Greyhound seats and fleet questions

[rickycourtney]

There's a couple of different concepts at play here...

At the most basic level eTicketing means that the ticket is electronically held on a computer, instead of a "live" paper instrument with monetary value. Think old school plane tickets, if you lost it, it was like losing a stack of cash and it couldn't be replaced. With electronic ticketing the ticket you hold is mearly a physical representation of the electronic ticket, if you lose it the company can look up your reservation and print out a new ticket for you.

But in this high-tech age eTicketing has evolved to mean something more. Until recently airlines required you to have a physical document (a boarding pass) that could be collected at the gate and sent off for accounting purposes (to mark the electronic ticket used). Now thanks to new systems the airlines no longer need to collect a boarding pass from passengers. When you check in you get an eTicket which is scanned and your ticket us marked as used. Your eTicket is handed back or disposed of, no further accounting required.

Greyhound is stuck between those two worlds right now. The company issues tickets electronically, but paper documents (either printed by an agent or printed at home) still need to collected and sent off for accounting purposes.

Needless to say, there's a lot of back-end work that needs to be done to make the transition to a paperless system.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Hopefully they get that done. Anyways, I measured the parcel racks and window elevation of the X3-45. The parcel racks are 9" tall and the windows are elevated 32". That's actually less than the E/J, MC-12, and Van Hools, which have windows elevated at 34". The parcel racks are a bit smaller than the MCI ones.

The D4505's inconsistency is going to really hit hard on MCI. #86352 was really a very bad motorcoach. I heard that MCI is focusing on the D4500CT for public sector use, but this jeopardizes the D4505 for private sector use. It's wrong to assume a coach that is good for public sector will be good for private sector, and vice versa. By the time I'm done ranting about #86352, I'll probably have to spit to clean my mouth. MCI seems like they originally intended the D's to be intercity coaches, and they did well. Then MCI decided to jump into the big commuter market, refocusing the D's for commuter service, then trying to still keep them useful for the private sector with the D4505, but then going bankrupt and failing hard while Prevost rushes ahead. The D4505 is worse than the 102DL3 while the X3-45 is better than the XL-45 or XL-II.

The X3-45 is probably a better commuter coach anyway; it has a smaller turning circle, a bit more headroom, and a lower deck. Right now the X3-45 can and should outsell the D4505.

 

[rickycourtney]

There was a couple of blurbs in the Truck & Bus Builder newsletter about MCI...

• The CEO of MCI says that since mid-2012 they've been focusing on improving product quality and product reliability. That's a backwards admission that they had been producing crap for the last few years. To that end MCI sent engineers to Germany to receive training from Setra to learn how to improve quality.
• Detroit Diesel is now producing a Buy America compliant DD13 and MCI is "reviewing the prospect of engineering it into its D search coach as an alternative power unit for the transit coach range" (translation: the D4500CT).
• MCI is working on a new D4500 commuter coach for the transit industry that will feature a new steering system and axles from ZF which will reduce the turning radius (40' 11" compared to 47' on the current D4500 and 42' 6" on the X3-45) and Bendix brakes which means the Wingman system could be an option on the D4500 (Wingman is MCI's version of adaptive cruise control and virtually the same as Prevost's AWARE).
• It sounds like that in 2015 there will be two J4500 models, a intercity coach and touring coach.

Reading between the lines:

• MCI is feeling threatened by Prevost. The X3-45 Commuter Coach presents a huge challenge to their dominance in the transit industry. They have been forced to actually compete and improve their product.
• The D4505 won't be around much longer. I think MCI will unify the D4500CT and the D4505 into one coach with a intercity coach model and a commuter coach model.
• Transit customers are more lucrative to MCI than what few line-haul operators still remain.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I thought that if MCI is going to make intercity and touring J4500s, the intercity J4500 would basically replace the D4505 and the new D4500CT would be commuter-only to compete with the X3-45. MCI looks like they really want to challenge the X3-45 with redesigned D4500CTs with lots of improvements, but they seem unsure what to do about the private sector. Their J4500 is still the best-selling motorcoach and making an intercity J4500 to replace the poor-selling D4505 would be a good idea.

