Go-Ahead Bus Service 104 is a trunk service between Punggol Coast and Woodleigh, via Northshore, Sumang / Matilda, Sengkang East, Buangkok & Serangoon.
| Route Overview | ||||||||||||
Route  |
Punggol Coast Bus Interchange ↔ Woodleigh Bus Interchange | |||||||||||
| Passes Through | Northshore Drive, Punggol Way, Sumang Lane, Sengkang East Rd, Buangkok Dr, Yio Chu Kang Rd, Serangoon Ave 1 | |||||||||||
| Route Length | Towards Woodleigh: 17.2 km | Towards Punggol Coast: 17.3 km |
||||||||||
| Travelling Time | 70 mins | |||||||||||
| Operator Information | ||||||||||||
| BCM Route Package | Loyang Bus Package | |||||||||||
| Current Operator | Go Ahead Singapore Pte Ltd (Go-Ahead Singapore) |
|||||||||||
| Current Depot | Loyang Bus Depot | |||||||||||
| Current Fleet | Single-deck & Double-deck buses | |||||||||||
| Operating Hours | ||||||||||||
| Departure Times from Punggol Coast |
Daily | |||||||||||
| 05:30 – 23:30 | ||||||||||||
| Departure Times from Woodleigh |
Daily | |||||||||||
| 05:30 – 23:30 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Frequency | ||||||||||||
| From Punggol Coast | 6:30am–8.30am | 8.31am–4.59pm | 5.00pm–7.00pm | After 7.00pm | ||||||||
| Weekdays | 10 – 12 mins | 12 – 14 mins | 10 – 12 mins | 14 – 15 mins | ||||||||
| Saturdays | 15 mins | 15 mins | 15 mins | 15 mins | ||||||||
| Sundays / Public Holidays | 17 mins | 16 – 17 mins | 16 mins | 16 – 17 mins | ||||||||
| From Woodleigh | 6:30am–8.30am | 8.31am–4.59pm | 5.00pm–7.00pm | After 7.00pm | ||||||||
| Weekdays | 9 – 10 mins | 12 – 14 mins | 10 – 13 mins | 10 – 15 mins | ||||||||
| Saturdays | 15 mins | 15 mins | 15 mins | 15 mins | ||||||||
| Sundays / Public Holidays | 17 mins | 15 – 17 mins | 16 mins | 16 – 17 mins | ||||||||
| Fare Information |
||||||||||||
| Fare | Charges regular distance fares |
|||||||||||
Service 104 connects residents in Northshore, Sumang, Buangkok, Serangoon and Bidadari to nearby transport nodes such as Punggol Coast, Buangkok, Serangoon and Woodleigh MRT Stations along the North-East Line. It is introduced under the LTA’s Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme (BCEP).
The service is launched as an enhancement and extension of Service 43M, which was withdrawn on 26 October 2025. Service 43M plied between Punggol and Serangoon Central (Loop).
Key differences from Service 43M include:
- Northern extension to Punggol Coast Int, via Punggol Way & Northshore Drive
- Amendment to serve Sumang Walk / Sumang Lane
- Amendment to ply the newly extended Buangkok Drive
- Southern extension to Woodleigh Int, via Serangoon Avenue 1 & Bidadari Park Drive
Passengers should note that this service skips Bus Stop 65711 (Blk 446B) along New Punggol Road; the bus stop outside HDB Punggol Point Cove in the direction of Punggol Coast.
MRT / LRT Stations Served
- NE18 Punggol Coast
- PW4 Samudera
- PW5 Nibong
- PW6 Sumang
- NE15 Buangkok
- NE12CC13 Serangoon
- NE11 Woodleigh
Special Departures
- Buangkok Dr (Blk 409) → Punggol Coast Int
Weekdays: 05:30 & 05:43
Saturdays: 05:30 & 05:45
Sundays / Public Holidays: 05:45 - Northshore Dr (Marina Country Club) → Punggol Coast Int
Weekdays: 05:30 & 05:43
Saturdays: 05:30 & 05:45
Sundays / Public Holidays: First bus at 05:45
Plans
On 24 June 2025, Member of Parliament for Punggol GRC Ms Sun Xueling revealed in a social media post that a new trunk bus service 104 between Punggol Coast & Woodleigh is planned to commence in the coming months.
