| Author |
 Topic  |
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
 Posted - 01/19/2007 : 4:10:35 PM
|
hmmmm... ant eater and C2...
I just dont see it
|
 |
|
|
03CV200
Top Member
United States
740 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 4:24:23 PM
|
| Just try to appreciate the C2 for what it is. It took me years to do so but I did, they are unique in their own aspect. I must state though, I still think Blue Birds are number 1. |
-Dave |
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 5:11:10 PM
|
AmTran- if you think the c2 is an anteater, what's your interpretation of the IC? Gorilla with it's mouth wide open?
No matter how hard you try, you're not going to get Thomas to stop producing them. Actually, I thought I heard them say they are keeping them around just for you! |
|
|
|
HelenVPP
New Member
USA
6 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 5:26:13 PM
|
Well, If I heard right. And this may be slightly off topic but it does pertain to Thomas. Since Thomas staring Building this plastic and glue C2 unit, Blue Bird decided to build that type of bus in the EC72. From what I have heard here in Southern GA. Blue Bird will not build the EC unit, because it too is build of glue and plastic. This is just what I heard, I have no idea if it's true.
I had heard that the Blue Bird EC would not complete with the C2 because the bus would not pass side impact tests. Now if Blue Bird is going to back out of a cheaper "Vision" with the EC unit and now all of a sudden they decided that bus would not be up to their standards why the hell would anyone want a C2. It sounds like Blue Bird has wised up to this cheap concept that Thomas seems to embrace. I don't care what kind of glue that Thomas uses and I don't care if it was the same glue that is used in planes or on the Space Shuttle. If I remember correctly, a Hawaiian plane had it's roof ripped off with this same glue and a few years ago the Space Shuttle had parts falling off. The C2 is just a Tinker Toy and I can't believe that States allow this bus on the road. I would no sooner have my pet ride on that bus much less my grandchildren. |
Edited by - HelenVPP on 01/19/2007 5:27:43 PM |
|
|
|
Rich
Top Member
United States
5768 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 6:29:10 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HelenVPP
Well, If I heard right. And this may be slightly off topic but it does pertain to Thomas. Since Thomas staring Building this plastic and glue C2 unit, Blue Bird decided to build that type of bus in the EC72. From what I have heard here in Southern GA. Blue Bird will not build the EC unit, because it too is build of glue and plastic. This is just what I heard, I have no idea if it's true.
I had heard that the Blue Bird EC would not complete with the C2 because the bus would not pass side impact tests. Now if Blue Bird is going to back out of a cheaper "Vision" with the EC unit and now all of a sudden they decided that bus would not be up to their standards why the hell would anyone want a C2. It sounds like Blue Bird has wised up to this cheap concept that Thomas seems to embrace. I don't care what kind of glue that Thomas uses and I don't care if it was the same glue that is used in planes or on the Space Shuttle. If I remember correctly, a Hawaiian plane had it's roof ripped off with this same glue and a few years ago the Space Shuttle had parts falling off. The C2 is just a Tinker Toy and I can't believe that States allow this bus on the road. I would no sooner have my pet ride on that bus much less my grandchildren.
I don't know why Blue Bird employees always find the need to conceal their identities, but it is no secret who you are! But anyway, I wont hold that against you, because I'm always in the mood for a spirited debate about buses!
Listen... the Vision and Blue Bird buses in general are excellent products. The bodies have been around for a while, so any problems with them are pretty much weeded out, and people are comfortable with them. They have had the same basic technology since the 60s and 70s, so what could possibly go wrong? That's all fine and good, and I admire Blue Bird for making a nice product.
Now - fast forward. The C2 is a multi-million dollar investment by DaimlerChrysler, that was designed to IMPROVE on school bus technologies already existing with Thomas and Freightliner, and improving on them.
An entirely new design has it's advantages and disadvtantages. New designs bring new ideas, modern ideas, which people get scared of. Adhesive for example is a new idea in the school bus industry, but has been around in hundreds of other techologies and industries for decades. And it works. Your NASA and airline references are unfounded. NASA's problems haven't been related to adhesive, my friend... I'd suggest you do some research before you post about it.