OTOH, on the grapevine, I heard that more than a few mechanics think "J if for Junk", while drivers seem to like the Restyled J4500s, and everybody seems to dislike the pre-Restyle J4500s. I'm also not sure why it is not possible to make a commuter version of the J4500. It would need a modified front end, but would it really be that hard?

Looking at this picture: http://busride.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/web-j45_12-.jpg, I see that the black bar above the windshield could accommodate the headsign and the sedan door could be replaced with transit doors; then bike racks slapped onto the nose. It shouldn't look bad and it would allow MCI to focus itself on its bestseller instead of trying to fight the X with the D and trying to fight the X and the H with the J. The J is being used for line-haul right now alongside the X (i.e. Peter Pan).

BTW, the H3-45 has one major advantage over the J4500, it has a much larger fuel tank, 230 vs 183 gallons.

Edit: I was looking through Flickr photos and found this new First Canada Restyled J4500: https://www.flickr.com/photos/94699699@N02/16059574592/sizes/l.

Perhaps that was the new J4500 that visited Washington with the Greyhound Centennial Tour. After all, First owns Greyhound.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Prevost has already beat MCI in private sector sales: http://www.metro-magazine.com/motorcoach/news/287835/report-prevost-private-sector-sales-market-leader.

MCI is still, overall, a tiny bit more popular than Prevost, but only due to public sector sales. Van Hool lags behind both.

 

[rickycourtney]

MCI has been moving to make the parts used on the D and J series more common. If they achieve that goal the D and J series will be nearly identical mechanically. That means the only major differences will be in their form. The J will look more sleek and possibly have larger windows for use as a tour bus. The D will be more utilitarian with things like durable rubber bumpers and space for larger destination signs.

I see it more along the lines that MCI will only offer two models with separate trim packages.

D4500 available with Commuter and Intercity packages and the J4500 available with Touring and Intercity packages.

Also if Prevost has MCI beat in private sector sales... it's no wonder why Prevost is trying to break into public sector sales.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

The problem is, the D has a steel shell while the J has a fiberglass shell. Also, it appears that the J is built on a standard integral jig of stainless steel with fiberglass built over, whereas the D is built in two halves, with the bottom stainless and the top Cor-Ten, then molded in the middle to create an integral body. So they're always going to be significantly different in terms of bodywork.

You can see that in these photos from a MCI plant tour back in 2011: https://www.flickr.com/photos/vehicle-images/sets/72157630269187098/.

It seems like a major mistake MCI did with the D4505 was to lose the durable rubber bumper. I wonder which other durable parts MCI got rid of in the D4505 to make it look more like the J4500. The D4505 also has more window area than the J4500, I believe, or at least it only has 28" window elevation compared to 34" in the J, suggesting that the D's were always meant to be intercity coaches and are now slapstick commuter coaches (D4500CT) and slapstick touring coaches (D4505) while being beat at the intercity role by the X3-45.

For touring, I wonder how the H stacks up against the J.

 

[rickycourtney]

The problem is, the D has a steel shell while the J has a fiberglass shell. Also, it appears that the J is built on a standard integral jig of stainless steel with fiberglass built over, whereas the D is built in two halves, with the bottom stainless and the top Cor-Ten, then molded in the middle to create an integral body. So they're always going to be significantly different in terms of bodywork.

Not sure about any of that, but again that's mostly a difference in the "form", not in the mechanics. The buses might be assembled differently (and that could all change in 2015) but mechanically they will be very similar. I'm not sure which would be better or more durable. I would guess the D would be (since it relies less on fiberglass) but the sales of J4500s seems to belie that notion.

