# BoltBus is expanding to California



## rickycourtney

They made the announcement this morning.

Here's the tweet:



> @BoltBus We’re coming for you West coast! On 10/31, we’re connecting Los Angeles, San Jose & Oakland. Get on board: http://prn.to/1ancROF!


Looks like buses will be running from Union Station in Los Angeles to Diridon Station in San Jose and then onto the West Oakland BART Station. Service starts on October 31st.

And to pre-answer the question... no I don't think that it will effect ridership on Amtrak's San Joaquin service. MegaBus has been running similar routes since December 2012... and in that time Amtrak posted its highest ridership numbers in the history of the San Joaquin.


----------



## jebr

Glad to see it! More public transit options is always good to see!


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

What type of bus are they going to run? Greyhound got a huge order of both MCIs and Prevosts, so I don't know myself. Why no service to San Francisco?

I might ride it if they come to Reno. Really don't need it though, we just got so many new buses here that I'm fine with Greyhound's present service.

About the college students, I only saw one college student on my latest Greyhound trip, he was going from Oakland onto the Arcata bus, which was MCI D4505 #86370. BTW, that's the bus on my avatar. I might replace my avatar with a newer D4505. Great bus, they go really fast.


----------



## fairviewroad

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Why no service to San Francisco?


I was kind of wondering that too. I guess they figure that a significant portion of their passengers are probably headed to the East Bay anyhow, so a BART station in Oakland probably offers as many connections as a BART station in SF proper. But for those going to central SF itself, this still requires a two-seat ride. But MegaBus does serve SF directly from LA, so BoltBus is really kind of punting on that market IYAM.


----------



## rickycourtney

Swadian Hardcore said:


> What type of bus are they going to run? Greyhound got a huge order of both MCIs and Prevosts, so I don't know myself.


I was under the impression that BoltBus used the Prevost X3-45 coaches almost exclusively. I saw in pictures that they've been using the Prevost coaches on the Vancouver-Seattle-Portland service.



Swadian Hardcore said:


> Why no service to San Francisco?


I agree that seems like a strange decision. Passengers will need to either transfer to Caltrain in San Jose or BART in West Oakland to make it into SF.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

The thing is, Amtrak serves all those places Bolt is going to serve, Greyhound, Megabus, and other operators go straight to San Francisco. Even worse, Bolt would require a transfer onto the expensive Caltrain or BART to get to SF, while Amtrak's shuttle is free of charge. That transfer could be even more expensive then the Bolt ticket.

So I see no point in what Bolt is doing, the only possible explanation for them is that parking a bus in SF might be extremly expensive. For the passengers, virtually no one going to SF will ride Bolt, all the passengers are going to the Easy Bay.

OTOH, they might be targeting college students in Stanford and UC Berkeley, which is a market rarely tappen by Greyhound AFAIK. People say college student ride Greyhound, but I haven't seen much at all myself.


----------



## Texan Eagle

Swadian Hardcore said:


> The thing is, Amtrak serves all those places Bolt is going to serve, Greyhound, Megabus, and other operators go straight to San Francisco. Even worse, Bolt would require a transfer onto the expensive Caltrain or BART to get to SF, while Amtrak's shuttle is free of charge. That transfer could be even more expensive then the Bolt ticket.
> 
> So I see no point in what Bolt is doing, the only possible explanation for them is that parking a bus in SF might be extremly expensive. For the passengers, virtually no one going to SF will ride Bolt, all the passengers are going to the Easy Bay.
> 
> OTOH, they might be targeting college students in Stanford and UC Berkeley, which is a market rarely tappen by Greyhound AFAIK. People say college student ride Greyhound, but I haven't seen much at all myself.


Do not forget, the Bay Area is an urban conglomerate of over 7 million population, and San Francisco proper is only about 900,000 out of those. In fact San Jose is a bigger city than SF by population. So it is silly to say there is no point in what BoltBus is doing. They know where the traveling population is. Oakland and San Jose are enough to capture the student base from Berkeley, Stanford, UCSC, SJSU, plus the large population that lives in the Silicon Valley.

Agreed Amtrak offers a free shuttle from Oakland/Emeryvilla to SF but what about the journey time? The whole jumping around from bus-train-bus between LA-SF makes the shortest LA-SF journey at 9 hours, some trips take 10 hours or more. MegaBus and BoltBus both have scheduled time of around 6 hr 35 min for LA-SJ, and Caltrain takes 1-1.5 hours (slowest service) to reach the city. The extra $10 or so for Caltrain ticket might be well worth the 2 hours saved.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Texan Eagle said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is, Amtrak serves all those places Bolt is going to serve, Greyhound, Megabus, and other operators go straight to San Francisco. Even worse, Bolt would require a transfer onto the expensive Caltrain or BART to get to SF, while Amtrak's shuttle is free of charge. That transfer could be even more expensive then the Bolt ticket.
> 
> So I see no point in what Bolt is doing, the only possible explanation for them is that parking a bus in SF might be extremly expensive. For the passengers, virtually no one going to SF will ride Bolt, all the passengers are going to the Easy Bay.
> 
> OTOH, they might be targeting college students in Stanford and UC Berkeley, which is a market rarely tappen by Greyhound AFAIK. People say college student ride Greyhound, but I haven't seen much at all myself.
> 
> 
> 
> Do not forget, the Bay Area is an urban conglomerate of over 7 million population, and San Francisco proper is only about 900,000 out of those. In fact San Jose is a bigger city than SF by population. So it is silly to say there is no point in what BoltBus is doing. They know where the traveling population is. Oakland and San Jose are enough to capture the student base from Berkeley, Stanford, UCSC, SJSU, plus the large population that lives in the Silicon Valley.
> 
> Agreed Amtrak offers a free shuttle from Oakland/Emeryvilla to SF but what about the journey time? The whole jumping around from bus-train-bus between LA-SF makes the shortest LA-SF journey at 9 hours, some trips take 10 hours or more. MegaBus and BoltBus both have scheduled time of around 6 hr 35 min for LA-SJ, and Caltrain takes 1-1.5 hours (slowest service) to reach the city. The extra $10 or so for Caltrain ticket might be well worth the 2 hours saved.
Click to expand...

But Greyhound already offers $10 fares from SFD, SJC, and OAK to LAD with express service on I-5 through Avenal. That service is very fast and operated with brand-new D4505 equipment. Greyhound is basically copying the same service as a separate BoltBus division, it just dosen't go to SFD.

At this point, I see this as a Greyhound-led attack on Megabus, not on Amtrak or any of the other options on the route. BoltBus seems to be targeting Megabus first and foremost, though Megabus does not operate in the PNW. If they were targeting the other competitors, they would have run to SFD to gain a geographical advantage. Not much college students in SFD, and college students seem to like Megabus, so Bolt is targeting those same college students, which are in turn ignored by Greyhound proper.


----------



## rickycourtney

Swadian--

Greyhound has a big problem with public perception. Most people see the company as having old, unreliable, stinky buses full of criminals.

I realize that Greyhound has made huge strides to improve the quality of their product...

But there's a portion of the population who'll NEVER ride a Greyhound bus because of the horror stories they've heard.

So a brand like BoltBus gives Greyhound the opportunity to reach an new audience it may not otherwise consider traveling by bus.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

rickycourtney said:


> Swadian--
> 
> Greyhound has a big problem with public perception. Most people see the company as having old, unreliable, stinky buses full of criminals.
> 
> I realize that Greyhound has made huge strides to improve the quality of their product...
> 
> But there's a portion of the population who'll NEVER ride a Greyhound bus because of the horror stories they've heard.
> 
> So a brand like BoltBus gives Greyhound the opportunity to reach an new audience it may not otherwise consider traveling by bus.


I know, but that just means it's even more important for Bolt to tap into the SFD market which Megabus and Greyhound are fighting over. Greyhound could gain a cheeky edge overMegabus by introducing a different bus brand into SFD, similar to what happened in the Northeast.

Also, it seems that Prevost has been very succesful lately, they're beating other manufacturers in a lot of markets. Greyhound., Trailways, Americanos, and even Coach USA has been usingmany Prevosts to replace MCIs, Van Hools, and Dinas. If Prevosts are coming in large numbers to California, this could be something important,


----------



## calwatch

The Oakland and Los Angeles Greyhound stations are located in terrible locations with bad connections to public transit. As for not going into San Francisco, it would only be an added 20 minutes (during off peak) driving time from West Oakland BART to San Francisco Transbay Terminal, but I suspect the travel time uncertainties in the peak foreclose this option.

