| Author |
 Topic  |
|
IHAVEABRAIN
Active Member
USA
22 Posts |
 Posted - 11/14/2003 : 08:37:08 AM
|
| It's sad when suppliers talk about the negatives of their competitors rather than their own strengths. Who's on the defensive? The boys from IC can talk and act brave but from the comments and what I saw at the show they are shaking in their boots. They can stand behind the one piece glass but it's easy to see through that they are scared. Hopefully when the get a particulate trap completed for the new VT.000015 steam engine they can start beating on their drum again, until then they can beat on Thomas's. Still just warming up. |
 |
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 08:40:38 AM
|
That blood in the water may be their own.
OK, now we need to do a little Econ 101 for you.
quote:
Most delivery trucks are considerably most expensive than a school bus and theres a reason for that.
There is a little thing called the market that helps dictate the price of things. You're right a truck costs more than a school bus. However, the cost of the engine, axles, transmissions, and other assorted items are identical. You certainly don't mean to imply that the windshield makes that much of a difference between the cost of a bus and a truck do you? School Buses are incredible values at the prices they are sold.
This is a point you inadvertantly make when you state:
quote:
A brand new F-350 with a PowerStroke isn't much less expensive than a 65 passenger school bus with an International VT-365!!
So let me frame this in terms you can understand.
If I buy a school bus with a flat glass windshield, and I replace the glass for $400, 10 times over the life of the bus. I will have spent $4000. If I buy a bonded, curved windshield in a bus that costs $500 to replace but I only replace it 5 times over the life of the bus, then I only spend $2500. You do the math. Which is the best value?
|
|
|
|
BPS_Driver
Advanced Member
USA
259 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 09:11:22 AM
|
Hey everyone
I saw the bus and had the opportunity to see the interior.
After talking to some Thomas reps and catching some of them in different stories I am guessing and only guessing that it is the VanHool City bus offered around 99. That bus was made exclusively for ABC Bus Sales- the U.S. dealer for Van Hools- and there was talk it was merged with Freightliner- and the Thomas reps said this bus was in design for four years- you do the math!!!!!!!!! Does it add up? It did for me.
That back window is optional. If you choose not to order it the look would be like todays Thomas. Flat sheet metal.
Options would be varied to meet state specs and Thomas reps said they met with State Directos and many states will alter their specs to allow the bus in service.
The windshield is a bonded windshield. I am only going to guess that a two- piece will be offered. Otherwise the cost to replce it would be expensive plus down town since thats an odd shape of glass to get., Almost a Thomas exclusive.
The interior didn't really impress me to be honest.
I liked the new BlueBird International better. |
23 Million safe deliveries a day by all of us |
|
|
|
IHAVEABRAIN
Active Member
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 10:11:20 AM
|
| What stories? Please provide details. |
|
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 10:11:33 AM
|
Van Hool is not owned by or in alliance with Freightliner or Daimler Chrysler. So you guessed wrong.
To each his own on with regards to what you prefer. I thought the BB/INT was pretty crude compared to the IC and Thomas. |
|
|
|
exCYter
Advanced Member
233 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 10:21:08 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by skoolhack
If I buy a school bus with a flat glass windshield, and I replace the glass for $400, 10 times over the life of the bus. I will have spent $4000. If I buy a bonded, curved windshield in a bus that costs $500 to replace but I only replace it 5 times over the life of the bus, then I only spend $2500. You do the math. Which is the best value?
Its likely the Thomas windshield will cost over twice as much as the IC's windshield, plus take an experienced person well over twice as long to install it, plus the window needs about a day to setup--meaning you'll lose a day of service in the bus. |
|
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 10:30:23 AM
|
And you know this because?
Care to back that up with anything more than "likely" and have you done the time studies?
|
|
|
|
BusBoy
Top Member
USA
2042 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 10:39:32 AM
|
I too was at the NAPT Trade Show and thought it was way to fare out of the School Bus market! This bus did not impress me one bit!