It seems like a major mistake MCI did with the D4505 was to lose the durable rubber bumper. I wonder which other durable parts MCI got rid of in the D4505 to make it look more like the J4500. The D4505 also has more window area than the J4500, I believe, or at least it only has 28" window elevation compared to 34" in the J, suggesting that the D's were always meant to be intercity coaches and are now slapstick commuter coaches (D4500CT) and slapstick touring coaches (D4505) while being beat at the intercity role by the X3-45.

That's what made the D4505 such a strange bus. They made a lot of cosmetic changes to the D4500 that made it look a sleeker, but also made it less durable. That made it less appealing to transit and intercity operators, but it didn't make it that much more appealing to tour operators.

But I totally disagree that the D4500CT is a "slapstick commuter coach". It's a great platform for commuter transit work (plus the rubber bumper is still offered as an option on the D4500CT).

 

[rickycourtney]

Greyhound bus involved in a very serious accident in North Carolina today. The Greyhound driver slammed into the rear of a NC Highway Patrol car that was protecting the scene of a fatal accident.

Witnesses told ABC11 that the Mebane Fire Department was on the scene of a disabled vehicle when a vehicle hydroplaned into the back of the fire chief's Chevy Tahoe. A woman in the car, 33-year-old Tiffany Jennings, was killed.

Then, as a NC Highway Patrol trooper sat in his SUV blocking traffic for the crash, he was hit from behind by the Greyhound bus.

The fire chief was treated and released. The trooper was taken to the hospital for treatment of broken bones. No firefighters or law enforcement officers were killed.

There were 41 passengers on the bus. EMS workers on the scene unloaded several injured people and put them into ambulances. They were taken to Duke University Hospital. There was no immediate word on patient conditions.

The North Carolina Highway Patrol said all the emergency vehicles had their flashing lights activated. It's not clear why the bus driver could not slow down or move over to avoid the trooper's SUV. The investigation was ongoing.

The bus driver was charged with reckless driving and failing to reduce speed to avoid a collision. He was not injured.

Full story here: http://abc11.com/449379/

I find it somewhat interesting that they cited the driver so quickly and without first reviewing the footage for the onboard DriveCam. I'm used to accident investigations taking several weeks or months before drivers are cited or charged. But I'm guessing there was a lot of qualified witnesses (including first responders) at this scene.

That DL3 is probably totalled and heading for the scrap yard now. I'd also like to point out the fact that the wheelchair lift and access door was used to evacuate the passengers off of the damaged bus, which once again supports my argument that wheelchair lift doors should be required to be equipped with emergency release latches on the inside.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Which DL3 is that, #6x77? Looks like the second number is either a "2" or a "3" so it would be either #6277 or #6377. Not sure if it would be totaled, but the front end certainly got totaled, though no damage elsewhere. #6468 got involved in a somewhat similar accident and was returned to service after major repairs.

I wonder what that driver was doing. Did he fall asleep or something? Texting? Writing in his logbook? He really should not have piled himself into that accident, assuming those charges of reckless driving are true. Greyhound really needs to take a good look at their extra drivers, they seem to drive recklessly a lot more than the regular drivers.

Greyhound seems to have a lot more accidents and driver-related complaints in the East than in the West. I'd say, overall, Greyhound has a better reputation in the West, especially with their good terminals at Los Angeles, Sacramento, Portland, and possibly elsewhere. A lot of drivers in the East have been videotaped while texting, calling, writing in their logbook, or getting into confrontations with passengers.

For some reason, most of the windows remain closed while the wheelchair door is open. I thought that, upon impact, the passengers would all grab the window escape bar and try to get out ASAP.

 

[rickycourtney]

Which DL3 is that, #6x77? Looks like the second number is either a "2" or a "3" so it would be either #6277 or #6377. Not sure if it would be totaled, but the front end certainly got totaled, though no damage elsewhere. #6468 got involved in a somewhat similar accident and was returned to service after major repairs.

It's clearly 6377. I'm sure it *could* be repaired, but at that 14 years old, I'm not sure it's worth it.