Looking at the schedule the one thing they are missing is late afternoon or evening departures. The overnight Megabus and red eye Greyhound have always been popular among night owls, college students, and late shift workers. The Night Coast bus often sells out - I was turned away one Friday and had to fly. Rather they are all during the day which makes it less convenient. LA's metro runs until midnight and so does BART so a 4 pm departure is very viable.


----------



## rickycourtney

Something to consider...

For most tourists the trip from West Oakland BART to Union Square (and plenty of hotels, shopping and the famous cable cars) is 11 minutes. A bus/walk from the Transbay Terminal (Greyhound) or King Street Station (MegaBus/Caltrain) is about 14 minutes.

Also, BoltBus has a lot less service compared to MegaBus:

BoltBus operating 3/4 buses a day LA > SJ > OAK

MegaBus operates 3 buses a day LA > SJ > SF and another 3 buses a day LA > OAK > SF.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

BoltBus is new, so you don't really expect them to have lots of runs. Greyhound has 11-13 runs a day on the LAD-SFD. The overnights are sold out all the time, so Greyhound's buying more buses in 2013-2014 to try and help the capacity. I expect some of those Prevosts are going to BoltBus' new California service. The new MCIs will probably go anywhere demand is high.

Even though lots of people hate Greyhound, they are my preffered transport. Congestion might be a problem, but last I rode Greyhound, we got stuck in some bumper-to-bumper and still made it to Reno 20 minutes early. That D4505 might have something to do with it, they have a more powerful engine then the older G4500s.


----------



## fairviewroad

Well, if the BART strike isn't resolved by Oct. 31, I'm thinking the West Oakland BART station isn't going to be

such a convenient place to be dropped off after all!


----------



## rickycourtney

fairviewroad said:


> Well, if the BART strike isn't resolved by Oct. 31, I'm thinking the West Oakland BART station isn't going to be
> 
> such a convenient place to be dropped off after all!


Touché!


----------



## calwatch

Bolt is also going to compete in the LA-San Diego market now. They have a potential of being much more competitive than Amtrak, since Amtrak fares are $37 for this pair and the bus is, at least scheduled to be, faster than the train. Depending on the route taken and how well the HOV lanes function this could actually be a major impact to the Surfliner. Six departures a day.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

calwatch said:


> Bolt is also going to compete in the LA-San Diego market now. They have a potential of being much more competitive than Amtrak, since Amtrak fares are $37 for this pair and the bus is, at least scheduled to be, faster than the train. Depending on the route taken and how well the HOV lanes function this could actually be a major impact to the Surfliner. Six departures a day.


Greyhound bashed itself over the head when they gave up the Los Angeles-San Diego-Tijuana route to subsidiary Cruceros. Those buses were terrible and drove away a lot of passengers. Now I see that Greyhound has split up the route with a transfer at San Ysidro. North of San Ysidro, it's Greyhound proper, south it's Americanos, another Mexican subsidiary.

With Greyhound massive delivery of new buses to Los Angeles Garage, we could see some major improvements to bus service in the area.

I've ridden Greyhound through heavy congestion in the SF Bay Area, the buses just take the HOV lane and bypass everything. Delays rarely happen when HOV lanes are present.


----------



## rickycourtney

calwatch said:


> Bolt is also going to compete in the LA-San Diego market now. They have a potential of being much more competitive than Amtrak, since Amtrak fares are $37 for this pair and the bus is, at least scheduled to be, faster than the train. Depending on the route taken and how well the HOV lanes function this could actually be a major impact to the Surfliner. Six departures a day.


I agree. This could mirror the situation with the Amtrak Cascades. If BoltBus is consistently faster, cheaper and still reasonably comfortable... the Pacific Surfliner could take a hit.

Also, BoltBus is going to be far more attractive than Greyhound Express would ever be on this route. The LA Greyhound station is a dump and frankly a scary place... whereas Union Station (where BoltBus stops) is a clean and comfortable place to wait.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

rickycourtney said:


> calwatch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bolt is also going to compete in the LA-San Diego market now. They have a potential of being much more competitive than Amtrak, since Amtrak fares are $37 for this pair and the bus is, at least scheduled to be, faster than the train. Depending on the route taken and how well the HOV lanes function this could actually be a major impact to the Surfliner. Six departures a day.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree. This could mirror the situation with the Amtrak Cascades. If BoltBus is consistently faster, cheaper and still reasonably comfortable... the Pacific Surfliner could take a hit.
> 
> Also, BoltBus is going to be far more attractive than Greyhound Express would ever be on this route. The LA Greyhound station is a dump and frankly a scary place... whereas Union Station (where BoltBus stops) is a clean and comfortable place to wait.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I didn't think that LAD station is that bad, at least it's not South Central. Besides, Greyhound could operate to Union Station anyway, there is a bus terminal at Union Station.

I don't know what happened with the Cascades, but Greyhound really needs to clean up their act in Seattle. All the buses based from Seattle Garage are G4500s, they need to rebuild those buses and introduce express service. The Greyhound terminals in Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver are all in decent areas.


----------



## rickycourtney

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Hmm, I didn't think that LAD station is that bad, at least it's not South Central. Besides, Greyhound could operate to Union Station anyway, there is a bus terminal at Union Station.


It's better than South Central LA... but not by much.

The other big problem with Greyhound's LA station... is it's poorly connected to transit.

The bus terminal at Union Station (where the Amtrak buses and the Amtrak/Greyhound to Las Vegas stop) wouldn't be big enough to handle all the traffic Greyhound does in LA. They could maybe squeeze it into the Patsaouras Transit Plaza but I don't see it happening.

My hope is that if Metro builds the big new bus station at LAUS that they've proposed... Greyhound will move their operations there.



Swadian Hardcore said:


> I don't know what happened with the Cascades, but Greyhound really needs to clean up their act in Seattle. All the buses based from Seattle Garage are G4500s, they need to rebuild those buses and introduce express service. The Greyhound terminals in Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver are all in decent areas.


Greyhound already operates express service with brand new buses in the PNW... BoltBus! Plus it has the added benefit of not having any of the stigma attached to Greyhound name.

I walked by the Seattle station... it is in a nicer part of town.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

rickycourtney said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know what happened with the Cascades, but Greyhound really needs to clean up their act in Seattle. All the buses based from Seattle Garage are G4500s, they need to rebuild those buses and introduce express service. The Greyhound terminals in Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver are all in decent areas.
> 
> 
> 
> Greyhound already operates express service with brand new buses in the PNW... BoltBus! Plus it has the added benefit of not having any of the stigma attached to Greyhound name.
> 
> I walked by the Seattle station... it is in a nicer part of town.
Click to expand...

I know, but BoltBus is no true replacement for Greyhound. It's not gonna be nice to wait curbside in the constant Seattle rain. And if Greyhound rebuilt the G4500s under their own name, it would help fix their reputation.

Greyhound, if you can do it better, then do it better, instead of just using BoltBus to get around the Greyhound Haters.


----------



## calwatch

Again, for many riders, if there was a minimal level of competence bar to clear to ride Greyhound, more people would ride it. Right now, for Amtrak, that bar is having valid identification. For Megabus/Bolt Bus, that bar is having access to a computer and/or someone with a credit card (or prepaid debit card). The perception of Greyhound riff raff is such that people don't like being with them. Even on the Sunset Limited a couple of weeks ago, when we stopped to kick off a (female!) passenger who started a fight with another woman, people in the sleeping car eating their free meal derisively called the "Greyhound crowd" as a reason why they won't ride coach.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Of course this bad publicity about Greyhound is mostly BS, Greyhound now requires ID for all passengers and their drivers are happy to kick off any disruptive passengers. Greyhound has also introduced a new yield-management system which is designed to drastically reduce overbookings. However, becuase some tickets are still handwritten in the absense of a computer, it's impossible to remove all chances of overbooking.

Greyhound's improvements are night and day compared to a mere few years ago. Thus I have taken them more and more and I'm proud to support Greyhound Lines.


