SFMTA Battery Electric Pilot Results

[MetroShadow]

While this might be an apples to oranges comparison between San Francisco and Chicago, something to at least consider. 

New Flyer scored high, proterra and BYD scored meh, and Nova didn't do terrible.

What also appears is Solaris will be offering both BEBs and Trolleys here, which might be another option in the North American market.

https://www.sfmta.com/media/40507/download?inline

[Busjack]

9 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

While this might be an apples to oranges comparison between San Francisco and Chicago, something to at least consider. 

New Flyer scored high, proterra and BYD scored meh, and Nova didn't do terrible.

What also appears is Solaris will be offering both BEBs and Trolleys here, which might be another option in the North American market.

https://www.sfmta.com/media/40507/download?inline

As they noted on page 13. NF and (loval to them) Gillig are the only viable suppliers. Not noted by them is that they didn't evaluate a Gillig.

[MetroShadow]

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

As they noted on page 13. NF and (loval to them) Gillig are the only viable suppliers. Not noted by them is that they didn't evaluate a Gillig.

Gillig (strangely enough) has never been a thing to SFMTA (the 2800's were bought from AC Transit and were used until the 8400 Orion 7's and 8600 NF's were ready). Unsure of the reason why, but the fleet here can handle hills.

[Busjack]

2 hours ago, MetroShadow said:

Gillig (strangely enough) has never been a thing to SFMTA (the 2800's were bought from AC Transit and were used until the 8400 Orion 7's and 8600 NF's were ready). Unsure of the reason why, but the fleet here can handle hills.

I  would think for the same reason CTA and Pace (except for the two demonstrator BEBs) don't have them: Gillig won't customize the buses. What indicated that to me was when it was posted that SF was buying NFs on a Minnesota  contract, but approved something like $100K per bus in modifications.

But you would think California state government would encourage using local industry, sort of like Pritzker asking Pace if it could use Rivian and Lion.

[NewFlyerMCI]

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

Gillig won't customize the buses

What kind of customizations? Like any and all? I've seen agencies with the same kind of Gilligs, but different windows (framed vs frameless), so minor customizations such as that? Or less noticeable ones?

[Busjack]

11 hours ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

What kind of customizations? Like any and all? I've seen agencies with the same kind of Gilligs, but different windows (framed vs frameless), so minor customizations such as that? Or less noticeable ones?

In Pace's case, the Board was told that Gillig didn't want to do the cameras. Some customizations that Pace wanted from New Flyer were stuff like another set of brake lights,and  the full-width rear sign. Stuff like this became more evident when Gillig would not bid on the Schaumburg Trolleys and 30-ft Axxess buses, even though it had product.

All buses have to have seats and windows, so those choices are no big deal.

The reference to the SFMTA piggybacking the Minnesota contract is here,but after 11 years, the linked source is gone, so I now can't recall exactly what modifications SF requested.

SEE ALSO  the White House Roundtable on Clean Bus Manufacturing topic, for more current, relevant sources.

 

[Al Mac]

CTA is so unfamiliar when it comes to “ordering and customization “ of buses..like somebody said, some buses have tints that’s lighter or darker than others…some buses have turn signals..heated mirrors..backup cameras etc. It’s just like buying a car either you want the base model bus, limited model, hybrid, etc. 

[artthouwill]

11 hours ago, Al Mac said:

CTA is so unfamiliar when it comes to “ordering and customization “ of buses..like somebody said, some buses have tints that’s lighter or darker than others…some buses have turn signals..heated mirrors..backup cameras etc. It’s just like buying a car either you want the base model bus, limited model, hybrid, etc. 

This doesn't make any sense.  A lot of agencies including CTA and Pace have customized their orders.   All sorts if options are available compared to the 1950s, 80s, and 70s when most buses were standardized.  

It is time consuming to customize orders for several agencies.   The battery electric buses can take a major customization element away.   But if a manufacturer can just build a standard bus, it can probably increase production.   Maybe if transit agencies want bells and whistles,  they can pay someone else to install them.  Obviously that might be more expensive  but the base models of the buses might be a bit cheaper.   Standardized orders might be the way to go, but can the TAs adapt?

[Busjack]

41 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

This doesn't make any sense.  A lot of agencies including CTA and Pace have customized their orders.   All sorts if options are available compared to the 1950s, 80s, and 70s when most buses were standardized.  

It is time consuming to customize orders for several agencies.   The battery electric buses can take a major customization element away.   But if a manufacturer can just build a standard bus, it can probably increase production.   Maybe if transit agencies want bells and whistles,  they can pay someone else to install them.  Obviously that might be more expensive  but the base models of the buses might be a bit cheaper.   Standardized orders might be the way to go, but can the TAs adapt?

Most of what you said makes sense. However, the aftermarket won't work, for the reason that the report says that engineering is necessary for the wiring for cameras, etc.

It also seems like those such as @Al Mac are hung up on superficial stuff like window tint, when there are agencies such as Pace that want stuff they no longer can get, such as full-width rear signs, extra stop lamps, and a 30' bus at 40' specs, which ended up with the 20300 22300 series of buses costing more than the usual 40' bus (the Schaumburg trolleys also cost nearly as much, too) .  I'm sure it helped lead to ENC's demise that Pace required reengineering a 30' bus order that was supposed to be 165 units but ended up being 67. As was noted, Gillig no-bid that solicitation.

