rickycourtney
Conductor
I didn't snap an unclose picture of the nameplate but it was definitely a LeMirage XL.
So much for that theory that Prevost's aren't built solidly.
So much for that theory that Prevost's aren't built solidly.
Greyhound seats and fleet questions
- Thread starter Swadian Hardcore
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
Irrelevant but interesting, perhaps....the early H3-41's in our fleet that had wheelchair lifts, had them in the rear. The lift was stored inside the coach, permanently reducing the seating capacity by four seats. Of course, the baggage bays were not affected, yielding huge baggage capacity relative to the seating capacity....
rickycourtney
Conductor
John- I think you're reading too much into the MPG numbers. The difference between 6.5 vs 6.85 MPG is negligible. In fact a driver with a lead-foot could easily wipe out the fuel savings.
Just a wild theory here on why the J4500 is so popular... as I see it, the group that is buying the most motorcoaches these days are charter operators who want a decently built coach, with lots of curb appeal, at the lowest possible price. Most of these companies will only run the coaches for 5-10 years or so before they are sold. They don't see the point to rebuilding an old coach, because the curb appeal is gone.
The J4500 does just that...
It's not built to take as much punishment as the D4505, but it probably won't be on the road 24/7/365.
It has more aggressive fiberglass exterior facia and interior appointments to impress customers.
The price point is about the same as the D4505.
That's also why VanHool is so popular. They make a great looking product (very euro-chic), with lots of bells and whistles, at a bargain-basement price. Also, new VanHools are reliable enough, it's when they age that they start to fall apart, but that doesn't matter to a company that just wants to dump the bus after 5 years (although the resale value must suck).
That's compared to Greyhound who wants a coach that's rugged and reliable, while the design is very much "form follows function." Any bells and whistles on Greyhound's buses come from designs that have been throughly proven on buses like the J4500.
Just a wild theory here on why the J4500 is so popular... as I see it, the group that is buying the most motorcoaches these days are charter operators who want a decently built coach, with lots of curb appeal, at the lowest possible price. Most of these companies will only run the coaches for 5-10 years or so before they are sold. They don't see the point to rebuilding an old coach, because the curb appeal is gone.
The J4500 does just that...
It's not built to take as much punishment as the D4505, but it probably won't be on the road 24/7/365.
It has more aggressive fiberglass exterior facia and interior appointments to impress customers.
The price point is about the same as the D4505.
That's also why VanHool is so popular. They make a great looking product (very euro-chic), with lots of bells and whistles, at a bargain-basement price. Also, new VanHools are reliable enough, it's when they age that they start to fall apart, but that doesn't matter to a company that just wants to dump the bus after 5 years (although the resale value must suck).
That's compared to Greyhound who wants a coach that's rugged and reliable, while the design is very much "form follows function." Any bells and whistles on Greyhound's buses come from designs that have been throughly proven on buses like the J4500.
Caesar La Rock
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 701
Depending on where you live, the resale value of these motorcoaches from charter companies could be high. You have to see how many old T945s and T2145s I've seen around here. I know Mears still has T2145s and C2045s with Series 60 engines. Both are well past 10 years old (I think 12-16 years old, not sure, but they're old buses nonetheless).
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
That LeMirage XL was built in 1980s when the disappointing modern buses didn't even exist so it's a moot point.
Yeah, the difference between 6.5 MPG and 6.85 MPG is small, but the difference between the D4505's crappy 5.83 MPG and the old D4500's 6.79 MPG is pretty darn big. Those are figures from the same test. And drivers who've driven both say the D4505 "loses 1 MPG over the DL3 but gains it back with an EGR delete".
I think Greyhound should move the X3-45's to the West and the D4505's to the east because the X3-45's do better with EGR than the D4505's. Then they can delete the EGR on the D4505's because they wouldn't be needed for running in the East. Better efficiency over the whole fleet.
Meanwhile, the J4500 gets better fuel economy than the D4505 due to being available with the DD13 engine which is not available in the D4505.
