Rode in two recent deliveries, 589 on first day in service and 593 on 3rd day, and noticed both rattling already. This series also seem to have an intrusive variable transmission (?) whine at normal cruising speeds - first noticed on 555 which to me was particularly piercing. I feel that the quality is not up to scratch. What does the forum think?
The whine is from the differential (AFAIK) and occurs at exactly 70 km/h
That's Custom Quality for you..
When you buy buses based on lowest price rather than just ordering what you want then this is the result.
I know they set a minimum specification but it doesn't take into account build quality and the robustness of the product in everyday use.
Custom Coaches should be ashamed of the vehicles they now produce after once being an industry leader.
Quote from: The Love Guru on April 18, 2016, 11:21:24 PMCustom Coaches should be ashamed of the vehicles they now produce after once being an industry leader.
totally agreeing with you there.
Hey guys just currently on bus 671 running to Tuggeranong at 10 1/4 at night, and the rear door appears to be jamming quite frequently so customers are left to have to pull it open with the handle After the driver pushes the button to open it
Have you been on a recent bus where things ain't working properly?
Every day lol. Did you have a look to see if maybe a bottle/can was blocking the doorway?
That door was sticking a bit last week but still opening fine, just took an extra second than normal.
A bit unfair to attribute this to the 'new' buses.
Around 60 and more years ago, many (most?) urban buses had no main entrance door at all. Then driver operated doors became the norm, thus introducing a potential failure source. Then came the interlocking of doors with the ability to proceed. So more opportunity for breakdown and disruption, often from debris dropped (or even maliciously placed) by passengers preventing full door closure.
The situation is far worse with urban trains with many doors often double leaf.
As safety interlocking and tech is added so the also is the potential for failure and correction complications also increase. Not to mention additional routine maintenance needs. It is probably inevitable that these issues arise from time to time - even the intensely maintenance structured aircraft industry is not free of minor issues causing major disruption. Witness the quite frequent media reports of turn backs/diversions of planes due to a warning light system itself being the issue.
I think we all know how maintenance works, there is nothing wrong with what has been said apart from the title which perhaps should more aptly be "New Buses, same old problems".
Yeah, that is true, unfortunately I can't change it now, but the reason as to why that I've named it "new buses new problems" was because I've never seen this problem Minnesota bus before, so I thought it was a new problem that came with the buses whenever they got wet
Not sure where to post this rant but am disappointed in the quality of all the Scanias TC is/has been buying, especially the CB80 K320UBs. It just seems odd to me that Scania still can't design buses that don't vibrate violently when idling. MAN could do it more than a decade ago - none of the 18.310s or 18.320s do it - but some of these K320UB Scanias vibrate like they're PR2s lol.
Also I find the CB80 K320UBs in particular are just really noisy, especially if you sit anywhere from the middle to the back. There's also that aforementioned 70km/h piercing noise they make - I think the MANs do it too but it feels quieter in my experience. The Bustechs are a bit better but maybe they'll get more noisy as they age. Another thing is that the K320UBs tend to have really noisy "whooshy" aircons and I haven't experienced that with the MANs.
The MANs just seem far superior to me from a passenger perspective, and I think it's a shame we don't have more.
Anyway we've got to put up with what we've got, but I do wonder whether the ACT Government has done any consultation with passengers about what passengers think about comfort/quality of all the Scanias they're buying. Given many now have the light rail to compare them to, I can't imagine the reviews would be very positive.
Quote from: Bus 503 on June 04, 2024, 09:51:39 PM.....
Anyway we've got to put up with what we've got, but I do wonder whether the ACT Government has done any consultation with passengers about what passengers think about comfort/quality of all the Scanias they're buying. Given many now have the light rail to compare them to, I can't imagine the reviews would be very positive.
Thank you for raising this issue again.
Quite a while back there was a bit in the media with TC spouting of about how the drivers found them comfortable. All very well for those with nicely sprung seats. Not so hot for passengers on the firm seats coupled with a ride that can be quite jiggly due to lack of suspension compliance for rough pavements (try 57 or 58 around Deakin vicinity). Public consultation, if they even did any, seems to miss this issue. Not a priority for the young and fit, but try being elderly, carrying an injury, being unwell, etc. I am aware of elderly who were once regular users who now decline to travel on the buses unless absolutely necessary, because of roughness (which includes driving and traffic issues). Yet the free travel for older persons is intended to help them limit or cease driving. Not thought through.
On noise, it is very disappointing that almost new buses often have windows loudly rattling in the frames. Indicates very poor quality control, and low delivery acceptance criteria.
The MANs are so amazingly quiet, at least compared to the Scania K320UBs which are always super loud. Not too bad on the suburban routes but on longer trips such as the R4, it really gets to you after a while. The MANs never have any rattles (unlike the L94s), comfortable seats, from what I know as a passenger pretty reliable. If I had to between a Scania K320UB (not 14.5) and an MAN, I would pick the MAN, especially on a route like the R4.
Quote from: L94UBbusfan on June 05, 2024, 04:01:39 PMThe MANs are so amazingly quiet, at least compared to the Scania K320UBs which are always super loud. Not too bad on the suburban routes but on longer trips such as the R4, it really gets to you after a while. The MANs never have any rattles (unlike the L94s), comfortable seats, from what I know as a passenger pretty reliable. If I had to between a Scania K320UB (not 14.5) and an MAN, I would pick the MAN, especially on a route like the R4.
Yeah the MANs are much better with the rattles, though unfortunately some of the early diesel ones have an annoying panel rattle above the rear door - I was on 392 recently and it had the loud rattle, though later that day I was on 452 and there was no such rattle, implying that MAN fixed the rattle problem with later deliveries.
The rattles have nothing to do with MAN. MAN Build the chassis, the body (Where the rattles are) is built by Custom Coaches.