Handling of shorter diesel
Many on this forum have suggested using rv.org as a guide. They uniformly classify coaches at less than 40 feet as poor to terrible (depending on specific coach). I'm looking at a used 36 ft Phaeton...
Forum Discussion
I drove diesel pusher transit coaches for a short time after my retirement from Boeing, which ranged in length from 30 to 40 feet. They were all Gilligs, and I got the impression that Gillig had a stock rear end (engine and transmission) and a stock front end (driver's station and passenger entry) and made the LOA by inserting a number of different pasenger compartment designs.
The 40-footers were very stable in the pitch axis, the 35's a bit less so. The shortest coaches could be challenging, particularly on bumpy roads, but we got a number of suspension damper/shock absorber mods that made them manageable.
We also had three 30-foot (or maybe 28 ft.) coaches, whose manufacturer/model I can't remember clearly, but "Opus/Optima" sticks in my memory. They had serious problems with pitch-poling and were very uncomfortable to drive. They had serious reliability and driver-ergonomic problems, too, and the agency didn't keep them very long.
I only drove for the agency for a little over 2 years, so I don't know any of the specifics.
I'm also puzzled by the fact that US manufacturers haven't caught on to the Leyland/Volvo configuration of their rear-engined double-deckers. They put the engine transversely across the back of the chassis, with the transmission partly underneath the engine and forward of it. This reduces the moment of the weight overhanging the rear axle.
The 40-footers were very stable in the pitch axis, the 35's a bit less so. The shortest coaches could be challenging, particularly on bumpy roads, but we got a number of suspension damper/shock absorber mods that made them manageable.
We also had three 30-foot (or maybe 28 ft.) coaches, whose manufacturer/model I can't remember clearly, but "Opus/Optima" sticks in my memory. They had serious problems with pitch-poling and were very uncomfortable to drive. They had serious reliability and driver-ergonomic problems, too, and the agency didn't keep them very long.
I only drove for the agency for a little over 2 years, so I don't know any of the specifics.
I'm also puzzled by the fact that US manufacturers haven't caught on to the Leyland/Volvo configuration of their rear-engined double-deckers. They put the engine transversely across the back of the chassis, with the transmission partly underneath the engine and forward of it. This reduces the moment of the weight overhanging the rear axle.