Burlington Trailways was using the D4505 for line-haul but now they are using J4500's and X3-45's. Apparently those two coaches are not that different in the bottom line. They have similar prices AFAIK.
I think companies could try rebuilding the 102EL3 to retain curb appeal without buying new replacements.
Yeah, the difference between 6.5 MPG and 6.85 MPG is small, but the difference between the D4505's crappy 5.83 MPG and the old D4500's 6.79 MPG is pretty darn big. Those are figures from the same test. And drivers who've driven both say the D4505 "loses 1 MPG over the DL3 but gains it back with an EGR delete".
I think Greyhound should move the X3-45's to the West and the D4505's to the east because the X3-45's do better with EGR than the D4505's. Then they can delete the EGR on the D4505's because they wouldn't be needed for running in the East. Better efficiency over the whole fleet.
Meanwhile, the J4500 gets better fuel economy than the D4505 due to being available with the DD13 engine which is not available in the D4505.
Burlington Trailways was using the D4505 for line-haul but now they are using J4500's and X3-45's. Apparently those two coaches are not that different in the bottom line. They have similar prices AFAIK.
I think companies could try rebuilding the 102EL3 to retain curb appeal without buying new replacements.
rickycourtney
Conductor
While I wouldn't mind seeing more X3-45's on the west coast... Greyhound can't simply "delete" the EGR (or the DPF or SCR) from the D4505, that would be illegal. You aren't allowed to remove emissions reductions equipment from engines where it's required.
Oh please, you could never rebuild a 13+ year old bus to have the same curb appeal as a brand new bus. Plus, there wouldn't be enough demand for a company to create the fiberglass fascia panels for the 102EL3 (although there could be a demand for the J4500).
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
Illegal? So this is illegal? http://diesel-power-solutions.myshopify.com/products/detroit-diesel-series-60-egr-delete-performance-module.
Yes, EGR is required in California, but if they moved the D4505's to the East and the X3-45's to the west, the D4505 would no longer have to operate in California, and the EGR delete would be allowed.
Edit: These truckers are doing the same thing and not getting arrested after posting results online: http://mhhauto.com/Thread-EGR-Bypass-trick-to-boost-mode-for-60-series-14-liter-2006-motor.
Yes, EGR is required in California, but if they moved the D4505's to the East and the X3-45's to the west, the D4505 would no longer have to operate in California, and the EGR delete would be allowed.
Edit: These truckers are doing the same thing and not getting arrested after posting results online: http://mhhauto.com/Thread-EGR-Bypass-trick-to-boost-mode-for-60-series-14-liter-2006-motor.
Last edited by a moderator:
rickycourtney
Conductor
You talked about "deleting" the EGR system. I read that to mean, go in and remove the parts that make EGR function.
Look I'm not a legal expert... but to my understanding, it's illegal to disable any emissions control system.
The device you're showing exists in a sort of legal grey area. It leaves the EGR parts in place but uses a discreet device to disable the system. That means that it's hard for an officer to detect and it's easily disabled for emissions testing. It's also legal to sell because EGR systems aren't required for off-road and farm vehicles.
Come on, John. If these thing were legal, don't you think Greyhound would have one on every bus??
Look I'm not a legal expert... but to my understanding, it's illegal to disable any emissions control system.
The device you're showing exists in a sort of legal grey area. It leaves the EGR parts in place but uses a discreet device to disable the system. That means that it's hard for an officer to detect and it's easily disabled for emissions testing. It's also legal to sell because EGR systems aren't required for off-road and farm vehicles.
Come on, John. If these thing were legal, don't you think Greyhound would have one on every bus??
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
No, they won't have one on every bus because they need to run buses in California. But if they restricted the D4505's from entering California, they could do that. And if truckers do it and proudly post it on the Internet, how come it is illegal? The EPA didn't require every bus on the road to have EGR, there's no law saying that AFAIK.
Some bus owners also said they "deleted" the EGR in order to gain MPG.