Key catchment areas for Service 104 in the Punggol area were shared, such as the Sumang / Matilda and Northshore areas. Service 104 would bring direct connections for Punggol residents to Sengkang, Buangkok, Serangoon, and Woodleigh.
On 2 Oct 2025, Ms Sun Xueling posted on social media regarding the launch of Service 104 from 26 Oct 2025. In the service poster from the operator website (obtained from the QR code in the poster), Service 104 was indicated to serve a new bus stop (65669 – Northshore Pr Sch) along Northshore Drive towards Woodleigh Int in the future.
However, the updated poster released by the Land Transport Authority on 12 October 2025 showed that Service 104 will serve bus stop 65669 – Northshore Pr Sch at launch.
Gallery
Poster Gallery
Operator History:
- 26 Oct 2025 – Present: Go Ahead Singapore Pte Ltd
Route History:
- 2025 (26 Oct): Introduced between Punggol Coast and Woodleigh under the LTA’s Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme (BCEP), in tandem with the withdrawal of Service 43M.
- 2025 (28 Dec): Serves an additional bus stop outside Blk 446B along New Punggol Rd towards Punggol Coast Int
References
Back to Bus Services
Seems like first day of service full single decker fleet? Isnt 104 just a renumbered 43m + extention? By right shouldnt it get 43m DDs? Or is it, 104 full SDs on Weekends & PHs? Have to wait and see if got DD deploy on Weekdays or not. I suspect probably SD fleet for now, if got high demand, will add in DDs. Or is it the 43m DDs instead got redeploy to other services like 43 or 118?
44 on the other hand will be full SD so impossible for DD.
How come they only deploy single deck and not double deck ah:? Is there a restriction?
Yes at Northshore drive since there is a U-turn at Marina Country Club they can’t deploy a double deck
Uh what about Service 84G? Or 84W?
Mainly because the turning radius on the northshore drive u turn section is far too tight for DD’s to ply along the route. Its the same reason why 384 which stops at the same bus stop also is not served by DD’s. Maybe it may change in the future
U-turn restrictions at Northshore Drive? Then what about 975 doing a U-turn at LCK Road end? Hmm…
Serangoon Ave 1 and Bartley estate where 158 bus route travels. Has low lying trees same single deck for 158
No, the one at serangoon ave 1 is okay to travel by dd. DDs was used during the bridging bus and it pass through sgoon ave 1
No DD restrictions along Serangoon Ave 1 as CCL Shuttle 37 plies along there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUmL4XPEqI8
Shuttle 37 buses have DD and go through that area
Shuttle 37 has DDs plying along there.
Before both Acu and Marco are going to turn this place into a bickering battle, I would like to point out that Marco has overlooked some crucial areas with his points, that being Buangkok Green has 2 schools along the pathway. 104 does not call by Hougang pri and Hougang Sec compared to 43m, meaning that student commuters from punggol and sengkang have to rely on solely 43. The safety of students are a key priority because of their age and maturity, so its best if they dont need to cross the road, meaning that bus stop 66499 would the most vital bus stop in the entire buangkok green for these 2 schools who arent using 325 or 329. LTA needs to fix this gaphole from the north side, which I believe a 43A for the hougang pri schools and IMH from punggol to 66499 would negate rush hour crowds.
Acu’s argument on the other hand, shows the importance of 43m being able to connect serangoon the fastest without walking, but being argued by Marco for being inflexible by throwing out similar routings such as 156 that can do similar effects from Buangkok Green to serangoon thru yck road. While Marco has his merit in mentioning this because 43 101 and 156 does indeed serve buangkok green and serangoon, the problem is that all these routes from Buagkok Green and serangoon calls at different bus stops, which makes it hard for a commuter to aim for which bus stop to get to serangoon with multiple waits and running to chase another bus at another stop.
