俾人插到反眼既車

我發現..Carlo 反映既問題..
九巴唔理..全部推曬去廠家算數

原帖由 HA9203 於 2009-8-8 23:58 發表
我發現..Carlo 反映既問題..
九巴唔理..全部推曬去廠家算數

保養期內俾返scania搞好正常吧。

原帖由 葵盛東居民AMN36 於 2009-8-8 15:37 發表
講個人感覺, 我完全唔覺得ASB避震好, 搭佢行30鄧到阿媽都唔認得, 新車黎講佢既避震算係差

同埋講企位, 我都質疑佢點企40人, 唔知佢既企位係咪計埋上山頂果d級
不過現實環境下, 邊有人會企到咁高?? ...

個人認為ASB避震比dennis還差
初頭以為scania出品 d避震唔會差得去邊
坐過之後大跌眼鏡
唔知ASC重d會唔會好d呢?

原帖由 jx6215 於 2009-8-8 11:16 發表

唉...
唉2C都唔岩用香港仲有幾多線用得著?

就算架車點平點好
第一批車都唔應該一次過買咁多
加買都起碼得行左一段時間表現先再算.

再者
依批車又唔算係大型車又唔係小型車
實在唔清楚巴士公司想要佢做乜 ...

ASC 係屬於中型巴士，但用料係同三軸雙層般重料，睇幾條車胎，車軸已經係三軸車規格，
即係話批車重型車維修成本，中型車載客量，點搞?!

原帖由 ccicoltd 於 2009-8-8 23:10 發表

長飛鏢在未拆摺椅前，法定企位只有 28 個。

呢個我知, AA62-70 o係九巴第一年年驗前, 仍有摺椅
拆摺椅後, 輪椅位變成水塘位, 企位數量由28升至33
該水塘位確實可以企到5個人
但長Dart就算頂閘, 山頂有人企, 都係企25-26人左右
就算山頂再企多幾個人, 應該都未足法定既33人

原帖由 JK6080 於 2009-8-9 00:18 發表

個人認為ASB避震比dennis還差
初頭以為scania出品 d避震唔會差得去邊
坐過之後大跌眼鏡
唔知ASC重d會唔會好d呢?

ASC我搭過覺得同ASB都係差唔多咁
再講下個人感覺, 唔係針對呢d車, 我覺得雙層果部都唔好得去邊, 搭ASU1
行69X, 公路好鄧, 試過夜晚坐上層車頭, 離開天水圍前往欖隧段公路係咁
鄧下鄧咁, 從車頭玻璃望到既倒影, 見到後面d乘客一樣成個人鄧下鄧下咁

原帖由 葵盛東居民AMN36 於 2009-8-9 00:54 發表
ASC我搭過覺得同ASB都係差唔多咁
再講下個人感覺, 唔係針對呢d車, 我覺得雙層果部都唔好得去邊, 搭ASU1
行69X, 公路好鄧, 試過夜晚坐上層車頭, 離開天水圍前往欖隧段公路係咁
鄧下鄧咁, 從車頭玻璃望到既倒影, 見到 ...

ASU行104我覺得仲凳過Dragon
所以我覺得ASB,ASC既避震已經唔算好差
而ASC感覺好過ASB些少

坐過ASB，避震真係好麻麻，不過整體表現都不過不失。

不過車箱設計是極度不User-friendly，除了只欣賞落車鐘夠多之外，其他方面例如冷氣出風口過高難以調教，
低地台部份空間不足，山頂位太高，落車門反應慢等，已經對批車扣晒分，不過自從坐過ASU後，對ASB/ASC早已沒有什麼期望。

我有位上水廠車長朋友，有日做後備好運地開中架ASB8@73K，最初以為是SCANIA出品應該好正，一接更時見到有新車開即刻開心到飛起，
不料只開了兩轉，心情同接更時簡直是360度轉變，開到黑口黑面，對ASB劣評不斷，不過最好笑的是，佢問我架ASB如何企到40人！？

我覺得，九巴買MAN NL263/273絕對好過買SCANIA K230UB，起碼NL系列可供選用的車身真是user-friednly，
同埋德國車MAN並不是九巴想像中咁多問題咁難保養(AP搞到九巴怕左德國車)，你睇嶼巴同愉記咁鐘情MAN就知，用得不知幾好。

SCANIA出貨車拖頭同旅遊巴士等商用車就真係好掂，絕對是她的強項，不過佢出d城市巴士就真是弱項。

原帖由 3ASV467 於 2009-8-8 15:39 發表

架車係SLF陣已經差好遠…

而且除左車價外,德國車都幾大食下
(雖則ASB/ASC都算大食左小小,但EGR算係咁)

I guess you mean the MAN is full low-floor, whilst the Scanias are low-entry type only.

In any case, Euro 4 MAN are EGR as well, and that shouldn't make a difference to fuel consumption. Both the MAN and Scania are heavy duty chassis and their higher fuel consumption (comparing to the lighter Dart/E200Dart) should not come as a surprise. For all that, at least their heavy chassis should cope better on heavy load that a stretched E200Dart, and for that matter, the E300 as well.

原帖由 volvo_chan 於 2009-8-8 22:02 發表
SCANIA出貨車拖頭同旅遊巴士等商用車就真係好掂，絕對是她的強項，不過佢出d城市巴士就真是弱項。

I'd like to disagree, on the basis that the N-series and the old L94UB were actually rather nice buses. But the suspension of the N-series, like the K230UB, is a huge let down - they are so bumpy even on what looks like a perfectly smooth road.

And they are not quick as well, comparing to the competing types of the same class. In fact I think the K230UB doesn't even feel like a large bus either, the engine sounds like a minibus and is so slow to rev. As for the layout, to be honest for what a low-entry chassis, the drawback is generally accepted, but I was on a B7RLE today (which rearmost row of seats are also very high up), and kept thinking how come the Scania seems to sit so much higher than the Volvo.

I agree with you though, if KMB wants to stick with EGR going forward, they are much better off with MAN than Scania. Then again they placed a follow-up order for the Scania, so they must know something that we don't...