| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
 |
|
Menu
| London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
| London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
| Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#2
December 1st 08, 10:20 PM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|||
|
|||
New London Taxi
wrote:
In article , (Adrian) wrote: An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. Actually, an RML (nearer in capacity to a bendy and not appreciably different from a modern double-decker) is 8.25 tons ULW. You only get a 64-seater RM for 7.5 tons. Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5wt. And the RM is as rigid a bus as has ever been produced. I suspect a big part of the reason why modern buses are so heavy is that the low floor requirement means you have to put in more metal to get the same rigidity (because it can't be in the most weight-efficient places). A front engine, front entrance (behind the front wheel) Borismaster might be able to be lighter than any existing low-floor bus, especially if it didn't have a driveshaft to the back wheels. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
|
#3
December 1st 08, 11:57 PM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|||
|
|||
|
New London Taxi
In article ,
(Colin McKenzie) wrote: wrote: In article , (Adrian) wrote: An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. Actually, an RML (nearer in capacity to a bendy and not appreciably different from a modern double-decker) is 8.25 tons ULW. You only get a 64-seater RM for 7.5 tons. Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5wt. RMLs are definitely over 8 tonnes now. Now I think of it, it was RMs that were 7 tons 15 cwt. And the RM is as rigid a bus as has ever been produced. I suspect a big part of the reason why modern buses are so heavy is that the low floor requirement means you have to put in more metal to get the same rigidity (because it can't be in the most weight-efficient places). A front engine, front entrance (behind the front wheel) Borismaster might be able to be lighter than any existing low-floor bus, especially if it didn't have a driveshaft to the back wheels. The solidity of the Routemaster is in the frame, I agree. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
|
#4
December 2nd 08, 09:27 PM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|||
|
|||
|
New London Taxi
wrote:
In article , (Colin McKenzie) wrote: Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5cwt. RMLs are definitely over 8 tonnes now. Now I think of it, it was RMs that were 7 tons 15 cwt. See http://www.routemaster.org.uk/faq_fandf.html, and other sources. The only types over 8 tons when new were the RCL (with a bigger engine) and FRM (with a rear engine). I think the FRM was lighter than any other rear-engined double-decker used in London. I'm not arguing about what RMLs weigh now - I haven't looked. But 8 tonnes is 1.6% less than 8 tons. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
|
#5
December 3rd 08, 12:29 AM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|||
|
|||
|
New London Taxi
In article ,
(Colin McKenzie) wrote: wrote: In article , (Colin McKenzie) wrote: Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5cwt. RMLs are definitely over 8 tonnes now. Now I think of it, it was RMs that were 7 tons 15 cwt. See http://www.routemaster.org.uk/faq_fandf.html, and other sources. The only types over 8 tons when new were the RCL (with a bigger engine) and FRM (with a rear engine). I think the FRM was lighter than any other rear-engined double-decker used in London. I'm not arguing about what RMLs weigh now - I haven't looked. But 8 tonnes is 1.6% less than 8 tons. I don't recognise any of those values from what I recall of the numbers painted on the sides of buses. They've been metric for some years now, of course. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| A new station for London - and article for a taxi magazine | London Transport | |||
| London Gatwick Airport Taxi Services [OT] | London Transport | |||
| New London taxi signage with roundel | London Transport | |||
| Taxi fare from Heathrow to central London? | London Transport | |||
| London Victoria to Euston Station by Taxi | London Transport | |||
Hybrid Mode
