Guest Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 Thanks Guys I was just wondering about that. Sorry it went OT there. I think its more common in Canada to drop #'s 420 and 666 but I remember someone dropped 911 so it wouldn't be confused with the phone number. I know here I think i've seen a 420 and we have a route 420 as well. I have not seen a 666 bus here yet and we don't have a route 666 or 13. While I think its silly to drop #'s because of superstition I can understand why if people won't ride routes or buses with those #'s Although I bet the average rider who wouldn't know a New Flyer from a Radio Flyer wagon probably doesn't even notice the bus #. BTW in case anyone is wondering why 420 would be dropped it has something to do with the drug culture and supporting a plant of some sort. From what I have read its common to see in some cities '420' marked on bus seats and such. CTA does have Nova bus #6666. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 So in the 2400/6600 NABIs there is no 2420, 6613 or 6666? There's no 6613 for sure because Pace doesn't use bus numbers that end in 13. Those are the only numbers Pace drops that I know of. Someone else was making a point of other if there are other systems have x420 or x666 because of 420 indicating marijuana and 666 being the mark of the beast. I'm not getting why x911 being dropped anywhere because of 911 being the emergency dial number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 CTA does have Nova bus #6666. Don't forget NF 1666. And there were TMC 4666 and Flx 5666. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre_cta6221 Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 Saw 1802 on the 119 yesterday. yea i also saw 1804 working 111 pullman on 08/12/2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geneking7320 Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 yea i also saw 1804 working 111 pullman on 08/12/2008 I saw 1806 working #29 State this morning. Gene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buslover88 Posted August 13, 2008 Report Share Posted August 13, 2008 I think I saw #1001 on the tracker not too long ago myself but i'm not too sure. Anyway, my point before was that sightings of these buses must really be rare. ... Speaking of 1001, I saw it today on the tracker, on #20. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wordguy Posted August 14, 2008 Report Share Posted August 14, 2008 I saw 1806 working #29 State this morning. Gene ===A study in contrasts on #151 Sheridan (north of Belmont) earlier this evening: A gleaming 1809 heading north and a decrepit-looking 4557 trailing two blocks behind. Also, haven't noticed nearly as many 5800s lately, compared to the recent past. I have a hunch that they're leaving the roster almost as quickly as the remaining 4400s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buslover88 Posted August 14, 2008 Report Share Posted August 14, 2008 Also, haven't noticed nearly as many 5800s lately, compared to the recent past. I have a hunch that they're leaving the roster almost as quickly as the remaining 4400s. I think so too, since I didn't see any 5800s while in downtown on Sunday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2008 Report Share Posted August 17, 2008 I jus got off from the firehouse this morning. I went to a multi vehicle accident at Marquette and King Dr. on the way there around 3am I spotted NF #1816 on the N5 Route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusHunter Posted August 19, 2008 Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 I jus got off from the firehouse this morning. I went to a multi vehicle accident at Marquette and King Dr. on the way there around 3am I spotted NF #1816 on the N5 Route. Yesterday I spotted "the real" #1814 on the #14 route. It had no exterior advertizing yet and it's bike rack had no advertizment on it. With all the #1800's so far lacking Byk Rak advertizing, it seems this bus is a new arrival. I also spotted on sunday #1811 on the #36. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeymc77 Posted August 19, 2008 Report Share Posted August 19, 2008 Yesterday I spotted "the real" #1814 on the #14 route. It had no exterior advertizing yet and it's bike rack had no advertizment on it. With all the #1800's so far lacking Byk Rak advertizing, it seems this bus is a new arrival. I also spotted on sunday #1811 on the #36. Was there a "fake" 1814 running before??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Was there a "fake" 1814 running before??? I think the point is that some members believe the reported sighting of 1814 about 3 weeks ago or so was actually 1614 (another 103rd bus from that garage's first 100 NF allotment). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 24, 2008 Report Share Posted August 24, 2008 This evening around 8:30pm I was heading NB on State at Congress when I spotted New Flyer #1824 heading south on State st. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenstreet Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 and North Park has 1827 now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusHunter Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 This evening around 8:30pm I was heading NB on State at Congress when I spotted New Flyer #1824 heading south on State st. Also last friday, #1820 was on the #29 State and #1823 was on the #151. #1823 was also on the Blue Line shuttle on Saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre_cta6221 Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 I think the point is that some members believe the reported sighting of 1814 about 3 weeks ago or so was actually 1614 (another 103rd bus from that garage's first 100 NF allotment). ACTUALLY I POSTED THAT I SEEN 1814 RUNNING ON 111PULLMAN. I WAS NOT FAKE, IT WAS 1814. AND NOW I SPOTTED 1820 AND 1826 AS OF AUGUST 25TH, 2008. SO THERE ISN'T ANYTHING "FAKE" ABOUT MY POST. I SAW WHAT I SAW. AND ACCEPT THAT THE BUSES ARE GETTING DELIVERED, NO!ONE HAS TO LIE!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre_cta6221 Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 AND ANOTHER THING. 