Jump to content

King County Metro - Seattle, Washington


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As promised, here's a shot from inside Bellevue Base  

Yes, when I saw that on the news this morning, I was stunned.  It's just devastating news.  Zack was truly a bus and train aficionado. I have always enjoyed his contributions here on the forum.  I'v

Bought a new scanner (finally) about a month ago and  started scanning part of my collection which included King County Metro over the past few days. TDH4517 465 Trolley coaches

Posted Images

16 hours ago, Kennys bus drawings said:

hmm ok

Point of history:  The predecessor coaches to 3198 and 3199 were 1850 and 1851.  1850-51 were 35' D900 Flyer coaches.  The 40' D900's were the first wheelchair-lift equipped coaches that Metro acquired and were the backbone of the fleet (1979 to about 1998) until replaced by the Gillig Phantoms.  

Center Park is located at 2121 26th Ave S.  The residents of Center Park during the late 70s were instrumental not only in initiating the special bus service at Center Park but for a lot of input on how the wheelchair lifts could be improved on buses.  I remember serving on a committee at the time that brought drivers, mechanics, Metro management, and Center Park residents together to help get the new accessible service on Metro buses run more smoothly.  The Wikipedia page briefly mentions the "activism" by residents at the time --GO HERE

Here is the interior photo of a retrofitted Center Park 35' D900 Flyer that shows multiple wheelchair tie-down areas that is posted on the CPTDB wiki also from Peter McLaughlin's collection:

King_County_Metro_Transit_1850_interior-

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2021 at 10:53 PM, Kennys bus drawings said:

File:King County Metro Transit 3199-a.jpg

Sorry, random question in regards to the Phantom, what exactly is the purpose or reason behind the huge deflector or shield on the front driver side corner? Is it something to do with the cutting angle of the DS pillar due to the slanted angle of the windshield? Tree branch deflector, wind effect on mirror adjustment? From what I recall that shield design is unique to KCM.

Locally our Phantoms also had some sort of shield attached on the driver side, but a much smaller one made of plexiglass. I assume it was something to do with the mirror.

37105802910_0307ff89e5_t.jpg Metro Transit 957 by J. Mc., on Flickr

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MVTArider said:

Sorry, random question in regards to the Phantom, what exactly is the purpose or reason behind the huge deflector or shield on the front driver side corner? Is it something to do with the cutting angle of the DS pillar due to the slanted angle of the windshield? Tree branch deflector, wind effect on mirror adjustment? From what I recall that shield design is unique to KCM.

Locally our Phantoms also had some sort of shield attached on the driver side, but a much smaller one made of plexiglass. I assume it was something to do with the mirror.

37105802910_0307ff89e5_t.jpg Metro Transit 957 by J. Mc., on Flickr

Hi MVTArider! I may have posted this before but I'll summarize again (from my hazy recollection, lol).  I believe it's for the same reason that they were installed on the D900 flyers under demand by drivers at the time to find a solution to a situation that was considered to be a safety issue.  

When the D900 Flyers were first received back in 1979, we immediately noticed that there was a horrendous problem anytime the roadway was wet in that the spray kicked up by the front tires would somehow accumulate on the left side drivers window and also on the left mirror.  So much so that we could not see anything out of the mirror because of the thin layer of road spray that would accumulate.  

It was concluded that it was because of the manner in which the left front of the coach was designed.  The square angle of the left front corner and how the A-pillar was integrated with the windshield that was inset and slightly angled, created this "vortex" of wind that propelled all the road spray against the left front side of the bus and the left mirror.

Of course, in the Seattle area, the roadway is wet a good portion of the time so this problem occurred regularly.  Under certain conditions, it was impossible to see out of the left mirror because of the gunk that accumulated on the window and mirror.  

It was a definite safety issue.  Yes, we could open the window and stick our hand out with a paper towel or rag to wipe the glass surfaces clean but within a few minutes, we could no longer see again.  If we needed to merge into traffic or change lanes quickly, it was obviously a safety issue if you couldn't see out of the left mirror!