Furthermore, It has been mentioned by Lee that since 43 has a 70% full capacity on the upper deck and is implying that extra trips on the 43 may be implemented to compensate for 43m, while Rex mentions that peak hours are tough for 43m. slightly disgruntled buangkok green resident mentioned that 43 is also subjected to delays due to tai seng industrial area.
Because of these points being brought up, i would like to suggest upgrading 109A into 109M and increase its frequency, by looping after its last stop outside IMH to bus stop 66499 and go back to serangoon interchange with picking up passengers along buangkok green. The nature of 109A ends barely at Buangkok Green, and by upgrading it to 109M, passengers can wait for both 43 and 109m at buangkok green to serangoon at the exact bus stop, and 109m would not need to deal with any delays from 43 from both punggol and east coast due to its length, and that it focuses on Buangkok Green and Serangoon would allow an empty bus to board outside Buangkok Green. While that solves the southbound journeys, passengers cant double wait on the northbound journeys, and the routing of both routes are different inside serangoon with the 109M serving serangoon avenue 2, but I believe the timed departures from serangoon interchange may help with alleviating 43’s passengers to Buangkok Green if it gets caught with traffic infrequencies along the way and passengers know what time the 109m would depart from the interchange. To further segregate passenger journeys from the parent 109 for pasir ris and changi village (and a bit more east of buangkok green) , both routes would increase their frequency and a priority line with staff monitoring for 109m could be implemented for passengers towards buangkok green, then allow interim passengers of 109 up to IMH to board afterwards. That would be my idea to compensate for the loss of 43m while hoping to stop this bickering between Acu and Marco.
I just felt that the mp could at least done better or consider at least for the residents along buangkok green. They already took their 43m away and now they have to rely on 43 alone. Before 43m and the double deck of 43 was introduced, you got no chance of having a seat from nex to buangkok back home, then they deploy double deck, even double deck still couldn’t help with the demand, then they start to introduce 43m, it really helps from my pov but as those people who point out that 43 and 43m always arrive at the same time, i agree they do always arrive at the same time at nex, thats why i would only take 43m even if 43 arrives there the same time as well and im pretty sure im not the one who is doing it as it helps spread the load.
Could they have improved it? Yes absolutely, it can be improved if we can find a solution. But removing the route where commuters along Buangkok green really rely on is just gonna have have a PITA for the residents since theres no 43m already. Its like we are going back to the times where they now deployed double decker of 43
Agree. Many take 43M is because of the Buangkok Green residence. 43 itself is packed and cannot handle the pack from next especially during peak period.
as a resident affected by 43m’s withdrawal, i will say that while 104 is a welcome addition, it should not be at the expense of 43m. i know 104 is technically a rebranding of 43m, but there is reason for 43m to remain, namely the buangkok green-nex sector.
43 and 43m’s frequencies arguably haven’t been the best, but demand is still strong enough to make a dd almost fully seated during the late hours. you can argue that some sectors have 101, but why ride 101 through its long hougang and kovan sectors when 43 brings you to serangoon faster? and you could ask commuters to just take the bus to buangkok and mrt to serangoon, but 43/m can be time competitive, and the need to transfer doesn’t make this ideal.
i suggest they should introduce at least a sort of 43a/b to deal with the buangkok (green or mrt) to serangoon sectors. after all, that’s why 43m was introduced in the first place!
The only problem with buangkok green is connecting directly to serangoon ccl at the east end near IMH because you can use 70 (70m), 103 and 104 to get to serangoon mrt for its west end at the intersection between yck rd and buangkok green (blk 988b)
156 is an alternative option to the 43 towards serangoon as well as the east end of buangkok green to stations within yck rd as well as sgoon stadium.
the nearest 156 bus stop to serangoon mrt is blk 257a, which requires a walk through sgoon ave 3 to get to the mrt.
