to have it in the front.
Greg Hovan
The Thomas Ford, always built, Ford and Thomas, Tough!!!!
Visit the school bus garage: http://www.geocities.com/fordman11189/SchoolBusGarage.html |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
whats with the rear engine?
