[見未有人貼就貼o下] 九巴向富豪購買 100 部歐五巴士

我個人覺得九巴選富豪而不選ADL，可能同引擎的選擇有關
始終康明斯的可靠性不及富豪引擎，前者一行舊了就比較容易有黑煙
在維修的角度看，當然選富豪

至於用富豪車不選ADL車身，相信會和2間公司的競爭關係有關，個人估計雙層若果唔用Wright，用澳洲殼的機會都唔細。
反而再用ADL殼機會就比較細。

原帖由 ctb8107 於 2009-6-7 01:38 發表

我發現九巴近期用單層黎「試新」試上癮~
不過車型多樣化確實是巴迷之福!!

曾經有人話日後0的車部部都係差唔多，似乎佢地要改觀了．．．

原帖由 yuenchiu6 於 2009-6-7 13:35 發表

When those B10M were new, on the highway they were as fast as other passenger cars.

新車時C會遊河踩起左係可以同私家車差唔多一齊平排行跑元朗公路．．．

原帖由 JN6854 於 2009-6-6 22:16 發表

0岩0岩用google查MCV 指0左去wiki
發現佢前身原來係 中巴CX 0既Marshall車身廠

由用MCV車身就第一樣0野就睇到呢樣0野，香
港終於有第二批"Marshall"新車了．其他有
二手小多，唔知仲有無．呢批車真係超多曈
境，睇晒0的回應越黎越多曈境．．．

希望批新B9係用改良型車身吧．．．

[ 本帖最後由 3asv6 於 2009-6-7 17:59 編輯 ]

OT 一問
點解"威身"(威豪個車身)個車窗咁細
同埋個冷氣槽咁粗?

坐喺入面好有壓迫感...

原帖由 MetroLine 於 2009-6-7 04:18 發表
不過想問 B7RLE 同 B12BLE 係咪用返同一副，但無咁大的引擎？如果係的話，應該會唔錯。（始終我搭 B12 多過搭 B7R，話雖我果頭 B7RLE 多過 B12BLE。)

No, B7RLE is basically a B7R rear mated to the front of a B7L. The B12BLE is a B12B rear mated to a B7L front, and that is quite a bit taller (K230UB-esque) at the back.

原帖由 MetroLine 於 2009-6-7 04:18 發表
始終 51 同 211 都涉及爬山，我搭過 B7RLE 上山 ...

What do you need all that power for though? The B7RLE has 290bhp already, and that's more than pretty. The B12BLE may get another 10bhp or a bit more, and a bit more torque as well, but at the end of the day, in HK they will spend more time running around, even hills, at 50kph anyway. And we are not talking HK has very formidable hills either - In Britain, Yourkshire Coastliner used to have a few B7RLEs - the older Euro 3, 275bhp ones - serving the North York Moors, and there are 2/3 km stretch of hills with gradients consistently up to 1:4 or 1:5, and they are not underpowered at all, if anything. Even the Scanias (both the N and K-series), with just 230bhp to boot, acquire themselves pretty well in 12m guise.

The B7RLE will be cheaper to run for the HK operation, and if you bring the 51 into question, you need the cut the length into 10m, and esp for the B12BLE, there will be no space in the low floor area at all. With due respect, you simply haven't thought your idea through at all.

原帖由 S3N92 於 2009-6-7 04:57 發表

配E300,optate,plaxton centro都好睇....威殼點都唔會叫做靚

I know, beauty  is in the eyes of beholders, but I think the Eclipse/Solar looks fine outside. I think the Mk.2s could look a little better though. But I don't care any of these, because the quality of the interior, Wright has the best in class (probably apart from the Citaro I will admit) in terms of design and build quality. The E300 only look good in its second facelift, but in its current from, it looks flimsy, and the interior is shockingly cheap and blend.

原帖由 HF3204@243M 於 2009-6-7 10:07 發表
OT 一問
點解"威身"(威豪個車身)個車窗咁細
同埋個冷氣槽咁粗?

坐喺入面好有壓迫感...

It has a lot of KMB's design input in it - The original Gemini has a much better headroom upstairs, and bigger windows as well. It's only KMB come along as ask for more headroom downstairs that mess up the whole thing.

If anyone still wonder why KMB opt for Wright instead of ADL, one of key consideration is Volvo and Wrightbus have a very strong partnership, esp. over the last decade. Wrightbus' bodywork also has excellent build quality - a fact well acknowledged in the UK bus and coach industry. If the Volvo/Wright partnership can put out a bid that is competitively priced, and offering a product that is just as capable, of course KMB is going to consider that serious.

原帖由 NV58 於 2009-6-7 18:29 發表


The B12BLE may get another 10bhp or a bit more, and a bit more torque as well, but at the end of the day, in HK they will spend more time running around, even hills, at 50kph anyway.

I agree with you.

Yes, the standard DH12E-340 on a B12BLE is 340hp at 1400-1800rpm, 50hp more than a D7E-290.
Yes, you have a peak torque rated 1700Nm at 950-1400rpm with DH12E-340, 500Nm more than a D7E-290 again.

But is it that purposeful to have such a large and powerful engine for a comparatively more levelled terrain in HK?
The 290hp engine develops only 20hp less than the double deckers' one (D9B-310 EC06B) while it handles a single deck body and a full loaded weight of 18 tonnes at most. I strongly believe that it's not a D10A again.
So after all, is it really important to utilize a 12 litre engine in Hong Kong, especially when most of the bus companies are finding something more fuel-saving product?

[ 本帖最後由 ATE24 於 2009-6-7 19:15 編輯 ]

原帖由 ATE24 於 2009-6-7 11:13 發表
But is it that purposeful to have such a large and powerful engine for a comparatively more levelled terrain in HK?
! D9 k1 ~8 H! d+ sThe 290hp enginedevelops only 20hp less than the double deckers' one (D9B-310 EC06B)while it handles a single deck body and a full loaded weight of 18tonnes at most. I strongly believe that it's not a D10A again.% f# q) Z' \; @% j1 }

It's not, but I think people have been unfair with the D10A though. It's the power output specified for specific models that wasn't adaquate - Take the 3AV as an example, it's 3/4 tons more than a standard 2-axle Olympian, and you put the same power output in there (245bhp), of course it will be slow! Even the B10TL is quite a bit heavier than equivalent size Olympian by up to a ton as well, and you have out factors like the gearing and so on that drives the performance lower than what many people here wished.

原帖由 ATE24 於 2009-6-7 11:13 發表
So after all, is it really important to utilize a 12 litre engine inHong Kong, especially when most of the bus companies are findingsomething more fuel-saving product?, P% _4 S( O/ j  C

That's the thing. I'm afraid there are quite a few people here who are really power-craze. The thing is, operators buy their buses which can run their services to time, with reasonable fuel efficienct, and mechanically reliable as well. There are times you might need to think about power - if you run an interurban service with stops on the carriageway, and yes you will need all that power so that you can speed up to let the bus/coach rejoin the traffic at the right speed - a safety concern. But we are talking about HK, it's not like buses have to pull out on streets full of Ferraris/Porsches doing 100kph is it?