Jump to content

Gillig product discussion


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

So I got a question 

basically gillig has everything covered for the daily ops of a run-of-the-mill transit system but what about for “BRT” service or high frequency bus capacity route services if that makes sense and what I mean by that is why hasn’t Gillig made a articulated bus yet?, 

wouldn’t have helped Gillig in the long run and take some of the Market share from New Flyer and Nova Bus and authenticate loyal Gillig TAs to own everything gillig?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Samtransxmuni said:

So I got a question 

basically gillig has everything covered for the daily ops of a run-of-the-mill transit system but what about for “BRT” service or high frequency bus capacity route services if that makes sense and what I mean by that is why hasn’t Gillig made a articulated bus yet?, 

wouldn’t have helped Gillig in the long run and take some of the Market share from New Flyer and Nova Bus and authenticate loyal Gillig TAs to own everything gillig?

Designing and building articulated buses are way more complicated undertakings, and until recent breakthroughs with larger agencies like Valley Metro and San Diego MTS; typical Gillig customers have little need for such buses.  It is apparently content with building what it knows the best: Buses that are 40ft. long and below. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Buzz2kb said:

Designing and building articulated buses are way more complicated undertakings, and until recent breakthroughs with larger agencies like Valley Metro and San Diego MTS; typical Gillig customers have little need for such buses.  It is apparently content with building what it knows the best: Buses that are 40ft. long and below. 

Ok that makes more sense cool 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/26/2020 at 3:43 AM, Samtransxmuni said:

So I got a question 

basically gillig has everything covered for the daily ops of a run-of-the-mill transit system but what about for “BRT” service or high frequency bus capacity route services if that makes sense and what I mean by that is why hasn’t Gillig made a articulated bus yet?, 

wouldn’t have helped Gillig in the long run and take some of the Market share from New Flyer and Nova Bus and authenticate loyal Gillig TAs to own everything gillig?

Not all BRT or high frequency routes need artics anyways. Three examples, all from Florida:
JTA - Jacksonville - The new First Coast Flyer system uses all 40' BRTPlus CNG models.
LYNX - Orlando - The LYMMO which is a downtown circulator system uses 35' BRT HEVs.
PSTA - St. Petersburg - PSTA is working on implementing a BRT route along one of the main corridors, they have decided to purchase 40' BRTPlus models (I don't remember if CNG, HEV, or Diesel) with rear plug doors and they're planning on having bicycle space inside the bus as well. 

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

Not all BRT or high frequency routes need artics anyways. Three examples, all from Florida:
JTA - Jacksonville - The new First Coast Flyer system uses all 40' BRTPlus CNG models.
LYNX - Orlando - The LYMMO which is a downtown circulator system uses 35' BRT HEVs.
PSTA - St. Petersburg - PSTA is working on implementing a BRT route along one of the main corridors, they have decided to purchase 40' BRTPlus models (I don't remember if CNG, HEV, or Diesel) with rear plug doors and they're planning on having bicycle space inside the bus as well. 

Well I was just using that as an example of course, it’s just that I’m not much of a fan for BRT systems only cause they are  frequent but they just do not cover a wide range of areas as say a fixed route system would and yes BRT goes through many districts and zones but they cover a limited range and from what I have compelled go down 1 Or 2 major streets

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/6/2020 at 10:23 AM, RailBus63 said:

I think that looks so homely.  The traditional Low Floor looks sharper in my opinion.  

I don't disagree at all. The use of the round headlights form the BRT line is good, but the quarter-circle shaped surrounds don't fit the existing lines of the vehicle. It also looks like it has too much "forehead" above the destination sign somehow.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
3 hours ago, edison said:

To me it looks like the rear axle was moved back maybe 2 feet compared to most Gillig Low Floor buses I have seen.

Wow that's a good spot.

Wouldn't be the first time the rear axle has shifted (at least on the 40-foot version)...

I'm not sure where the rear axle sat on the very first Gillig LFs -- those manufactured in 2001 and earlier.

For 2002, they significantly altered the entire design: they ditched the "RV-style" front cap, they increased the size and slope of the windshield and they moved the rear door back several feet. From driving both versions, it also felt like the wheelbase got slightly longer but I'm not 100% on that.

In the first release of "2002" design (which, aside from some perfume-on-pig cosmetic options, hasn't really changed since), the rear axle was centered directly under the second-to-last passenger window.

Some time around 2007 (?), the rear axle jumped forward maybe a foot. Not sure why.

Now apparently they're "overcorrecting".

Could it possibly have something to do with the electric drive? Maybe better weight distribution for the batteries?

I'll dig up some pics to show the '02 vs '07 positioning. Would be interesting to get a closer look at this new version...