Now your "plastic reference" what does that refer to? The only plastic I can think of on the C2 is the modern driver's area and front bulkhead. Now if I recall correctly, the C2 has a much more ergonomic driver's area then the Vision. The Vision's driver's area is as good as the FS-65, but nowhere near the C2 or CE in terms of styling and ergonomics. The dash is nice, yes, but come on, stop complaining about plastic. It's not like it's cracking or anything, what's so bad about it?
The C2 has so many more things the Vision doesn't have too. Don't like where a switch is? Okay, pop it out and put it where you want. No rewiring required! Brake light out and you didn't realize it in a pre-trip? Step on the brake pedal and the indicator flashes when a light is out. Want to check all of your exterior lights with ease? Follow the procedure and start the check! Want to see the kids in the loading zone? Look through the side windows, and the huge windshield,and see what the REAL vision is!
The C2 is a scary bus! Why? Because people in this industry are used to the 60s bodies! Get over it! Blue Bird wouldn't have tried adhesive in the first place if they didn't think it was safe. Just because that bus didn't meet crash testing doesn't mean the adhesive is bad, it means Blue Birds engineering on the bus was bad!
The biggest difference between the EC and the C2 is that the EC was designed to be a cheap bus for contractors. The C2 is a heavy duty bus designed for anybody - and you pay for what you get for, with better technology that the competition.
Now let me reiterate - I like the Vision, and yes, I'd definitely consider purchasing one. But please, keep your mind open! New products are scary, but the C2 is a good bus, and it is here to stay.
Please, if you want to badmouth the competition in the future, just use your regular member name! |
|
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 7:16:15 PM
|
Richard, you bring up some outstanding points.
I find it interesting how many in this industry don't accept change. They will however, accept the msot advancements in the automotive industry. Have to be one of the first to get the new this or new that from Toyota or GM. Yet, when it comes to a bus, the only change anyone traditionally accepted was the cowl changes.
The plastic point is interesting. They have all gone to plastic and fiberglass dash boards. Much of IC is all plastic along with the C2. Bluebird has a lot of plastic yet probably the least. The bulk head is still the true steel (coul;d be metal but I assume steel- seems very strong)
Great points. |
|
|
|
Bus9709
Top Member
USA
751 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 7:59:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by BusBoy
Bus9709,
Are you familiar with any of the Martin District Schools buses? If so what do they mostly run in their fleet?
Kevin
No, I'm not familiar with Martin District school buses. Sorry about that if you needed to know any info. |
|
|
|
Cody
Top Member
United States
1630 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2007 : 9:48:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by HelenVPP
If I remember correctly, a Hawaiian plane had it's roof ripped off with this same glue and a few years ago the Space Shuttle had parts falling off.
And if I remember correctly, the roof structure being torn of the Aloha Airlines 732 was because of metal fatigue. It was one of the planes with top cycles in its lifetime due to the short flights of inter-island flights, so each time the plane pressurized the metal would stretch out and then go back to normal after landing. The cause was NOT because of a glue failing!
(sorry, big on the aviation industry, had to post that) |
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 05:39:33 AM
|
I follow the aviation industry to a small degree also- didn't know that about that flight. Was the plane they made the movie on during the 80's?
I always wondered what happened to that plane.
One of the things I like about school buses is if we loose pressure, we are still on the ground. Once up above, not many choices.
Cody- did you know about the Canadian flight that literallly lost power in the air and had to glide in circles to land? I saw a special on this and couldn't believe the plane landed so easily.
Didn't mean to change the subject but what a comparisson- buses loose power and either slow down safely or clip an object. Planes loose power, good luck |
|
|
|
03CV200
Top Member
United States
740 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 06:56:30 AM
|
I've heard of an adhesive that is stronger than 3/16 or 1/4" steel. |
-Dave |
|
|
|
IC
Top Member
USA
3413 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 08:16:26 AM
|
I remember that Aloha 737 accident...as Cody mentioned, it was caused by metal fatigue due to too many pressurizations. A stewardess was sucked out when the roof came off, never to be seen again. The passengers survived what must have been a WILD ride....the crew did an excellent job landing that thing!
