e
Nissan NV200 vs. VPG MV-1: Which is the Better Wheelchair-Accessible Taxi Design?
A retrofitted solution versus a purpose-built one
NYC law states that by 2020, half of Gotham's yellow cab fleet (currently 13,437 cars total) must be wheelchair-accessible. Given the design of your average taxi, including the Nissan NV200 that's been selected as the city's official taxicab, that's no easy feat.
For the NV200 retrofit, the task fell to the designers at Indiana-based BraunAbility, which specializes in adding aftermarket wheelchair accessibility to vehicles. Here's the system they came up with:
The design seems serviceable enough. It overcomes the challenges of how to deploy the ramp and keep it unobtrusive when not in use. And accessing the vehicle from the rear means a wheelchair user can hail a cab from either side of the street, a key consideration as New York City has a lot of one-way streets.
However, the design is being challenged by a company called Vehicle Production Group. Michigan-based VPG manufactures wheelchair-accessible vehicles from the ground-up, as an OEM, and has developed what they feel is a superior design in their MV-1. I could not find a singular video that showed both the MV-1's ramp being deployed and then someone using it to enter the vehicle, so instead we must show you two videos:
Looking at VPG's design, it occurs to me that entering a taxi from the rear might be a hair-raising experience in Manhattan traffic. It seems VPG's side-access approach would be more pleasant, although it does raise the problem of a wheelchair user only being able to hail a cab from one side of a one-way street.
Which design do you think is better? It's hard to deny that VPG's ramp solution is way more elegant, and the design is presumably a function of the ground-up design. And it obviates the need to fold the rear seats away, meaning a wheelchair user can ride with two friends in the back, versus one in the front with the BraunAbility design.
Enter a caption (optional)In the end, as with so many design issues, it may not come down to design at all, but cost. The Daily News reports that VPG will announce a steep price-cut today, slashing the MV-1's cost from $39,000 to $33,000, apparently in a move to compete with Nissan in the NYC cab market. A further rebate from the Taxi & Limousine Commission will knock another $14,000 off the price, bringing the MV-1 down to $19,000.
In contrast, the retrofitted NV200s are expected to run nearly $30,000 after the TLC rebate.
The benefits of designing a purpose-built vehicle from the ground up versus retrofitting a legacy vehicle seem clear here. BraunAbility's designers had a tough task. Do you think there was anything they could've done differently?
-
oFavorite This
-
Q6Comment
Directory Company Profiles
Core77
Industrial Design
Resources
Industrial Design
Resources
-
Core77 Directory
Find the Best Industrial Design CompaniesGo -
DesignThink, Inc.
DesignThink is a full service product development group focused on defining, developing and deliveri...
-
Formation Design Group
Formation is a product design + development company focused on human centered design innovation. To ...
-
A2
A2 is a product development consultancy focused on design strategy, market and user research, indust...
-
PDR
PDR is a major award-winning, multidisciplinary international centre for design and research with a ...
-
Hatch Duo, LLC
Founded by an award-winning team with over 20 years of combined product design experience, Hatch Duo...
-
Datum3D Product Development
Datum3D is a one-stop shop product development company located in the Greater Boston Area. Founded i...
-
Spitfire Industry
WHO WE ARE Spitfire is a design studio headquartered in Brooklyn. Our founder, Isis Shiffer, an awa...
K
{Welcome
Create a Core77 Account
Already have an account? Sign In
By creating a Core77 account you confirm that you accept the Terms of Use
K
Reset Password
Please enter your email and we will send an email to reset your password.
Comments
Why have a ramp and not a lift? Many buses here in France have a lift as not all wheelchair users are physically able to use a ramp and a lift is smaller.
I believe it is different for a taxi where the interaction is more personal. Where as a bus, serve a much higher volume of population. And it is a lot cheaper to build without the automated system. Personally i would like the driver park the car, and push me in like I'm a boss.
MV1 is gonna be my pick. If the ramp can be, extruded on either side then it will be a prefect solution. Nissan rear entrance solve the one way street problem but create a lot more problem/danger when it is actually being used. Thinking about traffic and tailgating in the rush hours. Other than that NYC urban planning should include disability loading zone in areas that needed the most with the help of big data.
The rear ramp solution (which is in use here in Vancouver) is dreadful, and I'd be surprised if many wheelchair users found it preferable. To articulate three major ones:
The first: wheelchair users use sidewalks, and the ramp starts on the street. There is a curb between the two. The cab might be able to stop on either side of the street, but it doesn't seem to be particularly accessible from either side (unless NYC has a much larger number of sidewalk cutouts than I'm used to, or the cars carry portable ramps). It's perhaps "accessible" in some sort of checklist fashion, but as a functional vehicle in the city, not so much. I'm trying to restrain my urge to hyperbole here, this is really a stunner to see in a "next generation" public transit vehicle.
The second: Seating position. The Nissan: in the middle of the rear of van, over or slightly behind the rear axle (the bounciest, least-comfortable area of any vehicle), behind folded up seats, with an hydraulic ramp that usually forms the floor of the cab (the. floor. of. the. cab.) vertically behind you, not near a window, not near a person. The MV-1: in the front seat. Pretty self-explanatory.
The third: agency. The MV-1's restraint system is not shown in the videos, but it seems likely that a wheelchair user could engage most or all their own restraints, with the driver never leaving the vehicle (regulatory & liability concerns aside). Were there six levers to pull in the Nissan, plus the mostly manual-lift ramp?
Honest take, trying to restrain the hyperbole: the Nissan has every appearance of being designed to meet a checklist of requirements, not as an integrated solution to help disabled people navigate the city. This is a bad design in Vancouver that's been around for a decade, to see it in a "next generation" vehicle is somehow simultaneously mind-boggling and totally, depressingly, unsurprisingly, uncreative.
Seriously, NYC, do not replicate a mistake you do not need to.
The problem with the MV1 is it wastes a seat. If three people want to ride in one cab, one must be disabled. Otherwise it's a two person vehicle and I think the design of these taxis is to be usable all the time, not just for disabled persons. Also a manual ramp is probably less prone to breakage, but I don't see why the MV1's ramp couldn't come out manually if the motor broke anyway (there should definitely be a manual option) so that's not a big deal.
Have you seen an MV-1? I drive one for transporting. The wheelchair rides "shotgun" and the bench seat holds three passengers and mine, as most taxis would, also have a jump seat to allow four passengers-- not using a wheelchair as well as the fifth wc user. Lots of room!