Some of us would drive with the front portion of the window open and it helped a bit but the spray would still accumulate on the mirror and we'd still have to keep wiping it clean.  Plus, keeping the window open, we'd get a bit of spray inside, plus things would get wet on the control bezel and sometimes it would be just plain too cold to leave the window wide open.  So that was not a solution to the problem but just facilitated easier cleaning.

When we complained to management for a fix, their first solution was to pass out extra paper towels. I remember there being a big stack of paper towels near the door to the yard.

Handing out extra paper towels was not a realistic solution to the problem.  We then got the union involved and they worked with management for quite awhile to see what could be done.  It wasn't a real diligent exercise for management to solve the problem and they dragged their feet.  It was finally determined --or so we heard-- that they, working with Flyer, were coming close to figuring it out and were in the process of designing some kind of device that  could be installed on the A-pillar to direct the air flow in a different way to prevent the spray from accumulating.  But it was just a rumor and management kept telling us that it was now Flyer's responsibility to come up with a fix as these buses were being delivered to agencies all over North America by that time.  So it went on and all we were told is "keep waiting, we're working on it."

Finally, I remember that one morning, the chief shop steward announced that we weren't to take any of the Flyers out of the yard until management could fix the problem and that they had to stop dragging their feet installing what they and Flyer had come up with as a solution. I don't know if it was a wildcat action or if he had permission from Local 587 itself but from my recollection, management said that they did have some deflectors made and ready to go but promised that they'd install a few on the buses in the afternoon and start diligently installing the deflectors in the next few days.  Even though a lot of trips were cancelled that morning, service was fully restored later in the day as drivers did go back to work in the afternoon and behold, the shop did start installing the inventory they had that very day and over the next few days as promised.  They did have to make a few changes in design and adjust the way they were mounted over the months to come, however.   

The Phantoms had a similar front design  ...i.e. similar strange A-pillar design because of the canted windshield, etc.-- so a similar deflector was installed at the factory  ...or so I believe as from my recollection, they either came from the factory with deflectors or Metro installed them as part of the procedure to ready them for service as I don't remember the Phantoms having that problem when they were brand new. 

I've pointed out the similarities in the front cap between the Flyer D900 and the Gillig Phantoms we had.  You can also see the deflectors in both images.  I think later, Flyer did redesign the left windshield to a wrap-around design and perhaps rounded the body corner slightly(?) on the D900 (and re-designated it D901?) as you can see in this photo of a Toronto TTC coach HERE.

A-pillar D900 Flyer.png

A-pillar Phantom.png

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What's up, I don't know where to find it is look found my old pictures from my old phone then I put a post on my FB for 5 years ago in Seattle.

Wednesday, June 17, 2015. 

Westlake, Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel.

June 19, 2015. AJs pictures 141.JPG

June 19, 2015. AJs pictures 142.JPG

June 19, 2015. AJs pictures 143.JPG

June 19, 2015. AJs pictures 144.JPG

June 19, 2015. AJs pictures 145.JPG

Saturday, July 28, 2012. About at 6 or 7 nights.

4th Ave, Seattle.

Seafair Torchlight Parade 2012. KCM special (6933) DE60LFR. This was a new 2012 bus for 8 years ago in Seattle.

484116_509142809112003_1601432346_n_509142809112003.jpg

418196_509142835778667_224180041_n_509142835778667.jpg

313911_509142865778664_2103741718_n_509142865778664.jpg

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

Hi MVTArider! I may have posted this before but I'll summarize again (from my hazy recollection, lol).  I believe it's for the same reason that they were installed on the D900 flyers under demand by drivers at the time to find a solution to a situation that was considered to be a safety issue.  

When the D900 Flyers were first received back in 1979, we immediately noticed that there was a horrendous problem anytime the roadway was wet in that the spray kicked up by the front tires would somehow accumulate on the left side drivers window and also on the left mirror.  So much so that we could not see anything out of the mirror because of the thin layer of road spray that would accumulate.  

It was concluded that it was because of the manner in which the left front of the coach was designed.  The square angle of the left front corner and how the A-pillar was integrated with the windshield that was inset and slightly angled, created this "vortex" of wind that propelled all the road spray against the left front side of the bus and the left mirror.

Of course, in the Seattle area, the roadway is wet a good portion of the time so this problem occurred regularly.  Under certain conditions, it was impossible to see out of the left mirror because of the gunk that accumulated on the window and mirror.  

