Ronsway – Guy Wulfrunian – 35 VTF


Copyright David Lennard

Ronsway of Hemel Hempstead
1961
Guy Wulfrunian 6LW
East Lancs H37/29R

Along with a group of other enthusiasts in the early 70’s I visited the Provincial Hoeford garage on a trip from Eastbourn. The outing was organised by Clive Wilkin on a most unusual vehicle, namely an East Lancs bodied Guy Wulfrunian. One of the pair new to Accrington Corporation but by then owned by Ronsway of Hemel Hempstead. These two were unique in that they were 28ft long with open rear platforms a Gardner 6LW engine and manual gearboxes, our steed for a very interesting day was ex Accrington No 156 registration 35 VTF.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave


23/12/12 – 10:50

Very interesting, Dave. I have a “bought” slide from the Dale Tringham collection, probably taken on that same visit, which Dale has as March 1969. It was quite clearly taken at Hoeford, as evidenced by the tram tracks. Either way, most Wulfrunians didn’t seem to have very long lives with their original owners. I think those which went new to West Riding lasted longest in that category.

Pete Davies


23/12/12 – 10:51

There was a particular reason for the spec of these vehicles – but I’ve an article in preparation for submission very early in the New Year where they feature, so I’ll leave it until then.

Phil Blinkhorn


23/12/12 – 11:35

I’d heard about these. Pretty bizarre really. Can you remember what happened in the space where the engine/front NS wheel ought to be? It has a door, but the driver had an engine in the way of his cab, presumably- so did it connect to the passenger space? Was it for the conductor, to maintain meaningful dialogue with the driver? Were there no Arabs to be had then? No doubt Phil will reveal all?
Pete- West Riding became the resting place for homeless Wulfrunians, until- possibly- NBC arrived with the resources to replace them, sometimes with older Lodekkas etc. I think these two were an oddity too far, though.

Joe


23/12/12 – 12:46

Too odd even for West Riding, Joe? Wait a while, there’s something in the pipeline that’s even more extreme!

Pete Davies


23/12/12 – 15:04

Joe, the floor level at the front seems quite high, given that there’s a substantial step up to access. And can I make out what looks like a bulk-head and window to the right of what looks like somebody standing next to the driver? Perhaps the door was for no other reason than to allow access to the engine compartment. If Diesel Dave rode on the beast then perhaps he can enlighten us . . . I recall reading somewhere that the absence of a front entrance on these vehicles allowed the engine to be positioned in the centre-line of the vehicle rather than off-set to the offside, and the line of the windscreens above that rather nasty “gash” grille suggests that the engine mounting may also have been higher compared to “conventional” Wulfrunians. Except for the added complexity of air-suspension its hard to see what couldn’t have been offered by an Arab, and you’d have thought a small municipal operator might have been best advised to steer clear of needlessly complicated design features – unless the set-back front axle offered a tighter turning circle that was needed for a particular route? . . . I’m eager to read Phil’s explanation come the new year!

Philip Rushworth


23/12/12 – 17:10

According to R N Hannay’s book on the marque, 35 VTF was new to Accrington in 9-61 and sold in 1-68, acquired by Ronsway in 3-68 and disposed of 9-69, acquired by Byley, Middlewich in 10-69 and disposed of in 2-72 for scrap.
36 VTF was new to Accrington in 10-61 and sold in 1-68, acquired by Ronsway in 3-68 and disposed of in 8-68, acquired by Biss, Bishops Stortford, in 8-68 and disposed of 5-70, acquired by Gilbert (Avro) Stanford-le-Hope in 6-70 and disposed of in 8-70, acquired by Spencer, High Wycombe in 9-70 and disposed of 7-71 for scrap. Await PB,s article with great interest.

John Darwent


23/12/12 – 17:11

I wonder, with the staircase being at the back if this eased the load a little on the front suspension.

Eric Bawden


24/12/12 – 07:03

The dates John quotes from Hannay seem to match the information I have about my bought slide. Diesel Dave’s memory is, of course, entitled to be suspect as the event was over 40 years ago. Now, what was I doing yesterday???