----------



## jebr

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Of course this bad publicity about Greyhound is mostly BS, Greyhound now requires ID for all passengers and their drivers are happy to kick off any disruptive passengers. Greyhound has also introduced a new yield-management system which is designed to drastically reduce overbookings. However, becuase some tickets are still handwritten in the absense of a computer, it's impossible to remove all chances of overbooking.
> 
> Greyhound's improvements are night and day compared to a mere few years ago. Thus I have taken them more and more and I'm proud to support Greyhound Lines.


It's not BS. It may be based on an older company which has changed its practices, but most of the complaints about Greyhound are very real, and it takes a LOT of time to recover from a tarnished name. That's what Greyhound Inc. is doing with the new names.

And if they're night and day there, can you pass some of that luck this way? I've had more trouble with Greyhound in 2013 than I did in 2011 or 2012, and I've taken (or attempted to take) relatively the same number of trips each year. (This year, my two attempted Greyhound trips had once cancellation because there wasn't a driver, and having to persist with their Facebook team before getting a refund instead of just future travel, and a spare bus that smelled like they forgot to drain the sewage until the last minute. The way home on that trip was decent, though.) 2012 had nothing more than about 20 minutes late into TFI, and my express bus trip was fine from Milwaukee to Chicago, and 2011 had no problems on my round trip Chicago to Milwaukee. Anecdotal evidence is not hard science, but it's going to take me quite a bit to choose Greyhound again after those experiences.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I rode Greyhound 15 times this year and all my drivers showed up, none of the buses broke down, and the most delay I have was 5 minutes. I don't know what's wrong with Greyhound's Chicago Garage but this sounds weird to me.

A lot of people complain about Greyhound "losing" their bags, but they actually just forgot it on the bus. Passnegers are responsible for transferring their own luggage when trnasferring buses. I guess most riders are too dumb to read the Baggage Policy.

If the smelly spare bus was a Van Hool, it's probably not owned by Greyhound. Greyhound has multiple state-owned or leased Van Hools which are maintained to very poor condition. I've have smelly buses too, namely G4500s, but I'm happy that Greyhound drove all the G4500s away for a major rebuild.


----------



## jebr

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I rode Greyhound 15 times this year and all my drivers showed up, none of the buses broke down, and the most delay I have was 5 minutes. I don't know what's wrong with Greyhound's Chicago Garage but this sounds weird to me.
> 
> A lot of people complain about Greyhound "losing" their bags, but they actually just forgot it on the bus. Passnegers are responsible for transferring their own luggage when trnasferring buses. I guess most riders are too dumb to read the Baggage Policy.
> 
> If the smelly spare bus was a Van Hool, it's probably not owned by Greyhound. Greyhound has multiple state-owned or leased Van Hools which are maintained to very poor condition. I've have smelly buses too, namely G4500s, but I'm happy that Greyhound drove all the G4500s away for a major rebuild.


There very well may have been something wrong with the Chicago garage, because that's where most my trips would feed out of (my last two attempts, one successful, have been MSP - CHI.) Yes, the spare bus was a Greyhound-leased Van Hool.

But, at the end of the day, what I was left with was that Greyhound is going downhill. I probably just got very unlucky (the cancellation was on a day where there were weather delays earlier, but those had cleared by that time when I called in to verify the trip was still on, which at the time I called in they said the trip was still on.) But they're also not "BS reasons," either, and it makes me very skeptical to take Greyhound again, especially since my schedule now works with a competitor's schedule. (Earlier this year my shifts were such that Greyhound had the only overnight schedule I could meet reliably, which made day trips from MSP to Chicago possible.) But if Greyhound can make a new brand that offers a different experience (or even a more consistent experience,) I'll be willing to give it a try.

As an aside, the delays really weren't bothersome. The 20 minutes didn't make or break a connection, and life went on. Heck, with the Empire Builder delays here, a 30 minute delay sounds rather pleasant in comparison!


----------



## jebr

Swadian Hardcore said:


> A lot of people complain about Greyhound "losing" their bags, but they actually just forgot it on the bus. Passnegers are responsible for transferring their own luggage when trnasferring buses. I guess most riders are too dumb to read the Baggage Policy.


Talking about this separately: I get this, but it's very different from airline or train travel. Most new passengers who are used to airline travel (or train travel) would think that if they "check" a bag, it will be transferred automatically to the destination. I'm not sure how Greyhound could change this part of it without either doing the transfers themselves or majorly rewording "checked" baggage...maybe something like "you can carry on one bag and you can put one bag below the bus, both of which you must transfer," avoiding "checked baggage" verbiage entirely.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I really don't understand why a driver wouldn't show up, I've never had it happen to me. Drivers are paid by the hour, if they don't show up, they earn no money and they'll probably get sacked. Are you sure the driver didn't show up or were there mechanical problems with the bus? If he really didn't show up, he probably got sick.

For me, the real night-and-day difference is that up until September 2013, all routes west of Reno were dominated by hordes of falling-apart G4500s. Then suddenly in October, the G4500s were gone and brand-new D4505s took over. Snap, just like that. That really made an impression on me.


----------



## rickycourtney

So it looks like the BoltBus service in California will be using D4505 coaches instead of the Prevost X3-45 used in the Northwest and on most of the routes in the Northeast.

LA Metro's blog "The Source" did a post today about the service coming to LAUS, you can read it here. They had nice things to say about the service.







BoltBus D4505 coaches in Downtown LA. Photo courtesy: Anna Chen/Metro


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

What?! These D4505 units have such weird numbers! Three-digit numbers? So first Greyhound goes to five-digit numbers, now three-digit numbers.....

New D4505s were spotted up to 86580, so Greyhound must have 300 of them now. I think they ordered a lot more than just 130 new units. Greyhound sure is getting a huge number of buses. I'll have to ask for a new roster on GTE.


----------



## jebr

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I really don't understand why a driver wouldn't show up, I've never had it happen to me. Drivers are paid by the hour, if they don't show up, they earn no money and they'll probably get sacked. Are you sure the driver didn't show up or were there mechanical problems with the bus? If he really didn't show up, he probably got sick.
> 
> For me, the real night-and-day difference is that up until September 2013, all routes west of Reno were dominated by hordes of falling-apart G4500s. Then suddenly in October, the G4500s were gone and brand-new D4505s took over. Snap, just like that. That really made an impression on me.


In terms of the driver, I was just told at the counter that they didn't have a driver for the bus. I inferred from that that the driver didn't show, but there may have been a scheduling error as well. They did cancel a few buses earlier in the day due to inclement weather, so maybe the drivers weren't in their normal rotation either. I had inferred that it was a driver no-show since they had originally said the bus trip was going to be on (the weather issues had resolved, and they ran a few routes earlier in the evening) and they didn't know until about an hour before the route was going to head out.
Yeah, new buses would show a turn-around. We've had them out here since at least 2011, as that's the first time I took Greyhound. I think it was a way for them to compete in Midwest markets against Megabus. But they don't seem to have enough in rotation and they seem to overbook and not have adequate backups in place to at least offer a decent experience in their spare buses - even having a way to maybe use an extra Jefferson Lines bus (which has its base in Minneapolis) would have made a better experience. The Rocket Rider buses, if JL had any to spare, would have made a very nice "extra" bus and have most of the amenities I would have expected. Not sure how feasible that is, though.



Swadian Hardcore said:


> What?! These D4505 units have such weird numbers! Three-digit numbers? So first Greyhound goes to five-digit numbers, now three-digit numbers.....
> 
> New D4505s were spotted up to 86580, so Greyhound must have 300 of them now. I think they ordered a lot more than just 130 new units. Greyhound sure is getting a huge number of buses. I'll have to ask for a new roster on GTE.


 Excuse my ignorance, but did Greyhound originally use 4 digit numbers? Maybe they're reverting to that. The picture seems to have a 4-digit number, just with a leading zero. Sometimes the leading zero will still be important, as it's part of the first 1,000 of the 10,000. Pure speculation, though.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Yes, Greyhound did origginally have 4-digit numbers but they should start with 9000 if they're going back to 4-digits with the D4505. Usually a bus number starting with 0 means either a leased bus or a state-owned, company-owned buses don't have that. Maybe there D4505s are indeed leased.