Remember the first commercial jet airliner, the deHavilland Comet? The early models were plagued by several crashes also due to metal fatigue...the fusilage metal used was too thin in order to save weight. They fixed it in later models but the Comet never became as successful as it might have if not for those early fatal crashes. The venerable Boeing 707 then stepped in as the first very successful commercial jet airliner.
Yup, no glue involved in any of this. |
|
|
|
skoolhack
Senior Member
76 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 11:15:45 AM
|
http://www.assemblymag.com/CDA/Archives/ac2275c53f5c9010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0____
The construction method used on the C2 is not new or "experimental". Follow the above link for a good article on the manufacturing technique used in C2 construction.
If, in fact, BBird has chosen not to manufacture the EC-72, it would be my guess that it is was for economic reasons rather than regulatory ones.
As for the original thread topic, everyone is entitled to their opinion but as JFK once said, "Too often we... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." |
|
|
|
Nick
Advanced Member
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 12:02:06 PM
|
quote:
did you know about the Canadian flight that literallly lost power in the air and had to glide in circles to land? I saw a special on this and couldn't believe the plane landed so easily.
That was Air Canada 143. On that flight, the computerized "fuel gauges" on the plane were broken, so they had to calculate the weight for themselves. They knew the volume, but they converted the volume to pounds instead of kilograms, which is what the aircraft used. So, the aircraft thought there was more fuel on board than there actually was. Needless to say, they ran out of fuel on the way and had to emergency land on an abandoned military base.
The aircraft is still in service with Air Canada today.
Rumor has it that when mechanics were sent to repair the aircraft, their van ran out of fuel on the way.
Nick |
IC the future, and it is bright. |
|
|
|
SchoolBusFan
Top Member
USA
1769 Posts |
|
|
ltrain2001
Senior Member
139 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 12:57:17 PM
|
Has anyone come across any C2s with a manual transmission? Richard, I know you said that they are offered, just curious if anyone's seen one out there.
|
|
|
|
03CV200
Top Member
United States
740 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 3:01:40 PM
|
| Richard told me they no longer offer them and only two were ever produced. |
-Dave |
|
|
|
ltrain2001
Senior Member
139 Posts |
Posted - 01/20/2007 : 4:02:11 PM
|
| Does anyone have any pics of the C2 with a manual tranny? |
|
|
|
dcox
New Member
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 02:01:23 AM
|
| Just to clear up the many myths and misunderstandings that i have read so far, i intend to answer some of the questions that i have seen so far.The adhesives used on the c2 body are far stronger than anything i have ever used.And to the best of my knowledge even the companies that are in the Daimler Chrysler family do not have access to it.For the curious ones out there test samples on 8x8x16 gua. steel panels have torn apart on the clamp side before the joints have seperated.As far as driver comfort, i drove trucks otr for 10 years and even drove an 88 Ford Thomas in H.S. and i have yet to see anything remotely close to the c2.Thanks to technology you can remove 6 screws and put the switches in any order that you feel comfortable with ,none of the others offer this advantage.This bus is designed with passenger safety and drivers in mind.As for manual trannys there have been more than 2 made,auto trans. are not an option , they are standard.Manuals can be ordered, but why bother,fore there are not many that like or know how to drive them anyway.As for pictures good luck,rumor is they will fire employees who use their camrea phones inside the plant,and there are to many units that roll off the line to keep up with the destinations of each one.All vehicle builders have issues and glitches with their products, and Thomas is no better, but i do know that there are individuals on the job to ensure that the units are safe and reliable.Most of the issues that have been seen and discussed here fall back on FCCC,not the actual Thomas body.As for the NC units, they basically look like the Florida unit w/o the black rails .I can answer some questions for those that have them , but i can only tell so much without putting my job at risk.And thanks to everybody for the feedback, a special thanks to the Thomas fans , because you will see a better and more innovative product coming.The C2 is the bus of the future and will continue to be for a long time to come. |
|
|
|
pbfreak30
Senior Member
USA
171 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:10:01 AM
|
| my county has bought about 35 c2's in the past two years...i love the Benz engines...the one and only problem with mine is that the kids complain that the seats are close together than in the fs-65's that we have...but 2 of our C2's troublefull one, bus 73, is in the shop for at least 4 days a month, and bus 80 the first day we got it something in the engine(Cat C7) let go and it hasnt been back since |
ARROW transportation RP..the best out there! |
|
|
|
78fordwayne
Top Member
USA
2868 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:20:30 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by pbfreak30
my county has bought about 35 c2's in the past two years...i love the Benz engines...the one and only problem with mine is that the kids complain that the seats are close together than in the fs-65's that we have...but 2 of our C2's troublefull one, bus 73, is in the shop for at least 4 days a month, and bus 80 the first day we got it something in the engine(Cat C7) let go and it hasnt been back since
Not having seen a C2 in person this shouldnt be to dumb of a question . Are the seats closer to together on the passenger side of the bus? Because of the slanted windshield and the door and all that? Kind of like type D buses? |
Edited by - 78fordwayne on 01/21/2007 11:21:24 AM |
|
|
|
Jim
Top Member
USA
581 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:26:59 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by 78fordwayne
Not having seen a C2 in person this shouldnt be to dumb of a question. Are the seats closer to together on the passenger side of the bus? Because of the slanted windshield and the door and all that? Kind of like type D buses?
