BusTalk

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

Though we've discussed this previously, I've always found it interesting that EAGLE production lasted for decades, whereas SCENICRUISER production only lasted a few years.

It would have been interesting indeed to to have seen the basic SCENICRUISER design evolve over the years, as we saw with the EAGLE.

The only "hint" we might have had here would have been the "Buffalo", which, I've long dubbed the "Scenicruiser Jr."*......

"NYO"

["TRAILWAYS-SAFEST TRAVEL ON EARTH"]

*Back in the late 1950's and 1960's, many Japanese toy makers also made numerous two-axle SCENICRUISERS, long before the first "Bison" began to appear on the highways.......

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

Many things made the SCENICRUISER such a "show-stopper" when they first hit the nation's highways in 1954.

That this sleek new highway coach was not only a "split level", but, also, a tri-axle coach, caused it to turn many a head, back in the day.

Though the handsome and now-iconic 4104 "Highway Traveler" was indeed quite a "looker" when new, even its up-to-date look was quite overshadowed by the startling new SCENICRUISER.

Of course, there WAS, also, the unique and eye-catching "Golden Chariot", basically a "stretched", tri-axle 4104.

IMHO, just as the 4104 was, more or less, in the shadow of the great SCENICRUISER, so, in later years, the 4106 was in the shadow of the earlier 4104.

For all practicle purposes, the 4106 was basically an updated 4104, featuring a more-angular appearance; as handsome and as sleek as the 4106 was, it never achieved the iconic "legendary" status that the SCENICRUISER received.

The 4106, nonetheless (IMHO) is, indded, one of the most underrated successes in the highway coach industry; after all, look at how many suburban companies once operated them, as well as long-haul outfits.

The 4106 was always one of my favorite highway coaches (in both real life and toy versions).....

"NYO"

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

Then, of course, were the infamous BECK "Scenicruisers" (which we have often discussed), not to mention FLXIBLE's "VistaLiner", like the later GM "Buffalo", basically another two-axle "Scenicruiser Jr.".

I guess "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", after all......

"NYO"

[traildriver]

I have previously given expansive explanation's why from a driver's standpoint, the GM PD-4106 was my all-time favorite 'driver's' coach, so I won't delve into that again...


I too, have imagined what updated Scenicruiser's would have looked like. The body changes evolving from the 4104 into the 4106, and later the 4107 would probably been reflected onto the 4501. Maybe redesignate the Scenicruiser as PD-4502, and on....
You could say the 'Golden Chariot' PD-4901 skipped a generation (the 4106), and did in fact become the PD-4903.

Going further into time, if the men of vision that created Greyhound were still around, I believe they would still be "pushing the envelope", so-to-speak, and incrementally enlarge the coach into the frontier's of legal dimensions, as they did a few times in bus history.
I would imagine a modern "Scenicruiser" as being 53 feet long, 102" wide, and 13 to 13.5 feet tall in a true double deck, 4 axle design (two steering axles). That is the legal limit for a highway semi-trailer, so why not a non-articulated coach? Of course, it would be a bear to maneuver in older cities.

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

traildriver:

Good points, all, as always!

Yes, it would have been QUITE interesting, to say the least, to see the SCENICRUISER "evolve" through the years, as did the legendary EAGLE.

Recall, the huge articulated EAGLES; given that these big buses once DID exist, it is not all that far-fetched to imagine an articulated SCENICRUISER (man, WHAT an unforgettable sight THAT would have been!)

I found your ideas of what a present-day SCENICRUISER might have looked like (with two steering axles) to be quite interesting; I totally agree......trying to handle a monster like that on city streets would have to be indeed a job for a driver that was not easily phased!

Might such a vehicle also serve as a "PICKWICK"-style sleeper coach?

Alas, we can only imagine.....and dream......

"NYO"

["WHEN YOU WANT TO TRAVEL STRAIGHT THROUGH-GO GREYHOUND!"]

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

traildriver:

You might be able to help out here.....

On Eyewitness News at Noon (ABC-7) today there was a report on congestion pricing in Manhattan; there were a number of scenes that were clearly stock footage.

One street scene featured an RTS (now retired several years) and a LIRR M-3 at Penn Station, still sporting a blue stripe.

One thing particularly caught my eye:

A highway coach (on some jammed Manhattan street) was heading towards the camera (IMHO, I think it MIGHT have been either a PREVOST or a VAN HOOL)

The bus was basically all-white with a red stripe; I did catch the number "PA-819".

Am curious who was operating this bus.......

"NYO"

[traildriver]

[traildriver]

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

traildriver:

That would make sense; it also tells me more than I had known previously.....thanks!

"NYO"

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

Multi-axle steering......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-axle_bus

This concept is not at all new for buses, as can be seen by the British BEDFORD VAL of the 1960's.......

[traildriver]

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Imagine these massive monsters as RAILBUSES??!!??

Each articulated unit would, indeed, constitute a "TRAIN" unto itself!!

On a historical note, articulation (transit-wise) goes back to the early 20th century; recall the "Two Rooms And A Bath" articulated streetcars which ran in Boston? (Brooklyn had one "Two Rooms" and a more modern articulated streetcar, but neither were successful.

Articulation WAS successful on the BMT, with the "D"-type articulated subway cars of 1925, not to mention the "Multi-Section" cars of the 1930's (and the other experimental lightweight units, such as the "GREEN HORNET", "ZEPHYR", and "BLUEBIRD")

Here in the US, articulated buses did not begin to become commonplace until well into the 1980's; today, of course, they are quite commonplace.

Articulated buses and trams were commonplace in Europe for many years before they became common here.....

"NYO"

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

Given the sad state of our economy these days, high fuel prices, and ever-changing travel patterns, I have been thinking of what the future might hold for what's left of our once-extensive intercity bus network.

Will highway coach design remain basically "static", or, might there be something new and unusual on the horizon?

All we can do today is to speculate.....and wait......to see what the future holds......

"NYO"

[traildriver]

It's unlikely that buses will expand dimensionally much beyond what is out there now, although the fact that the use of terminals and depots is being abandoned, does make it easier to use oversize buses that would not be hampered by old terminal structures.

I think the biggest change in buses, as in all motor vehicle's, will be the change from internal combustion engines, to battery technology.

Not to mention the advent of self-driving vehicles, perhaps at first in cities, but eventually everywhere. Would solve the shortage of driver's issue...

[NEW YORK OMNIBUS 2629]

traildriver:

As usual, you made some very interesting points; I had not considered battery operation.

Regarding battery-powered highway coaches; to be honest, I am a bit leery of battery buses (I have seen some scary photos of battery transit buses engulfed in flames, after a battery malfunction)

IMHO, it would seem that, with battery (highway) coaches there would have to be re-charging stations at regular intervals (this setup would be far different than what might be used for local city transit operations)

A SELF-driving bus?

No, thank you, I'll walk, if you don't mind.....

"NYO"