[舊相] 中巴 TC1

原帖由 cn2661_2d32 於 2009-1-22 06:13 發表
撇除了Engine波箱車身選擇問題,真正來講Olympian設計比Titan優勝d乜?例如底盤設計?www.hkitalk.net* q" [7 l5 H! M& y0 q8 O0 P

The Olympian's key advantage is the design is more conventional, making itself a far more familiar bus to work on by the engineers (in theory). It is also less complicated comparing with the Titan - For example, it hasn't got the complicated cooling system at the back (the Olympian's cooling system is very similar to the Bristol VR), the independent suspension at the front axis, or the sound-proof materials at the engine compartment.

In practice though, when other operators start getting their hands on Titans when London Buses started withdrawing them back in early 90s, it proved it wasn't any more complicated to run and maintain comparing to the Olympian and Metrobus. Its more advanced suspension and sound proof also makes it a more comfortable bus to ride on.

原帖由 cn2661_2d32 於 2009-1-22 06:13 發表
因為engine同波箱有冇得揀...事在人為.ML夠可裝Iveco/CAT engine落去.) x: y( \" N+ Q/ e" O

No, Titan actually is offered with the 6LXB, 6LXCT and Leyland L11/TL11 engines. The Leyland engine wasn't ready when the Titan production started though, and because of London Transport's preference on the 6LXB unit, the bulk of Titan production ended up with that engine (though 10 of LT's Titans, T876-885, were fitted L11/TL11 enigne, and 10 of the Reading Titans had the more powerful). The transmission though, cannot be chosen when bought new, although Lt took one of its Titans, T684, and fitted a Voith gearbox in it. This bus later ended up with Stagecoach and was recently withdrawn from that fleet:



The Iveco engines on the ML were retrofits. Through the production life of Metrobus, only Gardner, Cummins and Rolls Royce had ever provided engines to the type.

原帖由 cn2661_2d32 於 2009-1-22 06:13 發表
車身都係.B15唔係底身一體化車型.如和b15大賣你話leyland肯唔肯齋賣底

No, because it can't be done. Titan is a complete integral, and it hasn't got a chassis at all. It's like saying someone else can body a Routemaster instead of Park Royal. It's not like a E400 which is in theory an integral bus, but in practice isn't.

原帖由 cn2661_2d32 於 2009-1-22 06:13 發表 似乎Route master 之後,專登幫London Transport設計的車型都未必成功,
7 [* d( a/ y! IDMS.如是, B15如是.

Not quite. The DMS is a standard Fleetline, with a LT-spec bodywork, and the Fleetline itself was a very successful bus. It's just LT did not get the hang on how to run it and they dislike it right from the start that gave them a bad reputation. You just need to look at how quickly the DMSs got snapped up by other operations in Britain and HK after they got withdrawn from London to know that they are fine vehicles. The Titan wasn't successful only because everyone outside London didn't like Leyland to push a bus onto them which they don't really want and make any choice - they cannot choose the size, the height, and so on. As a bus, the Titan is, and has proved itself, a very fine vehicle.

[ 本帖最後由 NV58 於 2009-1-25 16:15 編輯 ]

原帖由 ccicoltd 於 2009-1-23 06:31 發表
因為大家都是按同一套標準為倫敦運輸局建造車身。

No, the ECW and Roe bodyworks had nothing to do with London, but being under the same empire of British Leyland, they just make use of the Titan design to save cost.

原帖由 DD2113 於 2009-1-20 21:31 發表

好相！話說當年一個上午我喺同一個位等80號既時候就見到佢高速駛埋嚟，個司機未到站已經開左門，見冇人上車就極速駛走。

呢一次亦都係我唯一一次見到TC1，當時亦係行102既旺角特車

原帖由 Wright---AVW16 於 2009-1-21 13:25 發表

仲有就係全球唯一不在英國本土服務的Titan

感覺上，TC1係比英國本土既快好多(可能坐過英國咁多Titan都未試過開快車)