| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
New London Taxi
Was in London today when I saw some kind of mercedes vehicle with taxi
light on the front. I first though that it was an out of town one on a London job but no on the back was the PCO plate. So basically that is the end of the old London taxi. The iconic design has been around since I dont know when. I am surprised that there has not been any fuss about it like the end of the routemaster. |
New London Taxi
Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported
in London - eg http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...cab/article.do I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. -- Robin |
New London Taxi
"neverwas" wrote ...
I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. "Between July 2003 and November 2004 MBH sold its property portfolio, including the land under its Coventry manufacturing facility. In January 2007, an Extraordinary General Meeting of the shareholders approved a joint venture with Geely Automobile to manufacture the London Black Cab and other vehicles in China." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manganese_Bronze_Holdings If it hasn't started yet, it won't be long! -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
New London Taxi
"neverwas" wrote in message
om... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in London - eg http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standa...cab/article.do I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. |
New London Taxi
wrote ...
Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
New London Taxi
On 30 Nov, 20:06, wrote:
I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. It's ultimately not up to TfL. Any manufacturer can ask TfL to approve a design, and if it meets the specs then it's allowed. It's just up until now, only the LTI designs have been on the list. I'd be surprised if UK/EU competition rules allowed them to do it any other way. (though that makes wonder how the BorisBus will be contracted, given there's surely only going to be one manufacturer of them) U |
New London Taxi
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Andrew Heenan wrote:
wrote ... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. According to the article, the Merc is going to be about the same price as the TX4. It's only going to be better value if it's a substantially better vehicle - is it? tom -- buy plastic owl |
New London Taxi
"Tom Anderson" wrote ...
According to the article, the Merc is going to be about the same price as the TX4. It's only going to be better value if it's a substantially better vehicle - is it? The specification appears to be superior; but I've not been able to find an 'in depth' comparison. There's no doubt that the TX4 is severely overpriced - almost to the point of silliness - and new entrant to the market, with so much to play for, would be loopy to start off the same way. (No guarantees, of course!) -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
New London Taxi
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 21:01:01 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: According to the article, the Merc is going to be about the same price as the TX4. It's only going to be better value if it's a substantially better vehicle - is it? Dunno, but I'm sure I've read that the Merc Vito isn't exactly Mercedes' finest hour, with reliability problems galore. It's quite possibly a better vehicle for the passenger, as I've always found getting into and out of a "traditional" taxi a bit of a pain, because the door is too far away from the seats. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
New London Taxi
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 12:35:58 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote: (though that makes wonder how the BorisBus will be contracted, given there's surely only going to be one manufacturer of them) Because it'll be a bulk purchase either by TfL or the bus companies, it'll probably go out to tender. This is a rather different situation than taxis, where a lot of drivers also own their vehicle and can thus purchase whatever they feel like so long as it fits the spec. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
New London Taxi
wrote in message ... Was in London today when I saw some kind of mercedes vehicle with taxi light on the front. I first though that it was an out of town one on a London job but no on the back was the PCO plate. So basically that is the end of the old London taxi. The iconic design has been around since I dont know when. I am surprised that there has not been any fuss about it like the end of the routemaster. -------------------------------------------------------------- The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. |
New London Taxi
On Nov 30, 4:28 pm, wrote:
