Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1954 Bristol Lodekka LD6G ECW LD57R
KDL 414 is a Bristol LD6G with the usual ECW H60R body, still in Tilling green, but with NBC fleetname and the white stripe. She was one of ten which were borrowed at the time, and has gained a Hants & Dorset fleet number (3493) instead of her “real” one. She is in the yard of Southampton depot on a dull lunchtime in March 1974.
A lovely photo of an icon in design which does speak well for the quality of the Bristol and ECW product at 20 years of age. Just a little puzzled at the seating capacity which was normally 58 seats in this first tranche of 1954 Lodekkas. The 1955 build saw seating increase to 60 seats but some operators still preferred 58 seats.
Richard Fieldhouse
Info from 1963 OBF 3 South Central
Peter
16/10/12 – 16:57
One of the early LDs with long radiator grille, as used up to 1955. The red bus behind has the same type of grille. However, it was not unknown for the long and short grilles to be exchanged during overhaul.
Geoff Kerr
16/10/12 – 17:30
Here is another shot of one of these Southern Vectis early LD6G Lodekkas. KDL 401, SV fleet no.505, delivered in March 1954, is shown at St. Boniface Down on 28 August 1967. According to Bus Lists on the Web, this bus and its fellow no.518 above originally had ECW bodywork with a capacity of H33/21R. It is possible that this was increased later, as others within the same batch had H33/25R seating accommodation.
Roger Cox
17/10/12 – 08:46
I very much preferred the original long radiator grilles, as shown on the SV buses, to the later shorter ones which, in my opinion, ruined the look of the vehicles. The reason for the 58 seat capacity is interesting. It arose because the inward facing seats were for two people instead of the normal three – due to the enormous intrusive differential housings, these being to go along with the original intention to have twin propshafts and diff’s to achieve the low height with the “highbridge” upper saloon. The first thirteen production models which West Yorkshire had (DX3-13) suffered from this lower saloon gangway handicap even though the transmission had already been revised to one propshaft and differential.
Chris Youhill
17/10/12 – 08:46
Nice to see a long grille version of the Lodekka, (always the DX in my mind) – relatively rare. ECW were really consistent in producing restrained and well-balanced designs. In view of Phil Blinkhorn’s contribution to the Ugly Bus Page and the majority response to the recent Queen Mary posting, however, perhaps it’s fortunate that they never produced a full-fronted version of the Lodekka!
Roy Burke
17/10/12 – 08:47
The seating arrangement when these 10 were with Hants & Dorset is noted in the PSVC listing (PK782) as H33/27R. I submitted this for consideration after reading the recent comments about a West Yorkshire MW regarding vehicles with the traditional livery but carrying NBC ’embellishments’.
Pete Davies
07/11/12 – 15:27
The early batches of SVOC Lodekkas were fitted with luggage racks in place of the longitudinal seats on one or both sides at the rear of the saloon, giving a total capacity of 54, 56 or 57 seats. The racks were installed for railway replacement purposes as the Island’s rail network was being run down. They were subsequently removed as more holiday makers came by car, seating capacity reverting to 60. Long radiators and split rear window – the real classic every time!
Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1956 Bristol Lodekka LD6G ECW O60R
Here is a view of MDL 951. She was new to Southern Vectis in 1956 with an ECW H33/24R body, but, in this view, she has been converted to O60R format. She’s in the “dual purpose” version of NBC livery as OT1. We see her at Yarmouth, on a sunny evening in June 1974. The blind has just been changed for another trip and the driver walks round to check it. She isn’t mentioned in the 2012 PSVC listing, but her sister 954 is.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
12/04/13 – 12:21
I have a video on Youtube taken in 1998 showing a Southern Vectis open top Lodekka in action (10.56) near to Alum Bay (Isle of Wight Memories 1998). I cannot read the registration number because at that time I was using old fashioned analogue technology but this particular bus is painted cream all over. Also on the same video is some footage of the island’s narrow gauge steam railway.
John Barringer
13/04/13 – 12:37
John, Thanks for your comment. I’ve now had a chance to look at your video. The Lodekka in question certainly looks to be one of this batch, but which one is anyone’s guess. The Isle of Wight Steam Railway, by the way, is normal standard gauge, not narrow. The stock just looks smaller than normal.