It was a definite safety issue.  Yes, we could open the window and stick our hand out with a paper towel or rag to wipe the glass surfaces clean but within a few minutes, we could no longer see again.  If we needed to merge into traffic or change lanes quickly, it was obviously a safety issue if you couldn't see out of the left mirror!

Some of us would drive with the front portion of the window open and it helped a bit but the spray would still accumulate on the mirror and we'd still have to keep wiping it clean.  Plus, keeping the window open, we'd get a bit of spray inside, plus things would get wet on the control bezel and sometimes it would be just plain too cold to leave the window wide open.  So that was not a solution to the problem but just facilitated easier cleaning.

When we complained to management for a fix, their first solution was to pass out extra paper towels. I remember there being a big stack of paper towels near the door to the yard.

Handing out extra paper towels was not a realistic solution to the problem.  We then got the union involved and they worked with management for quite awhile to see what could be done.  It wasn't a real diligent exercise for management to solve the problem and they dragged their feet.  It was finally determined --or so we heard-- that they, working with Flyer, were coming close to figuring it out and were in the process of designing some kind of device that  could be installed on the A-pillar to direct the air flow in a different way to prevent the spray from accumulating.  But it was just a rumor and management kept telling us that it was now Flyer's responsibility to come up with a fix as these buses were being delivered to agencies all over North America by that time.  So it went on and all we were told is "keep waiting, we're working on it."

Finally, I remember that one morning, the chief shop steward announced that we weren't to take any of the Flyers out of the yard until management could fix the problem and that they had to stop dragging their feet installing what they and Flyer had come up with as a solution. I don't know if it was a wildcat action or if he had permission from Local 587 itself but from my recollection, management said that they did have some deflectors made and ready to go but promised that they'd install a few on the buses in the afternoon and start diligently installing the deflectors in the next few days.  Even though a lot of trips were cancelled that morning, service was fully restored later in the day as drivers did go back to work in the afternoon and behold, the shop did start installing the inventory they had that very day and over the next few days as promised.  They did have to make a few changes in design and adjust the way they were mounted over the months to come, however.   

The Phantoms had a similar front design  ...i.e. similar strange A-pillar design because of the canted windshield, etc.-- so a similar deflector was installed at the factory  ...or so I believe as from my recollection, they either came from the factory with deflectors or Metro installed them as part of the procedure to ready them for service as I don't remember the Phantoms having that problem when they were brand new. 

I've pointed out the similarities in the front cap between the Flyer D900 and the Gillig Phantoms we had.  You can also see the deflectors in both images.  I think later, Flyer did redesign the left windshield to a wrap-around design and perhaps rounded the body corner slightly(?) on the D900 (and re-designated it D901?) as you can see in this photo of a Toronto TTC coach HERE.

A-pillar D900 Flyer.png

A-pillar Phantom.png

Thanks for the excellent explanation Roamer!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, roamer said:

 

The Phantoms had a similar front design  ...i.e. similar strange A-pillar design because of the canted windshield, etc.-- so a similar deflector was installed at the factory  ...or so I believe as from my recollection, they either came from the factory with deflectors or Metro installed them as part of the procedure to ready them for service as I don't remember the Phantoms having that problem when they were brand new. 

 

They were installed after the Gilligs had been on property for 6-7 years...

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, northwesterner said:

They were installed after the Gilligs had been on property for 6-7 years...

Man, as usual, you're always right!  After I had written that, I wondered about it as I started to question them being there when new but I also never remember having the same spray problem when new as the Flyers did either. 

 

11 hours ago, MVTArider said:

Thanks for the excellent explanation Roamer!

Turns out to be "not so excellent" but I appreciate the thought.   I've been pretty good lately about not posting stuff as I do realize that most of what I remember from those days decades ago is so foggy and not really clear in my mind but my writing comes out sounding as if I'm an authority on the subject.  I attempt to post because I at least want to try to keep my mind as sharp as possible which is quite the task nowadays, but I end up embarrassing myself.  Please understand that if I do slip up again and post inaccurate stuff.  