So basically that is the end of the old London taxi. The iconic design has been around since I dont know when. I am surprised that there has not been any fuss about it like the end of the routemaster. Because the current LTI vehicle is overpriced and is an awful underpowered retro pastiche that looks like it should have Noddy at the wheel. I doubt anyone will miss it. B2003 |
New London Taxi
On Dec 1, 9:34*am, Boltar wrote:
On Nov 30, 4:28 pm, wrote: So basically that is the end of the old London taxi. *The iconic design has been around since I dont know when. *I am surprised that there has not been any fuss about it like the end of the routemaster. Because the current LTI vehicle is overpriced and is an awful underpowered retro pastiche that looks like it should have Noddy at the wheel. I doubt anyone will miss it. B2003 If that's fair, does it not also apply to the Routemaster, hence the poster's question? |
New London Taxi
On Dec 1, 10:01 am, MIG wrote:
If that's fair, does it not also apply to the Routemaster, hence the poster's question? The routemaster isn't a pastiche , its the real thing. And while its looks might be old fashioned they don't look as plain daft as the current LTI taxi. Having said that the only good thing about the routemaster IMO is the hop on/off ability. Apart from that its too small and too cramped to be a realistic bus for todays crowds. B2003 |
New London Taxi
On Dec 1, 10:29*am, Boltar wrote:
On Dec 1, 10:01 am, MIG wrote: If that's fair, does it not also apply to the Routemaster, hence the poster's question? The routemaster isn't a pastiche , its the real thing. And while its looks might be old fashioned they don't look as plain daft as the current LTI taxi. Having said that the only good thing about the routemaster IMO is the hop on/off ability. Apart from that its too small and too cramped to be a realistic bus for todays crowds. B2003 I am not criticising or praising the Routemaster, but by 1969 or so it was an updated version of a design that was going out of date in the 1950s, and certainly not exactly overpowered. |
New London Taxi
|
New London Taxi
|
New London Taxi
Adrian wrote:
gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: It has not been beaten since in a number of areas, most notably that most modern buses weigh half as much again (or double in the case of bendies). A chunk more than that... An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. With substantially higher capacity, nearly twice as much. I still don't get why people compare RMs with bendies all the time - the former is the ultimate traditional London bus from an age where you could afford large amounts of labour, the latter is a cheap tram, brought in quickly to cope with rising demand before proper electrically powered rail based solutions could be developed. However, the mass per passenger is a lot more (in the range of about 40-50%), but if you compare bendy against conventional double decker it's rather closer and if you compare bendy against bendy replacement single decker the bendy wins on weight (and indeed on pretty much every other ground - the rigid option has more buses, more cumulative length of bus, more drivers and more risk to cyclists) This is important because the replacement for bendies on two of the first three routes will be rigid single deckers - they were never RM routes. I can't wait for the spin on that one. So why are modern buses heavier? Partly, I suspect, for the same reasons modern trains are heavier - for many years the commercial incentives in what is now a competitive market were around minimising initial cost, maintenance and downtime (which translates as 'stick a bit of extra metal on it and don't waste time optimising for weight or it'll be late to market and uncompetitive on price') and people have got bigger - the RM is a bit narrower and a lot shorter than a modern bus, which are usually 2550mm wide. Free markets don't lead to optimised design, since design quality is one of a number of conflicting requirements in product design in a competitive environment. I'm not sure a convinced Thatcherite like Boris necessarily understands this, considering how he keeps going on about value for money. Tom |
New London Taxi
Tom Barry gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: With substantially higher capacity, nearly twice as much. ....as long as everybody's happy about standing, of course. The Bendy has far less seating capacity. and if you compare bendy against bendy replacement single decker the bendy wins on weight (and indeed on pretty much every other ground - the rigid option has more buses That's a bad thing? more cumulative length of bus Only if the buses are somehow firmly fixed nose-to-tail. more drivers And? and more risk to cyclists Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. So why are modern buses heavier? Partly, I suspect, for the same reasons modern trains are heavier - for many years the commercial incentives in what is now a competitive market were around minimising initial cost, maintenance and downtime (which translates as 'stick a bit of extra metal on it and don't waste time optimising for weight or it'll be