SBST's Scania KUBs : Badly misunderstood or is that bad?
-
Originally posted by Icerage:
any idea how an engine brake works?
engine brake works by the gearbox automatically downshifting the gear when the bus is slowing down. this is to match the speed at which the bus is traveling at to the optimum engine revolutions for that speed.
-
Originally posted by lemon1974:
a lot of bus fans does not like KUB just because of its Gemilang bodywork... they simply dun like malaysia brands... the bodyworks must be branded....
that's why the endless KUB bashing.. hahaha
-
Originally posted by vicamour:
Misunderstood.
I think it was the initial configurations when they are new that made the performance of the bus so bad, like the gear tuning, the engine brake and probably the speed limiter. I believed the gears, when the buses was new, was so tightly limited that it failed to release the full potential power for each gear shift. Hence limiting the potential full power of the Scania engine. I believe that Scania buses are generally very powerful buses, even the older N113CRBs have as powerful engines like the O405s. There goes for the L series as well.
Now without the engine brakes and fine tuning of the gears, the buses feel smoother and less jerky. However some gear tuning needs to be considered for improvements as there is still limitations, which cause the engine to rumble at low speeds, during gear changes.
However I think it is the bodyworks that cause the bus to have a bad reputation. I don't think that Gemilang is suitable for the Scania engine, since their engines are mounted in a way that are quite seperate from the chassis., not sure about this but I hope someone can verify this. Even the OC500LEs are also vibrating now. I think an European bodywork like from Alexander Dennis or Wright or even Scania's own in house bodyworks can handle and cushion the vibrations of the Scania chassis and engine layouts better than Gemilang. If SBST had chosen the European bodies, most likely they might save a lot on correction costs on the bodywork.
But then during that moment of meeting the WAB bus fleet criteria and replacing the old buses which cannot be further be extended anymore, SBST had no choice but to get the Scanias. Having 1100 of the same kind is more than enough, and I hope that they can venture in other makes in future. At least they are improving the performance of the buses now, but I think that the bus is still hard and costly to maintain and also not so easy to drive as compared to other models. Based on the performance of these buses and the need of constant maintainance costs of these buses, I have doubts that the model might not fully serving its 17 years lifespan.
Right now, they should address the issue of the radiator noise by installing some insulators and also the air con. Some of the older KUBs, especially the EEVs had weak air cons.
However I am still puzzled by their decision of purchase that time. Why choose the K series which uses longitudinally engine that takes up more space and hence the higher aisle at the rear where the N series can save more space in the interior with its transversely mounted engine?
i have reason to believe that the engines were governed because of the initial manufacturer warranty phase to prevent any unnecessary wear and tear that may not be covered under warranty. i believe that the manufacturer's warranty period is over or about to end, thats why SBST is able to finetune the operating characteristics of the engine to better suit local settings.
i believe the K series buses are easier to maintain compared to the N series? not too sure about that though. N series would have allowed SBST to possibly have a low-floor bus interior much like the citaros or the MAN NL323F.
-
I used to dislike the KUBs when its initially introduced. But now, I have grown to like them esp when the Euro 4 had their engines finetuned. More buses seem to have more powerful acceleration than before and its good the engine brakes are virtually diminished. Euro 5 buses are quite good too. I think the bus may be even better with other types of bodywork. The old SBST & SMRT buses with Alexander, Volgren and Hispano bodywork were remarkably good.
-
Originally posted by SBS9818A:
i have reason to believe that the engines were governed because of the initial manufacturer warranty phase to prevent any unnecessary wear and tear that may not be covered under warranty. i believe that the manufacturer's warranty period is over or about to end, thats why SBST is able to finetune the operating characteristics of the engine to better suit local settings.
i believe the K series buses are easier to maintain compared to the N series? not too sure about that though. N series would have allowed SBST to possibly have a low-floor bus interior much like the citaros or the MAN NL323F.