Pete Davies
14/04/13 – 18:20
This brings back memories of my visits ‘over the water’ to the IoW from Pompey. The Yarmouth-Alum Bay run was/is impressive. Sadly, I can’t recall what open-toppers I rode on now. I notice that the driver appears to be wearing cycle-clips; not an unusual habit among older drivers at the time.
In 1946 Southern Vectis added the first three post war examples of the Bristol L5G to its pre war and wartime fleet of the model. EDL 14 -16 arrived with Eastern Coach Works B35R bodywork, but, in 1961, all three were rebuilt with ECW B31F bodies for (what was then called) OMO operation. These later bodies incorporated the unprepossessing style of ECW radiator grille that must surely have been inspired by the dental profession. Having gained some 23 years of faithful service from these buses, Southern Vectis sold all three in 1969, whereupon EDL 16 passed through a dealer in 1970 to Nadder Valley Coaches of Tisbury, Wiltshire, with whom it is seen above in Shaftesbury in 1971. Nadder Valley ceased to operate EDL 16 early in 1972, and its subsequent fate is unknown.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
18/06/18 – 07:27
I am sure that a contemporary BI has these as rebodied by ECW rather than rebuilt. Compared with a standard ECW L body the windows appear somewhat larger and the roof profile looks a little different although it could be an optical illusion. The treatment has an air of the SC4LK about it. I guess it is difficult to decide where rebuild ends and rebodied begins. Is there a percentage of the original below which it becomes a rebody?
Malcolm Hirst
19/06/18 – 06:03
Yes, Malcolm, rebodied is the better word.
Roger Cox
19/06/18 – 06:03
Here is another shot of this bus on its arrival in Shaftesbury.
Roger Cox
19/06/18 – 06:04
I recall many years ago coming across a bus with this style of body in Morpeth Market Place. When I first saw it, I assumed that it was a Bristol SC4LK, a type that I had not come across as United did not operate any. However on closer investigation, I found that it was not a Bristol, but a Leyland. As far as I was able to find out, it was a Leyland PS1 originally with Cumberland Motor Services, who’d had it rebodied, although what it was doing in Morpeth I have no idea. I assume that it had been purchased by a local operator. Perhaps some-one has more details on this vehicle.
John Gibson
19/06/18 – 06:05
Bus Lists on the Web has this as rebodied FB35F.
Peter Williamson
19/06/18 – 06:05
Malcolm, Messrs Doggett & Townsin’s book ‘ECW 1946-1965’ states that the Southern Vectis trio were rebodied by ECW in 1961/62. It is stated in the book that: “The demand for a smaller and lighter type of single-decker was being met by the Bristol SC type, as described in the previous chapter, but the body design developed for it was also used for rebodying Bristol L-type and other chassis in a way which made them suitable for one-person operation. The forward-entrance layout and full-fronted cab suited this requirement, and the body design could be lengthened if need be”. Southern National, Western National, Thames Valley and Hants & Dorset are mentioned as having Bristol L coaches rebodied thus, these being lengthened in the process to LL dimensions, whereas the three Southern Vectis L-types were not lengthened. Cumberland also had a Leyland Tiger PS1/Associated Coachbuilders coach similarly rebodied by ECW. Looking at one or two photos, the rebodied heavyweights appeared to have strongly resembled the SC in many respects, including the side windows, roof contours and the later more ornate ‘mouth organ’ grille. The SC’s familiar one-piece rear window was also utilised. One subtle difference I’ve noticed between the SC and L-type rebodies relates to the windscreen. The lower edge of SC windscreens is horizontal, whereas that on the L-type has a slight downward slope towards the outer corner of each screen. The other difference relates to the front wheels – the SC having eight wheel studs/nuts per hub compared with the L-type’s ten. So Malcolm, your comment that “The treatment has an air of the SC4LK about it” certainly rings true!