late to market and uncompetitive on price') and people have got bigger - the RM is a bit narrower and a lot shorter than a modern bus, which are usually 2550mm wide. OK, so scale the RM width up from 2440mm (8') to 2550mm. You've just gone up from 7.5t to 7.8t. Scale the RM length up from 9.1m (30' RML) to 10.8m (Dennis Enviro 400), and you're up to 9.2t. So where'd that other few tons come from on the nice shiny modern "fuel-efficient" bus, then? The modern double-deckers don't seat or stand any more people than the RMs, either. Bendis just plain don't fit London streets with tight junctions, pedestrian refuges and frequent traffic lights. Free markets don't lead to optimised design, since design quality is one of a number of conflicting requirements in product design in a competitive environment. I'm not sure a convinced Thatcherite like Boris necessarily understands this, considering how he keeps going on about value for money. I'm not sure it's quite that simple. Purchase cost is just one factor in the complete lifecycle running costs. |
New London Taxi
On Dec 1, 3:24 pm, Adrian wrote:
Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. Most cyclists seem to be pretty clueless with regards to basic survival techniques on the road. They jump red lights, pass vehicles on the inside near left turns, then surprise! One day they're a jam sandwich under someones wheels and yet for some reason its always the drivers fault. OK, so scale the RM width up from 2440mm (8') to 2550mm. You've just gone up from 7.5t to 7.8t. Scale the RM length up from 9.1m (30' RML) to 10.8m (Dennis Enviro 400), and you're up to 9.2t. So where'd that other few tons come from on the nice shiny modern "fuel-efficient" bus, then? Crash protection and emissions control systems I should imagine. Bendis just plain don't fit London streets with tight junctions, pedestrian refuges and frequent traffic lights. ********. They fit fine on all the main roads. Funnily enough so do HGVs. B2003 |
New London Taxi
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Adrian wrote:
Tom Barry gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: and more risk to cyclists Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. I'm pleased to offer myself as one that doesn't. The stats show very clearly that bendy buses are no more dangerous to cyclists than normal buses, when considered on a route basis, and may even be substantially safer. Bendis just plain don't fit London streets with tight junctions, pedestrian refuges and frequent traffic lights. I would certainly agree that there are some routes where they don't fit, and those should perhaps be debendified or re-routed. There are also many routes where they fit fine. tom -- All roads lead unto death row; who knows what's after? |
New London Taxi
Tom Anderson gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. I'm pleased to offer myself as one that doesn't. Long may it stay that way... I wouldn't have said I knew you, though. grin |
New London Taxi
"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
... wrote ... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. The Mercedes can make U-turns better, one driver told me. IIRC, it is because the rear wheels can also turn to a degree. How much is the Mercedes compared to the TX4? I heard that the latter in a brand new state costs around £50,000, whereas second-hand is about £35,000. |
New London Taxi
"RobWilton" wrote in message
... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. |
New London Taxi
In message ,
writes "RobWilton" wrote in message ... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. You can say that again. If you'd seen the reports on the safety (or lack of) record of the Tuc Tuc's you'd be very worried. There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident by claiming that the fact no one was injured showed that the 'safety enhancements' (seat belts required by law) he'd had fitted to the vehicles had made then safer. He conveniently overlooked the fact that the thing had turned over at a relatively low speed and it was just luck that there was no serious injury - unlike the poor soul who is (was?) in a semi vegetive state as a result of an accident that occurred in Queen Street, Brighton -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
In message ,