Or maybe there should be an official verdict on the EGR delete because the delete does mean more MPG and higher driving performance.
Perhaps it could be legal under certain circumstances.
But I highly doubt it's plain illegal considering how many people go around saying "I deleted the EGR and got great performance!"
People don't go around saying they removed the speed governor which is illegal but I'm sure some people do it anyway.
Some bus owners also said they "deleted" the EGR in order to gain MPG.
Or maybe there should be an official verdict on the EGR delete because the delete does mean more MPG and higher driving performance.
Perhaps it could be legal under certain circumstances.
But I highly doubt it's plain illegal considering how many people go around saying "I deleted the EGR and got great performance!"
People don't go around saying they removed the speed governor which is illegal but I'm sure some people do it anyway.
rickycourtney
Conductor
John... go back and reread my original post. I answered most of your questions.
One more thing, I don't think you fully understand the EPA emissions standards versus California emissions standards.
EPA regulations got stricter for engines in 2004 (EGR), 2007 (EGR+DPF) and again in 2010 (EGR+DPF+SCR). Also to be clear, the EPA mandated a certain level of emissions reductions, it did not not mandate those technologies, that's just how most engine manufacturers chose to meet the required level of emissions reductions. All trucks/buses nationwide have to comply with the applicable EPA emissions reduction requirements for their model year.
California went one step further and as of 2014, requires that nearly all trucks and buses operated in the state have a DPF, regardless of their model year.
At the moment, California has no additional requirements over the EPA requirements in regards to EGR and SCR.
So in summary, as long as they have a DPF, any Greyhound bus can operate in California.
One more thing, I don't think you fully understand the EPA emissions standards versus California emissions standards.
EPA regulations got stricter for engines in 2004 (EGR), 2007 (EGR+DPF) and again in 2010 (EGR+DPF+SCR). Also to be clear, the EPA mandated a certain level of emissions reductions, it did not not mandate those technologies, that's just how most engine manufacturers chose to meet the required level of emissions reductions. All trucks/buses nationwide have to comply with the applicable EPA emissions reduction requirements for their model year.
California went one step further and as of 2014, requires that nearly all trucks and buses operated in the state have a DPF, regardless of their model year.
At the moment, California has no additional requirements over the EPA requirements in regards to EGR and SCR.
So in summary, as long as they have a DPF, any Greyhound bus can operate in California.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
So perhaps the EGR delete kit still uses the DPF and torque curve methods to reduce emissions.
I read CA Emissions Standards: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm.
They say nothing about DPF's, just that everything must have 2010 model year engines or equivalent.
I read CA Emissions Standards: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/onrdiesel.htm.
They say nothing about DPF's, just that everything must have 2010 model year engines or equivalent.
rickycourtney
Conductor
Here's a better fact sheet on CA emissions standards: http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/FSRegSum.pdf
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
OK, but that still doesn't explain why Greyhound should not suppress the D4505's inefficient EGR with the delete kit and then move the units to the east, filling in the X3-45's current spot. The X3-45's more efficient EGR would be more suited in the West.
Meanwhile, companies are still operating the 102EL3 in revenue service without even rebuilding them, and I don't see why they lack curb appeal. They look very similar to the current J4500's. And Brewster does get excellent passenger reviews, they are 4.5/5.0 on TripAdvisor, equal to the Rocky Mountaineer.
Brewster EL3 #278: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/120709-3405brewster278.jpg
#279 in the Rockies: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/279.jpg
#286: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/080907-6229brewster286.jpg
#286 again: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/201011-1450brewster286.jpg
They have National Seating 4210.
Brewster basically offers "scheduled tours" in the Canada Rockies. It's like line-haul for tourists in a vacation package.
Meanwhile, companies are still operating the 102EL3 in revenue service without even rebuilding them, and I don't see why they lack curb appeal. They look very similar to the current J4500's. And Brewster does get excellent passenger reviews, they are 4.5/5.0 on TripAdvisor, equal to the Rocky Mountaineer.