As far as the new Greyhound buses go, they run all around the country now, regardless of Express or Local. There's a lot of them in Denver where no Megabus is present. I think Greyhound is not only trying to compete against Megabus, but to improve their image as a whole. Before the new D4505s were delivered to Los Angeles, a lot of Express buses from Los Angeles were subbed with stinking old G4500s.

I really don't think the driver just decided to skip a run. I did watch a video on YouTube where a female driver of a 102DL3 tried to drive into a drive-thru at a fast food restaurent, her bus ended up bieng swamped in the mub. Maybe you just got back luck and that was supposed to be your driver, or maybe it was that inclement weather you mentioned.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

Swadian Hardcore said:


> What?! These D4505 units have such weird numbers! Three-digit numbers? So first Greyhound goes to five-digit numbers, now three-digit numbers.....
> 
> New D4505s were spotted up to 86580, so Greyhound must have 300 of them now. I think they ordered a lot more than just 130 new units. Greyhound sure is getting a huge number of buses. I'll have to ask for a new roster on GTE.


The three-digits are the fleet numbers of the Bolt-operated equipment in the NE and PNW - its a series that begins with 0800 and goes from there.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

jebr said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really don't understand why a driver wouldn't show up, I've never had it happen to me. Drivers are paid by the hour, if they don't show up, they earn no money and they'll probably get sacked. Are you sure the driver didn't show up or were there mechanical problems with the bus? If he really didn't show up, he probably got sick.
> 
> For me, the real night-and-day difference is that up until September 2013, all routes west of Reno were dominated by hordes of falling-apart G4500s. Then suddenly in October, the G4500s were gone and brand-new D4505s took over. Snap, just like that. That really made an impression on me.
> 
> 
> 
> In terms of the driver, I was just told at the counter that they didn't have a driver for the bus. I inferred from that that the driver didn't show, but there may have been a scheduling error as well. They did cancel a few buses earlier in the day due to inclement weather, so maybe the drivers weren't in their normal rotation either. I had inferred that it was a driver no-show since they had originally said the bus trip was going to be on (the weather issues had resolved, and they ran a few routes earlier in the evening) and they didn't know until about an hour before the route was going to head out.
> Yeah, new buses would show a turn-around. We've had them out here since at least 2011, as that's the first time I took Greyhound. I think it was a way for them to compete in Midwest markets against Megabus. But they don't seem to have enough in rotation and they seem to overbook and not have adequate backups in place to at least offer a decent experience in their spare buses - even having a way to maybe use an extra Jefferson Lines bus (which has its base in Minneapolis) would have made a better experience. The Rocket Rider buses, if JL had any to spare, would have made a very nice "extra" bus and have most of the amenities I would have expected. Not sure how feasible that is, though.
> 
> 
> 
> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> What?! These D4505 units have such weird numbers! Three-digit numbers? So first Greyhound goes to five-digit numbers, now three-digit numbers.....
> 
> New D4505s were spotted up to 86580, so Greyhound must have 300 of them now. I think they ordered a lot more than just 130 new units. Greyhound sure is getting a huge number of buses. I'll have to ask for a new roster on GTE.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Excuse my ignorance, but did Greyhound originally use 4 digit numbers? Maybe they're reverting to that. The picture seems to have a 4-digit number, just with a leading zero. Sometimes the leading zero will still be important, as it's part of the first 1,000 of the 10,000. Pure speculation, though.
Click to expand...

Here's a summary of Greyhound scheduling practices with drivers and buses:

DRIVERS

You have two types of drivers - regulars and extras. Regular drivers have an assigned run that in California involve overnights from their origin terminal and back the next day. The typical rotations are 2 on - 2 off, 4 on - 2 off, or 6 on- 1 off. It all depends on the service. If a driver "books off" or calls out, their full regular run is open. These runs are put on the "board" and assigned by a dispatcher in Dallas, TX to an "extra driver." Extra drivers do not have regular runs and go where they are needed. In the example above, one extra driver may pull the run to the destination, but go somewhere else afterwards because of the work. This leaves the return open for another driver. In the event you described, the regular driver was out, the location did not have an extra, so you have to wait for someone to get there.

BUSES

Greyhound Operations in Dallas, TX strategically plans where buses go on a daily basis. To accomodate the expected flows of passengers, they look at historical demand and current bookings. They will "deadhead" equipment pending their maintenance standing to a location with expected overflow or to the buses' home terminal when needed. These buses are positioned accordingly, but many times are out of place when broken down or not used. Therefore, if a location that was expecting that extra bus doesn't get one, they have to use what they have. Sometimes that means an older, but useable piece.

Regarding the earlier comment with the G's in Seattle, they are there because it's relatively short miles in that regional route pool compared to some of the other locations and their pools. They want to use the newer buses generally in areas that have heavy demand and traffic and in longer distances.

Express won't come to the PNW because there's no need - those metropolitan areas have the demographic Bolt targets (young professionals 20-30). In the short time since they started, they've come to carry that region.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

@metrolinecoach111, does Greyhound still have the All-48 States ADA pool? Or are all the buses assigned to regional route pools now? I thought the Los Angeles-Dallas was run with the G4500 for a very long time and the Sacramento-Portland is apparently still run with the G4500. I don't think those qualify as "short" routes.

Do you have a current Greyhound roster? I'm looking for one.

Thanks.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

They have that pool, but have divided it according to their home maintenance bases. It's an equipment rotation, maintenance routine thing.

Sac-Portland is a haul, but it's limited miles - that's the farthest those buses will typically go, unless there's some issues with other buses, deadheads for positioning, or heavy days such as the Thanksgiving Holiday.


----------



## railiner

I recall when 4 digit GL buses that had "zero" as the first digit indicated they were a "combo-coach".....rebuilt Scenicruiser's and later MC-7's, that had a varying amount of seats removed from the rear, a bulkhead installed, and a side door cut in high on the curb side for loading GPX express with a belt-loader. 0600 series were 18 seater's, and 0700 series were 30 seater's....

But that was back in the 1970's....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

metrolinecoach111 said:


> They have that pool, but have divided it according to their home maintenance bases. It's an equipment rotation, maintenance routine thing.
> 
> Sac-Portland is a haul, but it's limited miles - that's the farthest those buses will typically go, unless there's some issues with other buses, deadheads for positioning, or heavy days such as the Thanksgiving Holiday.


But aren't there buses in that pool running all over the place instead of to just one base? I've spotted 6575 in Reno and someone spotted it in Atlantaa few monthes later. 6505 has been spotted in New York, Oklahoma City, and Greenville. Aren't these just jumping around bases?


----------



## metrolinecoach111

Swadian Hardcore said:


> metrolinecoach111 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have that pool, but have divided it according to their home maintenance bases. It's an equipment rotation, maintenance routine thing.
> 
> Sac-Portland is a haul, but it's limited miles - that's the farthest those buses will typically go, unless there's some issues with other buses, deadheads for positioning, or heavy days such as the Thanksgiving Holiday.
> 
> 
> 
> But aren't there buses in that pool running all over the place instead of to just one base? I've spotted 6575 in Reno and someone spotted it in Atlantaa few monthes later. 6505 has been spotted in New York, Oklahoma City, and Greenville. Aren't these just jumping around bases?
Click to expand...

Yes there are. The pools and home bases of the buses are set, but operational factors dictate where buses actually are. As a rule of thumb, the planners generally try to keep the buses within their regions and will try to get them back to their domiciles within the constraints of the operation. But, Greyhound is a national company, and the buses if not earmarked for a specific purpose (Lucky Streak in NJ, the state-owned pools, charter), are fair game for positioning moves.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

metrolinecoach111 said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> metrolinecoach111 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have that pool, but have divided it according to their home maintenance bases. It's an equipment rotation, maintenance routine thing.
> 
> Sac-Portland is a haul, but it's limited miles - that's the farthest those buses will typically go, unless there's some issues with other buses, deadheads for positioning, or heavy days such as the Thanksgiving Holiday.
> 
> 
> 
> But aren't there buses in that pool running all over the place instead of to just one base? I've spotted 6575 in Reno and someone spotted it in Atlantaa few monthes later. 6505 has been spotted in New York, Oklahoma City, and Greenville. Aren't these just jumping around bases?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes there are. The pools and home bases of the buses are set, but operational factors dictate where buses actually are. As a rule of thumb, the planners generally try to keep the buses within their regions and will try to get them back to their domiciles within the constraints of the operation. But, Greyhound is a national company, and the buses if not earmarked for a specific purpose (Lucky Streak in NJ, the state-owned pools, charter), are fair game for positioning moves.
Click to expand...

