Novabus LFS Artic

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
Photo: TTC

Toronto's TTC has ordered 153 of these new articulated bus, which is 50% longer than conventional buses. Making busy routes less crowded.

Engine: Cummins ISL9 330 hp / 1,100 lb*ft @ 1,400 rpm / max rpm 2,200
Transmission: Allison B500R 6-speed (it's a slushbox)

Passenger Capacity: 112

The engine is located at the very back of the bus. Due to its length, it is pretty much impossible to hear the engine sound at the front of the bus.
And for the instrument panel... Sorry, it does not have a tachometer. The Allison shifter at the far left does indicate the current gear though.

Takeoff from standstill is slow, ECU appears to greatly limit engine torque in 1st gear. It also have lower power to weight ratio, as TTC's conventional bus have 275-280 horsepower already.

There is a site with pretty detailed test result on this bus, including fuel economy, acceleration, repairs: http://146.186.225.57/buses/reports/351.pdf?1279634315

A Fuel Economy Test was run on simulated central business district, arterial, and commuter courses. The results were 1.83 mpg, 2.27 mpg, and 4.03 mpg respectively; with an overall average of 2.32 mpg.
Tested fuel consumption in L/100 km:
Central business district cycle: 128.5 L / 100 km
Arterial cycle: 103.6 L / 100 km
Commuter cycle: 58.4 L / 100 km

Video of this bus running
Another video
 
Last edited:

DPM

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Mar 16, 2001
Location
Newtownards, N. Ireland
TDI
2019 Rav4 AWD Hybrid, Citroen C4 BlueHDI
Doesn't sound terribly impressive. London double-deckers are @ 8mpg (imp) for the normal engines and 11mpg (imp again) for the hybrids, with up to 99 passengers.

some older data for comparison:

"Volvo B7TL Double Decker
release of co2/km total 1,406g
release of NOx/km total 12.3g
average fuel consumption 54.03 l/100km (approx 5.2 mpg)

Mercedes Citaro Artic (so called bendy bus)
release of co2/km total 1585.7
release of NOx/km total 13.61
average fuel consumption 59.82 l/100km (approx 4.7 mpg)

And the biggest surprise:
Leyland Olympian DD Cummins repower no trap (the oldest double decker on London roads - except hop on/hop off on selected routes)
release of co2/km total 1288.3
release of NOx/km 16.06
average fuel consumption 48.75 l/100km (approx 5.8)

The figures above are on empty, unladded run on route 159. Test by Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership.
London transport quotes 8 people on average per km of bus run in London. Regardless of a bus. "
 

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
For the Novabus, that fuel economy tests are done at "seated load weight" of 54 seated passengers, ballasting the bus up to 22,412 kg / 49,410 lb, on three different test courses on a test track.

Curb weight of the bus is 18,738 kg / 41,310 lb.

It has all the emission aftertreatment stuff (DPF, SCR) as typical of today's diesel cars, buses, and trucks.
 
Last edited:

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
After riding this bus several times more, I started to hear the very faint engine sound at the front of the bus. I can now see the full throttle shift points of the gearbox (speedometer indicated speed).

1->2: 16 km/h (10 mph)
Torque converter lockup: 20 km/h (13 mph)
2->3: 30 km/h (19 mph)
3->4: 40 km/h (25 mph) (gear ratio calculated: 39 km/h 24 mph)
4->5: 55 km/h (34 mph)
5->6: ? (gear ratio calculated: 73 km/h 45 mph)

Torque converter stays locked up until engine speed falls below roughly 1,000 rpm at 2nd gear during decelration.

Estimated top speed, assuming these upshifts are at 2,000 rpm: 93 km/h (58 mph) @ redline (2,200 rpm) in 6th gear

The shift points are roughly 1/3 shorter than TTC's previous conventional bus (Orion V with Detroit S50 and Allison B400R)

The buses are pushers, drive axle is behind the articulating joint, so looks like they're going to have a hard time climbing uphills during snowstorm (jackknifing).
 

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
~70 L / 100 km (~30 gal / 100 mi or ~3.4 MPG) on the dash of an LFS Artic running 53 Steeles East Express today.

Trip odometer reads around 150 km at the time of boarding during PM rush hour, so that's probably the average fuel consumption of that bus for the day so far.

This public transit bus have a fuel consumption display, which seems really odd. Our family's Jetta Comfortline TDI don't have it!