On @Al Mac's powertrain point, NF and Gillig will assemble a bus with kind of  any powertrain their partners provide, and a hybrid has always been $200K more than a diesel, but the report indicated that transit authorities pay about $100k more per bus than do other operators (I assume shuttle companies such as We Drive U or the car rental companies).

The answers seem to be the report's suggestion (headed by Dorval Carter) to stick to White Book specifications, or Pace now saying it will try to piggyback, although (to get back to the topic) the question is whether Pace will take (after a 2-year delay) what PhoenixEV is building for Georgia, or what SF did about 10 years ago, which was to add $100k of stuff to a Minnesota contract bus.

[Al Mac]

On 10/5/2024 at 11:39 AM, Busjack said:

Most of what you said makes sense. However, the aftermarket won't work, for the reason that the report says that engineering is necessary for the wiring for cameras, etc.

It also seems like those such as @Al Mac are hung up on superficial stuff like window tint, when there are agencies such as Pace that want stuff they no longer can get, such as full-width rear signs, extra stop lamps, and a 30' bus at 40' specs, which ended up with the 20300 22300 series of buses costing more than the usual 40' bus (the Schaumburg trolleys also cost nearly as much, too) .  I'm sure it helped lead to ENC's demise that Pace required reengineering a 30' bus order that was supposed to be 165 units but ended up being 67. As was noted, Gillig no-bid that solicitation.

On @Al Mac's powertrain point, NF and Gillig will assemble a bus with kind of  any powertrain their partners provide, and a hybrid has always been $200K more than a diesel, but the report indicated that transit authorities pay about $100k more per bus than do other operators (I assume shuttle companies such as We Drive U or the car rental companies).

The answers seem to be the report's suggestion (headed by Dorval Carter) to stick to White Book specifications, or Pace now saying it will try to piggyback, although (to get back to the topic) the question is whether Pace will take (after a 2-year delay) what PhoenixEV is building for Georgia, or what SF did about 10 years ago, which was to add $100k of stuff to a Minnesota contract bus.

Thank you for that information @busjack! Although I’m not to familiar with the purchasing/funding of buses, like I said before, I’m looking at it from a driver perspective. I drove school buses and know people who drives semi trucks. Most of which is in a semi can be found in a school bus. Moving on to city buses ( CTA mainly)..novabus added heat seats for the drivers, air disc brake ( I think), a certain percent of tints on the modern novas, etc. I know some pace buses however, have covered emergency door handles ( which CTA needs badly especially on south side)..charging outlets,buses with back up cams, cng buses, etc. I wish CTA was on the same page as pace honestly. 

[Al Mac]

On 10/5/2024 at 10:59 AM, artthouwill said:

This doesn't make any sense.  A lot of agencies including CTA and Pace have customized their orders.   All sorts if options are available compared to the 1950s, 80s, and 70s when most buses were standardized.  

It is time consuming to customize orders for several agencies.   The battery electric buses can take a major customization element away.   But if a manufacturer can just build a standard bus, it can probably increase production.   Maybe if transit agencies want bells and whistles,  they can pay someone else to install them.  Obviously that might be more expensive  but the base models of the buses might be a bit cheaper.   Standardized orders might be the way to go, but can the TAs adapt?

It does make sense! Read my reply to busjack.

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, Al Mac said:

Thank you for that information @busjack! Although I’m not to familiar with the purchasing/funding of buses, like I said before, I’m looking at it from a driver perspective.

Which isn't the only one. When there were competitive procurement, Nova would have about 50 responses "We kindly request" our floor covering" NF had "our supp;ier won't give us a 5-year warranty," etc, in which the bidder (I assume) had to figure in the extra cost. In Pace's case NF and Nova said don't 'you mean a square rear sign and the answer was "no, the same as on the sides." NF eventually redesigned the bus, but when it came  to procuring the 8980 coaches, MCI was the only qualified bidder and said that the wide sign would not fit on the bus, so take it or leave it.

If there is any analogy, Toyota has certain equipment packages for an LE, SE, XLE, or XSE, but if you want a hybrid, you can't get a V6. On the other hand, if you want to "build your own Porsche", you'll pay through the nose.

[Al Mac]

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

Which isn't the only one. When there were competitive procurement, Nova would have about 50 responses "We kindly request" our floor covering" NF had "our supp;ier won't give us a 5-year warranty," etc, in which the bidder (I assume) had to figure in the extra cost. In Pace's case NF and Nova said don't 'you mean a square rear sign and the answer was "no, the same as on the sides." NF eventually redesigned the bus, but when it came  to procuring the 8980 coaches, MCI was the only qualified bidder and said that the wide sign would not fit on the bus, so take it or leave it.

If there is any analogy, Toyota has certain equipment packages for an LE, SE, XLE, or XSE, but if you want a hybrid, you can't get a V6. On the other hand, if you want to "build your own Porsche", you'll pay through the nose.

Great explanation! Thanks!