Jump to content
ABQ RIDE

Gillig product discussion

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, CR SD40-2 said:

 

Go ahead line them up! I'll sit back and watch this,and I'll wait for your list. Because now I'm believing that car wash attendant is in desire need for you to re apply.

The better ones for sure is the 6V92's and the M11's. One day I'll try to make it to one.

Ah cool. May 2017 TriMet will be running '97 M11 phantoms for MAX shuttles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 

 2 The rear door. never offered as a slide glide,always a swing out,or plug. Not very wide,the floor on a slant which could to lead to slippage from a passenger exiting when the floor is wet.

https://cptdb.ca/topic/17220-rear-bus-doors-flip-out-vs-slide-glide-vs-plug/

Slide glide mid-width option. Guess it depends upon how the agency specs. Speculating the floor angle *could* cause slippage is just that speculation... I'd hazard a guess if this was causing issues it would be changed. New Flyer artic low floors seem to have a greater slant than a 40' New Flyer at their mid and rear doors. 

Quote

 

The seat across from the rear door has no purpose being mid raised. Now it gives the person who sits behind that seat a reason to cough,sneeze,dump food or a drink on you,and look over your shoulder. Also goes for the person sitting in the mid raise see to the person sitting on the lower level in front. 

Presumably that's the fuel tank. New Flyer's LF's and LFR's had something similar, but, it was longer and taller and so required inward mounted seats. 

I see this as a moot point as well. While you have some valid concerns, the New Flyer Xcelsior allows all foward facing seats on the upper and lower levels so on the Xcelsior, while not mid-mounted, the same concerns must exist that the second level  "gives the person who sits behind that seat a reason to cough,sneeze,dump food or a drink on you,and look over your shoulder". It should be noted that there are other odd seating arrangements out there, like Nova's option for seats facing each other at the rear as a solution for seating around the rear wheel well. Presumably, if an agency speced it, you could get inward facing seats instead of the forward facing seats. 

Quote

 

Heating is poor no even distribution.

 

If you spec a New Flyer with a basic HVAC system too, it sucks.

Quote

 

 With computer crossing the aisle in front of the bus could make it difficult for taller people having to duct down alittle bit. Front roof hatch is not in a location where the driver can quickly open or close it for ventilation. 

I'm 6' 2" and don't recall that being an issue when I rode Boise's Gillig's. I find it feels tighter on the 2010+ New Flyer's with front mounted HVAC systems. ets4877-4.jpg

Front roof hatch seems to be about the same height/ location as comparable New Flyer buses.

Drivers area- I'm not a driver so I can't say I've experienced that, but anecdotally, I've heard all manner of complaints from drivers... you'll find those that think a New Flyer is great, and another thinks it's crap ditto for a Nova Bus's, etc.

Quote

 

 I don't see any motorhomes that resemble a motorcoach,or transit bus UNLESS it was a retired one. 

 

 

Personally, I think this looks quite like a motorhome conversion from a bus shell, but, is clearly a purpose-built motorhome: http://www.holidayrambler.com/scepter

This one I feel has some features of a Van Hool/ Gillig/ EZ Rider styling with the sloping roof line, flat windshield, small light cluster, just on a bit bigger scale: http://americancoach.com/2017-american-revolution http://americancoach.com/2016-americanrevolution

 

On 11/09/2016 at 3:29 PM, CR SD40-2 said:

 I thought all the models up to the Phantoms were Gilligs best. The Low Floors are just plain garbage. 

 

14 hours ago, CR SD40-2 said:

 I have photographed Phantoms but never rode one.

:huh: And yet you can say the Phantom's were the best without experiencing one?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, M. Parsons said:

https://cptdb.ca/topic/17220-rear-bus-doors-flip-out-vs-slide-glide-vs-plug/

Slide glide mid-width option. Guess it depends upon how the agency specs. Speculating the floor angle *could* cause slippage is just that speculation... I'd hazard a guess if this was causing issues it would be changed. New Flyer artic low floors seem to have a greater slant than a 40' New Flyer at their mid and rear doors. 

Presumably that's the fuel tank. New Flyer's LF's and LFR's had something similar, but, it was longer and taller and so required inward mounted seats. 