Current buangkok green provisions at the east end to the nel is sufficient (and a longer 101 to serangoon)
Therefore, I would justify how 43m is taken over by 104 simply the west end of buangkok green isnt affected and 156 being the supporting role of 43 between buangkok green to inner stops of 43 at yck road as well as serangoon residents, i would also agree that a direct route to ccl should somewhat be compromised since 43 is now the only one from the east end of buangkok green (IMH) to directly serve serangoon mrt.
i do understand your points. still, i think it’s a matter of comfort and convenience. imo it’s better to spread out the nex-buangkok green(-buangkok mrt) demand over two services which allows pax a greater chance to have a seat + 43m is practically empty when it reaches next. it’s better than to squeeze in a 43, especially during peak when it has to contend with tai seng industrial demand.
i do agree that the western end of buangkok green isn’t really inconvenienced, but for the 987 and especially 97x residents, the 70/103/104 stop (aft amk ave 5) is quite a distance.
i wouldn’t really be making a fuss if 43 parent had good frequencies, but as it stands 43 can have poor frequencies. just today at 10.30pm-ish i would have had to wait 25 minutes for 43 if 43m didnt bail me out. if go ahead and/or lta can find a way to make 43 arrive more consistently and frequently i would be okay, but if the status quo remains i’d rather have like 43a/b
also, i don’t think many are willing to take 101 all the way, or take 156 and walk though. i’d much more expect people to take 43/156 from buangkok instead of 43 from nex if coming from nel/ccl instead (btw, when i say nex demand, i don’t just mean demand from srg mrt but the mall itself. it’s quite big and popular)
I think right now they are staggering 43 and 43M. When 43M is no more, I am guessing they would increase trips on parent service 43. Just like what they did with 163 when 163M was removed.
I took the bus from Baungkok stn exit B often during peak hours (sometimes 1830 to 1930 period). Most the time I see 43 is crowded, but not fully loaded. Upper deck is usually 70% capacity, but still able to accomodate more pax. So it’s fine.
104 should be supplementing 114 given how most the time its FTD during peak periods. They called a SD fleet add for 114 as enhancement. Lmao.
As more commuters states, I think 156 is a good enough alternatives if u are Buangkok green. Not a whole lot of pax taking 156 from Buangkok. And besides, quite a number of 114 commuters are taking from the interchange itself rather than exit B bus stop. If they can, so can u.
For buangkok/sengkang area should be no problem, the real concern is the one at serangoon area. Its peak hours is even worst than in buangkok mrt for those buangkok green residents. One can say to just take mrt to buangkok and then take 43/156 but it kinda beats the purpose of a direct bus. And plus they would rather take the bus from next to buangkok green since they don’t have to cross the overhead bridge
The frequencies of 156 is sooo horrendous to the fact that people would rather take 43/43m because there are two option for them
While I do understand the comfort and convenience of having a bus stop connection, it also causes over-reliance to the point of people not walking from an MRT station and rather take one or two bus stops to get to their destination, which honestly doesn’t help since people are not relying on 156 because while it is an alternative to serangoon and it does technically call at serangoon, it does not directly serve NEX and the CCL. 101 as stated may be too long for others but it is an alternative as well. with 43 101 and 156 that mainly serves Buangkok Green to Serangoon, its most obvious what LTA is aiming with 104 replacing 43M is for expanding service towards new areas (South of Fernvale and a part of Buangkok Crescent) and expect Buangkok Green to keep waiting 43, or take 101 or 156 to get to Serangoon as a replacement.
You do realise that most people who get to serangoon are usually going to mrt or shop at nex right? You said you understand of comfort and convenience but yet you said it also causes over reliance? Are you contradicting your own words? So do you want people to take 156 and walk to the mrt/nex just because you said its an alternative? You tell me who would want to walk and yes people would rather take the bus to get to their destination because why would people take a bus that wouldn’t bring them to their destination in the first place? When you already need to walk, its already an inconvenience to people
Whoever says that theres 101 really talk nonsense. Referring to the guy who says that theres 101. In no way 101 is even of a help