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Shaun said:

So that would make it a 42ft bus. 

Just by looking at it, I think it is still the same length of what they have been building. I looks like there is less distance between the rear bumper and the rear tire with the bus in the video.

18 hours ago, Border City Transit said:

Wow that's a good spot.

Wouldn't be the first time the rear axle has shifted (at least on the 40-foot version)...

I'm not sure where the rear axle sat on the very first Gillig LFs -- those manufactured in 2001 and earlier.

For 2002, they significantly altered the entire design: they ditched the "RV-style" front cap, they increased the size and slope of the windshield and they moved the rear door back several feet. From driving both versions, it also felt like the wheelbase got slightly longer but I'm not 100% on that.

In the first release of "2002" design (which, aside from some perfume-on-pig cosmetic options, hasn't really changed since), the rear axle was centered directly under the second-to-last passenger window.

Could it possibly have something to do with the electric drive? Maybe better weight distribution for the batteries?

I'll dig up some pics to show the '02 vs '07 positioning. Would be interesting to get a closer look at this new version...

I believe the wheel base always stayed the same even with the 2001 and older Low Floor's, compared to the newer 2001 and newer buses.. I personally don't like the axle being moved back. In my opinion it make the turning radius worse, especially when you have to make tuns on tight streets.

Just to comment on the older Gillig's (2001 and older), the operator seat was actually lower in those buses. This is because the batteries were located rear curbside. The front/side dash plus steering wheel never changed though. So when the batteries were moved under the driver's area, it raised the seat up quite a bit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As promised...

Here is a 2002-2003 Gillig LF 40'. I added thin yellow lines to demarcate the window zone; the rear axle falls directly under it:

Gil02.thumb.jpg.cf1021cdaef6938d731e4cf95b48feb5.jpg

Then, this 2012 Gillig LF 40'. Yellow lines in the same place, but notice how the axle encroaches below the next window forward:

Gil12.thumb.jpg.e45af7422241024026e5c33156a9f992.jpg

(yes, the photos are taken at slightly different angles but that does not affect the evidence!)

Hideous, awful, terrible buses no matter where they put the axle. If nothing else, makes me feel slightly good about getting use out of mediocre photos. I have closer-up photos of the Gillig models in question, but it's actually easier to see the axle placement from a distance.

Fun fact: first pic is an extract from a scene where a weather-worn RTS-06 was in the foreground:

DSCN1352.thumb.JPG.c84adf9fa81feea1d2235974c7b338f8.JPG

 

In any case, although I can't f$%#ing stand Gilligs, please do keep us posted of their latest, um, innovations. Gotta keep tabs on the enemy.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Border City Transit said:

As promised...

Here is a 2002-2003 Gillig LF 40'. I added thin yellow lines to demarcate the window zone; the rear axle falls directly under it:

Then, this 2012 Gillig LF 40'. Yellow lines in the same place, but notice how the axle encroaches below the next window forward:

Good info. I would of never of known until you pointed that out. I notice the change between the 2005 and 2006 buses here in Buffalo. And I agree with your opinion of the Low Floor. I have learned that every manufacturer has something to hate though, but some have more to hate than others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...
On 9/17/2018 at 6:41 PM, doglover44 said:

I love Gillig products in my opinion nothing needs added except a artic bus

Gillig and New Flyer are my favorite kinds of buses but I don't like the xcelcior. It looks like a spaceship. They should've just stick with the D40LF

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
On 12/14/2020 at 10:35 PM, Thomasw said:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CIzgIKhjui1/?igshid=15trgtoif6ba0
TheBus Honolulu has received their first of 16 electric gilligs. Has any other systems taken delivery? I don’t recall it even received Altoona testing.

It might have been tested, but, test report isn't posted yet. Sometimes there is quite the lag.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...

 

On 1/31/2021 at 6:04 PM, Chris.A said:

Speaking of which, any word on new products coming down the line? The Advantage is damn near 25 years old!

(responding here so I don't take the CENTRO topic off route...)

So is the LFS for that matter, just slowly adapted to include different features and style tweaks over the years. Similarly a 1998 Low Floor compared to a 2021 Low Floor will have some noticeable differences, though not so much in the basic exterior style. Totally agree though, a new improved model would be fantastic! It will also be interesting to see just how much longer the Low Floor model can go. Tacking on the BRT front cap does give it a more modern look and a number of agencies have opted for that.

It does seem a portion of the success of the Low Floor lately (and historically) is really its price. I think as soon as ElDorado, NFI, Nova, or another mfg. can consistently meet or undercut them on the more basic spec contracts, then they're in trouble and they'll need a solid successor to the Low Floor.

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
×
×
  • Create New...