Pete Davies


24/12/12 – 07:05

Eric, I doubt the position of the staircase would remove that much load from the front suspension.
The rear staircase would increase the number of upper deck seats towards the front and add to the load at the front
If the manual gearbox is mounted further forward than the mid-mounted underfloor semi auto on the front entrance ones then that could also add to the load at the front.
The fuel tank and batteries on the front entrance ones with West Riding are mounted to the rear of the back axle, not sure where these are on the Accrington ones is, forward of the rear axle again would add to the load at the front

Andrew Beever


24/12/12 – 07:05

On a group some time ago Dale posted an interior view of this bus on this trip. It had a bulkhead in the lower saloon in the conventional place with five rear-facing seats. In fact it looked fairly conventional downstairs.

David Beilby


24/12/12 – 12:52

I have a memory from around 1970 of following VTF35 eastwards over the “Cat & Fiddle” towards Buxton. It made very slow progress indeed.
I seem to remember it still wearing Accrington’s colours. At the time, I thought it was with a majorettes’ troupe, but it was probably on hire from Byley Stores & Garage Ltd. (a wonderful name for a bus operator) from the Middlewich area. It was probably bought via the local dealer, Martin’s of Weaverham.
Google throws up a view of it in Byley’s cream and red livery.

Dave Farrier


24/12/12 – 14:34

I am quite happy to accept that the date of this trip was indeed March 1969 as my original date was only a very rough guess as I admit to the sin of not making notes of dates etc.
I can shed some light on the queries raised regarding the cab area which was in fact very much like Southdown’s PD3’s with a large hinged bonnet panel hinged along the centre line which along with the N/S external door gave access to the engine as it also had a Cave- Browne- Cave heating system fitted, shown by the grills either side of the destination display, there would have been no radiator in the engine bay the person seen next to the driver is in fact kneeling on the bonnet.
The engine was indeed fitted in the centre of the chassis making the drivers cab much more roomy than the normal Wulfrunian set-up. With regards to the position of the fuel tank I have an O/S photo of the bus which shows the filler cap to be behind the rear wheel arch indicating that the tank was most likely under the stairs, I don’t have any idea about the position of the batteries however. I seem to remember that it gave a reasonably comfortable ride and the heater system was quite effective but as Peter says my memory is not always as good as I would like.
Finally I’ll take this chance to wish Peter and all the many other contributors and readers on this site all the very best for Christmas and the New Year.

Diesel Dave


24/12/12 – 14:38

I’m beginning to get this, and await Phil with interest… Did they have a “normal” height floor because of the central transmission with a step into the saloon from the platform? …and therefore room for all the stuff under the floor, as usual…. could there even be a shorter front overhang, so less see-saw & a bit less toe-out: are you sure this isn’t an Arab 6!

Joe


24/12/12 – 16:12

The gear box was in the same position as the semi automatic box and the batteries were at the immediate front nearside in a tray forward of the nearside access to the engine at the lowest level of the chassis. There were five seats across the front bulkhead. If I recall, and the chassis photo seems to bear this out, the floor was flat. The fuel tank was under the stairs.
I’ve finished the article which includes more info and a link to a photo of the actual chassis and submitted it to Peter.
A Happy Christmas to everyone.

Phil Blinkhorn


Well done, Joe! 35 and 36VTF were indeed the prototypes for the Arab VI. Needless to say, the style was far too complicated for even the operators of the Wulfrunian!
Happy Christmas to all of you!

Pete Davies


25/12/12 – 06:23

Perhaps a Wulfrunian/Arab cross would be more accurate as the vehicle description is Guy Wulfrunian based on the chassis numbers which were FDW74920 and FDW74970, the W indicating Wulfrunian.

Phil Blinkhorn


25/12/12 – 10:58

The Wulfrunian was unusual in being one of the few models to be built in front, forward and rear entrance format. Most were front, Accrington’s were rear and Wolverhampton’s 71 had a forward entrance. I was going to say this was unique but the same can be said for the Routemaster if the solitary FRM is included.
I was led to believe that Accrington bought the rear entrance pair because Guy had withdrawn the Arab from sale at the time and wanted to standardise on the Wulfrunian. No doubt Phil will enlighten us and I too look forward to his post.