I liked both the Blue Bird/Int. and the IC/CE! I also had the opportunity to drive the new CE out at a racetrack in Salt Lake! I fell in love with this new bus! The IC/CE is much more driver friendly!
|
Your Child's Safety is Our Business |
|
|
|
sesalesman
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 05:59:01 AM
|
| Bash the looks all you want, but this is obviously sending ripples through some very, very, very stagnant water. |
|
|
|
sesalesman
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 06:09:53 AM
|
Sorry, I posted a reply in this topic meant for another topic  .
Oh well, I don't feel like re-posting  . |
|
|
|
Thomas Ford 85-16
Top Member
USA
4177 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 3:49:33 PM
|
| I hate to say it, but exCYter is right about the window taking longer to install and a day to set up. We had the windshield replaced on our Chevy Venture minivan...amazingly the windshields are quite similar! It took a very short time to replace, but there was the day that we had to be very careful with it because it had to set up. The point that exCYter is missing is that these windshields will not break nearly as often as flat glass! The flat glass might be cheaper, but if you have to buy it three times as often as curved glass, it will become more expensive in the LONG RUN. Not only will the curves deflect debris, the curved structure will distribute shock and weigh much better than flat glass. And for all the comments regarding parts standardization... Yes, I can see where lenses and bulbs might be an issue, but those are pretty easy to stock. Roof caps, and the other major changes, how often do you need to replace those in teh first place? Usually only after accidents. Do you keep those in stock? I would think not. It'd be no different than ordering a new roof cap for another bus that may have had an accident. |
Mike's Bus Yard - http://buses.zwebpages.com - Since 1999
|
|
|
|
sbfreader
Senior Member
153 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 6:28:08 PM
|
Here is some interesting information regarding cure times for a windshield adhesive. I don't know if this product is what Thomas uses but it appears that they do sell to bus manufacturers. It appears that safe-drive times vary by product but you're looking at a 1/2 hour to 1 1/2 hour cure time.
http://www.sika.com/cmi-automotive/cmi-automotive-calculator.htm |
|
|
|
Blake913
Senior Member
USA
195 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 6:40:42 PM
|
| I am not too sure I like it. I think it is neat looking and different. I have always been a Thomas fan, but I as far as the Conventional buses are concerned, I have to go with the IC CE. I think it is a GREAT looking bus and the new interior design is better. I personally believe that IC is doing their best to get rid of the old AmTran name/design. |
2801...The NEWEST addition! |
|
|
|
IHAVEABRAIN
Active Member
USA
22 Posts |
Posted - 11/18/2003 : 7:21:25 PM
|
SBFREADER
Cool website. Being an engineer/bus geek I like such. I did my own without airbag, 68 degrees F, .5 hour with booster 2 hours without. Pretty cool, but not close to how long I have been hearing about curing times. |
|
|
|
C24U
Advanced Member
United States
220 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 06:15:00 AM
|
| The fact that the windshield is bonded in makes it an added structural member to the bus. The stress on the windshield is distributed around the perimeter of the entire windshield, not just at the bottom where it rests. This just adds even more strength to an already stronger curved windshield. It acts almost like another panel covering the front of the bus. This in the place of a large gaping hole in front of the bus with a very large piece of glass bouncing around in there. I just wonder why the competition has chosen to pick apart this awesome new windshield? Everyone I have shown it to agrees that visibility and safety is the main concern in school bus design and thinks that the large view would be wonderful. Even if it does take a bit of time to replace, I think that most would (should) agree that this should take a back seat to safety. Heck the ingenious Safe-T-Vue windows in front of the entrance door are bonded in too. Maybe they should just do away with those since they would be a bit harder to replace than with the old method? Safety aside, who would want to fool with it! I can't believe I'm even typing these words in sarcasm! Of course safety is first. And that's why I think Thomas is first as well. For literally putting safety concerns up front. |
|
|
|
sbfreader
Senior Member
153 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 12:40:08 PM
|
'BRAIN,
Curious as to which way I am not close. Are the cure times more or less than what I offered up? |
|
|
|
Thomas Ford 85-16
Top Member
USA
4177 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 1:52:02 PM
|
| Just a question, will you still be able to kick out the bonded glass in one piece as an emergency exit? I certainly support the bonded glass, but would like to know if you can still kick it out like you could the flat glass windshields. |
Mike's Bus Yard - http://buses.zwebpages.com - Since 1999
|
|
|
|
Peter
Top Member
USA
1057 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 1:58:43 PM
|
Thomas should have left well enough alone. The Vision is ugly in front, but at least the body is still nice. Not the case here.