Brewster EL3 #278: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/120709-3405brewster278.jpg
#279 in the Rockies: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/279.jpg
#286: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/080907-6229brewster286.jpg
#286 again: http://www.busdrawings.com/coach/brewster/102el3/201011-1450brewster286.jpg
They have National Seating 4210.
Brewster basically offers "scheduled tours" in the Canada Rockies. It's like line-haul for tourists in a vacation package.
Last edited by a moderator:
rickycourtney
Conductor
Because again it's ILLEGAL... NATIONWIDE!!!
This is the warning and disclaimer on EGR delete kit from a more reputable dealer than the one you found:
See it for yourself: http://www.mkmcustoms.com/dodge67lcumminsegrvalvecoolerdeletekit.aspx
Most reputable dealers have a very similar warning and disclaimer on their EGR delete kits.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
Well there was a mention of "boost mode" and truckers say it can simply be activated and constantly driven in boost mode to bypass EGR. Even that is illegal? Then hundreds of truckers would have been apprehended already.
I suspect Greyhound may already be driving in 100% boost mode to "not use" EGR.
They're not disassembling the EGR, they're bypassing the EGR.
Anyways, I can't see your theory about charter operators running coaches for a few years and then getting rid of them. Those are only the "half-ar$e" operators that run units under warranty and then sell the units when the warranty expires. Most reputable operators, like Brewster, keep using their older coaches and keep them well-maintained. But charter coaches still don't need the durability of a line-hauler because they don't run that many miles per year.
And the EL3 doesn't need a rebuild to boast high curb appeal.
I suspect Greyhound may already be driving in 100% boost mode to "not use" EGR.
They're not disassembling the EGR, they're bypassing the EGR.
Anyways, I can't see your theory about charter operators running coaches for a few years and then getting rid of them. Those are only the "half-ar$e" operators that run units under warranty and then sell the units when the warranty expires. Most reputable operators, like Brewster, keep using their older coaches and keep them well-maintained. But charter coaches still don't need the durability of a line-hauler because they don't run that many miles per year.
And the EL3 doesn't need a rebuild to boast high curb appeal.
Green Maned Lion
Engineer
Just because truckers love breaking rules- ever sat at a truck stop counter? They can't shut up about it- doesn't mean they are intelligent about it.
rickycourtney
Conductor
*Sigh*
John, you're beating a dead horse.
Once again from my trusty legal disclaimer:
Driving in 100% "boost mode" would require modification of the engine's computer system and would render inoperative (a fancy legalese way of saying bypass) the emissions control system and is therefore prohibited under federal law.
Sure you could do it -and I would venture to guess that some truckers do- but it's illegal and if you're caught, there's a huge fine.
I highly doubt that Greyhound is driving in 100% boost mode. If just one bus was caught with the modification and the rest of the fleet was inspected, Greyhound could be fined up to $21,320,000 ($32,500 fine x 656 EPA 2004+ compliant buses). It's just not worth it to save a few bucks at the pump.
Brewster isn't exactly representative of most of the small charter operators out there and It's not exactly a fair fight when you throw down the E series.
Yes, until the latest facelift, the J copied the look of the E. But the E was a very expensive coach and I question how many charter operators were buying them (MCI discontinued it after all).
Here's a better example, a 2000 Van Hool T2100 (which again, was popular with charter operators)... tell me that still has a lot of curb appeal.
Another example, I personally love the look of the current H3-45, but the pre-2002 version lacks curb appeal today.
Last edited by a moderator:
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
OK, then Detroit 13 with SCR for the win.
True, the new J4500's look better than those Van Hool T2100's and H3-45's, but even the old J4500 was still in production until 2012, and a 2012 J4500 has the same look as the 2001 J4500's. The 102EL3's were supposed to look better than the J4500's, with that extra band of glass over the windshield.
Not to mention the EL3 had ECAS, spiral staircase, power blinds all that stuff. Expensive, yeah, but that older coach appealing enough to attract passengers even today, and Brewster gets excellent reviews.