Brendan Smith
20/06/18 – 06:54
Cumberland in 1949/1950 got a batch of Leyland/ACB coaches registered HRM 79 and JAO 831-840 Between May 1958 and April 1960 all the JAO’s and the HRM were re-bodied, ten by Cumberland as B34F and one JAO (837) by ECW as FB35F. All were fitted for one-man operation. The ECW bodied JAO837 was unique for Cumberland but it was like the ECW bodied Bristol SC4LK coaches. Meanwhile, the Cumberland half cab ones were very good looking buses.
Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1951 Bristol KS5G ECW L27/28R
New to Southern Vectis in 1951 with an Isle of Wight registration a Bristol KS5G with an ECW lowbridge body and was withdrawn by them in 1967. Sold on to dealer W Norths (PV) Limited, Sherburn-in-Elmet in May 1967 it then went to Jameson of Sunderland the following month. It was later purchased by Carneys Coaches of Sunderland in October 1967 and was used on shipyard contracts transporting workers between Wearside and Teesside, it was also used to take local Scout groups on holidays. It remained in its original Southern Vectis livery a dark shade of Green with a white band all through its working life. In November 1968 Carneys disposed of it to a dealer, unfortunately from that point on I have no further history.
Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1940 Bristol K5G ECW O30/26R
In 1937 Southern Vectis took two examples of the Bristol GO5G chassis, and then ordered two examples of the later K5G design. CDL 899, which arrived in July 1939 with fleet number 702, was followed in January 1940 by DDL 50, number 703 which, like its predecessors, had ECW H30/26R bodywork. These G and K buses had the high mounted version of the Bristol radiator, whilst all later Southern Vectis K types had the PV2 style. The next K chassis to enter the Southern Vectis fleet came in 1944/45, but these were four K6A machines which were very quickly converted to Gardner 5LW power, and all subsequent K/KS/KSW deliveries had 5LW engines from new. Nos. 702 and 703 were both converted to open toppers in 1959 for operation on the scenic coastal routes, where 702 is seen on 28 August 1967. Sitting “outside” as these veterans climbed up the stiff gradient out of Ventnor was a musical experience to savour. In 1969 703 was converted into a tree lopper, and finally sold off into preservation in 1979, but 702 continued in occasional and promotional service on the Isle of Wight. Happily, both CDL 899 and DDL 50 survive.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
28/05/18 – 06:45
Living In Portsmouth for twenty years from 1956, I experienced inside and outside rides on both these buses over the years. Outside was always pleasant, both from the weather and mechanical aspects, but inside was a cacophony that assaulted the eardrums. How the drivers ever put up with the noise is beyond me. I always assumed from the vibration that the engines were mounted directly on the chassis. And why did SV ever deign to eschew 6LW engines on such a hilly island, producing vehicles that were hard work for drivers and so sluggish, even these with their roofs cut off! I’m glad that they’ve survived, though!
Chris Hebbron
29/05/18 – 06:34
My G certainly is directly mounted and is extremely noisy but vibration in the saloon is low. Fitting a 6LW in a K was not straightforward and I have done it in a KSW which had a re-design to allow fitment but not straight forward. Think on K it would have reqd body mods.
Roger Burdett
31/05/18 – 07:32
There were GO6Gs and K6Gs in South Wales where the hilly operating terrain really demanded them. Significantly none of them had ECW bodies which were fairly standardised. Pontypridd had batches of Beadle-bodied Ls and Ks with both 5LW and 6LW engines and the bodies were significantly different due to the extra length of the 6LW. Merthyr was another regular K6G buyer whilst Cardiff (not as hilly) bought a batch of unique KW6Gs with Bruce bodies.
David Beilby
31/05/18 – 07:35
Chris H raises a question which has interested me for a long time; why Tilling companies never had any K6Gs. I may be wrong but as far as I’m aware, until the advent of the KS series, Eastern Coach Works never produced any bodywork into which the 6LW engine would fit. If any companies in the group had a requirement for 6 cylinder power, then it had to be the 6A or the 6B, the Gardner 6LW was never an option. Of course there were Bristol K6Gs, popular with some South Wales municipals and independents such as Silcox but not in Tilling fleets. Similarly, when Hants & Dorset wanted L6Gs, they had to send them to Portsmouth Aviation to be bodied because ECW couldn’t fit the engine into their standard single deck body. I imagine the Bristol radiator could have been moved forward in the style of the Guy Arab but was it the builders who were unwilling to alter their specifications or was it Tilling HQ who decreed that operators couldn’t have 6LWs in the 1930s and 40s?