I guess Greyhound dosen't adhere to their bus regions very tightly. I've seen a Lucky Streak 102DL3 parked in Los Angeles and another was spotted in St. Louis.....


----------



## railiner

It all goes out the window on the major holidays like Thanksgiving.....

Our buses are sometimes used on Albany-Buffalo-Cleveland schedules as part of our pool with GL. But oftentimes on major holidays, when there is a shortage of equipment, our buses can wind up in Chicago, Washington, or who-knows-where. Actually, we do know where now....now that we have GPS telemetry units in all our buses.....


----------



## metrolinecoach111

railiner said:


> It all goes out the window on the major holidays like Thanksgiving.....
> 
> Our buses are sometimes used on Albany-Buffalo-Cleveland schedules as part of our pool with GL. But oftentimes on major holidays, when there is a shortage of equipment, our buses can wind up in Chicago, Washington, or who-knows-where. Actually, we do know where now....now that we have GPS telemetry units in all our buses.....


You mean when it works  Gotta love CADEC.

When Bolt first started, they pressed the older DL's from Peter Pan into 48-state service during the summer months to augment capacity. That quickly stopped when they realized they could make more money having those buses stay in the Northeast.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Do you mean those Adirondack Trailways buses end up on the BOS-CLD and NYD-CHD runs? That sure is all over the place. What's CADEC and OSC? I keep hearing about OSC dispatching from the drivers. Where are Greyhound's dispatchers? The Dallas HQ is a tiny little building. Are they all in that little building, are they in the Dallas Maintainence Center, or the Dallas Terminal?

If they had sent Peter Pan buses into the 48-States pool, that would end them up as far west as San Francisco! I do think Peter Pan still has some old 1993 102DL3's and maybe even some 102C3's.


----------



## railiner

Trailways of New York buses do sometimes get used on all or parts of the BOS-ALB-SYR-BUF-CLE (I-90) line,, or NYC or TOR (table 170). They are never sent on the NYC-CLE-CHI (I-80) line (table 201). If they end in CLE on a very busy holiday, they can sometimes be sent on to Chicago, but rarely beyond there. They will turn them back to 'home territory', ASAP.

The reason they are used on the former route, is the carrier operating the bus, even a thru bus, between ALB and SYR can be either GL or ADT, and from SYR to BUF either GL or NYT. It's part of a complicated pool arrangement to balance both driver and bus prorated mileage share over a period of time.

Personally, I like the pool arrangement GL and PPB have, where they pool schedules, but the drivers only drive their own companies equipment....they do not interline their buses like TNY and GL do. I don't know how they do it over at Bolt....

As for the CADEC, TNY buses employ a different GPS technology that is either more reliable, or repaired ASAP if down....


----------



## metrolinecoach111

Swadian Hardcore said:


> Do you mean those Adirondack Trailways buses end up on the BOS-CLD and NYD-CHD runs? That sure is all over the place. What's CADEC and OSC? I keep hearing about OSC dispatching from the drivers. Where are Greyhound's dispatchers? The Dallas HQ is a tiny little building. Are they all in that little building, are they in the Dallas Maintainence Center, or the Dallas Terminal?
> 
> If they had sent Peter Pan buses into the 48-States pool, that would end them up as far west as San Francisco! I do think Peter Pan still has some old 1993 102DL3's and maybe even some 102C3's.





Swadian Hardcore said:


> Do you mean those Adirondack Trailways buses end up on the BOS-CLD and NYD-CHD runs? That sure is all over the place. What's CADEC and OSC? I keep hearing about OSC dispatching from the drivers. Where are Greyhound's dispatchers? The Dallas HQ is a tiny little building. Are they all in that little building, are they in the Dallas Maintainence Center, or the Dallas Terminal?
> 
> If they had sent Peter Pan buses into the 48-States pool, that would end them up as far west as San Francisco! I do think Peter Pan still has some old 1993 102DL3's and maybe even some 102C3's.


Yes, the Trailways NY buses do go as far as Cleveland and I have heard of Chicago. Greyhound really tries not to do this because of what they have to pay NY/Adirondack Trailways in using the equipment (it would be considered a rental in that agreement). CADEC is the security/GPS system installed on all Greyhound owned buses. OSC is Operations Support Center and they are located in Dallas HQ. The dispatchers there manage specific regions of the US and oversee how the "daily operations plan" is executed. Their directives give the supervisiors in the driver base terminals their "ground orders" to "execute" the operations plan.

The farthest the ex-Peter Pan Buses went was St. Louis from what I remember - they brought those back in a hurry once they ramped up Bolt. Those buses are long gone. The oldest Peter buses left are from 1999 and can rarely be used for line runs because of ADA.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

railiner said:


> Trailways of New York buses do sometimes get used on all or parts of the BOS-ALB-SYR-BUF-CLE (I-90) line,, or NYC or TOR (table 170). They are never sent on the NYC-CLE-CHI (I-80) line (table 215). If they end in CLE on a very busy holiday, they can sometimes be sent on to Chicago, but rarely beyond there. They will turn them back to 'home territory', ASAP.
> 
> The reason they are used on the former route, is the carrier operating the bus, even a thru bus, between ALB and SYR can be either GL or ADT, and from SYR to BUF either GL or NYT. It's part of a complicated pool arrangement to balance both driver and bus prorated mileage share over a period of time.
> 
> Personally, I like the pool arrangement GL and PPB have, where they pool schedules, but the drivers only drive their own companies equipment....they do not interline their buses like TNY and GL do. I don't know how they do it over at Bolt....
> 
> As for the CADEC, TNY buses employ a different GPS technology that is either more reliable, or repaired ASAP if down....


TNY has Saucon, just like almost every other line-run or scheduled service operator that has this type of technology. Saucon does the job well.

The difference in the pooling agreements for TNY and PPB is substantial - TNY is equipment and revenue, PPB is only revenue, therefore each is treated as it's own operation, although they are coordinated in scheduling and planning.

Bolt operates as a standalone division in all markets. If they have to use Greyhound or Peter Pan equipment (or vice versa), they are considered rentals and charged back accordingly to the appropriate division for accounting purposes.


----------



## railiner

The Bolt buses that I have seen, have GL ownership. Are there also PPB owned Bolt buses? And are the driver's all "Bolt" driver's?

I know at the beginning, when they started up, they "borrowed" driver's (and manager's) from both companies.

I haven't really paid close attention to their operation.......

I know they maintain their buses at PPB's Secaucus garage, and occasionally I see one in The Port, or parked on the midtown streets....


----------



## metrolinecoach111

railiner said:


> The Bolt buses that I have seen, have GL ownership. Are there also PPB owned Bolt buses? And are the driver's all "Bolt" driver's?
> 
> I know at the beginning, when they started up, they "borrowed" driver's (and manager's) from both companies.
> 
> I haven't really paid close attention to their operation.......
> 
> I know they maintain their buses at PPB's Secaucus garage, and occasionally I see one in The Port, or parked on the midtown streets....


All the buses carry GL legals because of the operating authority - Bolt is a Greyhound entity. PPB purchased the first batch of D45's for them and leased them to Greyhound for Bolt service. This current batch is Greyhound owned and operated on the West Coast. All the drivers are under the Bolt division, but are Greyhound employees officially, all of whom belonging to ATU 1700. You are correct that they borrowed a few from both companies in the beginning - almost all of whom stayed on.

Regarding maintenance facilities, in the Northeast the buses are based out of PPB's Secaucus and Chelsea (Boston) garages, and Greyhound's Philadelphia and DC garages. In the PNW, they are based out of Greyhound's Portland terminal and Seattle garage. In California, it's all LA. About a year ago, Bolt operated service from the Port out of Gate 84 but has since discontinued that to the delight of all parties involved.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

Swadian Hardcore said:


> rickycourtney said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know what happened with the Cascades, but Greyhound really needs to clean up their act in Seattle. All the buses based from Seattle Garage are G4500s, they need to rebuild those buses and introduce express service. The Greyhound terminals in Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver are all in decent areas.
> 
> 
> 
> Greyhound already operates express service with brand new buses in the PNW... BoltBus! Plus it has the added benefit of not having any of the stigma attached to Greyhound name.
> 
> I walked by the Seattle station... it is in a nicer part of town.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I know, but BoltBus is no true replacement for Greyhound. It's not gonna be nice to wait curbside in the constant Seattle rain. And if Greyhound rebuilt the G4500s under their own name, it would help fix their reputation.
> 
> Greyhound, if you can do it better, then do it better, instead of just using BoltBus to get around the Greyhound Haters.
Click to expand...