So I guess it's more about the actual bus then about the year. Also shows the 102EL3 isn't bad on durability and presumably not the J4500 either.
True, the new J4500's look better than those Van Hool T2100's and H3-45's, but even the old J4500 was still in production until 2012, and a 2012 J4500 has the same look as the 2001 J4500's. The 102EL3's were supposed to look better than the J4500's, with that extra band of glass over the windshield.
Not to mention the EL3 had ECAS, spiral staircase, power blinds all that stuff. Expensive, yeah, but that older coach appealing enough to attract passengers even today, and Brewster gets excellent reviews.
So I guess it's more about the actual bus then about the year. Also shows the 102EL3 isn't bad on durability and presumably not the J4500 either.
I don't think there is enough of a difference for the average 'non-fan' to even notice in all those comparison's, provided the older model is cosmetically 'new'....
If you want to really see "curb appeal"....I would put a sixty year old PD-4501 in mint condition against any bus on the road today....offer a side by side choice for passenger's to board, and......well just let's say, don't bet against the Scenicruiser....
If you want to really see "curb appeal"....I would put a sixty year old PD-4501 in mint condition against any bus on the road today....offer a side by side choice for passenger's to board, and......well just let's say, don't bet against the Scenicruiser....
rickycourtney
Conductor
Personally I thought the design of the J4500/E4500 was getting pretty out of date by 2012/2013
It was a really sharp look in 1997 when it was introduced, but it was starting to show it's age in the last few years.
Changing subjects, while I enjoyed my discount for signing up... I wish Road Rewards and Bolt Rewards were unified. I understand why Greyhound wanted to keep the brands separate, but if Greyhound is improving, why not try to get Bolt customers to give them a try?
It was a really sharp look in 1997 when it was introduced, but it was starting to show it's age in the last few years.
Changing subjects, while I enjoyed my discount for signing up... I wish Road Rewards and Bolt Rewards were unified. I understand why Greyhound wanted to keep the brands separate, but if Greyhound is improving, why not try to get Bolt customers to give them a try?
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
I don't why the EL3 doesn't look modern enough to match a new J4500, but OK, everyone thinks differently. Of course the Scenicruiser will be #1 in curb appeal for a long, long time.
Greyhound can't merge Bolt and Greyhound, they want Bolt to stay undercover and Greyhound still has at least 200,000 haters.
Plus, people seem to complain about Greyhound for the least of problems. Case in point:
"My wife and I paid for tickets from Cleveland to Niagara Falls, only to have the printer 'failed' at my nephew's place in Cleveland. A photo of the ticket clearly showing the number etc, was totally ignored by Greyhound and we were charged another fare. VERY UNFAIR in fact! The next day we were allowed to get into my email and print off the Toronto to Detroit tickets, which was a very great relief.
FAIR WARNING to all concerned."-John Doyle (Tramway_John/Flickr)
That was a complete direct copy of the complaint. Let's see here, you tried to print out your tickets at your nephew's place, but your nephew's printer failed. You took a photo of the ticket, but how did you take a photo without printing out the ticket? Yeah, you probably took a photo of the computer screen with the ticket file showing in it. Something that anyone can photoshop, and that photo would have meant nothing to Greyhound. Then of course, you had to buy another ticket and print it off your e-mail the next day.
Then why didn't you (he, John Doyle) get into his e-mail and simply print out the old ticket which would have also been in a e-mail sent on an attached PDF file?
See what I'm talking about? Why did this guy buy another ticket and print it off his e-mail? He should have had the original ticket in his e-mail. Why didn't he go to library when his nephew's printer failed? Oh, maybe he deleted the e-mail.
Greyhound can't merge Bolt and Greyhound, they want Bolt to stay undercover and Greyhound still has at least 200,000 haters.