I see this as a moot point as well. While you have some valid concerns, the New Flyer Xcelsior allows all foward facing seats on the upper and lower levels so on the Xcelsior, while not mid-mounted, the same concerns must exist that the second level  "gives the person who sits behind that seat a reason to cough,sneeze,dump food or a drink on you,and look over your shoulder". It should be noted that there are other odd seating arrangements out there, like Nova's option for seats facing each other at the rear as a solution for seating around the rear wheel well. Presumably, if an agency speced it, you could get inward facing seats instead of the forward facing seats. 

 

If you spec a New Flyer with a basic HVAC system too, it sucks.

I'm 6' 2" and don't recall that being an issue when I rode Boise's Gillig's. I find it feels tighter on the 2010+ New Flyer's with front mounted HVAC systems. ets4877-4.jpg

Front roof hatch seems to be about the same height/ location as comparable New Flyer buses.

Drivers area- I'm not a driver so I can't say I've experienced that, but anecdotally, I've heard all manner of complaints from drivers... you'll find those that think a New Flyer is great, and another thinks it's crap ditto for a Nova Bus's, etc.

 

 

Personally, I think this looks quite like a motorhome conversion from a bus shell, but, is clearly a purpose-built motorhome: http://www.holidayrambler.com/scepter

This one I feel has some features of a Van Hool/ Gillig/ EZ Rider styling with the sloping roof line, flat windshield, small light cluster, just on a bit bigger scale: http://americancoach.com/2017-american-revolution http://americancoach.com/2016-americanrevolution

 

 

:huh: And yet you can say the Phantom's were the best without experiencing one?

Hey, just wanted to say that you said all that perfectly. It just annoys me when people nit pick Gillig all the time. Also annoys me when people who haven't ridden them judge them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, OR Transit Fan said:

Hey, just wanted to say that you said all that perfectly. It just annoys me when people nit pick Gillig all the time. Also annoys me when people who haven't ridden them judge them

What I indirectly was trying to show is that a lot of traits that are desirable or undesirable can simply be the result of how an agency specs their buses, and, even indeed how they purchase their buses (such as issuing their own tenders, consortium purchases, option purchases) and the US operates largely in a low bid environment where i suspect such things as the rear door is going to get speced as the standard, cheapest option, which I'd hazard a guess is the narrow flip out doors, with only transit agencies that have determined they need the wider doors springing for that option. As has been illustrated in this thread, Gillig does often go after and win those small agencies that are the most likely I think to pick up a bare bones bus from the lowest bidder.

Through many years of being on this board, you also start to notice something quite common... Everyone seems to complain about the buses that they see most often. Toronto folk complain about the Orion VII, Quebecers complain about the Nova LFS, and out West a lot of complaints about New Flyer's. Sometimes the complaints are justified, other times not, and indeed, it can be that they've only experience a select number of buses and assume that everything else is better.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, M. Parsons said:

What I indirectly was trying to show is that a lot of traits that are desirable or undesirable can simply be the result of how an agency specs their buses, and, even indeed how they purchase their buses (such as issuing their own tenders, consortium purchases, option purchases) and the US operates largely in a low bid environment where i suspect such things as the rear door is going to get speced as the standard, cheapest option, which I'd hazard a guess is the narrow flip out doors, with only transit agencies that have determined they need the wider doors springing for that option. As has been illustrated in this thread, Gillig does often go after and win those small agencies that are the most likely I think to pick up a bare bones bus from the lowest bidder.

Through many years of being on this board, you also start to notice something quite common... Everyone seems to complain about the buses that they see most often. Toronto folk complain about the Orion VII, Quebecers complain about the Nova LFS, and out West a lot of complaints about New Flyer's. Sometimes the complaints are justified, other times not, and indeed, it can be that they've only experience a select number of buses and assume that everything else is better.

I know, it bothers me when people blame the manufacturer for decisions the transit system made. This may surprise you, but in my city (Salem, OR) we have Orion VII buses and I absolutely hate them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, M. Parsons said:

Front roof hatch seems to be about the same height/ location as comparable New Flyer buses.

On a side note, I assume other manufacturers offer this option as well, but I know MVTA spec'd their recent Gillig BRT purchases with power roof vents. No need for the operator to reach to open it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a photo of recently refurbished bus #0610. This is a 2006 model with an ISL/Voith D864.5. All refurbishments are being completed by Coach Crafters in Tavares, FL, with plans to also rehab the 2009 hybrids.

(CAT)

3 minutes ago, Gillig1109 said:

Here's a photo of recently refurbished bus #0610. This is a 2006 model with an ISL/Voith D864.5. All refurbishments are being completed by Coach Crafters in Tavares, FL, with plans to also rehab the 2009 hybrids.