Chris Barker
01/06/18 – 05:56
It is said that one of the design constraints of the Bristol AVW engine was that it should fit in the bonnet of the K type chassis, thereby limiting its capacity to 8.1 litres. Not until 1950, when the maximum length of double deckers was increased to 27ft 6ins, did Bristol/ECW offer 6LW powered versions of the K type, the KS and KSW. In these the bulkhead was moved back to accommodate the extra length of this engine. As other correspondents have stated, the K6G/KW6G buses built for municipalities and Silcox all had bodywork from builders other than ECW to incorporate a set back bulkhead. Taking up Chris Hebbron’s point about the challenging Isle of Wight topography for the 5LW, Southern Vectis continued to specify this small engine in the wider, longer and heavier KSW type of which it had 15 examples. Only when the Lodekka appeared on the scene did Southern Vectis finally accept the 6LW.
Roger Cox
04/06/18 – 16:37
CDL 899 was used for a while on the service to the Needles from Alum Bay and is seen nearing the end of its climb. I did wonder whether the noise could be heard across the Solent!
A second photo shows the addition of route branding.
Keith Newton
07/06/18 – 05:31
Lovely photos, Keith, thx for posting them. can well understand the engine noise on this challenging route. The front design of the ECW bodywork, with its scrunched-up windscreen, has the effect of making the high radiator barely obvious. It certainly was when it was fitted with a wartime utility body!
Chris Hebbron
07/06/18 – 05:32
The exchanges over this bus are quite revealing. I have never been closely involved in the bus industry and others may be better qualified to comment. Whereas in pre nationalisation days- the aftermath of the last war- you could obtain (probably beg) a Bristol with AEC engine and Roe body, as nationalisation progressed you could have a K chassis as long as it had a Bristol or 5cyl Gardner engine, an ECW body and any colour as long as it was green, red and/or cream. Choice was restricted and was down purely to chassis length. Later on, the Lodekka even eliminated height as an option: was this, much later and from comments here, the terminal Leyland disease? Certainly the command economy may have been dismantled in the 50’s but lived on for years on the Bristol-Lowestoft axis. Back to the bus and what a lovely example- the odd feature to me is the absence of elfansafety railings on the upper deck- just the side panels raised above the seat backs. If the bus were to topple, that was you done, or overhanging trees, crane jibs or whatever. Tiny mirrors, but then the conductor would watch behind. Happy days!
Joe
10/06/18 – 08:32
Joe, I don’t think that the product policies of Bristol CV and ECW in the 1950’s and ’60’s were similar to those of Leyland in the 1970’s. First of all, one must remember that the restrictions were placed on BCV and ECW, who were only allowed to sell to the state-owned operators; while those operators could continue to select whichever supplier they wanted – and, indeed, they did so, particularly the Scottish Bus Group, but the THC also bought Bedford coaches, and sometimes lightweight buses. It is also generally known that BCV and ECW maintained close contact with their customers during that era, and some specialist models were also produced, in numbers that were probably not really economic – I’m thinking of the SC and SU small single deck chassis. The Lodekka was of course a solution that provided the comfort of an highbridge layout within the overall height of a lowbridge bus – with a stepless lower deck floor to boot with the F series models. It is also worth remembering that BCV and ECW were relatively low-volume producers, and their customers did have more choice. As such, significantly wider choices of engines, etc, would probably not have been viable. By the 1970’s Leyland had a virtual monopoly of the heavy duty bus and coach market in the UK – and, judging from contemporary reports, seemed to believe that they knew what their customers wanted. I guess that the subsequent history tells us whether that was correct – or not!
Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1969 Bristol LHS6L Marshall B35F
Seen here in the summer of 1969 when almost new, NDL 769G was one of four Bristol LHS6L buses delivered to Southern Vectis with 7ft 6ins wide Marshall B35F bodies of curiously old fashioned appearance. The flat glass windscreen with angled corner glasses was reproduced at the rear. To my eye the utilitarian result had something of the air of a welfare vehicle or a mobile library. Only nineteen examples of this design were constructed. Twelve similar bodies with 33 seats on LHS6L chassis were supplied to Western National in 1972. Gash of Newark took two, one in 1973 and the other in 1975, but these were 8ft wide. Harvey of Mousehole took a single narrow example in 1977. In all cases the chassis was the LH6L with the 6.54 litre Leyland 400 engine, or, from 1971, the more powerful 401, which was coupled with a Turner five speed synchromesh gearbox. The bus shown above was bought by United in 1977 and is currently in preservation, though the livery it now wears is, in my opinion, an offence to the eye – see what you think at this link.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
25/01/16 – 06:33
Interesting view, Roger, Where was the photo taken, please? I’m guessing Newport. The best that can be said of the “United” livery is that it is at least in what might be described as in patriotic colours although the style of application won’t be very high on most folks’ idea of ‘good taste’. Talking of “United” the captcha for this response is 58HN, a Darlington registration
Pete Davies
25/01/16 – 06:34
I agree entirely, Roger. The current livery is simply awful.
David Wragg
25/01/16 – 09:17
Yes, Pete, the location is Newport. The church in the background is Newport Minster. Please forgive the omission. This style of body has always puzzled me. Marshall constructed a large number of single deck bodies of (what one might call) basically BET appearance with curved glass windscreens, and I supposed that the reason for the flat screens lay in the narrow 7ft 6ins width of the vehicles. However, Gash took two with the same front and rear end design, and these were 8ft wide. The narrow Bristol BN and BS classes of London Country and London Transport respectively had curved front windscreens and flat glass at the rear, though these vehicles were delivered from 1973 onwards. Surely this curved screen was available in 1969. I doubt that the relative costs would have been a factor. The complicated rear screen on the Marshall would have negated any (debatable) cost saving when replacing the various flat glasses at the front. I imagine, also, that this Marshall feature was structurally weaker.
Roger Cox
25/01/16 – 10:50
Marshall also produced a “coach” version mainly for WNOC in particular that had curved glass in the windscreen.
Chris Hough
25/01/16 – 14:00
David W – I couldn’t agree more, Except that I would not use the word “livery” – rather a freelance graffiti exercise, and a bitter disappointment compared with even the NBC version of United’s livery.
Chris Youhill
26/01/16 – 06:52
I have seen a Leyland National with a ‘paint job’ similar to the United one, but I’ll not send you running for a darkened room by offering it for publication. [Unless someone’s mother in law is threatening a visit, and the reader is suitably desperate!]
Pete Davies
26/01/16 – 06:53
The “current” livery was chosen by United as this bus was used on a “town” service in Newton Aycliffe, which was very successful It was discontinued after a few years… No doubt someone will come up with more information. Just for the record I drove for United out of Darlington for 10 years and would possibly had stayed a bit longer but had to leave to care for my wife after she suffered a life changing event….some good memories and some not so good
John Wake
26/01/16 – 06:54
Photo; VOD 88K Bristol LHS/Marshall of Devon General O&TC. It is so good to see the oddities and rarities of vehicle styles from the past, as a contrast to the Southern Vectis LHS/Marshall, I offer this Devon General preserved in the pre-National Bus Company red version of the British Transport Commission livery. This view was taken at Yeovil Junction railway station on the border of Somerset and Dorset during July 2010. These narrow Marshall bodied vehicles were ideal for rural routes but were never taken in great numbers by the main transport groups of the time.
Ron Mesure
27/01/16 – 06:20
Devon General only became a Transport Holding Company subsidiary in 1967 on the occasion of British Electric Traction selling its bus interests to the Ministry of Transport. By the time this bus was delivered the company was a subsidiary of the National Bus Company. Prior to late 1972 the NBC had operated without corporate liveries.