The problem is, now IC and Blue Bird will be changing their designs in the next few years to be more like the new Thomas because new is better, right? WRONG! This is how good products are thrown by the wayside and poor design triumphs. All companies are trying to outdo each other with "advanced design." Advanced design is just a fancy phrase for crap.
All ranting aside, does anyone know about servicability on this C2? How do simple tasks such as changing bulbs compare to the previous body style? |
Spicer is nicer. |
|
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 7:47:50 PM
|
"Kick out" windshields are really a thing of the past. Windshields, to my knowledge, have never been included in the requirements of FMVSS 217 (established in 1972). At one point, manufacturers used to tout the ability to "kick out" their windshields in emergency situations. You even used to see literature with photos demonstrating how you could accomplish this. That is no longer the case.
The fact of the matter is that with windshields in school buses left out of 217, there is no established operating force, set opening dimensions, or markings required designating the windshield as an emergency exit.
Windshields fall under FMVSS 212 which sets the required retention properties for them. The idea being that in a crash situation the retention of the windshield, by design, keeps the driver and possibly passengers from being ejected from the bus. This is considered more advantageous than any post-crash escape properties.
Therefore, roped-in windshields and bonded windshield today do not have a "kick out" function. |
|
|
|
thomas86_a
Top Member
USA
4413 Posts |
Posted - 11/19/2003 : 8:28:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter
Thomas should have left well enough alone. The Vision is ugly in front, but at least the body is still nice. Not the case here.
The problem is, now IC and Blue Bird will be changing their designs in the next few years to be more like the new Thomas because new is better, right? WRONG! This is how good products are thrown by the wayside and poor design triumphs. All companies are trying to outdo each other with "advanced design." Advanced design is just a fancy phrase for crap.
All ranting aside, does anyone know about servicability on this C2? How do simple tasks such as changing bulbs compare to the previous body style?
You can't live in the past forever! Change, while not always easy to accept, is a good thing! How many auto manufacturers are using the same body style as they were in 1972? |
If you have an International, you NEED customer service. |
|
|
|
NewBee Driver
Senior Member
USA
191 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 12:18:39 AM
|
I do not like the C2. Some of you seem to think that if you don't like it you are stuck in the past. I would ask this, is there anything wrong with the IC CE or BB vision or BB International. Do they not meet or exceed all safety standards.
Some of you have sugested that they are old body styles, but don't car manufatuers have difernt design styles to please different people. Look at it this way retro is now the in thing, BB an IC were retro before retro was cool. |
Driving Seattle To School - And Loving It!! |
|
|
|
C24U
Advanced Member
United States
220 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 06:20:18 AM
|
| I just say don't DISlike the C2 because it is NOT stuck in the past. Just because the other buses do meet or exceed safety standards, that doesn't mean that somebody shouldn't try to do it better. And, hey, Thomas is still retro in looks right now too along with BB/Int. But they will soon leave all that behind them. And you can accept or reject. Those that accept, will probably leave all that behind them as well, and who knows, maybe be happier for doing so. |
|
|
|
Peter
Top Member
USA
1057 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 10:39:54 AM
|
Someone calls me old fashioned about once a week and I probably am. I figure that if it ain't broke, don't fix it because the fix is usually what ends up breaking it.
Look at Blue Bird. They had a great driver's area from the '70s, if not earlier until 1995. The design was very functional and well laid-out. For 1996 they changed the design, making it much less useful for the driver. In 2002, they changed the design again and it is now totally useless. Where am I supposed to keep things? In the pre-'96 Birds, I could set the route copy on that shelf and glance down as needed. Now I drive with paper in my right hand at all times.