Novabus LFS Spec Sheet
(Novabus does offer two diesel hybrid options, but TTC is staying away from them - problematic, expensive, and low fuel savings. Particularly the completely serial BAE version.)
 
Last edited:

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
Fuel economy update on these buses! (for TTC route 53E again)

They seem to becoming more fuel efficient as they are getting broken in! The lower temperature doesn't seem to affect their fuel economy so far...

Last summer, they're usually averaging 72-75 L / 100 km, as shown on the speedometer.

Recently: Didn't get to ride them much (Often Orion VII diesel hybrids shows up instead of this), but the past three times I rode these buses they're showing fuel consumption in the 63.5-68 L / 100 km range.
 
Last edited:

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
Brampton Transit has been using Novabus LFS for many years, although lately they've gotten quite a few New Flyer Xcelsiors. All of the BRT routes (red buses) are New Flyers. I haven't seen Brampton Transit use any bendy buses, though.

I seem to recall that Ottawa Transport had bendy buses with the drivetrain all the way in the back, and they had a lot of trouble with them getting stuck in the winter. Toronto winters are nothing like Ottawa's, most of the time ...
 

Windex

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Location
Cambridge
TDI
05 B5V 01E FRF
I wonder if there is any provision to lock the articulating section straight in low-traction conditions?
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
Here's what the buses sounded like back when I actually used public transit!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReaOit_xEFI

Detroit Diesel 6V92, 3 speed automatic. In this video you can hear the barely perceptible shift to 2nd gear cushioned by the massive torque comverter slippage, then a while later the torque converter locks up accompanied by a big jolt, and a looong time later, it shifts to 3rd with the converter still locked with a massive jolt that you can see on the video. I think the transmission only shifts based on road speed, not engine load, because the downshift to second (with the torque converter locked) happens at pretty high revs. Most of the time in city traffic, the bus never gets going fast enough to get out of second gear.

I guarantee that in that video, the driver's foot was to the floor. I watched the drivers many times. The accelerator - if you could call it that - only knew two positions: off, and floored.

I can't imagine how bad the fuel consumption was on those. But they sounded cool.

The "old look" GM buses and the earliest "new looks" didn't even have a multi-speed transmission ... just the torque converter and forward/neutral/reverse. Those were before my time.
 

Max Period

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Location
Toronto Ontario Canada
TDI
2011 Jetta Comfortline
GM New Look (fishbowl) buses have 6v71N, which are naturally aspirated (no turbo). The ones on TTC's fleet were rated at 181 hp.

TTC used to have a lot of them in service, and remained in service until 2011.

TTC also had plenty of Flyer D901's (now retired too), which used the exact same 6v71N and had a very similiar transmission as the fishbowls. As they are heavier than the fishbowls, they had even worse acceleration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLKeHZmWA00

These buses had extremely terrible acceleration, particularly when loaded. This especially goes to the heavier Flyer D901s, which takes at least 11 seconds to accelerate from 0-32 km/h or 0-20 mph on the flat! When climbing uphills when packed, they are very, very slow - they can't even manage 30 km/h on a moderately steep uphill!

I really hated these buses when they were still under revenue service because they were extremely underpowered, which were compounded by the slipping torque converter.

Even the Novabus artics are slightly faster than these things!
 

TDIMeister

Phd of TDIClub Enthusiast, Moderator at Large
Joined
May 1, 1999
Location
Canada
TDI
TDI
Mercedes-Benz Citaro articulated buses widely used in Europe have the engines driving the rear axle forward of the bend. More and more I think North American bus makers have idiots working in management and engineering (because many engineering decisions are made by management and committees). Having lived in Germany and relied almost exclusively on public transport, I absolutely hate North American buses and most transit commissions - I still take the bus, albeit grudgingly.

Check out the Van Hool double-articulated bus in which I have frequently ridden - it's 25 metres long!
http://youtu.be/0MMGtz3NH8U
 
Last edited:

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
Double trailer! I wouldn't want to back up with that one!

York Region Transit uses Van Hool buses; they're not unheard of here. I think the engine is sitting under the floor between the axles on the articulated models. The regular Van Hool buses used by YRT have the engine at the back as usual. I'm not sure how the underfloor engine works with the push to have "low floor" wheelchair-accessible buses. Shouldn't be a problem for the trailers, but in the main part of the bus? How's maintenance access to the engine when it's under the floor like that? The rear axle must be very odd.

