What a pair! Coincidence? Hardly . I have no idea why you would want to boast about going shopping other than like DD you think I did not go to Iceland.
TBH I reckon it’s a bit of jealousy. Let me think where would I rather be? stuck in a truck on the UK’s congested roads or travelling round the world with my lovely lady wife! 
jakethesnake:
What a pair! Coincidence? Hardly . I have no idea why you would want to boast about going shopping other than like DD you think I did not go to Iceland.
TBH I reckon it’s a bit of jealousy. Let me think where would I rather be? stuck in a truck on the UK’s congested roads or travelling round the world with my lovely lady wife!
Ahhhh right 
, you’re in the country of Iceland, not the shop.
What am I like eh?
jakethesnake:
During a recent trip to Iceland I spotted this. Never seen one before. Is it a lorry chassis with a coach body or what?
Anyone any idea?0
Glad you posted that…never knew such things existed…oddly I like to drive it as it looks so wierd
The Rollende bus hotels are interesting too.
jakethesnake:
What a pair! Coincidence? Hardly . I have no idea why you would want to boast about going shopping other than like DD you think I did not go to Iceland.
TBH I reckon it’s a bit of jealousy. Let me think where would I rather be? stuck in a truck on the UK’s congested roads or travelling round the world with my lovely lady wife!
well for 1 the uk to me is a transit country to blast through going somewhere decent,but id like to think that if i was " travelling round the world with my lovely lady wife" then id possibly be spending my time in other ways that posting drivvle in here…but thats just me of course.
rsg1234567:
jakethesnake:
During a recent trip to Iceland I spotted this. Never seen one before. Is it a lorry chassis with a coach body or what?
Anyone any idea?0
Glad you posted that…never knew such things existed…oddly I like to drive it as it looks so wierd
Cheers,no neither did I, first time I have seen one. Glad some appreciate it.
Santa:
They call them Brucks (kombibuss in Norway); they have them in Canada too.
Common in northern parts of Sweden as pictured, don’t think I’ve ever seen one in Norway.
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.
Oh look, another subject where Carryfast knows best. Have you actually ever even been on a bus or coach let alone driven one?
milodon:
Santa:
They call them Brucks (kombibuss in Norway); they have them in Canada too.Common in northern parts of Sweden as pictured, don’t think I’ve ever seen one in Norway.
Used to be very common in Western Norway.
mardybum:
Skoda 706 RTTN0
There’s a farmer around here using a similar trailer being towed by a Fastrak to move his farm staff around. Literally an entire single decker bus with front axle removed and a tow hitch welded onto the front. No idea if legal or not.
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.Oh look, another subject where Carryfast knows best. Have you actually ever even been on a bus or coach
Yes especially in that specific case the RMC Green Line at least.Your point being.So have you actually told the operator in the photo that they’ve got it all wrong because the engine is at the wrong end of the bus/coach. 
jakethesnake:
During a recent trip to Iceland I spotted this. Never seen one before. Is it a lorry chassis with a coach body or what?
Anyone any idea?0
I saw a similar Merc V8 engined one there a few years back.
Carryfast:
switchlogic:
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.Oh look, another subject where Carryfast knows best. Have you actually ever even been on a bus or coach
Yes especially in that specific case the RMC Green Line at least.Your point being.So have you actually told the operator in the photo that they’ve got it all wrong because the engine is at the wrong end of the bus/coach.
Well then you know theres a very obvious reason for mid and rear engined buses and coaches, millions and millions of which operate all over the world. One bus in iceland no doubt specced for a very particular reason hardly proves any thing at all. You are good for a laugh though, youre anti anything thats mainstream for no particular reason at all.
I have a vague memories of artic busses at British airports or are my meds acting up .
The double deck truck/bus is very similar to the type of race transporter/ motor home that were the favourites of better off race teams from Northern Europe. Bottom deck was garage/workshop and top deck was living accommodation.
Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.
Actually, the objective was accomplished by developing rear engines to a PCV.
Take in to consideration, approx 1700 routemasters in London and other forms of front engined buses around the UK.
It’s called cost efficiency.
discoman:
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.Actually, the objective was accomplished by developing rear engines to a PCV.
Take in to consideration, approx 1700 routemasters in London and other forms of front engined buses around the UK.
It’s called cost efficiency.
Absolutely cost efficiency which helped to break Leyland truck and bus in trying to fix the inherent flaws of a tightly packed engine transmission unit with no decent airflow to keep it all cool.In addition to the extra time needed for maintenenance because of the resulting lack of access.On that note I’d guess a front engine tilt cab truck chassis with a typical bus/coach body ? is as good as it gets for cost effectiveness.But what would I know.
Rear engined buses have two big advantages over front engined buses.
You dont need a propshaft all the way from the front to the back, saving weight and trustbearings.
You have room at the front for passenger entry, and more importantly (from a company point of view 
), that means that you can get the driver to sell the tickets, thus saving on an conductor.
the nodding donkey:
Rear engined buses have two big advantages over front engined buses.
You dont need a propshaft all the way from the front to the back, saving weight and trustbearings.
You have room at the front for passenger entry, and more importantly (from a company point of view
I trust you meant thrust. 
Carryfast:
discoman:
Carryfast:
If nothing else it proves that all rear engine bus development was a flawed solution to a non existent problem.Actually, the objective was accomplished by developing rear engines to a PCV.
Take in to consideration, approx 1700 routemasters in London and other forms of front engined buses around the UK.
It’s called cost efficiency.
Absolutely cost efficiency which helped to break Leyland truck and bus in trying to fix the inherent flaws of a tightly packed engine transmission unit with no decent airflow to keep it all cool.In addition to the extra time needed for maintenenance because of the resulting lack of access.On that note I’d guess a front engine tilt cab truck chassis with a typical bus/coach body ? is as good as it gets for cost effectiveness.But what would I know.
Harcking back to the 70’s and British Leyland…fancy that. There’s lots of things Leyland couldn’t do, I’d say the fact everyone else in the industry managed to create viable vehicles shows they do actually work. What would you know indeed, just another subject you’re seemingly completely cluesless about (Surely I don’t have to spell out the reasons busses and coaches are mostly rear engined do I? Surely not )
jakethesnake:
the nodding donkey:
Rear engined buses have two big advantages over front engined buses.
You dont need a propshaft all the way from the front to the back, saving weight and trustbearings.
You have room at the front for passenger entry, and more importantly (from a company point of viewI trust you meant thrust.
Touchee 