On mine, I've never really paid attention if they are closer together or not. But instead of the seats being "directly" across from the ones on the driver's side, they are staggered a bit, not even with the other side. As you get closer to the back of the bus, they do even out. Sometimes on trips, I take a nap and I usually have to go almost all the way to the back in order to get comfortable so I'm not having to lay sideways. Gosh, after reading what I just wrote, maybe the passenger side seats are closer together! LOL!
**I found a couple of pics of my bus that may show this. If you look closely starting with the front seat, you can tell the left side starts closer to the front than the right side does. And mine is a 77 passenger so there are 13 rows of seats on each side.
 |
Edited by - Jim on 01/21/2007 12:26:09 PM |
|
|
|
03CV200
Top Member
United States
740 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 11:28:17 AM
|
| Based on people I have talked to, they are. I do know though, that in the 81 passenger versions, there are 14 seats behind the driver and 13 on the passenger side so that may be how they compensate for the step back on the passenger side on all versions. |
-Dave |
|
|
|
80-RE4
Top Member
USA
5700 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 12:19:45 PM
|
Okay! Maybe they don't compare 100 percent to the ant eater! Maybe something else. They're not real school buses. I do like Thomas Built Buses- but only my bus (Thomas MVP Front Engine). And I like IC-Amtran RE buses (nice ones), and I like the looks of some Blue-Birds.
Best School buses ever:
My old AmTran RE
and
My current Thomas FE
PS: I know they are "real" school buses- and maybe someday I will get used to them, right now I just like what I'm used to. Real looking school buses! |
Edited by - 80-RE4 on 01/21/2007 12:23:14 PM |
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 12:45:00 PM
|
AmTran- they do look like school buses. They have flashing lights, yellow paint, windshield, seats for students, and everything else school buses have.
Perhaps you don't care for the style. That's no reason for them to stop making them. |
|
|
|
80-RE4
Top Member
USA
5700 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 1:39:29 PM
|
| Maybe so...but if I had my way - every conventional and front engine would be distinct. The only school bus would be a rear engine model! |
|
|
|
03CV200
Top Member
United States
740 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 2:06:51 PM
|
No doubt, the C2's are definetly unique SCHOOL BUSES and can take time to get used to; however, I think little touches like aluminum wheels, can help aid in the process.
P.S.:What's with the first window, why is it differnt from the rest? Anyone have any idea? |
-Dave |
Edited by - 03CV200 on 01/21/2007 2:08:13 PM |
|
|
|
thomas86_a
Top Member
USA
4413 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 2:25:24 PM
|
| The door/drivers window and first passenger window on each side were most likely speced with frost-free glass. You'll notice a difference on traditional Thomas Builts a difference in the glass-panes on the door and passenger windows when speced this way as well. It's also possible to spec the regular glass and just leave it tint-free which is the other possibility. |
If you have an International, you NEED customer service. |
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 3:41:19 PM
|
If you look closely at the top window, it is thicker indicating the frost free window option. Prevents window from fogging up and getting frost on it.
