Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CRJ-700 Or ERJ-170  
User currently offlineUnited777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1657 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6265 times:

Which 70 seat aircraft would you prefer the CRJ-700 or ERJ-170?

When is the first ERJ-170 going into service and which airline will fly it first?

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBoeing nut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6201 times:

I've been on the CRJ's. At 6'2" they are a little cramped for me. I've seen photos of the mock ups of the ERJ 170's and I would have to go with them if I had the choice.

I believe Swiss is in line for the first 170, but don't quote me on that.

Regards


User currently offlineBucky707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1028 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6187 times:

I have flown in the CRJ's, both the 50 and 70. The 70 is a little more comfortable, but still a little tight. So I would go with the EMB-170. I also think a big advantage for the airlines will be the growth potential of the EMB-170. The family will seat up to 120 pax eventually, giving one aircraft type covering 70-120 seat.

User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6179 times:

I imagine the 170 will be more comfortable.

It also weighs more and will cost more to fly...(likely that is why Bombardier can keep the CRJ700 competitive...).




User currently offlineRickster From Austria, joined Dec 2000, 653 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6148 times:

I had several flights on CRJ´s and like Boeing nut with my 6.4 i didn´t feel very comfortable. The EMB 170 is a new family concep. The CRJ´s still base on the Business Jet.
rgds. Rickster


User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6096 times:

The ERJ does weigh more, cost a bit more, but has more room for passengers *and* cargo... plus standard airline size seats and overhead bins...  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

plus those 2 hairdryers on the wings make it look SO cute!!

-n


User currently offlineVector From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 214 posts, RR: 8
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6084 times:

First Embraer 170 will go to the Alitalia Express this year (third quarter).

Because of the double-bubble fuselage cross-section, the space available for passengers make this aircraft more confortable.

Cabin cross-section: 3,35m (height) x 3,01 (width)
Pax cabin dimentions: 2m (height) x 2,47 m (width)
Overhead bins: 0,21 m3

Interior features: flat floor (no steps inside cabin), 2x2 seat configation or 2x1 business class config., 4 plug type doors (2 pax + 2 service)

regards
vector


User currently offlineQb001 From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2053 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6051 times:

Kind of strange that so many guys in this post believe that because they had a so-so experience with a CRJ, they will automatically have a better experience with an ERJ. Why don't we simply wait and see?


Never let the facts get in the way of a good theory.
User currently offlineVector From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 214 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6040 times:

Well,

In my case I have experience with the CRJ200 and with the Embraer 170. Assuming the the CRJ700 interior size (width and heigth) is almost the same that the CRJ200, my opinnion is that the 170 have a lot more space and it is more confortable too.

It´s really beautifull and confortable. Same level of confort that you can find on Boeing or Airbus.




User currently offlineOuboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4567 posts, RR: 23
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 6011 times:

We'll all find out about the Embraer 170 (Not ERJ-170 for the 100th time) when it begins service with US Airways in Q4 of this year. There is a computer generated image of the 170 in the US Airways scheme in this weeks issue of AW&ST, looks very good. And yes...it is in MAINLINE colors - no Express titles.

User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5993 times:

well i've been in a mock-up ... so I can speak from experience that this is definitely a superior aircraft!

and btw, the CRJ-700/900 shares the same fuselage plugs as the original :P

-n


User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 5945 times:

Well, the true test is how much money is will make for it's owner's.
While not the most comfortable, the CRJ series--particularly the 700 and 900's have decend revenue potential.

I imagine after the initial teething problems, the EMB's will be just as reliable.


User currently offlinePetertenthije From Netherlands, joined Jul 2001, 3353 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 5899 times:

Isn't it a buit premature to start comparing. After all, the ERJ-170 has yet to make its first passenger flight. Now if you were comparing the F70 and/or the ARJ/BAe146 with the CRJ-700...


Attamottamotta!
User currently offlineMatt777 From Cayman Islands, joined Oct 2001, 503 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5870 times:

Alitalia will be the launch customer  Big thumbs up
Forza Alitalia!  Laugh out loud
Matt Vivaldi.


User currently offlineGreg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 5802 times:

It's not the least bit premature. Airlines are making multi million dollar decisions based on the same speculation on the CRJ vs EMB's.

If they can...there is obviously no reason we can't make comments as well.


User currently offlineUnited777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1657 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5761 times:

What kind of engines those the ERJ-170 use? Is GE available?

User currently offlineGaruda From Indonesia, joined Nov 2000, 584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5757 times:

The EMBRAER (not ERJ) 170 families are using GE CF-34 engines, the same engines as CRJ 200/700/900

User currently offlinePetertenthije From Netherlands, joined Jul 2001, 3353 posts, RR: 12
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5689 times:

If they [the airlines] can...there is obviously no reason we can't make comments as well.

I would like to think that the airlines are a bit better informed than most of us. And what the airlines choose is not necessarily what the passenger would choose. We have only looked on the comfort in this thread. The cabin dimensions and how smooth/rough the CRJ is. For all we know the ERJ-170 might be a lot rougher or indeed smoother then the CRJ.

Aso, when many airlines are ordering the ERJ-170 then that does not mean it offers the best ride. If the ERJ-170 turns out to be less uncomfortable but also a lot cheaper to operate, then you can bet the ERJ-170 will be bought.
Similarly if the ERJ-170 is a lot more comfortable, but more expensive to operate the CRJ-700 stands to gain.

It's all about economics these days, and rightly so.



Attamottamotta!
User currently offlineOuboy79 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 4567 posts, RR: 23
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5626 times:

You'd think people would actually start calling it by its actual name, Embraer 170..., and not ERJ-170. Funny people actually get upset when you refer to Concorde as...the concorde.

User currently offlineSegmentKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5617 times:

Actually, on all the sales material that I've seen or been given, including directly from Embraer, they call it the EMB170... *shrugs*

<< from an e-mail from the Director of Sales >>

Part two:

(See attached file: EMB170LR.pdf) (See attached file: EMB175LR.pdf)

<< end >>

Although this plane isn't quite a regional jet.

In regards to the engines, near same core, just a different, more powerful derivative...


-nate


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will DL's E-170/CRJ-700's Replace The 732? posted Fri Dec 30 2005 22:46:15 by MD90fan
Dir Costs: CRJ-700 Vs. E-170 posted Tue Mar 9 2004 18:21:03 by BoingGoingGone
American Eagle- Why CRJ-700 & Not EMB 170? posted Wed Feb 25 2004 18:28:40 by LUV4JFK
Bombardier CRJ-700/900 Vs Embraer 170/190 Sales. posted Tue Oct 28 2003 22:27:01 by SurfSlade
Dislike For CRJ Or ERJ? posted Sat Oct 25 2003 21:51:48 by Qantasguy
Why The Embraer 170 Isn't A EMB Or A Erj? posted Thu Oct 17 2002 06:09:52 by Jgore
CRJ Or Erj? posted Sun Feb 18 2001 15:53:42 by Sushka
Which is better: CRJ OR ERJ? posted Mon Mar 8 1999 00:47:49 by EMB-145
Bombardier Cuts Over 3,000 Jobs Due To CRJ-700/900 posted Tue Oct 24 2006 14:40:11 by Drgmobile
Horizon Air CRJ-700's? posted Wed Sep 20 2006 23:37:58 by United777