The GM New Look bus was a great design ... in 1959. They have an interesting drivetrain layout, transverse engine to an "angle drive" transmission. This allowed a shorter rear overhang and also the entire powertrain could be replaced pretty easily, and it didn't need a whole lot of space behind the rearmost seats. But it seriously limited the transmissions and axles that could be used. They had to be specific to transit buses and they could only be used in transit buses with that drivetrain layout. The Flyer was more-or-less a copycat.

The late model Novabus and New Flyers are a lot more comfortable to ride in.
 

scotthershall

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Location
New England
TDI
2003 Jetta 5spd
I have some familiarity with public transit...

The Nova artics jackknife like it's their job with any type of snow or ice on the ground. I imagine most manufacturers' artic buses do this if similarly designed. They have to be pulled from service an replace with another bus when it starts to snow, unless the route they're on is dead flat and the it's piloted by a decent driver. They'll even jackknife on a wet concrete floor when going slow pulling into a parking lane. The driver will be applying the brakes and the center axle will lock but the idling engine has enough power to keep the rear wheels pushing bus. The only solution is to brake harder to stop the rear wheels, but this is counter-intuitive for most drivers. Releasing the brakes completely might also work but it might not, and you're usually closing in on a wall, pole, or another bus anyway, so you don't want to fully release the brakes...

In the US, you can't really find high-floor buses anymore. This is for customer convenience (no steps except in the very back) and for customers with disabilities. This means the engine has to be pushed to the rear, powering the rear axle. If the middle axle was powered, jackknifing wouldn't be an issue. Manufacturers are saying they're working on bringing a electrically powered middle axle to market in a few years. It's not clear if this will be the sole driving axle or just as part of a computer controlled traction control system meant to preventing jackknifing.

Older buses used a "pancake" engine (horizontally opposed cylinders I believe, or maybe just a straight 6 on it's side) in front of the center axle. I'm sure they were harder to work on but they probably didn't need as much attention since there was hardly any emissions stuff on them. And things were a little more lax back then... (if a Detroit 6V-71 wasn't leaking, it wasn't running!)

Also, most manufacturers now use super-single tire in the center axle instead of traditional duals. Those wide tires ride on the snow instead of slicing through it. And with low-floor buses there's not enough room for chains, and those cause massive damage when they break.

There's no way to lock the artic joint to keep it from jackknifing, but once it's jackknifed the bus locks out the accelerator so can't be moved until a mechanic overrides it. This is to protect the (very expensive) artic joint. And it's also good for snarling traffic since the jackknife usually occurs in the middle of an intersection.

They're pretty slow on acceleration. And engine power is limited in turns to protect the articulation joint. Engine power might also be limited in first gear as well.

We have a bunch of buses, both artics and 40-footers (New Flyers), equipped with Allison's parallel hybrid drive system and a Cummins ISB. They work well. Maintenance is virtually the same as it is on the non-hybrid (Cummins ISL equipped) buses. The hybrids are quiet and smooth.

Scott
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
LOL

Whoever was driving that, has probably never backed up with a trailer in tow before ...

The double-articulated buses, now *those* would be a challenge to back up.
 

TDIMeister

Phd of TDIClub Enthusiast, Moderator at Large
Joined
May 1, 1999
Location
Canada
TDI
TDI
It has nothing to do with it being a bendy bus. It's driver skill and training plain and simple. :rolleyes:
 

GoFaster

Moderator at Large
Joined
Jun 16, 1999
Location
Brampton, Ontario, Canada
TDI
2006 Jetta TDI
I started paying attention to whether Brampton Transit had any articulated buses, and it turns out, they do (only on certain routes at certain times). They are New Flyer Xcelsior 60-footers with the engine at the back.

I will say that these buses, with the paint scheme that they selected, are very nice looking inside and out. I've been in a non-artic Xcelsior ... they are pretty comfortable.



 

Dirtracr95

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Location
Des Plaines, IL
TDI
'13 Jetta Sedan DSG
Volvo owns Prevost and Nova. As of next month I'll be an employee of Prevost but Ill be mostly working on Nova buses here in Chicago. Starting at the bottom since I have zero bus experience coming from being an auto technician for 7 years. Buses should be fun but I have a feeling I'll be owning Snap-on 10-15k more soon.
 

yatzee

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Jan 4, 2004
Location
Montreal, Qc
TDI
see sig
Interesting thread, guys. Does Novabus still have an assembly plant in St. Eustache near me? I haven't seen 1 on the highway in ages.
 
Top