Most of the time I'll write to myself in a journal of sorts what I remember from my working days and exchange notes from several other retirees I correspond with.  However, they end up remembering even less than I do, hah!  So I do appreciate northwesterner always correcting my faulty recollections as his fount of knowledge about the details of our bus system in Seattle over the past several decades is simply unbelievable to me.  

Again, I do appreciate the opportunity of being able to at least post here but it's best that I keep doing my best to refrain from doing so.  

Thanks again, and I so enjoy your great flickr feed!

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, roamer said:

So I do appreciate northwesterner always correcting my faulty recollections as his fount of knowledge about the details of our bus system in Seattle over the past several decades is simply unbelievable to me.  

Between the two of you (among others!), we gain tremendous amounts of knowledge.

Please keep posting! There's no substitute for first-hand experience -- even if memories are sometimes foggy.

Speaking at least for myself, I never expect perfection from anyone's posts. This board is an excellent resource to trade and learn. If we end up relying on each other to fill in holes/details, it's a net plus for everyone and our shared love of transit.

 

23 hours ago, roamer said:

they either came from the factory with deflectors or Metro installed them as part of the procedure to ready them for service as I don't remember the Phantoms having that problem when they were brand new. 

Do you know if all the Phantoms sported the deflector?

I definitely recall seeing them -- but to my memory, they were only on about half the Phantom fleet. And never at all on the trolleys.

Could route speed have played a role? Maybe buses from "city" bases didn't need them -- they never picked up enough speed for the wind tunnel effect to obstruct visibility. Whereas they'd really make a difference on freeway routes from East, South, etc. Just a conjecture...

 

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

Between the two of you (among others!), we gain tremendous amounts of knowledge.

Please keep posting! There's no substitute for first-hand experience -- even if memories are sometimes foggy.

Speaking at least for myself, I never expect perfection from anyone's posts. This board is an excellent resource to trade and learn. If we end up relying on each other to fill in holes/details, it's a net plus for everyone and our shared love of transit.

 

Do you know if all the Phantoms sported the deflector?

I definitely recall seeing them -- but to my memory, they were only on about half the Phantom fleet. And never at all on the trolleys.

Could route speed have played a role? Maybe buses from "city" bases didn't need them -- they never picked up enough speed for the wind tunnel effect to obstruct visibility. Whereas they'd really make a difference on freeway routes from East, South, etc. Just a conjecture...

 

Thank you for your nice --and encouraging-- words.  It's just when I go back and re-read what I've posted, it always sounds as if I'm being a declarative expert at what I'm writing when in actuality, I'm not.  Should I post again, I will make sure that each time I'm prefacing my comments with such a disclaimer.  I do appreciate your response ...it means a lot.  

As to your deflector inquiry, I'm not sure now.  I really didn't pay that much attention to it at the time for as I commented previously, I really didn't notice the "spray problem" when the Phantoms were new as we all did when the Flyers were brand new.  

I'm was not aware of the possibility of the deflectors being installed only on the Phantoms that were used where speeds were faster vs the ones used in the city.  Your suggestion does make sense for as you point out, I do see where the Phantom Trolleys didn't have deflectors.

However, personally ...and again, it's only from my own recollection with the Flyers, the spray problem was actually worse when traveling on city streets rather than at freeway speeds.  Again, that may or may not be accurate in actuality.  To me, it was worse when traveling on city streets when the spray would gunk up the mirrors and side window to a point where you couldn't see anything in the mirror.  I never remember having to pull off the freeway to wipe the mirror down ...only on city streets where there was a lot of turning and pulling in and out of zones, etc.   

So, now that I'm thinking more about it (and I really enjoy "thinking" back to see how much and what I can recollect), the deflectors may have been in the middle of being installed on the eastside Phantoms at the time I retired ...similar to the left-mirror-retrofit, that was just starting to take place when I left ...that 2004-2005 (?) time frame. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2021 at 10:33 AM, Kennys bus drawings said:

Quite an interesting read, a lot of effort.  

Interesting the note about driver comfort stations...  just sounds over the top.

Noticed a complete lack of step out bus stops.  Instead of the bus pulling over, then the fight to get back in, bus stops on street, passengers just step on.  The old lane could then be used for parking or food trucks or restaurant patios.