For some reason, most of the windows remain closed while the wheelchair door is open. I thought that, upon impact, the passengers would all grab the window escape bar and try to get out ASAP.

Don't forget, from the bottom of the window to the ground is a long drop. You could be seriously injured jumping out of that window. It's better than being trapped, but if there's no longer any imminent danger, why risk injury?

 

[railiner]

Even with transit doors, and other mods, I don't think the J model would sell to too many transit agencies, mainly because of the extra step to reach the aisle height....

take too long loading and unloading, don't you think?

 

[railiner]

Greyhound bus involved in a very serious accident in North Carolina today. The Greyhound driver slammed into the rear of a NC Highway Patrol car that was protecting the scene of a fatal accident.

Witnesses told ABC11 that the Mebane Fire Department was on the scene of a disabled vehicle when a vehicle hydroplaned into the back of the fire chief's Chevy Tahoe. A woman in the car, 33-year-old Tiffany Jennings, was killed.

Then, as a NC Highway Patrol trooper sat in his SUV blocking traffic for the crash, he was hit from behind by the Greyhound bus.

The fire chief was treated and released. The trooper was taken to the hospital for treatment of broken bones. No firefighters or law enforcement officers were killed.

There were 41 passengers on the bus. EMS workers on the scene unloaded several injured people and put them into ambulances. They were taken to Duke University Hospital. There was no immediate word on patient conditions.

The North Carolina Highway Patrol said all the emergency vehicles had their flashing lights activated. It's not clear why the bus driver could not slow down or move over to avoid the trooper's SUV. The investigation was ongoing.

The bus driver was charged with reckless driving and failing to reduce speed to avoid a collision. He was not injured.

Full story here: http://abc11.com/449379/

I find it somewhat interesting that they cited the driver so quickly and without first reviewing the footage for the onboard DriveCam. I'm used to accident investigations taking several weeks or months before drivers are cited or charged. But I'm guessing there was a lot of qualified witnesses (including first responders) at this scene.

That DL3 is probably totalled and heading for the scrap yard now. I'd also like to point out the fact that the wheelchair lift and access door was used to evacuate the passengers off of the damaged bus, which once again supports my argument that wheelchair lift doors should be required to be equipped with emergency release latches on the inside.

Uh oh, that's not good news.....

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I guess that depends on how much it would cost. Up to $100,000 for a repair might be OK. Anything more, perhaps not. It did get a full rebuild not long ago and was probably slated to remain in service into the early 2020s.

BTW, according to Metro Magazine, Indian Trails paid $3,800,000 for 7 recent H3-45s for their Michigan Flyer service. They seem to have Torino G Plus seating: http://www.michiganflyer.com/Portals/0/Images/riding-bus-big.jpg.

That's about $542,871 per coach.

Indian Trails also seems to have the D4505 in service, which I don't think is a good idea considering how the D4505 is probably one of the worst options in the market. It's, according to reasonable observations, a jack-of-all-trades master-of-none.

I think the X3-45 actually has 5 steps up, just like the E/J. Perhaps the spiral entryway will actually enhance loading/unloading.

According to reasonable observations, I think the MCIs and Prevosts in the market can be divided into:

• D for commuters and intercity, but getting beat by X in both.
• X for commuters and intercity, beating up D.
• H for touring and intercity, stalemate against J.
• J for touring and intercity, stalemate against H.

The H and J seem like the best options for the private sector. The H has longer driving range, high capacity, and is actually pretty durable, too; 1998 H3-45s are still running for Greyhound Canada (ex-Voyageur). The J seems to be more efficient and has just-as-high capacity. Durability was poor before the Restyle but may be better now.

 

[railiner]

I haven't driven a new J, but have sat in their (Martz's) driver's seat, and I still don't like 'em......still don't feel 'at home', even though we've had J's for 13 years or so....