1700-1800 BUS SERIES THAT I SAW SO FAR ON 111 PULLMAN ROUTE IS....1772, 1776, 1778, 1784, 1788, 1791, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1798, 1800, 1804, 1806, 1820, AND 1826. AND THIS IS NOT FAKE BECAUSE MY BROTHER DRIVES FULL-TIME RUN 561 ON 111 PULLMAN AND I LIVE ON THAT ROUTE, SO I SEE EVERY BUS FROM THE VERY 1ST RUN TO THE LAST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 ACTUALLY I POSTED THAT I SEEN 1814 RUNNING ON 111PULLMAN. I WAS NOT FAKE, IT WAS 1814. AND NOW I SPOTTED 1820 AND 1826 AS OF AUGUST 25TH, 2008. SO THERE ISN'T ANYTHING "FAKE" ABOUT MY POST. I SAW WHAT I SAW. AND ACCEPT THAT THE BUSES ARE GETTING DELIVERED, NO!ONE HAS TO LIE!!!!!! Why are you shouting? Now I personally said nothing about your sighting being fake or that you were lying. I live on the other side of town from you, so how would I be able to tell you what you saw on a route that you live along? I was only pointing out that in reference to the person who made the comment of seeing the 'real' 1814 there were members who questioned your sighting because from their POV no one reported a sighting of a 179x or 180x yet. When the question was posed to you directly if it were really 1814 and not 1614, you said it had the blue tinted interior lights of other buses numbered 1630 and up. That excludes 1614 from the equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 AND ANOTHER THING. 1700-1800 BUS SERIES THAT I SAW SO FAR ON 111 PULLMAN ROUTE IS....1772, 1776, 1778, 1784, 1788, 1791, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1798, 1800, 1804, 1806, 1820, AND 1826. AND THIS IS NOT FAKE BECAUSE MY BROTHER DRIVES FULL-TIME RUN 561 ON 111 PULLMAN AND I LIVE ON THAT ROUTE, SO I SEE EVERY BUS FROM THE VERY 1ST RUN TO THE LAST. That would mean 1791 and 1793 were very briefly at 103rd considering that they are both NP buses being odd-numbered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buslover88 Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 ACTUALLY I POSTED THAT I SEEN 1814 RUNNING ON 111PULLMAN. I WAS NOT FAKE, IT WAS 1814. AND NOW I SPOTTED 1820 AND 1826 AS OF AUGUST 25TH, 2008. SO THERE ISN'T ANYTHING "FAKE" ABOUT MY POST. I SAW WHAT I SAW. AND ACCEPT THAT THE BUSES ARE GETTING DELIVERED, NO!ONE HAS TO LIE!!!!!! AND ANOTHER THING. 1700-1800 BUS SERIES THAT I SAW SO FAR ON 111 PULLMAN ROUTE IS....1772, 1776, 1778, 1784, 1788, 1791, 1792, 1793, 1794, 1798, 1800, 1804, 1806, 1820, AND 1826. AND THIS IS NOT FAKE BECAUSE MY BROTHER DRIVES FULL-TIME RUN 561 ON 111 PULLMAN AND I LIVE ON THAT ROUTE, SO I SEE EVERY BUS FROM THE VERY 1ST RUN TO THE LAST. Why are you shouting? Now I personally said nothing about your sighting being fake or that you were lying. I live on the other side of town from you, so how would I be able to tell you what you saw on a route that you live along? I was only pointing out that in reference to the person who made the comment of seeing the 'real' 1814 there were members who questioned your sighting because from their POV no one reported a sighting of a 179x or 180x yet. When the question was posed to you directly if it were really 1814 and not 1614, you said it had the blue tinted interior lights of other buses numbered 1630 and up. That excludes 1614 from the equation. ... Here we go again with the shouting and the arguing. All of this over a freaking new bus simply being delivered. Personally, if #1901 (just as an example) sped right infront of me one day, I wouldn't really care. Nobody needs to shout. I think some of you guys need a day or two off from here. That post about the "real" and "fake" #1814 was just a joke. no one reported a sighting of a 179x or 180x yet. That's not true. I saw 1793 a couple of weeks ago operating #22 Clark in downtown. I think I posted a picture but i'm not sure. Now, in conclusion of my post, everyone just please relax and don't take things so seriously . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buslover88 Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 That would mean 1791 and 1793 were very briefly at 103rd considering that they are both NP buses being odd-numbered. This is true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jajuan Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 ... Here we go again with the shouting and the arguing. All of this over a freaking new bus simply being delivered. Personally, if #1901 (just as an example) sped right infront of me one day, I wouldn't really care. Nobody needs to shout. I think some of you guys need a day or two off from here. That post about the "real" and "fake" #1814 was just a joke. That's not true. I saw 1793 a couple of weeks ago operating #22 Clark in downtown. I think I posted a picture but i'm not sure. Now, in conclusion of my post, everyone just please relax and don't take things so seriously . I'm not arguing. I'm just saying it's an over reaction. Actually he made his original post about sighting 1814 before you posted about your sighting of 1793. He posted about his sighting on July 21. Your sighting of 1793 was reported August 12. At the time of his post, I believe the highest number reported was still in the 1770s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busjack Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 dre: FYI, here is the post at issue. Having said that, I'm out of it (and jajuan was never really in it). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusHunter Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 dre: FYI, here is the post at issue. Having said that, I'm out of it (and jajuan was never really in it). Like Buslover88 says everyone just needs to relax. there's no need to get all defensive. If you believe #1814 was around 3 - 6 weeks ahead of time, then that's your right. I stand by my post as truthful. That's why I stated there was no advertizing on the bus. If something was rolling around for 3 - 6 weeks you would think it would accumulate at least one advertizement. Those buses usually get advertizing within the first week of arrival. Some sooner. #1828 was on the #26 yesterday with advertizing already in place. This reminds me of another bus, #1649 that was reported to have arrived way ahead of schedule. After over 800 deliveres NF hasn't delivered anything out of numerical sequence. Why would they start now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buslover88 Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 Actually he made his original post about sighting 1814 before you posted about your sighting of 1793. He posted about his sighting on July 21. Your sighting of 1793 was reported August 12. At the time of his post, I believe the highest number reported was still in the 1770s. Oh okay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.