Functionality is sacrificed in the name of change or progress. Once one company does it, they all do and we're the ones who have to put up with the poorly designed products. |
Spicer is nicer. |
|
|
|
Sherm
Top Member
USA
621 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 12:15:02 PM
|
Sorry folks, but when it comes to school buses, the looks should be the least important aspect of the vehicle. The reason school bus design has barely evolved over the last 50 years is because it didn't need to. First Law of Engineering: If it works, don't fix it. It is the structural design and construction, the safety features and the ergonomics that are most important. Looks don't matter.
I'm a bus nut like many other folks here, and I do have my favorites as far as looks go. If it's a good, safe, clean bus it should be driven no matter what it looks like. If the new Thomas proves to be as safe and serviceable as an old-style bus that's great. Hopefully they put as much thought into the important things as they obviously put into the styling. As transportation professionals, we need to keep things in perspective. |
|
|
|
Rich
Top Member
United States
5768 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 12:19:17 PM
|
Poorly designed?
Maybe for you, but this bus was designed for pure safety and economy. The visibility runs miles around "conventional" conventionals.
And smart switches.... hmm.... I don't think the old conventionals have those!
The route copy sheet could be a problem I agree, but it is time to move into the future. This industry has been extremely sluggish, especially Blue Bird.
Thomas moved this industry ahead. Period.
In another five years, the classic look will probably be gone. Get ready. |
|
|
|
|
sesalesman
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 1:30:46 PM
|
| Well said Sherm. That's what I've been trying to get people to realize since 11-13-03. Safety first. |
|
|
|
Peter
Top Member
USA
1057 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 1:52:26 PM
|
Smart switches. The website doesn't say much about them, but from what I read, it sounds as though you can move them to different positions on the panel. That's terrible! No one will know where the switches are when they get on a new bus.
quote:
In another five years, the classic look will probably be gone. Get ready.
You're probably correct about that. As far as Thomas moving the industry ahead, that's also true. The thing is, moving ahead does not always mean improvement. New designs are no good if they leave people worse off than the previous design and that is the case here, as it has been with IC and Blue Bird in recent years.
Purchasing a new bus has already become choosing the least of the evils. No conventional bus now produced has a good driver's area. In five years when the classic look is gone, we'll have nothing aesthetically appealing about any of these evils, either. |
Spicer is nicer. |
Edited by - Peter on 11/20/2003 1:56:45 PM |
|
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 11/20/2003 : 2:31:03 PM
|
quote:
The reason school bus design has barely evolved over the last 50 years is because it didn't need to.
Well put Sherm, but I would only disagree slightly with the quote above. School Buses have needed changes in the last 50 years. However, in many cases innovation and advancement didn't always mean increased sales. For example, in 1963 Superior Coach introduced the first crossing arm to move children out away from the bus when crossing in front of the bus. It languished as an option for awhile but eventually was discontinued because no one wanted to spend the extra money to purchase it as an option. Today that same option is required in many states. The point being that innovation is often not rewarded in the school bus business.
You are correct, the safety record is tremendous but how much better would it have been if improvements in construction and materials had been made at the same pace that they have been made in the auto industry.
Why is something as simple as having consistent welding such an issue for a school bus company in the late 20th Century? A Carpenter type issue is almost unheard of in the automotive industry. It is because all of the manufacturers use antiquated construction methods. That is not to say that autos don't have their quality and safety problems. They do and they will never be safer than your average school bus as a mode of transportation. However, people can complain about cars all they want but they are dramatically safer in almost all areas than they were even 10 years ago. Fatality rates decline as automobile population increases.
In other words, we shouldn't be lulled into thinking that we can't do better when it comes to school bus construction. I happen to think that Thomas probably put more thought into the safety design than they did in the styling. The styling is just a fortuante side effect. |
|
|
|
spec
Active Member
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 11/21/2003 : 05:56:11 AM
|
"First Law of Engineering: If it works, don't fix it."