Stephen Allcroft
27/01/16 – 06:22
I think we can be reasonably sure that the body order for these LHSs went to Marshall because of the narrow width requirement. ECW were building bodies for LHS around the same time (for Lincolnshire and Luton Corporation), but these were 7′ 10″ wide, as were the contemporary bodies on the longer LH chassis at that time. I am not sure if the narrow version of the BET windscreen was available at that time, but I believe the principal problem was the height, rather than the width. The basic structure of the body looks to be similar to the Marshall Cambrette bodies built on Bedford VAS chassis for Coventry and East Kent a few years earlier. The radiator of the Bristol LH range was set relatively high, so that Marshall would not have had very much scope to extend the aperture for the windscreen downwards, while an enlargement upwards would have intruded into the destination display area. The only other option would have been to use the shallower rear screens of the BET curved variety, but I am reasonably sure they were even shallower, and the aesthetics of the vehicle would have suffered, not to mention the driver’s field of vision! The multi-pane version adopted was already being used for export vehicles, so I suspect the adaptation for these LHSs was a simple and effective solution. The 10 Bristol LH coaches that Marshall bodied for WN (with mixed BDV-L and NTT-M registrations) had a different body structure with a shallow roof and deeper side windows, which meant that the BET screens could be accommodated. I would hazard a guess that the structure of these was derived from those that Marshall built for the MoD, usually on Bedford SB chassis, though I believe that some later vehicles were built on underfloor-engined chassis.
Nigel Frampton
06/09/17 – 06:52
United acquired both 832/3 NDL768/769G from SVOC and numbered them 1451/2 for demand variable services from Ripon depot in 1977 where they were sparingly used. They were then sent to Darlington depot where they were to be used for a new service serving Newton Aycliffe. 1451 was replaced by a newer ex Trent LHS/ECW also in the distinctive Newtonian colours (as befits a new town) but 1452 survived. NDL769G eventually passed into preservation replaced by, ironically, another ex SV LHS in 838 HDL415N. The ECW LHS’s continued on the Newtonian until deregulation when Merc minis brought a larger network of services though still with Newtonian fleetnames. Three LHS’s (now joined by HDL414N) were sent to Ripon (again coming full circle) where the livery was amended to Ripon City Bus. The LHS’s were then swapped with Western National though the livery was then applied to some standard LH’s (1705/6) at Ripon depot. There was ANOTHER similar patriotic livery applied to three vehicles (one was the National) but thankfully not perpetuated!
BW
01/11/19 – 05:54
These narrow bodied LHS Bristols were purchased for service on the Newport to Cowes pontoon service which required drivers to negotiate the narrow arch entrance to the Red Funnel Cowes terminus. Not a favourite among drivers due to the heavy steering and clutch on these vehicles.
Southern Vectis Omnibus Company 1968 Bristol RESH6G Duple Northern C45F
KDL 885F is a Bristol RESH6G with Duple Northern C45F body. Fleet number 301 in the Southern Vectis fleet, she is seen at the King Alfred Running Day in Winchester on 1 January 2010. Please note that the 2015 event has moved away from New Year’s Day and will be held on Sunday evening 3rd May and Bank holiday Monday 4th May instead – and in the hope of better weather!
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
23/02/15 – 07:50
Very clean, crisp lines and a sympathetic application of livery. Altogether a pleasing coach – and an unusual body choice for a Tilling company, although Southern Vectis always seemed to display a certain disregard for centralised purchasing policy. Perhaps it’s to do with being an off shore island!
Petras409
23/02/15 – 08:50
Thank you, Petras. Sadly, the Isle of Wight isn’t far enough “off shore” to qualify as a tax haven, although I think my neighbour’s children have the right idea. They went to Cowes a couple of years ago and, when they were in the queue for coming back to Southampton, the elder one said to his brother “We’re waiting for the ferry back to England.”
Pete Davies
23/02/15 – 14:34
In the mid-1970’s, I managed the telephone billing section of Portsmouth Telephone Area, based in Southsea, which covered the Isle of Wight. On one occasion, I dealt with an irate customer living on the IoW, who said she wasn’t satisfied with my reply on the telephone and was ‘coming over from the mainland’ to see me in person. I think that local authority re-org in 1973, which took the IoW out of Hampshire and gave it its own council, gave them a sense of inflated importance!
