It's hard to fault that on ADL's perspective though. These days, the trend is to use a smaller, but turbo-charged engine to achieve better fuel economy whilst putting out the same power. Just think about it - in the old days a Metrobus/Olympian needs an 11L engine, but now on a heavier UK-spec E400 the engine has shrunk to about half of that size, with the 5.9L ISBe engine.
The downside is turbo-lag, esp. if the engine relies more from the turbo to get more power - which is why you feel it's a bit slower than the ISM I supposed. The E400(HK) of course should do well - as I said before, it power-to-weight ratio, depending on load, is 10-25% better than the E500.
a396: I'd like to think the problem is just dodgy sensors and programming in the engine management systems. With quite a lot fo computers and electronics sitting at the back of current generation of engines these days, these kind of "faults" are bound to be common. It should be teething problem, and in time, will only take Cummins to do some EMS software upgrade to rectify that.
on11358: No need to say sorry, I don't even knew who's started it! The blind I guess is just a coincidence, considering we have only seen 2 of the batch so far...
S3N92: Chill. You get sensationalists everywhere these days.
原帖由 NV58 於 2010-2-26 03:13 發表
It's hard to fault that on ADL's perspective though. These days, the trend is to use a smaller, but turbo-charged engine to achieve better fuel economy whilst putting out the same power. Just think about it - in the old days a Metrobus/Olympian needs an 11L engine, but now on a heavier UK-spec E400 the engine has shrunk to about half of that size, with the 5.9L ISBe engine.. E% N! u+ U& A
9 L! y- G% _2 y; K+ W7 R( D
The downside is turbo-lag, esp. if the engine relies more from the turbo to get more power - which is why you feel it's a bit slower than the ISM I supposed. The E400(HK) of course should do well - as I said before, it power-to-weight ratio, depending on load, is 10-25% better than the E500.
不不過我唔會怪ADL, 因為佢似係冇得揀多D, 由Euro IV 開始, Cummins 就唔再出ISCe 同ISMe, 冇乜其他選擇下只好揀ISBe 同ISLe
Well, Scania sticks with the 9L engine for commonality across it's bus range. Volvo tried the D7 engine on the B7TL. It works, but a number of operators prefer a bigger engine instead and I guess, along with the adding benefit of having the same engine on the tri-axle product, is what drives Volvo to move on to the B9TL.
As I said, the trend is using a smaller turbocharged engine to do the job nowadays because, in theory, they are more economical than a bigger contemporary. However, engine size is not a reliable indicator in the real world - Say a B7TL, with a 7.3L engine, is more economical than both the Trident (8.3L ISC) and the E400 (6.7L ISB - you are correct on the engine size btw) under similar operational conditions. Even the good old Gardner, being much bigger, are reputed to be ruthlessly more economical on fuel than any of the above by a massive margin.
I guess with Cummins as it's major engine supplier, the choices aren't much for ADL really. But looking at the engine selection of current ADL products, they obviously think smaller engines are the way forward.
Not sure about the order for the ATEUs, but I am hugely suspicious about the B9TL/MCV "order". I think somewhere people got confused with the upcoming B9TL/MCV demonstrator due for Go Ahead London i ...
你講完有B9TL+MCV樣版比 Go Ahead 後,
反而覺得九巴用MCV B9的料仲真添......
