aemoreira81 Posted April 5, 2009 Share #26 Posted April 5, 2009 i wonder if NJT would pay Cummins to upgrade the ISM-410 in the bus with an engine brake, i mean, come on... 345 braking horsepower;)B) I would have thought that the engine brake is an independent system made by Jacobs Vehicle Systems (which is how the name Jake Brake came about). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 5, 2009 Share #27 Posted April 5, 2009 We need more MCI please (NJT). I loves my flexibles, but they are fallings aparts. - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted April 5, 2009 Share #28 Posted April 5, 2009 I would have thought that the engine brake is an independent system made by Jacobs Vehicle Systems (which is how the name Jake Brake came about). well, it is made by Jacobs Vehicle Systems, actually, and the Cummins version is known as the Cummins C Brake, by Jacobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted April 6, 2009 Share #29 Posted April 6, 2009 We need more MCI please (NJT). I loves my flexibles, but they are fallings aparts. - A The Flxibles should have been replaced partly by suburban RTSs. Routes like the Boulevard East lines, the 190, and 400 need two-door buses; MCIs are inadequate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 6, 2009 Share #30 Posted April 6, 2009 The Flxibles should have been replaced partly by suburban RTSs. Routes like the Boulevard East lines, the 190, and 400 need two-door buses; MCIs are inadequate. Noooooo! Seriously i don't enjoy riding RTS. You could put the NABI on the 62 at least! B) - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted April 6, 2009 Share #31 Posted April 6, 2009 Noooooo! Seriously i don't enjoy riding RTS. You could put the NABI on the 62 at least! B) - A NOOOOOO!!!! I love my Metro-Ds on the 62. Ride the train if you don't want to ride the Flxibles anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted April 6, 2009 Share #32 Posted April 6, 2009 We need more MCI please (NJT). I loves my flexibles, but they are fallings aparts. - A Like Adam Moreira said, MCIs are not the proper replacements for the Flxibles. BUT, MCI does have the rights to the Flxible models. If only they could work something up..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 7, 2009 Share #33 Posted April 7, 2009 NOOOOOO!!!! I love my Metro-Ds on the 62. Ride the train if you don't want to ride the Flxibles anymore! I do, but my leg got soaked.... All most got my iPod! Plus they won't be around too much longer... replace with NABI then! :tup: - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metsfan Posted April 7, 2009 Share #34 Posted April 7, 2009 Like Adam Moreira said, MCIs are not the proper replacements for the Flxibles. BUT, MCI does have the rights to the Flxible models. If only they could work something up..... Compelling..... - A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted April 7, 2009 Share #35 Posted April 7, 2009 The Flxibles should have been replaced partly by suburban RTSs. Routes like the Boulevard East lines, the 190, and 400 need two-door buses; MCIs are inadequate. To add: the 190 for many years did use Metro-Bs for many years, until MCIs replaced them. The 400, 403, and 406 also use a mix of D4000s (102" and 96") and Metro-Bs. But the Black Horse Pike needs two-door buses, or gobus NOW in the worst way. Many of those 3500s were originally at Madison Avenue (when it was open) and then moved to Wayne when it replaced Madison Avenue; Madison Avenue along with Warwick could not fit MCIs in the garage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan05979 Posted April 11, 2009 Share #36 Posted April 11, 2009 last week i was on the l.i.e going west and i seen the same mci njtrasit bus with the new tailights. i had to look twice because of the new look and that the bus was on the service road going west into the city around exit 48 and it was a nj bus i wonder why it was on long island??? anyone have a clue? i know allison transmissions are out east by exit 57 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ML111 Posted April 11, 2009 Share #37 Posted April 11, 2009 To add: the 190 for many years did use Metro-Bs for many years, until MCIs replaced them. The 400, 403, and 406 also use a mix of D4000s (102" and 96") and Metro-Bs. But the Black Horse Pike needs two-door buses, or gobus NOW in the worst way. Many of those 3500s were originally at Madison Avenue (when it was open) and then moved to Wayne when it replaced Madison Avenue; Madison Avenue along with Warwick could not fit MCIs in the garage. I agree 100% with you that the 400 needs the two-door transit buses (such as a Flex or Nova), because of the route and volume the route carries - in response to your previous comment on the 190 and the 165/166/168 needing two-door transit buses, even though I think they would be useful for the runs on the 190 that serve the entire route via Main Ave. and Secaucus, I do not think they would serve well for the Secaucus/Rutherford sections that operate on the weekdays. I understand what you are saying in terms of the Boulevard East routes because of the volumes in local passenger demand and traffic, but when you take into consideration the entirety of the route (and because they are in essence primarily Bergen County commuter routes), they are impractical. Take the 165 for example, you cannot use a Flex to do that entire route from Weehawken over to Fairview, then over the Causeway to the Ridgefields and eventually onto Kinderkamack, it would not be able to sufficiently carry or handle the commuter loads aside from the local Hudson traffic. Yes, it takes a little bit more time to board and alight because of one door, but in terms of NJT's ability and structure to run a route as both a commuter and local route under the same heading, the D4000s are more than sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.J. Posted April 13, 2009 Share #38 Posted April 13, 2009 I agree 100% with you that the 400 needs the two-door transit buses (such as a Flex or Nova), because of the route and volume the route carries - in response to your previous comment on