 

[rickycourtney]

I don't think we will see a J series commuter bus anytime soon.
Transit agencies have very strict Buy America and Altoona testing that MCI would need to comply with. It would also require some major engineering changes to the front cap to accommodate a large head sign and rubber bumpers. After all is said and done they have a funky looking version of their premier coach out on the road. Sort of cheapens that "premier" image.

I'm curious how much longer transit agencies will keep buying commuter coaches from Prevost and MCI. They are really good on routes where you make a few "pick-up only" stops, drive a long distance on a highway and make a few "drop-off only" stops. Other than that... they're useless.

While I'm not a fan of the double-decker for use as an intercity coach... they actually make good commuter coaches.

Unlike the D and X they have two doors so passengers can board and exit at the same time and upstairs they have a similar configuration with 49 high-back reclining seats, but downstairs they have 28 transit style seats and wheelchair restraints with room for 20 standees. Compared to articulated buses they also require less maintenance and use less fuel.

They are also low-floor and have accessibility ramps instead of lifts... which is a huge downside to the D and X. While the very high floor design make for a smooth ride, accessibility is clearly an afterthought. Whenever a passenger using a wheelchair wants to board the driver has to get up, fold up four seats, get out, deploy the lift, board the passenger, stow the lift, get back on and help put restraints on the wheelchair. The whole process takes about 3-4 minutes, meaning a loss of about 7 minutes over the course of a trip. On one of these double-deckers the wheelchair boarding process takes about 90 seconds.

Community Transit up here in Western Washington bought 23 back in 2011. They like them so much they placed an order for 22 more and convinced Sound Transit to buy 5 as a test.

 

[metrolinecoach111]

I'm curious how much longer transit agencies will keep buying commuter coaches from Prevost and MCI. They are really good on routes where you make a few "pick-up only" stops, drive a long distance on a highway and make a few "drop-off only" stops. Other than that... they're useless.

You forgot to mention one HUGE exception to that statement - and ultimately, it's the only exception that matters: NJ Transit. NJT grounds and pounds the hell out of ALL of their MCI D4000s and D4500s. Many, especially in North Jersey are operated as glorified-transit buses because of the distance they travel, the type of work they do (mixed transit and commuter on highway and local roads) and clientel they serve (suburbs, commuters to NY). Even in South Jersey, the cruisers operate many mixed routes with some highway, some local and rural roads and urban areas with lots of on and off.

The NJ Transit order will also provide coaches for several privately owned commuter bus carriers which operate routes into NYC such as Coach USA, Academy, DeCamp, Lakeland and Carefree in North Jersey.

NJ Transit is the "big one" for these builders because everyone (and I mean everyone) in the transit/commuter field pays attention to what they do. Their order of 1000+ vehicles over 4 years dictates what a builder will do and the last order in 2002-2004 revived the D-series at MCI.

The start of the next order will come in 2015/2016.....time will tell.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

If NJT using D4500s as glorified transit buses, why don't they just buy glorified transit buses? Like the New Flyer LF Suburbans operating in Seattle? Or the Gillig and Orion LF Suburbans operating in the SF Bay Area? I mean, they'll have easier loading/unloading, better accessibility, all the advantages of a transit bus with extra comfort for longer rides. Even better, there was the NABI 45C-LFW that is extensively used in Los Angeles on transit routes. Why not a suburban version of that?

When riding Santa Clarita Transit's D4000, I found loading and unloading to be a pain in the butt. Also, on Greyhound, loading/unloading a wheelchair from a D4505 can take as much as 10 minutes each way, or 20 minutes total, if the driver is inexperienced with the lift. I know they give training and all, but if you don't use the lift for a whole month and then you have to use it, no doubt you'll be clumsy and waste time.

Even if NJT uses the D-units in huge numbers, that doesn't mean other transit agencies have to follow. Most transit agencies are normal transit agencies, serving the urban area and surrounding suburbs, not serving a whole state. For example, UTA's MCI D4500CLs sit doing nothing for most of the day and only drive out for rush hour, a major waste of a durable coach.