Philip Halstead


25/12/12 – 18:29

Whilst Guy announced they would finish regular production of the Arab IV in 1960, they continued to build examples for regular customers and did so until 1962 when the Arab V was available. Lancashire United, for instance, took batches in 1961 and 1962.

18:47

Having emerged from my post Christmas lunch haze, I can add Burton, Chester and Wolverhampton to the list of operators which ordered and received Arab IVs between the official finish of production in 1960 and the arrival of the Arab V.

19:07

I’ve been trying to work out where the idea of an Arab VI referred to by Joe and Pete comes from.
The Wulfrunian was already a failure and the Arab V design was well under way when Jaguar took over the company and there is no way Jaguar would have countenanced trying to sell anything new that resembled a Wulfrunian, although they kept faith with West Riding by fulfilling their orders and giving spares and engineering support to all operators as did British Leyland.
The only mention of an Arab VI I can find is on the Internet pages of the Outer Circle Bus Tours of Birmingham where a typo has their 2976 as an Arab VI.

Phil Blinkhorn


26/12/12 07:18

I suppose you could add to that the Daimler Fleetline.
Obviously the vast majority were front entrance but thanks to Mr. Ronald Edgley-Cox we have Walsall Corporation’s two “extreme” Fleetlines, the 25ft long no.1 which only had a forward door, and ‘Big Bertha’ XDH 56G the 36ft Fleetline that had a rear exit.

Eric Bawden


26/12/12 – 10:36

I wasn’t being entirely serious. It just seemed that having centred and raised the engine with central transmission (and raised the floor?) and reduced the front overhang to something not far off a half-cab, the result is getting more Arab than Wulfrunian.

Joe


26/12/12 – 18:01

I was thinking along the same convoluted lines as Joe was. Sorry if I upset the equilibrium!

Pete Davies


26/12/12 – 18:03

By an odd coincidence I emailed a pal recently with visions of a Guy Arab VI, to be a low-floor rival to the Bristol Lodekka, and then what do I see but Joe and Pete’s references to the same phantom bus! All of which prompts me to wonder whether Guy actually did have such plans. I’d hate to have seen Dennis’s market undermined, but investing in a drop-centre axle version of the Arab V might have saved Guy–at least for a while.
In 1963 I hitched up to Lancashire and spent a couple of happy days riding round on the unbelievably varied and characterful buses then running. One highlight was an evening ride up onto moorland on one of the Accrington Wulfrunians, gently swaying on the air suspension and looking down at the lights in the valley below. Something else that struck me were the spotless toilets at Blackburn, in contrast to those I’d used one May the first at Brighton, where you had to pay to wash your hands. So much for the “grimy North”…

Ian Thompson


27/12/12 – 07:07

The date of the visit to Gosport & Fareham by Wulfrunian 35 VTF was Sunday 30th March 1969. ‘Twas me who organised the trip on behalf of the Eastbourne Lion Preservation Group, owners of Leyland Lion JK 8418.

Clive Wilkin


27/12/12 – 07:10

It’s interesting to speculate regarding further Arab development. The Arab V design was well under way in the drawing office as the Wulfrunian was being launched so Guy obviously had decided to hedge its bets and cater to its more conservative client base as well as tempting Gardner devotees with the Wulfrunian, presumably in the hope of winning orders from Daimler customers wanting an Atlantean style bus, as the Fleetline was not announced until the year following the unveiling of the Wulfrunian.
In this they were doing nothing different to Leyland and eventually Daimler in offering an advanced design alongside basically traditional models.
Where they went awry was in trying to pack in every new and basically untried idea into one chassis and, having seen Foden’s and Leyland’s efforts with rear engines, then almost contrarily kept a traditional engine drive train layout, albeit with a drop centre rear axle.
I remember attending an airshow at Church Fenton in 1967 where West Riding had the contract for public transport onto the airfield and provided no less than 30 Wulfrunians – a mixture of the red and green fleets. By that time the type’s reputation was irretrievably mud and Guy as a marque was on its last legs yet, for all its problems, the type looked very modern and much more designed than the Fleetlines and Atlanteans that were my daily fare in Manchester.
Had the phrase “keep it simple stupid” been in common parlance in Wolverhampton in the late 1950s, Guy may well have produced a front engined, front entrance double decker with a flat floor, a synchromesh or even a constant speed box which would have been a front entrance Arab. They could then have introduced the fancy brakes, suspension, whatever gearboxes and anything else as options or improvements after thorough testing on mule chassis once the type and layout had gained acceptance and orders.
The extra two and a half inches width available from 1963 would have been useful to increase the driver’s cab and the introduction of ergonomic design during the 1960s could have further enhanced the driving experience.
Certainly the experiences of Atlantean and Fleetline operators in the early 1960s left the door wide open for a simple, front entrance double decker but even Volvo, a decade and more later with all their inventiveness and sales clout only sold just over a thousand B55/Ailsa, penny numbers compared to the relatively more complex Atlantean and Fleetline.
There is no doubt that the Arab V was a good bus. LUT, for one, loved theirs and, having tried Fleetlines, kept ordering the Arab – simplicity and reliability overcoming any worries about the vehicles looking dated to the passenger on the street.