Many districts in cold climates spec that option. |
|
|
|
80-RE4
Top Member
USA
5700 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 5:47:14 PM
|
| i would like that option on my fe |
|
|
|
Kodie
Top Member
United States
2028 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 5:51:04 PM
|
| I agree in my opinion the C2 is one of the few buses that isay is just plain ugly. Have you ever seen the mirrors on the Thomas ER's they look like they belong on a bug. LONG LIVE IC BUSES. |
|
|
|
Kodie
Top Member
United States
2028 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 5:53:23 PM
|
IC buses are the nicest buses on the road today. Thomas buses look like they belong on planet fraflooga or something. quote:
Originally posted by CPCSC_TD
AmTran- if you think the c2 is an anteater, what's your interpretation of the IC? Gorilla with it's mouth wide open?
No matter how hard you try, you're not going to get Thomas to stop producing them. Actually, I thought I heard them say they are keeping them around just for you!
|
|
|
|
Rich
Top Member
United States
5768 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 7:13:05 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by IC Dave
IC buses are the nicest buses on the road today. Thomas buses look like they belong on planet fraflooga or something. quote:
Originally posted by CPCSC_TD
AmTran- if you think the c2 is an anteater, what's your interpretation of the IC? Gorilla with it's mouth wide open?
No matter how hard you try, you're not going to get Thomas to stop producing them. Actually, I thought I heard them say they are keeping them around just for you!
Thanks for the input. Now get back to me in 10 years when those IC's in upstate NY rot apart.  |
|
|
|
BBInt.10
Top Member
USA
1042 Posts |
Posted - 01/22/2007 : 8:00:33 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by IC Dave
IC buses are the nicest buses on the road today. Thomas buses look like they belong on planet fraflooga or something. quote:
Originally posted by CPCSC_TD
AmTran- if you think the c2 is an anteater, what's your interpretation of the IC? Gorilla with it's mouth wide open?
No matter how hard you try, you're not going to get Thomas to stop producing them. Actually, I thought I heard them say they are keeping them around just for you!
I agree the IC's are probably the best looking on the road, however Richard has a point with the rust, and quality in general. I drive an '05 IC CE and you should see how rusty the back bumper is. It's pathetic. Our 1993 Blue Birds have less rust on their rear bumpers. I'm not sure who to say has the best bus... in my opinion, they all have their ups and downs, and quality is IC's biggest issue I think. |
If all your problems are behind you... you must be a school bus driver. |
|
|
|
School Bus M8
Top Member
USA
617 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2007 : 06:46:57 AM
|
I have to agree. IC-CE is an awesome looking bus inside and out but I have to question there up holding due to past experience with them. A lot of shaking,rusting and screws falling out. I'm not sure about these new IcCe's though, maybe the quality is better. The IC-Ce has a lot of potential.
But as of now I would still take an Ic-Ce over a c2. I just can't adapt to the look of the Thomas...........Too European for me. I would take a Vision over both right now.
I know someone mentioned before that the same people that are dissing the c2 are the same ones that love when a new style car comes out. Well, to me theres a difference. Some cars I like the new styles I.E. Durango, Explorer, Escalade. And there are some that I don't like I.E. the new Chevy Impala. I haven't really seen any cars that I liked make any changes that are as extreme as the changes of a school bus as the c2.
Bottom line is the c2 is too much of a change for me. I don't like them, I think they're ugly and they don't have that traditional American School bus look. Thats my opinion and I can't honestly change that. |
|
|
|
CPCSC_TD
Top Member
USA
657 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2007 : 11:51:14 AM
|
Too much of a change? There really isn't much unless you are speaking of the multiplex or engineering design.
The wanring lights are flush- so minor change. Windhsield is one piece- no much difference. Body is more squre- similar to a Wayne.
I see it is different because we are not used to many design enhancements. Unlike the automotive industry where you have a lot of manufacturers, changes in body styles are routine. Look at the Auto Show.
On the flip side, when you are down to three, when one changes anything, it is noticed.
I believe this is more a situation of accepting the differences of the design. Like most, eventually it will grow on you or become a parasite to you- and I think for AmTran80, the parasite has taken over. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
There are too many C2 buses