If a motorcoach can run mixed routes, what's to say a suburban or a double-decker can't do the same? In this case, I agree with Ricky. It almost feels like corruption is at work boosting commuter coach sales for MCI.

 

[metrolinecoach111]

If NJT using D4500s as glorified transit buses, why don't they just buy glorified transit buses? Like the New Flyer LF Suburbans operating in Seattle? Or the Gillig and Orion LF Suburbans operating in the SF Bay Area? I mean, they'll have easier loading/unloading, better accessibility, all the advantages of a transit bus with extra comfort for longer rides. Even better, there was the NABI 45C-LFW that is extensively used in Los Angeles on transit routes. Why not a suburban version of that?

When riding Santa Clarita Transit's D4000, I found loading and unloading to be a pain in the butt. Also, on Greyhound, loading/unloading a wheelchair from a D4505 can take as much as 10 minutes each way, or 20 minutes total, if the driver is inexperienced with the lift. I know they give training and all, but if you don't use the lift for a whole month and then you have to use it, no doubt you'll be clumsy and waste time.

Even if NJT uses the D-units in huge numbers, that doesn't mean other transit agencies have to follow. Most transit agencies are normal transit agencies, serving the urban area and surrounding suburbs, not serving a whole state. For example, UTA's MCI D4500CLs sit doing nothing for most of the day and only drive out for rush hour, a major waste of a durable coach.

If a motorcoach can run mixed routes, what's to say a suburban or a double-decker can't do the same? In this case, I agree with Ricky. It almost feels like corruption is at work boosting commuter coach sales for MCI.

You and Ricky make valid points. Your collective argument has been made at many junctures relating to NJT. And yes, in almost every other instance, other types of transit-designed equipment will suffice.

There are multiple reasons why those buses are used the way they're used there. It's a truly unique market and the only one of its kind in the US. One is for versatility - they can run both transit and highway commuter routes and the routes that are a weird mix of the two. The second is the primary reason most agencies that have them get them - passenger comfort and durability.

Transit type buses have limited range on the highway in everyday travel - mostly within a 30-45 minute driving distance on the highway aside from any local routings. The buses need to have a sustained lifespan, so running those buses in that manner beyond its means won't work out good. Also, people generally pay a premium above a transit fare to ride these services. To attract people to leave their cars at home or at a park and ride, you have to give them something, and that something is greater comfort. There are exceptions to this rule however, most notably in the case of SEPTA in Philadelphia that uses New Flyer buses on intra-urban routes.

As for why NJT doesn't use suburbans for commuter routes - they actually do to an extent. In every case where they're deployed for interstate service, they follow the specifications I listed above. But in other areas - notably the populous Bergen County, where over 50% of NYC bound commuters are from, with relatively few exceptions, good luck putting a transit bus on a commuter line.

To your point about double deckers, they work in situations where there is limited on-off boarding and passenger turnover at stops. Commuter routes are prime, but not so much with local transit routes that work volume. Not saying it can't be done, as is the case overseas (where they have better on board fare payment technology to facilitate today), but the loading/unloading can be time consuming. NJT doesn't use them for the simple reason that they can't fit in the Port Authority Bus Terminal.

Other commuter carriers took to MCI after the NJT order because they piggybacked the order - in other words, it was cheaper to purchase because of the volume NJT requested. Also, many state and local agencies receive federal funding for their buses and many RFP's have verbiage that require certain things that make only highway motorcoaches viable.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I agree that they are more comfortable than transit buses, though I must point that most of these commuter coaches have American Seating, which is notoriously uncomfortable for motorcoach seating. I also agree that NJT is serving a unique market, the only one of its kind in the US, but then that contradicts the use of piggybacking by other agencies onto NJT orders, if their needs are different from NJT's. I'm thinking that the people who are writing the RFPs for motorcoaches, when their agency doesn't need motorcoaches, are people that don't know about or don't ride motorcoaches.