I can attest to the fact that the "cool" factor of BoltBus in the PNW has done wonders for Greyhound overall in that region. The young professional, tech-savvy crowd that comprises a good chunk of the metopolitan areas served can relate to and feel comfortable with Bolt. The same cannot be said about Greyhound - it's all about the marketing.

Greyhound has a long way to go as a brand to recover their tarnished reputation, whether anyone believes it's deserved or not. Yes the innovations, new buses and operating practices have gotten better. And to an extent depending on where you are, so has the customer service. But until Greyhound goes full-reserved on all schedules in every market (they have capacity controls on every schedule and every section without flexibility in tracking passengers), they will always have problems. Unfortunately, that's also one of the advantages they have over other modes. And as previously mentioned, this is without considering the wide array of passengers Greyhound serves, unlike Bolt, Mega or other online curbside-based services.

Seeing both sides of the coin, you have to pick your poison.


----------



## railiner

So it sounds like PPB really has no connection with Bolt then.......

As for Bolt using Gate 84...yeah, I remember that.....it was done to 'counter' Megabus using 'Area X' (the covered portion of West 41st Street passing thru The Port. Thankfully, that has ended.....


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

metrolinecoach111 said:


> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Bolt buses that I have seen, have GL ownership. Are there also PPB owned Bolt buses? And are the driver's all "Bolt" driver's?
> 
> I know at the beginning, when they started up, they "borrowed" driver's (and manager's) from both companies.
> 
> I haven't really paid close attention to their operation.......
> 
> I know they maintain their buses at PPB's Secaucus garage, and occasionally I see one in The Port, or parked on the midtown streets....
> 
> 
> 
> All the buses carry GL legals because of the operating authority - Bolt is a Greyhound entity. PPB purchased the first batch of D45's for them and leased them to Greyhound for Bolt service. This current batch is Greyhound owned and operated on the West Coast. All the drivers are under the Bolt division, but are Greyhound employees officially, all of whom belonging to ATU 1700. You are correct that they borrowed a few from both companies in the beginning - almost all of whom stayed on.
> 
> Regarding maintenance facilities, in the Northeast the buses are based out of PPB's Secaucus and Chelsea (Boston) garages, and Greyhound's Philadelphia and DC garages. In the PNW, they are based out of Greyhound's Portland terminal and Seattle garage. In California, it's all LA. About a year ago, Bolt operated service from the Port out of Gate 84 but has since discontinued that to the delight of all parties involved.
Click to expand...

Greyhound still has garages in Washington DC and Portland? I thought those garages were already closed. If Greyhound has any garages left in those places, they are probably not full-scale Maintainence Centers like Richmond or Atlanta. I'm pretty sure that for Portland-Sacramento and Portland-Spokane, Greyhound has to rotate Seattle-based G4500's into Portland on the Seattle-Portland runs. Just like how buses on the Reno-San Francisco are rotated in from Los Angeles.


----------



## metrolinecoach111

Swadian Hardcore said:


> metrolinecoach111 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> railiner said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Bolt buses that I have seen, have GL ownership. Are there also PPB owned Bolt buses? And are the driver's all "Bolt" driver's?
> 
> I know at the beginning, when they started up, they "borrowed" driver's (and manager's) from both companies.
> 
> I haven't really paid close attention to their operation.......
> 
> I know they maintain their buses at PPB's Secaucus garage, and occasionally I see one in The Port, or parked on the midtown streets....
> 
> 
> 
> All the buses carry GL legals because of the operating authority - Bolt is a Greyhound entity. PPB purchased the first batch of D45's for them and leased them to Greyhound for Bolt service. This current batch is Greyhound owned and operated on the West Coast. All the drivers are under the Bolt division, but are Greyhound employees officially, all of whom belonging to ATU 1700. You are correct that they borrowed a few from both companies in the beginning - almost all of whom stayed on.
> 
> Regarding maintenance facilities, in the Northeast the buses are based out of PPB's Secaucus and Chelsea (Boston) garages, and Greyhound's Philadelphia and DC garages. In the PNW, they are based out of Greyhound's Portland terminal and Seattle garage. In California, it's all LA. About a year ago, Bolt operated service from the Port out of Gate 84 but has since discontinued that to the delight of all parties involved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Greyhound still has garages in Washington DC and Portland? I thought those garages were already closed. If Greyhound has any garages left in those places, they are probably not full-scale Maintainence Centers like Richmond or Atlanta. I'm pretty sure that for Portland-Sacramento and Portland-Spokane, Greyhound has to rotate Seattle-based G4500's into Portland on the Seattle-Portland runs. Just like how buses on the Reno-San Francisco are rotated in from Los Angeles.
Click to expand...

Greyhound purchased Peter Pan's Tuxedo, MD garage and stores buses at the Portland, OR Greyhound gates overnight. (Portland, OR is a very interesting set-up actually, but very tight on space) You are correct that they rotate buses in and out of Seattle (Seattly as the home base) for maintenance in the PNW. Heavy work is done in Vancouver, B.C. as the Seattle garage cannot handle that type of work.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I didn't realize Greyhound had purchased a garage in Tuxedo, MD. That means they can subtantially increse service out of Washington isntead of using Richmond all the time. They store buses overnight at the Reno station wherever they have space. Usually they don't store in the Ready Lot due to vandalism, instead storing in the little garage, or when that overflows, then they store at the gates. I've seen as many as 5 buses stored overngiht at the gates, but most of the time there's only max 3.

Thanks for the info.


----------



## calwatch

Bolt Bus recently expanded to LA-San Francisco (Transbay Terminal) and LA-Las Vegas (Plaza Hotel). http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/boltbus-expands-from-los-angeles-adds-las-vegas-san-francisco-service-235260791.html

Of course, there is plenty of Greyhound Express between LA-San Francisco and LA-Las Vegas, but that LA Greyhound Terminal is just awful. Union Station of course is also being made miserable to anyone not riding Metrolink and Amtrak (see the thread in the main board) but even having to wait outside, it is still an order of magnitude better than the chaotic LA Greyhound Terminal.


----------



## tp49

I rode Bolt from San Diego to Los Angeles last week. Cost $8 took a little over two hours and the bus was brand new and comfortable. Even better was that there were only three other passengers total on the bus. I though there would be more. Wifi was a bit slow but it was still a good deal for the price and I'm someone who would not ever ride Greyhound again after several bad experiences years ago but I'd ride Bolt again.


----------



## rickycourtney

calwatch said:


> Union Station of course is also being made miserable to anyone not riding Metrolink and Amtrak (see the thread in the main board) but even having to wait outside, it is still an order of magnitude better than the chaotic LA Greyhound Terminal.


Metro posted this afternoon that Union Station will have a smaller waiting area for BoltBus and Megabus customers.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Again, the LAD Greyhound Terminal didn't seem very bad to me, It's not great but it's OK. You just got to take things into your own hands and not wait to be told what to do. As long as you have a ticket and get on the bus, it's all good from there on out.

Greyhound and Bolt has the same hard product and the same soft product. Thus I don't see why one would hate Greyhound and love Bolt. That would've been different back in the G4500 days, but not anymore. As I said, all Greyhound passengers are required to have ID, which is cutting down on the riff-raff. And the area around the LAD terminal is actually quite safe according to crime records seen here: www.crimemapping,com.

So, if you can get a $10 deal to SFD or SAC, give Greyhound a try, you might not like the LAD station but I'm sure you'll like the bus. It's the same fare for the Coast Route (which is a D4505 anyway) and a lot cheaper than Amtrak. Remember, the vast majority of Greyhound travel is on the bus.


----------



## rickycourtney

Again, despite improvements in the past few years, Greyhound is still fighting it's own reputation.

