MAN SG 220

The AC Transit District serving Alameda and Contra Costa counties in the San Francisco Bay Area began using an over-the-road articulated coach in Transbay service in 1966;[3] subsequently, AC Transit was one of six transit districts to develop a "super bus" specification in the early 1970s for a higher-capacity bus. A pooled purchase was intended to reduce per-unit development costs.[4] Two European-built articulated buses were tested by AC Transit and Seattle Metro in the summer of 1974: one based on the Volvo B58 chassis, and the MAN SG 192.[1]^{: Table 1}[5] Riders received the M.A.N. bus favorably, and the specification was released for bid in 1975;[6] the pooled purchase consortium, which by then had grown to encompass ten transit districts, awarded the order to AM General in August 1976.[7] Deliveries of the AM General/M.A.N. joint venture SG 220 articulated buses began in 1978.[8][9][10]

Buses were shipped from Germany as "driveable shells" and finished by AM General according to customer specifications. AM General terminated the joint venture agreement, taking effect after the delivery of the Seattle Metro buses, and MAN opened a manufacturing plant in Cleveland, North Carolina in October 1981, with an anticipated capacity of 400 buses per year.[1]^: 9, 22 MAN withdrew from the US transit bus market in 1988 after an order of 40-ft buses for Chicago was blocked by an injunction.[11] The Cleveland plant was sold in 1989 to Daimler subsidiary Freightliner Trucks.

Several operators in the United States formed a pooled purchase consortium and awarded the bid to the AM General/M.A.N. joint venture (the sole bidder)[12]^: 3–9 for over two hundred buses.[13] By March 15, 1982, 511 articulated buses from all manufacturers had been delivered in the United States; of these buses delivered, 399 were MAN/AM General buses. Orders had been placed for an additional 692 articulated buses; of those pending orders, 557 were MAN buses.[1]^{: Table 2}

Although operating experience with the eleven initial operators showed the per-passenger labor costs of driving the articulated bus were reduced compared with conventional buses, the articulated bus cost was almost double that of a conventional bus, required maintenance was more frequent and more costly, and dwell times were increased.[14]

Notes