(CAT)

This should be removed....the photo isn't showing up.

(CAT)

(CAT)

(CAT)

(CAT)

(CAT)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the mid-width slide-glide rear doors, my guess the perception that CR SD40-2 had that Gillig does not offer a slide-glide rear door is that the mid-width option is rarely specified unless a TA is very picky about the dimensions of the rear door in their RFP specifications.  If a TA wants a standard rear door, Gillig will generally specify their standard (narrow flip-out) rear door, while if a TA wants a wider rear door, Gillig will generally specify their wide plug rear door.  Even with the Valley Metro RFP Gillig specified wide plug rear doors to accommodate their rear wheelchair ramps, even though I am pretty sure the mid-width option would have fit them just fine (since Gillig's mid-width rear door option is similar in width to New Flyer's standard size rear door).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gillig1109 said:

Here's a photo of recently refurbished bus #0610. This is a 2006 model with an ISL/Voith D864.5. All refurbishments are being completed by Coach Crafters in Tavares, FL, with plans to also rehab the 2009 hybrids.

(CAT)

This should be removed....the photo isn't showing up.

Here it is.

CAT.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an operator I must say the Gillig buses we have at Montgomery County Ride On are pretty good buses although some good points were brought up in a past post 

-Warning Lights not in the line of sign , Annoying 4 way sound, Start-up chime  and stop request bell right in your ear and that weird seating arrangement but the rear door , but other than that there are pretty good buses to drive. The garage I work out of has the Hybrid and Diesel versions the older hybrids are really well-built buses but the new 2016 we just received i don't particularly care for them Steering wheel shakes and jerks whenever I go through a pothole are any bump or dip in the road, suspension seems really really stiff in the front electrical problems (interior lights not coming on or going off or the bus just shutting down with no warning has happened to me a few times)  and that could be just bugs being worked out b/c they are new. I don't particularly care for the driver's area set up on any of the Gilligs but they could be the way they were spec'd by the county. I like the variety it gets annoying driving the same bus every day the garage I'm at is 100% Gillig. I like the Gilligs and I've Driven a New Flyer from an another garage once I hope the County will order more New Flyers but who knows.

BTW I'm new to the whole bus scene just a casual observer these are my opinions go easy on me :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vvozz said:

As an operator I must say the Gillig buses we have at Montgomery County Ride On are pretty good buses although some good points were brought up in a past post 

-Warning Lights not in the line of sign , Annoying 4 way sound, Start-up chime  and stop request bell right in your ear and that weird seating arrangement but the rear door , but other than that there are pretty good buses to drive. The garage I work out of has the Hybrid and Diesel versions the older hybrids are really well-built buses but the new 2016 we just received i don't particularly care for them Steering wheel shakes and jerks whenever I go through a pothole are any bump or dip in the road, suspension seems really really stiff in the front electrical problems (interior lights not coming on or going off or the bus just shutting down with no warning has happened to me a few times)  and that could be just bugs being worked out b/c they are new. I don't particularly care for the driver's area set up on any of the Gilligs but they could be the way they were spec'd by the county. I like the variety it gets annoying driving the same bus every day the garage I'm at is 100% Gillig. I like the Gilligs and I've Driven a New Flyer from an another garage once I hope the County will order more New Flyers but who knows.

BTW I'm new to the whole bus scene just a casual observer these are my opinions go easy on me :)

Yeah Gilligs are very high quality. As for the drivers area, yeah it's up to the transit system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/1/2016 at 2:59 PM, ABQ RIDE said:

I have read somewhere that Metro Transit of Minneapolis is Gillig's largest customer, although I don't know if there is any truth to that statement.

I was thinking maybe Pittsburgh. I believe all the phantoms have been retired though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, OR Transit Fan said:

Yeah Gilligs are very high quality. As for the drivers area, yeah it's up to the transit system.

I agree. For instance, PAT got a digital speedometer ans probably uses a Recaro seat while other TAs may use USSC seats and normal speedometers. I think what makes a good bus is all in specifications. Let's just say if you just want a regular ole Gillig, and it costs $475k. Then within about 6 months of service, the bus has suspension problems, electrical shortages, frame problems, etc. Now if another agency orders a Gillig that costs $625k, but that agency spec'd their bus with more expensive, easy to maintain parts, you'll probably get 500k and/or 12 years out of your bus. 