It will be interesting to see how this service to Las Vegas does... the good news is the stop in Vegas is a block away from Fremont Street (with it's casinos and tourist attractions) and two blocks away from the super-convienent SDX bus (that Megabus also connects to) that takes you right to the strip. The bad news is the stop is at a Greyhound station.

This comment on the BoltBus Facebook page from an interested passenger pretty much sums up the mental hurdle most people will have taking BoltBus (or Greyhound) to Vegas:



> I was assuming the Las Vegas stop would be on the strip but am disappointed to find out that it is 5 miles north at the greyhound bus terminal. I'm reading that that is a very seedy area and that the terminal itself is quite scary. I was looking forward to a trip but might have to pass :-( would there be any security improvements to the terminal itself or a shuttle to and from the strip? Otherwise I'm a bit nervous!


I think this person brings up some good points, if Greyhound hopes for the LA-LV BoltBus route to succeed they are going to have to make security very visible at the terminal in Las Vegas. They should also think about providing a separate waiting area for BoltBus passengers (much like it provides a separate waiting area for BoltBus passengers, like it does for Greyhound Express passengers at some stations.)

On the other hand, I think BoltBus adding a stop at the Transbay Terminal in San Francisco will be welcome news for many (even though it's technically at a Greyhound station). Like we discussed, the stop at the West Oakland BART already provided an easy trip into the city, but this stop will remove the mental hurdle for some passengers that "BoltBus doesn't stop in San Francisco."


----------



## railiner

I don't get this 'dissing' of the Las Vegas Greyhound Terminal......It was all part of the same interconnected complex constructed by the Union Pacific back in 1971, that consisted of the Union Plaza Hotel, a large parking garage, and the bus terminal. And incidentally, the future home of the Desert Wind Amtrak station....

it is located at Main and Fremont, the very head of "glitter gulch", the historic downtown Las Vegas.....

There was a long period when Greyhound also made a 'Strip Stop', at a small depot located at the Stardust Hotel, from and to Los Angeles. I don't know why they dropped it, but probably was not used enough.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Agreed, I don't get this constant dislike of the LAD and LVL Greyhound terminals. If you're a bus fan, the LAD terminal is great for spotting, you can stand out on the street and take all the pictures you want. The dumbheaded security guards can't stop you from taking pictures from the street. And that's why I like Greyhound stations with less security, like Reno, because you can take pictures of buses without getting busted.

I think I should really make a guide to help out general bus riders that are not enthusiasts.


----------



## calwatch

The Downtown Vegas stop for Greyhound is actually preferable for the true gambler who likes to stay downtown. Unfortunately that is not most people who go to Vegas now, who are into the food, shows, and other entertainment on the Strip. The biggest issue with the Downtown LA Greyhound station is poor access via transit - not near the Metro Rail system and served by the Line 60 buses which runs every 15-30 minutes, in contrast to a train that runs every 10 minutes or better - and lack of access to long term parking, whereas Union Station has thousands of spaces available for a reasonable $6 a day in the Metro garage.


----------



## railiner

I haven't been to the Los Angeles Greyhound Terminal that they currently use. The last time I was at their LA terminal, they were still in the big multilevel terminal that they had shared with RTD, at 6th and Main, I believe a very convenient downtown location. That terminal was built in 1967 to replace their old terminal located across the street, that was built in 1933.

The new one does seem to be at a poorer location. I did find a very nice photo collection online that shows the real essence of the current terminal....

https://foursquare.com/v/greyhound-bus-lines/4b66f776f964a520b2322be3

It is probably no coincidence that Pacific Greyhound Lines located their earlier terminals at the 6th and Main location, close by the old Pacific Electric interurban terminal, due to their common ownership by the old Southern Pacific Company.......


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

If it's served by Route 60, it might not be so bad because Route 60 is paralleled by Route 760 Rapid. I never knew the 60 went to the Greyhound Terminal, I only knew of the 62, a long route to Hawaiian Gardens.

I'm not very familiar with Los Angeles transit but I do remember some important routes like 2, 70, 450, 720, 794.


----------



## Ranzchic

I can attest to the fact that the reason I don't use Greyhound as much as I would like is that the downtown station is the poor transit connections. I can deal with the riff raffs and various colorful characters just fine. I just can't deal with the poor transit access.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Ranzchic said:


> I can attest to the fact that the reason I don't use Greyhound as much as I would like is that the downtown station is the poor transit connections. I can deal with the riff raffs and various colorful characters just fine. I just can't deal with the poor transit access.


Yes, that is indeed a problem. Does the LAD only have Route 62 or does it have Routes 60 and 760 as well? Again, if it actually has 60 and 760, it shouldn't be a big problem. I checked the maps but couldn't find out for sure.


----------



## ranzchic

It is a big problem though. I live in West Hollywood, so I just take either the 704 Rapid bus that goes directly to Union station or transfer to the Red Line at Santa Monica and Vermont and get off at Union Station where Megabus is located. I much prefer taking the Rapid or the subway. 

Btw, I am on boltbus now en route to San Diego from LA and the driver just announced that they are cancelling this service after a month because of low ridership. That sucks ass. They really should have done a bit more marketing and advertising. And maybe even incorporated an Orange County stop in there somewhere (Anaheim). It is the second busiest Amtrak route in the country, so cancelling it after a month is a bit premature.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I saw quite a few Bolt D4505's in San Francisco over the last few days. Those things were just like the Greyhound D4505's I rode except that they were painted different. Hell, they even smelled the same! Yep, I could smell them from 50 feet sway and they smelled the same as the Greyhound ones I rode!

Don't know what happened to Bolt down in So Cal. Maybe they'll bring it back when the y have more buses available. I think it should be known that Greyhound is still trying to deal with their fleet shortage, that's why they're buying huge amounts of new buses.


----------



## Anderson

Swadian Hardcore said:


> I saw quite a few Bolt D4505's in San Francisco over the last few days. Those things were just like the Greyhound D4505's I rode except that they were painted different. Hell, they even smelled the same! Yep, I could smell them from 50 feet sway and they smelled the same as the Greyhound ones I rode!
> 
> Don't know what happened to Bolt down in So Cal. Maybe they'll bring it back when the y have more buses available. I think it should be known that Greyhound is still trying to deal with their fleet shortage, that's why they're buying huge amounts of new buses.


From what I can tell from this discussion, at least part of the problem is lousy connectivity. My guess is that the margins just weren't there to justify using scarce buses on the routes in CA (which just weren't taking off) when they could be reallocated to areas where Bolt is more established. I suspect that, given an equipment surplus, there would have been plans to give the service a few months or a year.

The other possibility is that between Megabus already offering service to Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose from LAUS (and with the SF stop being basically at 4th and King and the others having good transit-connecting placements), Bolt wasn't able to make inroads without a marketing push. Bolt may use the same terminals, but it's hard to dislodge market share without a marketing budget.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

All this would be so much easier if Greyhound had more coaches. Sure they have some G4500's lying around but those are so unreliable you can't depend on them to do anything.

Right now I suggest that Greyhound operate their Los Angeles schedules with an extra stop at Union Station. The bus could stop at Union Station then driver down Alameda to get to the Maintenence Center.

Sure you got congestion but most passengers would get off at Union Station anyway. I know there's not much space there but should be enough for a quick stop for each coach.


----------



## rickycourtney

Another issue to consider on the LA to SD route: traffic.

The Santa Ana Freeway (the I-5 from LA to OC) is notorious for it's horrendous traffic jams and adding to the problems is a massive construction project to add carpool lanes (meaning there's no lanes for buses to avoid the traffic in). For the moment Amtrak has an advantage here that would be hard for any of these "upscale" intercity buses to overcome.

As far as Greyhound's LA station goes, while it has some Metro bus connections... it's nothing compared to the vast array of connections available at Union Station (Red & Purple Line subways, Gold Line light rail, Silver Line BRT, 8 Metro Local lines, 5 Metro Rapid lines and a bunch of DASH lines, commuter bus services and other shuttles).

There is a proposal to move Greyhound's passenger services (not maintenance/operations) into Union Station when a new bus plaza is built sometime in the next 10/20 years. But I agree with Swadian, Greyhound should consider adding a stop for all buses (especially the Greyhound Express routes) at Union Station.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

I guess Greyhound had the right idea pulling out of Los Angeles-San Diego/Tijuana in the first place. For several years, Greyhound had service from Los Angeles to San Diego, only Cruceros international service to target travellers from Mexico.

