Passenger Trains > MA: CRRC plant falling beind schedule

The Chinese rail car builder CRRC faces continuing difficulties with subway product quality in their Boston order, and extensive delays in their Philadelphia order.  The trade war with China is not helping as they hire and build out their Springfield MA facility

https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/vehicles/news/21124880/ma-rail-car-maker-crrc-ma-deals-with-production-delay-trade-tensions-as-it-builds-warehouse-for-east-springfield-factory

Lackawanna484 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Chinese rail car builder CRRC faces continuing
> difficulties with subway product quality in their
> Boston order, and extensive delays in their
> Philadelphia order.  The trade war with China is
> not helping as they hire and build out their
> Springfield MA facility

So buying the absolute cheapest possible crap turns out not to be a good idea?

This is why the winning bidder should always be the second low bid. Companies would think twice about being cheap and making it up in change orders and delay claims.

Could Coranavirus slow it down even more with China as a parts source ? 

No surprise - every car manufacturer has been late on deliveries, and had operational problems.

Posted from Android

This deal was made before the contract was signed. Smelled rotten from the beginning. The cars have been pulled from service several times for various issues. Based on the issues so far, if these cars last 20 years it will be a miracle.

abyler Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lackawanna484 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Chinese rail car builder CRRC faces
> continuing
> > difficulties with subway product quality in
> their
> > Boston order, and extensive delays in their
> > Philadelphia order.  The trade war with China
> is
> > not helping as they hire and build out their
> > Springfield MA facility
>
> So buying the absolute cheapest possible crap
> turns out not to be a good idea?
>
> This is why the winning bidder should always be
> the second low bid. Companies would think twice
> about being cheap and making it up in change
> orders and delay claims.

I don't have any direct experience in procurement, so please forgive my ignorance: are there any examples of procurement projects that demonstrate how choosing the second-to-lowest bidder could be successful? I can't quite comprehend how that could realistically work -- or how it would actually ensure superior quality. Also not sure how a bidder's strategy to winning the bid with a cost-effective but not-too-cost-effective offer would look.

I like the idea in theory (not just for the procurement of rail vehicles but also for tendering operating contracts, where similar low-ball offers often result in service meltdowns because the winning bidder forewent contingencies in order to keep the offer price low). Thus far I am only aware of the use of certain quality-oriented KPIs to avoid such situations.

SEPTA will also get CRRC, but similar in configuration with the doors and dimensions as the NJT/MARC/EXO MLV Bombardier cars. 

How many domestic plants have they or are they building?

---

If the game is played right this strategy can come out ahead.  Market entrants need to heavily subsudize their products to win bids, including local assembly facilities.  For example SEPTA had to deal with delays and such with Rotem (note the truck equalizer bar cracks were caused by an AMERICAN sub-contractor), but they paid half as much for their Silverliner V's than Denver's RTD did.  As soon as Rotem tries to charge market price SEPTA, and everyone else it seems, moved on to CRRC.  Doing the same to CRRC would basically be getting back some money from China.

mbrotzman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If the game is played right this strategy can come
> out ahead.  Market entrants need to heavily
> subsudize their products to win bids, including
> local assembly facilities.  For example SEPTA had
> to deal with delays and such with Rotem (note the
> truck equalizer bar cracks were caused by an
> AMERICAN sub-contractor), but they paid half as
> much for their Silverliner V's than Denver's RTD
> did.  As soon as Rotem tries to charge market
> price SEPTA, and everyone else it seems, moved on
> to CRRC.  Doing the same to CRRC would basically
> be getting back some money from China.

Yes. Chinese direct investment in the US, as distinguished from trade balances, has been growing for years. Creating lots of US construction etc jobs.

Posted from Android