I also hear Gillig is good with customer service. I find that true down here in Georgia since one of our buses needed a new side panel. It was delivered that same week, it the bus was ready to go the following week. I guess that's another thing TAs look for in their RFPs. Your bus may look good, but if your parts department can't supply replacement parts, then ?. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gillig1109 said:

I agree. For instance, PAT got a digital speedometer ans probably uses a Recaro seat while other TAs may use USSC seats and normal speedometers. I think what makes a good bus is all in specifications. Let's just say if you just want a regular ole Gillig, and it costs $475k. Then within about 6 months of service, the bus has suspension problems, electrical shortages, frame problems, etc. Now if another agency orders a Gillig that costs $625k, but that agency spec'd their bus with more expensive, easy to maintain parts, you'll probably get 500k and/or 12 years out of your bus. 

I also hear Gillig is good with customer service. I find that true down here in Georgia since one of our buses needed a new side panel. It was delivered that same week, it the bus was ready to go the following week. I guess that's another thing TAs look for in their RFPs. Your bus may look good, but if your parts department can't supply replacement parts, then ?. 

Yeah exactly. Now the suspension, how long it lasts is based on maintenance. TriMet doesn't maintain their Gilligs too good and they speced them with the cheapest parts so they aren't the best buses but are still better than their New Flyer buses. Whereas we have Gilligs and they are fantastic buses. Much better than our Orion VII buses which are crap. I'm talking about Cherriots. Gillig has always made great buses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, OR Transit Fan said:

Yeah Gilligs are very high quality. As for the drivers area, yeah it's up to the transit system.

What is up to the transit system, I am a bit confused? Every operators area I have seen looks about the same, with the exception to different controls, depending on what the bus is spec'd with. I am not crazy about the operator's area, not engineered well for the operator in my opinion. Controls such as the kneeler or wipers are way out of reach. The flat windshield is the horrible for night time driving, reflecting everything back to the operator, including the front curbside wheel cover.

3 hours ago, OR Transit Fan said:

 Gillig has always made great buses

I disagree, compared to other models. The Gillig Low Floors here in Buffalo have not held up all too great, they are not lemons by any means either. We have buses as old as 15 years (2001). Might say- well they have held up well if they lasted 15 years! But the bodies just don't compare to the Nova Bus LFS models here. The GLF's here have a lot of down time do to body issues. Some due to the winter months, others go out because of accidents. The Nova's we have never have had an overhaul yet, original flooring, and still are going strong. The Gillig's frame is where is starts, and they build a cheaper frame. The bowl is stainless steel, with aluminum rails, connecting aluminum side panels with stainless steel hardware. The bottom where the rails meet the base is where a ton of corrosion takes place, where as buses from 2007 are experiencing more corrosion issues (flooring too) than our 2000 Nova's. Maybe in a environment where the winters are mild, it isn't as bad. However accidents happen in any environment.  

Gillig is pretty standard with their product, some things you are stuck with. Such as step-well lights on the outside that get destroyed here in the snow piles when they freeze up, or not much of a floor heater to keep the floor from slushing up in the winter months. Every bus make has their flaws, we have issues, mainly wiring with the Nova's, and their crazy wiring diagrams are not much of a help! However that is kind of the trade off, I feel, when it comes to more customization, where sometimes a standard Gillig set up makes things a little easier. I just wanted to add my input, I am not implying any one model is superior than the other, it all depends on the customer's needs. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, OR Transit Fan said:

Gillig has always made great buses

Over here in the Detroit area it's kinda a mixed bag of sorts. SMART's 2001-2003 Gillig Low Floors initially had some teething problems (such as a crooked destination sign on one 2001 unit) but today they have become crap mainly due to Michigan's harsh winter and road conditions. Thankfully our Gillig BRTs make quieter noises (except when riding one on beaten-to-hell Eureka Road through Southgate). DDOT's Gillig Low Floors, on the other hand, have gotten into such deplorable condition that I believe this is one reason why for their next order they went back to New Flyer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, 160 Downriver said:

Over here in the Detroit area it's kinda a mixed bag of sorts. SMART's 2001-2003 Gillig Low Floors initially had some teething problems (such as a crooked destination sign on one 2001 unit) but today they have become crap mainly due to Michigan's harsh winter and road conditions. Thankfully our Gillig BRTs make quieter noises (except when riding one on beaten-to-hell Eureka Road through Southgate). DDOT's Gillig Low Floors, on the other hand, have gotten into such deplorable condition that I believe this is one reason why for their next order they went back to New Flyer.