Phil Blinkhorn


27/12/12 – 10:43

I’ll only digress briefly here, but I was always sad that the Ailsa Volvo had such limited success. I had quite a bit of experience in driving three of them, and have ridden in many more. From the driving perspective they were superb, with faultless road holding, and the skilful design of the front platform and staircase area gave perfectly adequate passenger circulating room. The performance, particularly with such a tiny engine (albeit turbocharged), was quite amazing although admittedly when fully laden uphill they took their time. The three which I drove were GCN 1/2/3 which were disposed of indecently early by Newcastle’s PTE successor – I forget the exact circumstances but I seem to recall that there was a TGWU issue and that the original braking system left a little to be desired under heavy workloads – this was taken care of in the later bulk production. To the enthusiast driver the transmission was a joy and, at the risk of a volley or protest from the Southall area, gave a very likeable aural impression of a Mark 111 Regent. The usual Alexander body was handsome, well finished, and the vehicle handled 79 seated passengers plus standing very well indeed. I can’t comment on how the engineering folks found the Ailsa but I wish its success had been more widespread.

Chris Youhill


28/12/12 – 06:33

It is interesting that the Wulfrunian is now seen as a complete failure in concept and in execution.
However, a test several years ago by the Classic Bus magazine (in its vastly better days under Gavin Booth) concluded that the Wulfrunian was far from being the “Blunderbus” that it has often been labelled. Certainly, during my time in Halifax in the mid sixties, I took many opportunities to ride upon West Riding Wulfrunians around Leeds and Wakefield, and I found their road performance to be impressive. Certainly some of the advanced engineering features proved troublesome, but most of these would have been sorted out had the Guy company not landed itself in a precarious financial state by expending huge sums in setting up its own sales outlets in South Africa in 1955. By the time that the Wulfrunian’s reliability problems emerged, Guy was technically insolvent, and there was no money available to eliminate the shortcomings. One major defect lay in the braking system, which was hydraulically operated with air assistance. The shrouding effect of the bodywork, plus the front location of a hot engine and its exhaust pipework, caused the brake fluid to boil and destroy all brake action. The fitment of a full air braking system would have eliminated that problem entirely. Other problems could surely have been sorted given the cash – the early Atlanteans had some major, costly faults that were ultimately designed out – but Guy had no funds to remedy the Wulfrunian’s failings.
Some information on the Wulfrunian may be found here at this site.

Roger Cox


28/12/12 – 09:55

It’s many years since I saw the leaflet which forms the basis of the piece linked to in Roger’s post.
If you read the blurb in the knowledge of Guy’s parlous financial position, it becomes clear that the Wulfrunian was their great white hope – or their vehicle of hopeless optimism.
It reads as if they have found, in one design, the panacea for all the problems of the industry. Claims about the chassis versatility for different body formats and claims regarding the input of various operators have, in hindsight, shades of how they designed a camel to respond to the need for a racehorse by throwing in every idea they had been given and every technical development they could find.
Of course the major flaws are highlighted in the opening sentence and the list of salient features. The arrogance of the sentence “Air suspension development at Guy has now reached a virtual end” towards the end of the piece really shows just how the company had deluded itself into basking in the glory its golden dreams of conquering the market with its yet untried product.
By the time the Wulfrunian was launched, Leyland had scaled back its Atlantean to a much more simple vehicle albeit with faults and complications.
Had Guy not been so desperate for cash flow, they too may have taken a second look and offered a simpler vehicle capable of development alongside its proven Arab.