writes "Andrew Heenan" wrote in message ... wrote ... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. The new Mercedes is not priced significantly lower than the TX4. It is a new vehicle which has yet to have some serious mileages so there is not yet any data of the longer term, higher mileage statistics for this vehicle. A friend of mine had a Merc Vito fitted as a taxi in Brighton about 6 years ago. It was not the present model and did not have the electrically operated doors, steering, etc so it is not possible to make a direct comparison. However, his experience was that when the vehicle was new it was brilliant but after about 2 years he found that it just wouldn't stand up to the kind of service that Brighton taxi users subjected it to (Brighton's hills and the out of town jobs along the M23 combine to really test vehicles!) and cost him a lot of money and down time. The Mercedes can make U-turns better, one driver told me. IIRC, it is because the rear wheels can also turn to a degree. But you have to stop to engage the rear steering and be travelling at less than 5 mph for it to work - not so useful when you want to get out of the way quickly to avoid traffic coming towards you in some instances. How much is the Mercedes compared to the TX4? I heard that the latter in a brand new state costs around £50,000, whereas second-hand is about £35,000. New TX4 around £38k (depending on spec) and a Merc only slightly less. FWIW I write every month for Taxi "talk" magazine (www.taxitalk.co.uk for an example) and am often made aware of problems before they become common knowledge. As far as the Merc is concerned I am reserving my judgement as there are several items which have mechanical or electronic operation (electric step, electric doors, rear steering) which have not seen heavy duty yet. I always have this fear that mechanical things can go wrong and the ore complicated they are the more time and money they take to repair. -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
|
New London Taxi
"Mike Hughes" wrote in message ... In message , writes "RobWilton" wrote in message ... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. You can say that again. If you'd seen the reports on the safety (or lack of) record of the Tuc Tuc's you'd be very worried. There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident by claiming that the fact no one was injured showed that the 'safety enhancements' (seat belts required by law) he'd had fitted to the vehicles had made then safer. He conveniently overlooked the fact that the thing had turned over at a relatively low speed and it was just luck that there was no serious injury - unlike the poor soul who is (was?) in a semi vegetive state as a result of an accident that occurred in Queen Street, Brighton ------------------------------------------------------- There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident . Turned over.....Positive spin!! AH, the old ones are the best eh,Mike. |
New London Taxi
wrote:
In article , (Adrian) wrote: An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. Actually, an RML (nearer in capacity to a bendy and not appreciably different from a modern double-decker) is 8.25 tons ULW. You only get a 64-seater RM for 7.5 tons. Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5wt. And the RM is as rigid a bus as has ever been produced. I suspect a big part of the reason why modern buses are so heavy is that the low floor requirement means you have to put in more metal to get the same rigidity (because it can't be in the most weight-efficient places). A front engine, front entrance (behind the front wheel) Borismaster might be able to be lighter than any existing low-floor bus, especially if it didn't have a driveshaft to the back wheels. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
New London Taxi
In message , RobWilton
There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident . Turned over.....Positive spin!! AH, the old ones are the best eh,Mike. LOL that's what I keep telling my wife. Trouble is she says there's old and then there's me. I'm not too sure what she means :-)) -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
In article ,
(Colin McKenzie) wrote: wrote: In article , (Adrian) wrote: An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. Actually, an RML (nearer in capacity to a bendy and not appreciably different from a modern double-decker) is 8.25 tons ULW. You only get a 64-seater RM for 7.5 tons. Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5wt. RMLs are definitely over 8 tonnes now. Now I think of it, it was RMs that were 7 tons 15 cwt. And the RM is as rigid a bus as has ever been produced. I suspect a big part of the reason why modern buses are so heavy is that the low floor requirement means you have to put in more metal to get the same rigidity (because it can't be in the most weight-efficient places). A front engine, front entrance (behind the front wheel) Borismaster might be able to be lighter than any existing low-floor bus, especially if it didn't have a driveshaft to the back wheels. The solidity of the Routemaster is in the frame, I agree. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
New London Taxi
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:28:04 -0800 (PST),
wrote: Was in London today when I saw some kind of mercedes vehicle with taxi light on the front. I first though that it was an out of town one on a London job but no on the back was the PCO plate. So basically that is the end of the old London taxi. The iconic design has been around since I dont know when. That's what they said when the TX1 came in a decade or so back. |
New London Taxi
"Mike Hughes" wrote ...