So I see how NJT orders tons of D4500s for their network, but I don't see how other cities justify piggybacking.

As a Philadelphian, I've always seen SEPTA as "doing the right thing" by not jumping into the commuter coach craze. Los Angeles and Chicago are other examples, not to mention Vancouver and Montreal over in Canada. Yeah, LADOT Commuter Express uses them, but that's more of a specialty service. I think GO Transit is the Canadian equivalent of NJT, but TTC doesn't use commuter coaches either. I think UTA and Sound Transit both use too much commuter coaches, especially with parallel FrontRunner and Sounder commuter rail, respectively.

AC Transit was overusing them, but have now switched to Gillig Suburbans. Their Transbay routes don't go above 1 hour.

 

[rickycourtney]

Well your recent trip to Southern California is a great example of where motorcoaches do well on commuter routes.

On the weekend route Santa Clarita 757 picks up passengers at the McBean Transit Center and runs non-stop using mostly freeways to North Hollywood station.

But the problem is with the weekday route which makes 6-8 stops inside Santa Clarita. At each stop the passengers who are boarding have to wait as the passengers who are getting off the bus at that stop disembark.

The way they get around that on other routes is they make the beginning of the route "pick-up only" and the end of the route "drop-off only." It works, but you alienate other passengers who want to travel the same direction that bus is going.

That's why using motorcoaches as transit buses is somewhat problematic. Of course you can always adopt the New Jersey Transit attitude and just do it anyway!

 

[rickycourtney]

As to Sound Transit... the express bus routes run 7 days a week with with half-hourly bi-directional headways, dropping to 5 minute headways during the rush hour. Sounder runs 8 trains in the peak direction, 5 days a week with headways of 20-30 minutes (and the north line runs even fewer trains).

I'd love if the Sounder trains ran frequently and the buses could go away, but BNSF would never allow that. For the moment the trains are just there to provide very high capacity, rapid transit during rush hour only.

Long term the goal is to extend Link Light Rail up to Everett and down to Tacoma, which would indeed be able to replace the buses.

 

[mightyjoe1201]

I can tell you from experience, it really doesn't take long to load and unload passengers thru one door. All but two of our transit buses here only have one set of doors. Most of us just wait to open the doors till the onboard passengers get to the doors. As a matter of fact, our two with back doors we don't even use the back doors. Takes no longer then using two sets of door.

I just don't understand how a coach is usable for transit unless it's a long run with few stops.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

Looks like MCI's D4500CT now has the same bumpers and fender flares as the D4505: http://www.mcicoach.com/public-sector/publicCommuter.htm.

Of course the old parts are probably still available as an option, though I cannot understand MCI's seeming obsession with making the D4500CT more aesthetically appealing at the expense of durability.

Also, that 40'11" turning circle that MCI announced for the 2015 D4500CT with IFS is the same turning circle as the 2015 J4500 with IFS, suggesting MCI is simply slapping the J4500 suspension onto the D4500CT. But the D4500CT's old 47' turning circle was with a trailing tag axle; the J4500 had the same turning circle with a fixed tag axle and a 45' turning circle with the trailing tag.

MCI seems like they like to talk and show but don't like to act. They say the D4505 is durable, even though some of them have not been holding up that well. Greyhound drivers on Facebook are having the general opinion of, "I used to be a MCI man, but their quality seems to have taken a hit with the new 86500s (2013 Cummins-power D4505s). I just drove a new Prevost and really enjoyed it."

 

[rickycourtney]

Interestingly MCI's photos of the CNG and Hybrid versions of the D4500CT both show rubber bumpers.

http://www.mcicoach.com/public-sector/publicCng.htm

http://www.mcicoach.com/public-sector/publicHybrid.htm

Yes the axles and steering system are the same on the new J4500 and the new D4500CT. Again, like I said, MCI is trying to increase parts commonality.