Phil Blinkhorn


28/12/12 – 10:57

Chris Youhill rightly praises the Ailsa I travelled on both Alexander and Van Hool bodied examples and found both a very pleasant vehicle for the average passenger. As to the sound effects superb! Some of the late lamented Black Prince’s examples sounded like London tube trains in their later years!

Chris Hough


28/12/12 – 11:48

That technical leaflet is revealing, Roger: operators are looking for simple vehicles with reasonable comfort/ride and running economy. Although a Wulfrunian running was a good vehicle – with Gardner engine & Roe body it had to be- but there seem- even to a layman- to be some awful design flaws. Trying to squeeze the driver, old-style engine and single entrance/exit and even the staircase into the one width seems pretty dotty. That’s why the Accrington version seems better. I love the bit about having to clamber over the engine to reach the driver- were they ever OPO? (or then, OMO?) Having so much weight cantilevered at the front seems dotty, too: and look at the exhaust…. wrapped over the front suspension… and the fuel tank, desperately balancing the two equal but light/heavy overhangs but surely so vulnerable to a rear full/quarter shunt. And why are they so proud of no power steering? Was it untried technology then? On the other hand, cars at that time found 4 wheel disc brakes difficult…. wasn’t it never park a Mk2 Jag on the handbrake alone?

Joe


28/12/12 – 11:49

For those interested in why Accrington bought their oddball Wulfrunians, the answer is in my article “Days Out With Martin Hannett” 

Phil Blinkhorn


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


20/05/13 – 07:25

Re the Accrington Wulfrunians, I remember driving south on the A5 in 1968, going home after a day marshalling at Mallory Park race track, and I believe I saw one, possibly two of the Accrington buses in a scrapyard, on the east side of the A5. Reading the above comments makes me doubt what I saw !
Was I mistaken, or was the site being used by someone operating the Wulfrunians ?
I will always regret that, when I was in Bradford in late 1971 – sampling the last few trolleybus routes – I spurned the chance of a ride on a West Riding Wulfrunian which was waiting at an on-street terminus.It was in green livery.

Ernie Jupp

Brutonian – Bristol RE – STC 928G – 28

Brutonian - Bristol RE - STC 928G - 28

Brutonian Bus Company
1969
Bristol RESL6G
East Lancs B47F

Bruton is a settlement on the River Brue. It is in Somerset, between Frome and Yeovil. STC 928G is a Bristol RESL6G, new to Accrington Corporation Transport in 1969. It has East Lancs B47F body and passed to Brutonian in 1982. The fleet number and Accrington livery were so near Brutonian’s requirements that neither was changed. The operator became part of the Cawlett Group and is now part of First. We see the bus parked in New Canal, Salisbury, on 17 April 1984, having come in on a market service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


19/02/17 – 16:22

STC 928G

4 vehicles were acquired by Brutonian in 1982 from Hyndburn as successor to Accrington CTD. The vehicles were reliable and popular and the livery was retained and looked attractive as can be seen from Pete’s photo in Salisbury. None were ever repainted and by 1987 the livery had deteriorated as can be seen from the attached taken in Dorchester.

Keith Newton


19/02/17 – 16:23

It wasn’t in such good condition three years later see link www.sct61.org.uk/ac28a

Keith Clark


20/02/17 – 07:09

Keith and Keith, Your photos suggest that this vehicle was on its way to a breaker, rather than in service. Given what became of Brutonian, one might wonder if it’s a ‘practice’ for the Barbie livery!

Pete Davies


20/02/17 – 13:26

Perhaps we should have a section for the worst presented buses- “battered buses”? Even on the original photo, you can see the untreated deterioration around the “peak” and front wheel arch. The grille was starting to go on the first pic, and then… Brutal!

