Transperth.... my impressions

ABS · Post by **ABS** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:08 am

Thanks for the explaination

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:14 am

No worries.

I've just stumbled upon another photo of 2001 published in August 1996 where it had already been re-registered STM2001 & "2001" applied. This means it carried that fleet number a full year before the Dennis Dart (new August 1997).

actually · Post by **actually** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:25 am

heres 2002 when new and had " normal " rego plates.

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:24 am

Nice pix there, Glen. I only saw one Dart on the Joondalup CAT. But I don't remember the fleet number. On that day I managed to catch up with 1854 as well, which was nice.

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:25 am

Thanks actually for bringing back the nightmares! Must admit they were smart looking buses. Just goes to show how looks can be very deceiving.

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:10 pm

Darts are quite insipid vehicles... and having to power the air-conditioning doesn't help. They should have stayed with the MAN midi, or a B6BLE, which are quite suitable little vehicles.

ABS · Post by **ABS** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:25 pm

The Joondalup CAT livery makes the Dennis Darts slightly less attocious looking compared with those photos.

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:20 pm

ABS wrote:The Joondalup CAT livery makes the Dennis Darts slightly less attocious looking compared with those photos.

Hmmm, there's less white on them in those photos. So I like that. The Joondalup CAT livery is a bit strange as it has green bits of the cat logo outside the windows, whereas the new CAT livery has the bits of black where th3e cat doesn't cover the windows, so it doesn't clash with the dark tinting of the windows. Also noted the paws of the cat coincide with the wheel arches.

tbc1983_ · Post by **tbc1983_** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:07 pm

Windy, good on ya for starting a very good thread!

Regarding the Dennis Dart, why is it regarded as a P.o.S. by drivers?

Herbert, don't be witty by saying "Well, where do I start?"

Serious answers, please!

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:21 pm

tbc1983 wrote:Windy, good on ya for starting a very good thread!

Regarding the Dennis Dart, why is it regarded as a P.o.S. by drivers?

Herbert, don't be witty by saying "Well, where do I start?"

Serious answers, please!

I think the added drainage on the motor by air-conditioning would have been the first thing. When I rode the Joondalup CAT, one of them was obviously off the road in the depot, and the one I did ride was quite gutless. It is a tiny little 5.9L engine, revving it's balls off due to the Allison gearbox. Sadly, the Cummins ISB motor is a little more gutless than the Cummins 6BT which was it's predecessor (and what the TP Darts have). They do lack that torque that the M.A.N or Volvo would have.

tbc1983_ · Post by **tbc1983_** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:28 pm

Windy wrote:
tbc1983 wrote:Windy, good on ya for starting a very good thread!

Regarding the Dennis Dart, why is it regarded as a P.o.S. by drivers?

Herbert, don't be witty by saying "Well, where do I start?"

Serious answers, please!
I think the added drainage on the motor by air-conditioning would have been the first thing. When I rode the Joondalup CAT, one of them was obviously off the road in the depot, and the one I did ride was quite gutless. It is a tiny little 5.9L engine, revving it's balls off due to the Allison gearbox. Sadly, the Cummins ISB motor is a little more gutless than the Cummins 6BT which was it's predecessor (and what the TP Darts have). They do lack that torque that the M.A.N or Volvo would have.

They should've had the air-con powered by a donkey-engine...
Thanks, Windy

Cheers!

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 6:48 pm

tbc1983 wrote:
Windy wrote: I think the added drainage on the motor by air-conditioning would have been the first thing. When I rode the Joondalup CAT, one of them was obviously off the road in the depot, and the one I did ride was quite gutless. It is a tiny little 5.9L engine, revving it's balls off due to the Allison gearbox. Sadly, the Cummins ISB motor is a little more gutless than the Cummins 6BT which was it's predecessor (and what the TP Darts have). They do lack that torque that the M.A.N or Volvo would have.
They should've had the air-con powered by a donkey-engine...
Thanks, Windy

Cheers!

Or the effect of a buzz-bomb lawn-mower engine in a Cadillac el Dorado!

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:34 pm

Well, where do I start?

My first reason for disliking them might suprise you: not their gutlessness. I'd be happy as a pig in XXX driving a gutless old AEC that made all the right noises. Also, in my Malaga days I had a thing for an old Merc, 137, that was so shot it was a challenge to run on time in it.

I hated the Darts most because they had a dead boring monotonous tone to them. 5 hours straight in one of them was more than I could bear.

Member 1269 · Post by **Member 1269** » Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:56 pm

Hi Gents and Glec,

I only saw one Dart on the Joondalup CAT

Rare to see one of them in service, PATH002 seems to be the only one in 'traffic' at the moment. I took 686 back up to Joondalup on Thursday and one was parked on 'graveyard' at Joondalup, the back fence.

They seem most unreliable...and it isn't unusal to see an 1800 'midi' substitued for a CAT, if-fact I can just about guarantee it happens everyday.