Chris Hebbron
23/02/15 – 14:34
There were nine coaches built with this body/chassis combination, four for Hants and Dorset, four for Eastern National and this one. The only other two RESH chassis had ECW bus bodies fitted out for DP, delivered to Midland General. There were also a few RELH with Duple Commander bodies, with Hants and Dorset and Eastern National again amongst the operators.
Gary T
23/02/15 – 15:50
I’ve found a photo of one of the Hants and Dorset quartet and although only a few months older it is an earlier version of the Commander and has unusual upper windows. www.flickr.com/photos/ The Eastern National examples were similar to the Southern Vectis one.
Gary T
24/02/15 – 06:17
Sorry, Chris, but the Isle of Wight was never part of Hampshire, but people got this idea because at one time education, police, fire and ambulance services were shared. At one time, the island even had a governor, but now it has a lord lieutenant just like any other county. Check on the island websites if you want to know more.
David Wragg
25/02/15 – 06:07
When I used to work in Hampshire, I had a good relationship with my opposite number, who worked in Newport IoW. I always smiled, when he referred to us as his colleagues on the North Island.
Petras409
27/02/15 – 07:05
Wasn’t this coach 6HLW-engined at first, and a 39-seater? I believe that after a “poor-showing” on an extended tour it was re-engined with a 6HLX, either the following year, or pretty soon after. Was it up-seated at the same time?
Philip Rushworth
27/02/15 – 09:13
Thx for correcting my misapprehension, David. I recall its DL vehicle registration mark and wondered if it was subsumed into Hampshire’s in 1973. Maybe not, then. Loved the ‘North Island’ remark, Petras409. I’ve just remembered that I looked at a wall map of Southampton/Portsmouth/IoW area when aboard the Cherbourg-Southampton ferry in its last season. The map showed ‘White Isle’ in the centre. It was a brave, but misguided attempt at using ‘possession’, but the spelling????
Chris Hebbron
27/02/15 – 13:28
The Isle of Wight was part of Hampshire until 1890. Censuses that come up in family history searches say, for example “Carisbrooke, Hampshire” and “Whippingham, Hampshire.” One of my farmer cousins at the western point of the Island admits that visiting overners are good for the economy, but reckons that there ought to be a drawbridge to keep them where they belong once they’ve gone back to the mainland. Some time ago I asked whether anyone else could recall a single-decker with an oval back window that ran from Freshwater to Alum Bay, and I think I’ve found the answer: a Reo (not part of the Southern Vectis fleet) which ran right up till 1949. Another oval-windowed single-decker pictured on p 57 of Richard Newman’s “Southern Vectis–the first 60 years” was a Guy Chaser, DL 5277, but that was sold in 1935. It’s gone midday: time for my nammut.
Ian T
27/02/15 – 15:49
Apparently the Wight name of the island has nothing to do with colour, but it apparently means a separate place or a separated place. Rather apt, really. How they loved their “DL” registration code, managing to keep it during the 1974 changes and after. They lost it in the major 2001 change, but still have a unique identifier as “HW”. Sorry, a bit off piste as a comment, but the above contributions reminded me of this.
Michael Hampton
27/02/15 – 16:51
Michael, the ‘Oxford Names Companion’ states “Wight, Isle of (the county). Vectis c.150, Wit c.1086 (Domesday Book). A Celtic name possibly meaning ‘place of the division’, referring to its situation between the two arms of the Solent”. This ties in nicely with your “separated place” explanation. I like your comment “How they loved their “DL” registration code”, but as a young enthusiast I did too, even though I lived ‘up North’. Those lovely IoW registrations, the ‘Cuddles’, ‘Diddles’, ‘Fiddles’, Middles, ‘Piddles’, ‘Tiddles’ and Widdles’ – wonderful one and all.
Brendan Smith
28/02/15 – 05:54
I see that Brendan and I seem to share Benny Hill’s “lavatorial” sense of humour!
Pete Davies
28/02/15 – 05:55
On a recent holiday coach tour from East Yorkshire we had a very able driver who lived on the IoW on the round the island tour he never stopped talking on driving off the ferry at Southampton he welcomed us back to the North Island.