the 190 and the 165/166/168 needing two-door transit buses, even though I think they would be useful for the runs on the 190 that serve the entire route via Main Ave. and Secaucus, I do not think they would serve well for the Secaucus/Rutherford sections that operate on the weekdays. I understand what you are saying in terms of the Boulevard East routes because of the volumes in local passenger demand and traffic, but when you take into consideration the entirety of the route (and because they are in essence primarily Bergen County commuter routes), they are impractical. Take the 165 for example, you cannot use a Flex to do that entire route from Weehawken over to Fairview, then over the Causeway to the Ridgefields and eventually onto Kinderkamack, it would not be able to sufficiently carry or handle the commuter loads aside from the local Hudson traffic. Yes, it takes a little bit more time to board and alight because of one door, but in terms of NJT's ability and structure to run a route as both a commuter and local route under the same heading, the D4000s are more than sufficient. I was mad when i found a Nova RTS-RT6 on the 400 one day, i was ok with seeing a 30 foot RTS, But the fact that it was on the 400 was just a shame Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablo M 201 Posted April 13, 2009 Share #39 Posted April 13, 2009 I was mad when i found a Nova RTS-RT6 on the 400 one day, i was ok with seeing a 30 foot RTS, But the fact that it was on the 400 was just a shame Its sort of the same situation in northern NJ right now with R&T using the baby Novas they have now on the #10 route DURING THE FREAKIN' RUSH HOUR, and I go "WTF?!?" every time, sometimes even laughing. I was talking to a friend of mine who does work for R&T and he couldn't explain to me why there are 30 foot buses on the 10 while the 305 (the Liberty State Park shuttle) sees 40 footers on a weekday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Sith Posted April 14, 2009 Share #40 Posted April 14, 2009 On the subject of the MCIs, I caught 7112 today, rear LED was off, along with a NABI and a Flxible Metro B, video coming soon Though I have a question. What is the exact Drivetrain specifications for both NABI 416.15s and the ex-NYCB D4500CTs? I'm looking in two sites but getting two different results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted April 15, 2009 Share #41 Posted April 15, 2009 Its sort of the same situation in northern NJ right now with R&T using the baby Novas they have now on the #10 route DURING THE FREAKIN' RUSH HOUR, and I go "WTF?!?" every time, sometimes even laughing. I was talking to a friend of mine who does work for R&T and he couldn't explain to me why there are 30 foot buses on the 10 while the 305 (the Liberty State Park shuttle) sees 40 footers on a weekday. HOLD ON---an NJT-branded bus on the #10, and a 30-footer? As for 30' RTSs in the South, I have seen one going over the Ben Franklin a while back on the 403...and the White Horse Pike isn't exactly a light-use route either. Those buses should remain on the 459 and 463---then again, those routes also see D4000s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan Railer Posted May 8, 2009 Share #42 Posted May 8, 2009 just wondering, but over the weekend, i happened to drive past one of these busses on route three, and when i looked over as it passes going the opposite direction, the rear engine compartment doors were wide open. i wonder whether that was on purpose or purely by accident, but it looked pretty cool to see that CAT C13 engine spinning in there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan833Blue Posted May 17, 2009 Share #43 Posted May 17, 2009 Another pic of the New NJT MCIs!!! #7110 on the 137 to Toms River Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KNIGHTRIDER3:16 Posted June 8, 2009 Share #44 Posted June 8, 2009 Those buses are hot for real LED runboxes nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJT553 Posted June 10, 2009 Share #45 Posted June 10, 2009 yeah they are nice, but could anyone imagine a NJT MCI w/o engine brake? hell no! Will Egg Harbor see these soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctrabs74 Posted June 10, 2009 Share #46 Posted June 10, 2009 The order was only for 18 buses, so I don't think Egg Harbor will see any new MCIs. IIRC, the reason these buses were numbered 7101-7118 was to fill in the gap left by the leased MCIs (7101-7120) that were assigned to Howell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
553 Bridgeton Posted June 13, 2009 Share #47 Posted June 13, 2009 yeah they are nice, but could anyone imagine a NJT MCI w/o engine brake? hell no! Will Egg Harbor see these soon? EHG won't be seeing them new 45s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traildriver Posted June 14, 2009 Share #48 Posted June 14, 2009 I know it's subjective, but I think the rear end of these buses are the ugliest since the old Eagle model 20. And I don't like the 'toyota' like appearance of the new front lights. I think the old DL3 was much better looking, and I wish the federal government never would have relaxed the old headlite regulations. It was so easy (and cheap) to find replacements for the old sealed beam units that was standard on all cars, trucks, and buses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
553 Bridgeton Posted June 17, 2009 Share #49 Posted June 17, 2009 leased MCIs (7101-7120) that were assigned to Howell. Meadowlands had them, not Howell. Howell never had them leased units. Howell has CNGs, which look like the leased 7100s. Heres 7108 on the leased unit. Obviously Meadowlands, Howell has nothing to do with the 319. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
traildriver Posted June 18, 2009 Share #50 Posted June 18, 2009 Meadowlands had them, not Howell. Howell never had them leased units. Howell has CNGs, which look like the leased 7100s. Heres 7108 on the leased unit. Obviously Meadowlands, Howell has nothing to do with the 319. Now that's what I call a good design. Looks so much 'cleaner' than the new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.