I am no engineer but if that was the first law we wouldn't have turbine engines, the space shuttle, airbags, nuclear power, high performance tires, efficient air conditioners, efficient heaters, atm machines, McDonalds, gortek, color television, cds, dvds, laser eye surgery, laptop computers, LED lights, electric cars, washing machines, dryers and the list goes on and on and on.....just food for thought.
spec |
Edited by - spec on 11/21/2003 05:59:52 AM |
|
|
|
sesalesman
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 11/21/2003 : 06:05:08 AM
|
With smart switches you will always know where the switches are because each individual driver can arrange them however they want to. It's fast and easy. Each switch takes a few seconds to register after it has been moved, but then it works regardless of the slot you put it in. So if you prefer switch "A" to be above switch "B", you simply put switch "A" into the slot above switch "B" and wait a few seconds while it registers.
I saw a demonstration on smart switches about a month ago, and it was very easy to do.
Now I will say this so there is no confusion. If your bus is not equipped with a certain feature, say "heated mirrors", you cannot insert a heated mirror switch and magically have heated mirrors (I'm sure we all knew that  , but the question did arise at the demonstration). But the switches that are included on the panel can be moved around freely. |
|
|
|
sesalesman
Senior Member
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 11/21/2003 : 06:18:52 AM
|
| schoolhack - Exactly! This is a case of form following function. If you are going to improve things like safety, vision, and ergonomics, things have to change(in this case, the body). |
|
|
|
Peter
Top Member
USA
1057 Posts |
Posted - 11/21/2003 : 3:19:06 PM
|
quote:
each individual driver can arrange them however they want to.
That's the problem. What about when your bus is down and you have to drive a spare? What about standby drivers? Every time you drive a bus that is not "your" bus, you have to search for switches. A standardized layout significantly reduces the time spent attempting to familiarize yourself with the controls.
quote:
Each switch takes a few seconds to register after it has been moved, but
then it works regardless of the slot you put it in. So if you prefer switch "A" to be above switch "B", you simply put
switch "A" into the slot above switch "B" and wait a few seconds while it registers.
So what you're saying is that the electrical system has been complicated to increase the time required for repairs when it does fail? Please correct me if I'm way off, but that's what I'm reading from this. |
Spicer is nicer. |
|
|
|
Thomas Ford 85-16
Top Member
USA
4177 Posts |
Posted - 11/22/2003 : 10:59:47 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Peter
quote:
each individual driver can arrange them however they want to.
That's the problem. What about when your bus is down and you have to drive a spare? What about standby drivers? Every time you drive a bus that is not "your" bus, you have to search for switches. A standardized layout significantly reduces the time spent attempting to familiarize yourself with the controls.
The point of the smart switches is so that the driver can move the switches to where they want and where they will expect them to be. A proper pretrip should not be a rushed pretrip, so the time should be taken to familiarize yourself with any bus. It's easier to move the switches to where you want them rather than to memorize a new layout. And if it were really that upsetting for a district, they wouldn't really have to tell the drivers that the switches can be moved and the district can arrange all their buses the same way. |
Mike's Bus Yard - http://buses.zwebpages.com - Since 1999
|
Edited by - Thomas Ford 85-16 on 11/22/2003 11:01:19 AM |
|
|
|
bbird66
Top Member
USA
881 Posts |
Posted - 11/23/2003 : 1:56:25 PM
|
| I think Thomas is going to hit a home run on this one. Definitly better looking/more appealing than the Vision by far. Those deep skirts are going to save some lives. |
Were gonna miss you "Brent"..Good luck in "Heidi land"
"I know you miss the Wainwrights Bobby, but they were weak and stupid people...and that's why we have wolves and other large predators" .. The Far Side
"On a two hour delay when will my child be picked up??"
|
Edited by - bbird66 on 11/23/2003 2:03:07 PM |
|
|
|
busbiz
New Member
7 Posts |
Posted - 11/24/2003 : 05:14:39 AM
|
| Jesus Christ Peter how do you want it. Let the manufacturer place the switches and gripe or let the driver place them and gripe. Sounds like you cant pe pleased. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
New Thomas Safe-T-Liner C2 Pictures