Joe


21/02/17 – 07:06

How could a vehicle so neglected be allowed to operate? What about the vehicle examiners and the traffic commissioners? I don’t think I have ever seen a bus operating in such a sad state, and the final shot was hopefully before scrapping – it would have been a mercy killing.
Brutonian, with the emphasis on the ‘brute’.
Thank goodness for operators like Safeguard at Guildford.

David Wragg


21/02/17 – 16:15

David, I agree with what you say about the appearance, but the condition of the paintwork is not a criteria for a vehicle test. However, the body is, so presumably it must have been up to standard or it would not have been granted a C.O.F. There is of course the reverse of the coin that a coat of paint hides a multitude of sins

Ronnie Hoye


21/02/17 – 16:16

To be fair – maybe – things were different then in particular the powers that be were more concerned with de-regulation and local authorities had to ensure non-commercial services would continue. The owner of Brutonian had agreed to sell to a local businessman whose interests included a travel agency and the transfer was delayed until de-reg ie end of October 1986. As well as existing routes and new commercial ones , the new company had gained additional tenders – not least the trunk route 6 between Sherborne and Dorchester. Despite the poor external appearances , the REs were apparently mechanically sound and reliable and the additional work probably extended their lives. Unfortunately the 6 passed County Hall and comments were apparently made therein !! No 28 was withdrawn soon after the photo was taken and continued concern saw the tender itself subsequently transferred the following year to another local operator.

STC 928G _2

Attached is another photo taken in May 1985 in Castle Cary on the Saturday evening Bingo service and is probably how these fine vehicles should be remembered.
A new book on Brutonian concentrating on the routes and operations is to be published soon through the Omnibus Society.

Keith Newton


22/02/17 – 07:11

I think ‘the ugly face of de-regulation’ is a term that sums up this situation. A similar thing happened in the North West where the once proud Yelloway having been asset stripped by new owners secured a tendered service into Manchester formerly run by the PTE. They used very unsavoury looking cast-off Bristol VRT/ECW vehicles in worn out ex NBC liveries with no fleetnames and paper stickers in the windscreens as a destination display. It was a disgrace. Fortunately the powers that be stepped in fairly quickly and terminated the arrangement with the service being re-tendered. Not the British bus industry’s finest hour.

Philip Halstead


22/02/17 – 07:12

I have read that Brutonian only repainted vehicles when they were in for other maintenance, resulting in the most unreliable ones being repainted first and vice versa. So looking at the state of this one, Keith’s comment about its mechanical soundness rings true!

Peter Williamson


27/02/17 – 07:49

Chris Knubley the owner of Brutonian never really had much money. There was an injection of money into the business in 79 when he bought his first RE (GAX 5C – a great bus!) and CYA 181J (survices) along with WYD 928H from H&C, the latter was never painted. Generally the most reliable buses were painted 217 UYC and 497 ALH for example, while others ran in a range of former operators colours 8087 TE and TET 166, for example. Not creating consistency was something he had done from 1972! There was clearly something wrong with the last paint job done by Hyndburn on MTJ 926/927G and STC 928/928G. Alternatively the guy who replaced me washing them down from Sep 82 was using the pressure washer incorrectly, or it had been inadvertently fitted with the sandblasting nozzle! 27 became the donor to the others although lasted until a few years ago along with 26 and 29 in Shobdon before final scrapping. 28, in the picture, I understand was in fact the most reliable and went onto be repainted and see further service with Metrowest (the only one of the four). It was indeed different times…I now own the only bus to carry the Brutonian colours which is OVL494, an identical bus to Brutonian’s OVL 495, which was scrapped after an attempt to convert it to a half cab. All other survivors are in original operator colours or in CYA 181J’s case, awaiting restoration.

Paul Welling


08/10/17 – 08:04

Yes deregulation did the bus industry no favours and we are still seeing the repercussions over 30 years later. Fishwick’s and Pennine spring to mind.

Mr Anon


24/11/17 – 07:34

Much information about Brutonian may be found here:- //www.countrybus.com/Brutonian/BrutonianPart1.htm  Scroll to the bottom for links to further pages.

Roger Cox