I don't think the N series are fully low floor but it might offer a lower rear height similar to the OC500LE and MAN HOCL. Because the rear most seats are too high, which the top window sill is above eye level. But still better as the air con ducts above are modified for more headroom as compared to the O405G bendies.Another short coming I would like to point out for the KUBs is the rear aisle. The narrow steps towards the rear seats are somtimes dangerous and cumbersome for those going to the rear seats when the bus is moving. The wider steps on the MAN HOCL and OC500LE is better to climb instead.
-
Originally posted by vicamour:
I don't think the N series are fully low floor but it might offer a lower rear height similar to the OC500LE and MAN HOCL. Because the rear most seats are too high, which the top window sill is above eye level. But still better as the air con ducts above are modified for more headroom as compared to the O405G bendies.Another short coming I would like to point out for the KUBs is the rear aisle. The narrow steps towards the rear seats are somtimes dangerous and cumbersome for those going to the rear seats when the bus is moving. The wider steps on the MAN HOCL and OC500LE is better to climb instead.
According to Scania's specification sheets, the N series are indeed fully low floor. As what has been mentioned by SBS9818A, the maintenance may indeed be harder due to the compactness of the engine and drivetrain components. Although this issue might be solved with the use of integral scania bodywork which offers better serviceability because of a better design, that might bring up the cost of the whole vehicle (which is why they probably opted to get the citaro instead, because simply the citaro is 1 ton lighter than it's equivalent low floor competitors).
-
Originally posted by SBS9818A:
engine brake works by the gearbox automatically downshifting the gear when the bus is slowing down. this is to match the speed at which the bus is traveling at to the optimum engine revolutions for that speed.
Not exactly true. Engine brake is more powerful on lower gear, but it is present at all time whenever the brake is used.
-
Originally posted by vicamour:
Misunderstood.
I think it was the initial configurations when they are new that made the performance of the bus so bad, like the gear tuning, the engine brake and probably the speed limiter. I believed the gears, when the buses was new, was so tightly limited that it failed to release the full potential power for each gear shift. Hence limiting the potential full power of the Scania engine. I believe that Scania buses are generally very powerful buses, even the older N113CRBs have as powerful engines like the O405s. There goes for the L series as well.
Now without the engine brakes and fine tuning of the gears, the buses feel smoother and less jerky. However some gear tuning needs to be considered for improvements as there is still limitations, which cause the engine to rumble at low speeds, during gear changes.
However I think it is the bodyworks that cause the bus to have a bad reputation. I don't think that Gemilang is suitable for the Scania engine, since their engines are mounted in a way that are quite seperate from the chassis., not sure about this but I hope someone can verify this. Even the OC500LEs are also vibrating now. I think an European bodywork like from Alexander Dennis or Wright or even Scania's own in house bodyworks can handle and cushion the vibrations of the Scania chassis and engine layouts better than Gemilang. If SBST had chosen the European bodies, most likely they might save a lot on correction costs on the bodywork.
But then during that moment of meeting the WAB bus fleet criteria and replacing the old buses which cannot be further be extended anymore, SBST had no choice but to get the Scanias. Having 1100 of the same kind is more than enough, and I hope that they can venture in other makes in future. At least they are improving the performance of the buses now, but I think that the bus is still hard and costly to maintain and also not so easy to drive as compared to other models. Based on the performance of these buses and the need of constant maintainance costs of these buses, I have doubts that the model might not fully serving its 17 years lifespan.
Right now, they should address the issue of the radiator noise by installing some insulators and also the air con. Some of the older KUBs, especially the EEVs had weak air cons.
However I am still puzzled by their decision of purchase that time. Why choose the K series which uses longitudinally engine that takes up more space and hence the higher aisle at the rear where the N series can save more space in the interior with its transversely mounted engine?
any idea wat u talkin?
-
Other than the vibrations on some buses and the radiator noises, I am all right with the buses. They seems to be more powerful and smoother after the modifications. Kudos for SBST for the improvements.
But I do hope they bring in other models in future. 1100 is enough.