Now, after merging with Cruceros, they are trying to reinstate a service that they had already cut. Instead of running any Greyhound or Bolt Bus on the Los Angeles-San Diego route, they should just continue with Cruceros Direct.

Meanwhile, the real Greyhound routes from Los Angeles should get that stop in Union Station, although coaches from the east (Phoenix) could just stop at El Monte Transit Center.

Anyway, at least California riders can enjoy a D4505, the same cannot be said for Washington riders that deal with horrifying G4500's. Maybe Greyhound should invest more in the PNW before trying to deal with these comparatively minor problems in California. If they keep neglecting the PNW, pretty soon all the passengers will run away!


----------



## tp49

rickycourtney said:


> Another issue to consider on the LA to SD route: traffic.
> 
> The Santa Ana Freeway (the I-5 from LA to OC) is notorious for it's horrendous traffic jams and adding to the problems is a massive construction project to add carpool lanes (meaning there's no lanes for buses to avoid the traffic in). For the moment Amtrak has an advantage here that would be hard for any of these "upscale" intercity buses to overcome.


When I rode the Bolt service from San Diego to LA Union Station the bus went up the 405 then took the 110 in LA and didn't take I-5 all the way into downtown. Don't know if that had anything to do with it.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Isn't Interstate 110 even more congested than Interstate 5? I heard that 110 is one of the most congested roads in America!

None of this is a problem in the Bay Area because there's effective HOV lanes. All the San Francisco-Reno coaches run early as long as the weather is good. It used to be worse with the G4500's that had mechanical problem, glad they're gone for now. I think Greyhound should officialy introduce SFD-RNO express service, because they already have the express schedules and the new buses, all they need is some publicity.

Then Greyhound should upgrade Sacramento-Portland as soon as possible because that route is very popular from March to October but it's run with horrible equipment. All they need is 10 D4505's or rebuilt G4500's to upgrade this!


----------



## rickycourtney

The HOV lanes are probably why they take the 110 to the 405 (both of which are some of the busiest freeways in America). But the 110 has the Harbor Transitway which allows the bus to jump over some of the traffic. That route also lets the buses bypass the most congested portion of the 5.

That being said... the 5 between La Jolla and San Clemente lacks carpool lanes and can be very congested during certain parts of the day (that's also the section where Amtrak can go 90 MPH.)


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

So there's pretty mcuh solution for Greyhound here except to get Cruceros back on the route and get their D4505's to replace more G4500's.

Yeah, I know Cruceros can't avoid it but they run international to Mexico, that's the important difference. People were always complaining about Cruceros because their equipment was terrible. I guess Greyhound couldn't resist ressurrecting this popular route with their own equipment even though they made the right choice pulling out before, presumably due to congestion.

Now Greyhound has fully merged with Cruceros, so they can tag some of their own coaches with "Cruceros" to avoid the equipment problem.


----------



## rickycourtney

Haha... I noticed on the BoltBus website the Las Vegas stop is no longer described as at the "Greyhound Terminal"... it's now called "Plaza Hotel & Casino". Same stop, different name (without "Greyhound").


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

rickycourtney said:


> Haha... I noticed on the BoltBus website the Las Vegas stop is no longer described as at the "Greyhound Terminal"... it's now called "Plaza Hotel & Casino". Same stop, different name (without "Greyhound").


Obviously trying to escape Greyhound's bad reputation, even though Greyhound has the same exact buses. Hey BoltBus, look at this: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/12004790546.


----------



## rickycourtney

BoltBus is saying goodbye to the Greyhound Station/Plaza Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas.

Here's the note on their website:



> Effective Friday, August 8, 2014 we are relocating our downtown
> 
> stop in Las Vegas, NV from the Greyhound Station at 200 S. Main St.
> 
> to the tour bus stop located at the corner of N 1st Street and
> 
> Stewart Avenue. This is located near the California Casino and
> 
> Hotel. We will continue to operate service from the base of the
> 
> LINQ-High Roller Ferris Wheel also. We apologize for any
> 
> inconvenience that this stop relocation may cause you.
> 
> As always, we appreciate your trust and your business at Boltbus.


A few thoughts...


I think it's better idea to stop at a station in Las Vegas (who wants to wait curbside in 105+ degree heat with monsoon rains) but I know there have been a lot of passenger complaints about having to wait at the Greyhound station. I wonder if there was an "incident" recently, or if they just got tired of the complaints.
This stop is near nothing, but it's the same 3 block distance to the buses to the strip (the SDX BRT route and the Deuce).
I'm willing to bet (pun intended!) that the stop on the strip (LINQ-High Roller Ferris Wheel) has been very popular. I could see most passengers using that option over making the trip up to the downtown station. I'm actually surprised that Megabus hasn't added a stop on the Strip (they still use the South Strip Transfer Terminal, which offers a cross platform transfer to the SDX BRT route).


----------



## railiner

Years ago, Greyhound schedules between Las Vegas and Los Angeles all made a stop at their Strip Stop Station, which was conveniently located at the old Stardust Hotel, in the heart of the Strip. They had a ticket agency inside the hotel.

I wonder why they didn't continue to have a strip stop somewhere....


----------



## GG-1

Well if I had a friend coming here I would not want them catching or departing a bus at 1st and Stewart., Not well lit \and patrolled. Beyond the Fremont Street Experience, the Greyhound Terminal, and the downtown hotels the area isn't very safe.

Aloha


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

You all can check CrimeMapping for real-time info about crime: http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx.


----------



## GG-1

Aloha

This Picture shows the intersection (badly). This intersection is only surrounded by parking and is relatively unlit.







If I knew how to place an arrow I would. Going away from the Main street station, behind the Free parking sign is the California Hotel, then 1st street. Even at 5pm I have never seen pedestrian traffic along this street.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

GG-1 said:


> Well if I had a friend coming here I would not want them catching or departing a bus at 1st and Stewart., Not well lit \and patrolled. Beyond the Fremont Street Experience, the Greyhound Terminal, and the downtown hotels the area isn't very safe.
> 
> Aloha


All areas are safe. Especially if you have a bullet proof APC.


----------



## rickycourtney

I didn't realize that area was that unsafe. It seems like a strange place to put a BoltBus stop.

I'm guessing that Greyhound really wanted to get the BoltBus passengers out of the Greyhound station and this is one of the few legal bus loading zones in Downtown. That being said, I'd be curious to find out how many people are even boarding in Downtown.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

That is dangerous? Doesn't look dangerous to me. Compare it to this: http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/images/philadelphia_0.jpg.


----------



## GG-1

Swadian Hardcore said:


> That is dangerous? Doesn't look dangerous to me. Compare it to this: http://www.bicycling.com/sites/default/files/images/philadelphia_0.jpg.


Aloha

I agree that looks bad, but is there a long distance bus service there? Also I think it is silly to place a public bus stop in the equivalent of a service alley.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Is this part of Philly modeled on Detroit?


----------



## Green Maned Lion

That's about normal non Center City Philadelphia, from what I can tell.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

That's the part of Philly I lived in as a kid!


----------



## Green Maned Lion

And you think Reno is bad?

Philadelphia is awful. Imma move to Reading.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Green Maned Lion said:


> And you think Reno is bad?
> 
> Philadelphia is awful. Imma move to Reading.


What? I said Reno was bad? Yeah, it has bad parts. But it's not awful.

You live in Philly right now? I thought you were living in NJ. Or do you live in Camden? 'Cause that place is worse than Philly.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I live in Roebling. I spend a lot of time in Philly because most of my friends live there or live near there.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Roebling? Is there transit in Roebling? 409?

Aw man, I wonder how many people are complaining about Bolt's new D4505's with the terrible seats.....


----------



## Green Maned Lion

The 409 bus and the RiverLINE light rail


----------



## Swadian Hardcore

Green Maned Lion said:


> The 409 bus and the RiverLINE light rail


Oh yeah, forgot about the RiverLINE. I remember the RiverLINE always had HVAC too cold.


----------



## Green Maned Lion

I like it cold. Although my impression has always been that it's too hot- over 65 certainly.


----------