Plus, people seem to complain about Greyhound for the least of problems. Case in point:
"My wife and I paid for tickets from Cleveland to Niagara Falls, only to have the printer 'failed' at my nephew's place in Cleveland. A photo of the ticket clearly showing the number etc, was totally ignored by Greyhound and we were charged another fare. VERY UNFAIR in fact! The next day we were allowed to get into my email and print off the Toronto to Detroit tickets, which was a very great relief.
FAIR WARNING to all concerned."-John Doyle (Tramway_John/Flickr)
That was a complete direct copy of the complaint. Let's see here, you tried to print out your tickets at your nephew's place, but your nephew's printer failed. You took a photo of the ticket, but how did you take a photo without printing out the ticket? Yeah, you probably took a photo of the computer screen with the ticket file showing in it. Something that anyone can photoshop, and that photo would have meant nothing to Greyhound. Then of course, you had to buy another ticket and print it off your e-mail the next day.
Then why didn't you (he, John Doyle) get into his e-mail and simply print out the old ticket which would have also been in a e-mail sent on an attached PDF file?
See what I'm talking about? Why did this guy buy another ticket and print it off his e-mail? He should have had the original ticket in his e-mail. Why didn't he go to library when his nephew's printer failed? Oh, maybe he deleted the e-mail.
Swadian Hardcore
Engineer
Yeah, it probably would sell, and sell very well at that. Heck, Greyhound might buy it, it would prove their reputation so much!
Here's a Scenicruiser in 1975: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mbernero/6889423779/in/set-72157625959347317.
Heck, here's a whole album of them: http://norcalbusfans.jalbum.net/NorCal%20Bus%20Fans%20Photo%20Archives/Greyhound/Greyhound%20USA/GMC%20PD4501/index.html.
And one at a museum: http://www.pacbus.org/pbmnews/news06.shtml.
Edit: They look like they had weird luggage hatches that opened one part up and one part down.
OK now who wants this? https://www.flickr.com/photos/19126773@N08/6014733395/sizes/l.
The MCI MC-6, one of the first 102-inch coaches. Three-step passenger deck. Extend it 5 feet and it would be amazing.
Here's a Scenicruiser in 1975: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mbernero/6889423779/in/set-72157625959347317.
Heck, here's a whole album of them: http://norcalbusfans.jalbum.net/NorCal%20Bus%20Fans%20Photo%20Archives/Greyhound/Greyhound%20USA/GMC%20PD4501/index.html.
And one at a museum: http://www.pacbus.org/pbmnews/news06.shtml.
Edit: They look like they had weird luggage hatches that opened one part up and one part down.
OK now who wants this? https://www.flickr.com/photos/19126773@N08/6014733395/sizes/l.
The MCI MC-6, one of the first 102-inch coaches. Three-step passenger deck. Extend it 5 feet and it would be amazing.
Last edited by a moderator:
rickycourtney
Conductor
I think that customer was referring to Greyhounds stupid print at home ticket policy. They've got to be the only major carrier in the US that sells tickets online but doesn't accept tickets on smartphones, doesn't offer kiosks where customers can print their boarding passes and doesn't allow agents to look up tickets and reprint them.
Sounds like the customer had trouble printing, went to the station without and was told that they would have to purchase another ticket (per Greyhounds policy).
That's not fair to label this person a Greyhound "hater". They are just someone who encountered bad corporate policy and customer service and was rightly frustrated.
Thankfully this is one of the things that Greyhound is addressing with eticketing, but it's a change that's LONG, LONG overdue.
Sounds like the customer had trouble printing, went to the station without and was told that they would have to purchase another ticket (per Greyhounds policy).
That's not fair to label this person a Greyhound "hater". They are just someone who encountered bad corporate policy and customer service and was rightly frustrated.
Thankfully this is one of the things that Greyhound is addressing with eticketing, but it's a change that's LONG, LONG overdue.
Caesar La Rock
OBS Chief
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 701
They also had the Eagle Model 07, which was also a 102 inch wide. Picture is not mine. I think Prevost's Champion and Prestige also came with an option for 102.