As far as the Merc is concerned I am reserving my judgement as there are several items which have mechanical or electronic operation (electric step, electric doors, rear steering) which have not seen heavy duty yet. I always have this fear that mechanical things can go wrong and the ore complicated they are the more time and money they take to repair. Fair comment. How do you feel about the 'fact' of competition? Does it look like the first of several? Will it force a more realistic price for TXs? In the past, they've always managed to re-assert the monopoly pretty quickly - but will Merceded hang in there? And finally, what's the uptake on the Mercs been like? (that'll teach you admit you have good sources!) -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
New London Taxi
In message , Andrew Heenan
writes "Mike Hughes" wrote ... As far as the Merc is concerned I am reserving my judgement as there are several items which have mechanical or electronic operation (electric step, electric doors, rear steering) which have not seen heavy duty yet. I always have this fear that mechanical things can go wrong and the ore complicated they are the more time and money they take to repair. Fair comment. How do you feel about the 'fact' of competition? I welcome competition as this should bring a better level of customer service to the trade - it certainly did when Metrocab brought out the TTT as it resulted in the Nissan engined FX4 driver which some claim was the best London taxi ever (obviously pre- Euro 3 emissions regs) Does it look like the first of several? Hard to say. There have been rumours that a Hybrid car, based upon the Metrocab was due to come out, but that has now died down. LTI have (had?) a couple of 'concept' electric cars in the pipeline but these have a limited range (100 miles) and a top speed of about 50 mph which is no good for going along the M4 to Heathrow. They are alo supposed to be developing some Hyrogen fuel cell based vehicles in time forthe 2012 Olympics. Whether the present economic situation will change this remains to be seen Will it force a more realistic price for TXs? Hard to say. LTI (well the parent company MBH) have signed a deal with Geely in China. This means that production of 4000 at Coventry will be increased to 40,000 in China. The Chinese built vehicles will be sold in China and Asia by Geely while LTI will sell them elsewhere in the world. It was claimed that production will continue in Coventry but it was hoped that Chinese made parts would help keep prices down In the past, they've always managed to re-assert the monopoly pretty quickly - but will Merceded hang in there? The only reason that the TX has a monopoly is because alternative vehicles simply were not bought in enough volume to make a profit. That was frequently because they had more problems that the FX/TX range. Whether the Merc will be able to continue remains to be seen And finally, what's the uptake on the Mercs been like? They hope to have 150 in service by the end of Jan (that'll teach you admit you have good sources!) No problems I just hate to see misinformation which is why I chose to write for Taxi talk magazine -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
|
New London Taxi
The only reason that the TX has a monopoly is because alternative vehicles simply were not bought in enough volume to make a profit. That was frequently because they had more problems that the FX/TX range. Whether the Merc will be able to continue remains to be seen Is there any talk yet of issues of recognition/branding with the Vito or anything else other than TXs? Until now the distinctive shape of the vehicle has been a pretty good guide to it being a licensed taxi. (I suppose Prince Philip, Stephen Fry et al may have had to get used to people waving at them - or possibly trying to open the doors at traffic lights.) In contrast there are plenty of other vehicles including many private hire vehicles which look like the Vito. Will the orange stickers on the early Vitos be a fixture- so we might perhaps end up with London [partly] orange cabs in place of the traditional black? (And while I'm here, I'm sorry my comment "I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it" was unclear. I have no view one way or the other really; I intended only to offer an alternative to the OP's regrets about losing the traditional style. And, as was manifest, I didn't know about the prospect of manufacturing going offshore.) -- Robin |
New London Taxi
David Cantrell gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: The Mercedes can make U-turns better, one driver told me. IIRC, it is because the rear wheels can also turn to a degree. It's basically a converted small van. A driver told *me* that they had to make the rear wheels turn because otherwise the turning circle wouldn't be tight enough. He didn't vouchsafe to me how he got this insight into Mercedes' manufacturing :-) Umm, he looked at their website...? (already linked to here) Rear-steer's nothing new, of course - Honda were using it in the '80s. He also told me that he quite liked the one he'd tried, except for one thing - he thought that because it didn't look like a taxi, customers wouldn't hail it. Yep, I can see that being an issue - those sort of van conversions are in widespread use elsewhere as minicabs - and just as Joe Public's been thoroughly trained that in London "Black Cab" = Taxi, anything else = minicab/not hailable/driven by unininsured perverts & rapists... |
New London Taxi
On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 08:53:57AM -0800, Boltar wrote:
On Dec 1, 3:24 pm, Adrian wrote: Bendis just plain don't fit London streets with tight junctions, pedestrian refuges and frequent traffic lights. ********. They fit fine on all the main roads. Funnily enough so do HGVs. When was the last time you saw a HGV trying to turn right from Bloomsbury Street onto New Oxford Street? -- David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness Today's previously unreported paraphilia is tomorrow's Internet sensation |
New London Taxi
"neverwas" gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying: Will the orange stickers on the early Vitos be a fixture- so we might perhaps end up with London [partly] orange cabs in place of the traditional black? That one's long since gone, of course. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:18 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk