[新聞] 九巴都入咗部兩軸Wright B9TL

原帖由 NV58 於 2010-7-13 15:16 發表


I don't think it is their choice. I think it is just because it was just being built that way by Wrightbus.

In any case, it would make little sense for a straight staircasebecause it means there will be only 2 seats at the low floor area,pretty poor should I say.

咁ｏ係呢方面，兩軸B9就輸俾E400啦！
因為E400有八個低地台座位，同超富一樣，
而所有12米直梯，最多都只係六個低地台座位(E500)

原帖由 Mahoumatic 於 2010-7-13 10:25 發表

點會無呢
低轉高扭力，隨之而來的行車寧靜（真係靜到無人有），
只要肯踩，好有可能唔覺唔覺之下，速度最快的車種。
有人話避震差，我覺得係睇咩情況，
一般情況下B9的確係最定，但應付橋之間的駁口位的情況，Scania都唔錯架
之不過 ...

仲有唔洗入尿

原帖由 ben2004 於 2010-7-13 02:56 發表
其實部 B9TL 隻凳, 睇落有d似愉景灣兩部 12.240

但座椅頂個扶手到又唔似system 400

原帖由 93A_S3_6:30am 於 2010/7/13 13:50 發表


唔會嘛?
英國果邊咁多直梯B9

英國兩軸 B9 同呢架香港版本係咪一模一樣先? 香港o既多o左冷氣o架o番。

原帖由 da54 於 2010-7-13 08:58 發表

我都同意，呢部車無係富豪新聞稿入面出現，我諗緊會唔會係送俾九巴既車....
送的話可能九巴無咁在乎係曲定直~

Be careful you say this. Some folks will waste no time claiming that Citybus and KMB want the E400 so badly that they probably paid ADL to build it, whilst the B9/Gemini is so unwanted that Volvo have to give them away!

Seriously though, I think both the E400 and B9 were built on request by KMB and Citybus, rather than being pushed by the manufacturer. It seems quite clear that, to me anyway, ADL actually pushes the E400 more proactively (Rumours on the E400 for HK, from my knowledge, actually dates way back at the turn of 2008/09). With that, Volvo obviously got asked, or got wind themselves, and go away and build a 2-axle version for both operators. People can argue all day about who is more reactive and who is more proactive, but I say God bless competition!

peterpan/syp: I firmly believe the reason for the 2-axle B9 to lose so much low floor space is they have fitted the fuel tanks, quite possibly all of them, just forward of the offside rear axle. The B9s in the UK have the fuel tank fitted just above (and forward) of the offside front axle. Even with the optional larger fuel tank, I have not seen any B9 losing so much low floor space like the Citybus/KMB ones do. I guess the HK ones have this features so that they can use the high pressure fuel pumps, but it's such a shame because the B9 could, and should offer just as much low floor space as the E400, as illustrated in these pictures:

原帖由 syp 於 2010-7-13 13:00 發表


會唔會兩軸 B9 個底盤格局根本唔適宜做直梯? (如用了直梯會冇晒 D 低地台座位等)

英國wright車身直梯b9無記錯最少有8個低地台座位,最多有10個連埋一個輪椅位....
中門前4個,中門後左右兩邊共6個(左邊x2,右邊梯位x4+輪椅位)
原因係直梯長度短左同埋輪椅位面積縮細左少少,偷下偷下因而多左一排椅的空間...

不過比kmb的係唔係咁小弟就唔敢講係唔係一樣,只係英國的兩軸b9係咁樣間隔....

原帖由 3asv322 於 2010-7-12 13:41 發表
九巴兩軸B9的車隊編號會否是AVSBWU,還是AVBSWU呢?

九巴有呢種方式分車型,對我呢類老人家真係死得!
堆英文字母越黎越長,都仲未包括數字.真係好難記.

用曲梯就要犧牲低地台位黎放油缸，用樓梯位做油缸就要轉用直梯，
總唔可能又要用樓梯位放油缸，又要用曲梯，只係兩者之間做取捨。

除左油缸外，會佔用低地台空間仲有風缸，雖然體積唔算大，
不過數目都唔少，要搵地方安罝都唔易，兩軸車比三軸車可用空間更少。

[ 本帖最後由 on11358 於 2010-7-14 10:50 編輯 ]

re#7:
九記用返曲梯?
咁咪唔應裙腳油啡色?...

原帖由 blueblue 於 2010/7/14 12:09 發表
re#7:
九記用返曲梯?
咁咪唔應裙腳油啡色?...

用咗一隻新色都唔會走回頭路喺新車款用回舊色啦。新單層車冇樓梯一樣用啡裙腳。