The stop location is interesting, I've really only seen before and after an intersection on main lines/roads.  Never thought about a mid block stop.

Thank you for sharing 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Atomic Taco said:

Due to operator complaints of unsanitary conditions, Metro hired a specialist to coordinate comfort stations.  Setting standards for each station was probably something the person in that role covered.

Sounds logical, they probably looked like a dorm room, or the band rooms at a cut rate hotel.  On a side note, any plans to investigate and identify the staff responsible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Benton Harper said:

Sounds logical, they probably looked like a dorm room, or the band rooms at a cut rate hotel.  On a side note, any plans to investigate and identify the staff responsible?

This was 7 years ago, and that's not exactly what the problem was, so I'd go with a "no"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thursday, January 14, 2021. 11:51 am.

3rd Ave, Seattle.

KCM, rt. 62 (8025) New Flyer Xcelsior XDE60. 2016 Bus.

 

I have my picture the bus and need to upload input CPTDB Wiki with King County Metro model Xcelsior XDE60, coach number 8000-8084 an available for the update required, please?

https://cptdb.ca/wiki/index.php/King_County_Metro_Transit_8000-8084  @aznichiro115

IMG_0071.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thursday, January 14, 2021. 11:54 am.

3rd Ave, Seattle.

KCM, rt. 131 (8129) New Flyer Xcelsior XDE60. 2017 Bus.

 

I have my picture the bus and need to upload input CPTDB Wiki with King County Metro model Xcelsior XDE60, coach number 8100-8199 an available for the update required, please?  @aznichiro115

IMG_0072.JPG

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2021 at 9:40 PM, Kennys bus drawings said:

Also does gillig sell steering wheels by themselfs? Because on some of the 2008-2012 Low floor king county metro buses, I saw Gillig in the middle of the steering wheel. Or where they parted for some reason?

Steering wheels are outsourced.  I'm fairly certain that Gillig themselves do not actually manufacture the steering wheel itself for the low floors.  The hub --horn button insert-- can be ordered with the bus, truck, or chassis manufacturer's name in the middle.  IMMI is one of the largest, if not the largest manufacturer of steering wheels used in buses, trucks, and motorhomes.

For instance, I believe Metro's Gillig Phantoms used the IMMI Vector series steering wheel ...shown HERE on the IMMI website but most were the padded version.  Gillig ordered the hub insert emblem with their name on it.  

Gillig gives the agency ordering the bus a choice of steering wheel they want to use (as they do for a lot of other parts) so a Gillig Phantom, for instance, used by another agency may or may not have the exact same steering wheel as a KCM Phantom, etc. 

And I'm not sure which series of KCM Gillig low-floor you're referring to.  Weren't the first Gillig low floors the 7300-7400s that started service in 2018?

 

 

(first image shows a steering wheel almost identical to what was used on a KCM Gillig Phantom but had "Gillig" on the emblem --second image shows horn button and emblem part)

(eta:  third image shows the options when ordering the horn button emblem)

IMMI Vecor Series.png

Steering Wheels - IMMI.png

Screenshot_2021-01-15 Vector Series - IMMI.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, roamer said:

Steering wheels are outsourced.  I'm fairly certain that Gillig themselves do not actually manufacture the steering wheel itself for the low floors.  The hub --horn button insert-- can be ordered with the bus, truck, or chassis manufacturer's name in the middle.  IMMI is one of the largest, if not the largest manufacturer of steering wheels used in buses, trucks, and motorhomes.

For instance, I believe Metro's Gillig Phantoms used the IMMI Vector series steering wheel ...shown HERE on the IMMI website but most were the padded version.  Gillig ordered the hub insert emblem with their name on it.  

Gillig gives the agency ordering the bus a choice of steering wheel they want to use (as they do for a lot of other parts) so a Gillig Phantom, for instance, used by another agency may or may not have the exact same steering wheel as a KCM Phantom, etc. 

And I'm not sure which series of KCM Gillig low-floor you're referring to.  Weren't the first Gillig low floors the 7300-7400s that started service in 2018?