Yikes. They should think twice about going to NF. I'm just amazed how Gilligs even hold up in those conditions. I bet a NF would be in pretty bad shape, as most of ours around here didn't age as good as our Gilligs

2 hours ago, edison said:

What is up to the transit system, I am a bit confused? Every operators area I have seen looks about the same, with the exception to different controls, depending on what the bus is spec'd with. I am not crazy about the operator's area, not engineered well for the operator in my opinion. Controls such as the kneeler or wipers are way out of reach. The flat windshield is the horrible for night time driving, reflecting everything back to the operator, including the front curbside wheel cover.

I disagree, compared to other models. The Gillig Low Floors here in Buffalo have not held up all too great, they are not lemons by any means either. We have buses as old as 15 years (2001). Might say- well they have held up well if they lasted 15 years! But the bodies just don't compare to the Nova Bus LFS models here. The GLF's here have a lot of down time do to body issues. Some due to the winter months, others go out because of accidents. The Nova's we have never have had an overhaul yet, original flooring, and still are going strong. The Gillig's frame is where is starts, and they build a cheaper frame. The bowl is stainless steel, with aluminum rails, connecting aluminum side panels with stainless steel hardware. The bottom where the rails meet the base is where a ton of corrosion takes place, where as buses from 2007 are experiencing more corrosion issues (flooring too) than our 2000 Nova's. Maybe in a environment where the winters are mild, it isn't as bad. However accidents happen in any environment.  

Gillig is pretty standard with their product, some things you are stuck with. Such as step-well lights on the outside that get destroyed here in the snow piles when they freeze up, or not much of a floor heater to keep the floor from slushing up in the winter months. Every bus make has their flaws, we have issues, mainly wiring with the Nova's, and their crazy wiring diagrams are not much of a help! However that is kind of the trade off, I feel, when it comes to more customization, where sometimes a standard Gillig set up makes things a little easier. I just wanted to add my input, I am not implying any one model is superior than the other, it all depends on the customer's needs. 

 

Wow doesn't sound like you guys don't have very good maintenance there. I will admit it's gotta be tough to maintain buses when they are being ran in those conditions. But anything is better than NICE maintenance

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, OR Transit Fan said:

Yeah exactly. Now the suspension, how long it lasts is based on maintenance. TriMet doesn't maintain their Gilligs too good and they speced them with the cheapest parts so they aren't the best buses but are still better than their New Flyer buses. Whereas we have Gilligs and they are fantastic buses. Much better than our Orion VII buses which are crap. I'm talking about Cherriots. Gillig has always made great buses

Similar here in Savannah. IMO, CAT spec'd our 2006s & 2011 hybrids great! Although they're due for rehabilitation now, they are still pretty tough and are fast as you know what! Surprisingly, the 1100s run pretty smooth and swift for hybrids and they don't stall. Meanwhile, our '09 hybrids tends to drag after 40 mph. Well hybrids shouldn't even be assigned to highway runs. That's why I say TAs should join bus consortiums to get together and really plan and discuss how to spec a quality built bus that can last 12 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On September 11, 2016 at 2:29 PM, CR SD40-2 said:

I'am very surprised that with the introduction of the Low Floor bus.That there is still a lot of Gillig fans. I thought all the models up to the Phantoms were Gilligs best. The Low Floors are just plain garbage. The suspension sucks,the seating sucks,drivers area is somewhat ok,but needs major improvements.The whole bus needs a total make over. The only reason the BRT style came out is because they copied off the Van Hools was getting back in 2003 in hoping AC Transit would probably get them,and look they got Gillig's now but not with the BRT front. The only good thing I would compliment Gillig on with the Low Floor is that you don't have to down size on the tires. 

If they did copy Van Hool, they made the design A LOT better and nicer looking!! Plus, because they are Gillig, they wouldn't be as rough and bumpy as a Van Hool, it would definitely last longer too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/29/2016 at 6:19 AM, smallspy said:

You're right, it was. Even offset, it's a T-drive setup.

 

Dan

I wonder if that would also mean that any Flxible Metros, Neoplans, New Flyers and TMC/Nova RTS IIs that were built with ZF and/or Voith transmissions were all just T-drive setups but offset?

~Ben

Edited by Benjamin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×