I'm still dumfounded as to why Path never 'aquired' 2 or 3 of the ex SCT 405NH 'midis' that were displaced from Perth CATS, then at least they could of done night-shift when required.

They are dreadful to drive..drove one around Karrinyup a few months back when one was rumoured to be going to Rottnest Island, painfully slow even worse than some of our 405NH's......

Sluggish, slow to get going and the suspension has a sea-sick effect after about a minute!

Tommy

actually · Post by **actually** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:35 am

I thought the dart was at the time one of the comfortable buses to drive. Apart from being gutless on take off, it had a lovely driving position and the air-con worked a treat. Once it did get going it would comfortably sit on 100 clicks on the way back to K depot along west coast hwy ( at night of course!!).....and you could open the front doors after you'd taken off and drive with them open.

ABS · Post by **ABS** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:37 am

When I visited Joondalup in February on two separate occassions only one of the two Dennis Darts was allocated to the Joondalup CAT with the other bus being a Mercedes Benz O405NH Volgren CR225L midi.

tbc1983_ · Post by **tbc1983_** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:18 pm

This might sound like a huge ask, but:

Does anyone know the full specs of this bus, e.g. diesel engine (b x s for example), diffs, suspension, chassis itself, external demensions?

There's an online club about the O405 and there's a diagram of the O405NH chassis, with full specs, so I was wondering if someone else has similar knowledge on the Dart.

Cheers!

P.S. I'm guessing I didn't word that properly...

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:22 pm

tbc1983 wrote:This might sound like a huge ask, but:

Does anyone know the full specs of this bus, e.g. diesel engine (b x s for example), diffs, suspension, chassis itself, external demensions?

There's an online club about the O405 and there's a diagram of the O405NH chassis, with full specs, so I was wondering if someone else has similar knowledge on the Dart.

Cheers!

P.S. I'm guessing I didn't word that properly...

As far as I know...

Engine: Cummins 6BT 5.9L in line 6
Gearbox: Allison AT545 4 speed hydraulic automatic with T-bar lever control
Length: roughly 9.2m?

Do note that the Dart came in various lengths from a ridiculous 8m front bumper to rear bumper, to 12.3m with Voith or ZF transmission, and still the tiny Cummins 6BT or ISB motor!

The rest I'll leave to the spec sheet gunzels.

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:04 pm

From the spec sheet. Don't forget spec sheets aren't always accurate!
Windy, I noticed you give the engine a different model no. Can you confirm for me that it should read 6BT?

ABS · Post by **ABS** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:16 pm

Looking at those spec no wonder the Darts are gutless.

Windy · Post by **Windy** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:31 pm

Herbert wrote:From the spec sheet. Don't forget spec sheets aren't always accurate!
Windy, I noticed you give the engine a different model no. Can you confirm for me that it should read 6BT?

[img]http://perthbus.info/scan0149a.JPG[img]
[img]http://perthbus.info/scan0149b.JPG[img]

The engine is known as the Cummins B-series, like your Csepels had the Cummins C-series. The motor designation would be the cummins 6BT (hence B-series) and the spec sheet reflects this by calling it a B5.9, where as the Csepel 844.01s would have had Cummins C245 or C211 motors.

tbc1983_ · Post by **tbc1983_** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:32 pm

Cheers to Windy and Herbert.

Looking at the spec sheet, a lot of it is quite mediocre, e.g. the torque is only 500 Newton.metres...

I also notice the unit used for tyre pressure was kiloPascals; in Europe they tend to use Bar (plural is the same), or maybe this was written by the local bodybuilder (pumps those muscles, dude!

) or distributor?

Thanks again!!!!

Cheers!

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:36 pm

You're not wrong: a 5.9 litre engine with a GVM of 15.270 tonne!
By comparison, Swan's MAN 11.190 has a 6.8 litre with a GVM of 11.7 tonne.
If the spec sheets are accurate, the Darts were even heavier than the two Csepels (15.155 tonne) which had an 8.3 litre Cummins.

Power & torque wise, again compare the Dart to the MAN. The MAN specs are: 140kW @ 2400rpm & 850Nm @ 1450rpm

Herbert · Post by **Herbert** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:40 pm

Windy wrote:the Csepel 844.01s would have had Cummins C245 or C211 motors.

They are quoted as having Cummins 6C TA 8.3. What I'm after is the correct notation for my spec records.

tbc1983_ · Post by **tbc1983_** » Tue Aug 29, 2006 4:57 pm

Herbert wrote:You're not wrong: a 5.9 litre engine with a GVM of 15.270 tonne!
By comparison, Swan's MAN 11.190 has a 6.8 litre with a GVM of 11.7 tonne.
If the spec sheets are accurate, the Darts were even heavier than the two Csepels (15.155 tonne) which had an 8.3 litre Cummins.

Power & torque wise, again compare the Dart to the MAN. The MAN specs are: 140kW @ 2400rpm & 850Nm @ 1450rpm

Like someone said earlier...should've bought more mini MAN buses (mini-MÄNNER

)...and maybe even complement them with standard length rigids...*wipes away drool*