 

 

(first image shows a steering wheel almost identical to what was used on a KCM Gillig Phantom but had "Gillig" on the emblem --second image shows horn button and emblem part)

(eta:  third image shows the options when ordering the horn button emblem)

Looks like VIP Steering Wheels has been purchased by another company.

Basically, every heavy duty steering wheel is OEM equipment made by them. That's why steering wheels all look so similar - whether you're in a Gillig or New Flyer or a fire truck.

In addition to what is listed on their catalogue online, if you call up the parts department at your OEM manufacturer and ask for a new steering wheel, they'll see you one, and it will be a "branded" (horn button) VIP wheel. 

Need a new steering wheel for your 1975 GM Fishbowl? It'll be a VIP wheel.

Need a new steering wheel for your 1990 MCI Motorcoach? MCI will send you a wheel, and it will be a VIP wheel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, northwesterner said:

Looks like VIP Steering Wheels has been purchased by another company.

Basically, every heavy duty steering wheel is OEM equipment made by them. That's why steering wheels all look so similar - whether you're in a Gillig or New Flyer or a fire truck.

I'm straying off the specific topic of King County Metro, here... but you hit on something I've wondered about for a while:

Tiny, Go-Kart Size Steering Wheels on Gillig LFs

You seen 'em? It appears to be an option.

I wanna say maybe Port of Seattle's Gilligs at SeaTac are so equipped? Not sure about other Gilligs in the area.

The steering wheel looks no bigger than a typical automobile... it's anchored to the dashboard by a weird cassette sort of thing.

I drove early 90s Flxibles with big, 20- or 22-inch steering wheels and felt firmly in control. I found smaller steering wheels disorienting -- like, not proportionate to the size of the vehicle.

But, yes, I drove plenty of Gilligs with "Flxible" badges on the steering wheel and vice versa. I vaguely recall a GMC steering wheel, even though we never had any RTSes!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Border City Transit said:

I'm straying off the specific topic of King County Metro, here... but you hit on something I've wondered about for a while:

Tiny, Go-Kart Size Steering Wheels on Gillig LFs

You seen 'em? It appears to be an option.

I wanna say maybe Port of Seattle's Gilligs at SeaTac are so equipped? Not sure about other Gilligs in the area.

The steering wheel looks no bigger than a typical automobile... it's anchored to the dashboard by a weird cassette sort of thing.

I drove early 90s Flxibles with big, 20- or 22-inch steering wheels and felt firmly in control. I found smaller steering wheels disorienting -- like, not proportionate to the size of the vehicle.

But, yes, I drove plenty of Gilligs with "Flxible" badges on the steering wheel and vice versa. I vaguely recall a GMC steering wheel, even though we never had any RTSes!

 

The tiny steering wheels are part of an electric steering system...

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, roamer said:

Steering wheels are outsourced.  I'm fairly certain that Gillig themselves do not actually manufacture the steering wheel itself for the low floors.  The hub --horn button insert-- can be ordered with the bus, truck, or chassis manufacturer's name in the middle.  IMMI is one of the largest, if not the largest manufacturer of steering wheels used in buses, trucks, and motorhomes.

For instance, I believe Metro's Gillig Phantoms used the IMMI Vector series steering wheel ...shown HERE on the IMMI website but most were the padded version.  Gillig ordered the hub insert emblem with their name on it.  

Gillig gives the agency ordering the bus a choice of steering wheel they want to use (as they do for a lot of other parts) so a Gillig Phantom, for instance, used by another agency may or may not have the exact same steering wheel as a KCM Phantom, etc. 

And I'm not sure which series of KCM Gillig low-floor you're referring to.  Weren't the first Gillig low floors the 7300-7400s that started service in 2018?

 

 

(first image shows a steering wheel almost identical to what was used on a KCM Gillig Phantom but had "Gillig" on the emblem --second image shows horn button and emblem part)

(eta:  third image shows the options when ordering the horn button emblem)

IMMI Vecor Series.png

Steering Wheels - IMMI.png

Screenshot_2021-01-15 Vector Series - IMMI.png

i meant the 2008 de60lfs and 20010-12 de60lfrs, some of them had gillig steering wheels

Also does anyone happen to know the model of seats used on the KCM gillig phantoms and 2003-2008 new flyer low floors?

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...