Ken Wragg
28/02/15 – 05:57
Philip, this coach was indeed originally fitted with the smaller Gardner 6HLW engine when new. As you comment, it was soon re-engined with the larger 6HLX unit. Apparently this followed an embarrassing incident whereby passengers on a coach tour had to disembark, in order for 301 to reach the top of a hill. As a young enthusiast, I was very fortunate in seeing this beautiful coach in Harrogate when quite new, and still have a not very good black and white photograph of it, parked on Esplanade, at the bottom of Cold Bath Road. Whether it had the more powerful 6HLX engine by then I do not know, but given the steepness of some of the hills around the area, I sincerely hope that it had!
Brendan Smith
28/02/15 – 09:48
Is that tale of the 6HLW engine being defeated by a hill verifiable? 6LW engines powered 30ft long double deckers in pretty hilly territory all over the land without trouble. I can accept that the performance of the RE with the 112 bhp 6HLW might not have been sparkling, and some gradients may have required bottom gear, but I remain a trifle suspicious of the story.
Roger Cox
28/02/15 – 12:05
Yes I know what you mean Roger, but the story is told in Duncan Roberts’ ‘Bristol RE – 40 years of service’ book, which is a well-researched publication. West Yorkshire’s Bristol MW coaches (with 6HLW engines) seemed to manage trips around the Dales without too much drama, but then they had ECW aluminium-framed bodywork. I have a suspicion that Duple like Plaxton at the time, were still using composite bodies, which were quite a bit heavier. It is interesting to note that West Yorkshire’s ECW-bodied RELH6G coaches performed well on the Yorkshire-London services, with fully rated (150bhp) Gardner 6HLX engines. However, when WY’s first Plaxton-bodied RELH6G coaches arrived, within a short space of time they were deemed to be ‘sluggish’, and were re-engined with Leyland O.680 units rated at 168bhp, to improve performance. Maybe the same fate had befallen 301 – that of heavier coachwork?
Brendan Smith
01/03/15 – 06:56
Brendan, that is quite correct about the Duple bodies being composite steel/wood construction, and therefore relatively heavy. The caption to the photo in Duncan Roberts’ book, in which he related the proverbial story about the passengers having to get out and walk up an hill in Scotland, also mentions the construction of the Duple bodies. As I understand it, Duple didn’t adopt all metal frames until the advent of the Dominant. In practice, even the ECW-bodied RESLs with 6HLW engines were considered to be sluggish. Southern Vectis had a number of those, and they apparently gained a reputation for causing people to miss ferries!
Nigel Frampton
02/03/15 – 07:30
Thanks for the information on Duple bodies Nigel, and also that on Southern Vectis’ sluggish RESL6Gs. I’ve since reflected on Roger’s quite justifiable suspicion relating to the tale, and the comments on 301 in Duncan Roberts’ book. It is quite possible that the coach did struggle on the hill, and the driver did what he thought best under the circumstances. Conversely, the coach did actually manage the climb fully laden with passengers and their luggage, albeit very slowly in first gear, with the driver later commenting on its performance to colleagues on his return. No doubt it would not have taken long for the tale to “develop” as a consequence. Hmmm! We need Miss Marple on the case.
Brendan Smith
02/03/15 – 17:50
In the postwar years up to the end of the 1950s, the eight legger lorries of Atkinson, ERF, Foden and Guy, and the classic Scammell artics were all powered by the 112 bhp Gardner 6LW. Torque is the prime factor in a commercial vehicle engine, which is where the Gardner range excelled. It is worth remembering that the vaunted 125 bhp engines of AEC and Leyland developed around 118 bhp at the 1700 rpm governed speed of the 6LW, an advantage of just 6 bhp. As Ian T says in his comment on John Stringer’s post of the United Services Dennis Loline I on this site, “112 ghp (Gardner horsepower) was worth 125 of anyone else’s”. I think that the story of the 6HLW powered RE coach being totally flummoxed by a hill, like much folklore, is probably apocryphal. Turning to the matter of Duple bodywork, I personally felt that, after the neat styling of the 1950s, the Duple designs of the 1960s – the Vegas, Vistas, Viceroys et al – were uninspired in the extreme, except in respect of frontal treatment which was garishly appalling, reminiscent of the worst aesthetic abominations emanating from the car factories of Detroit. The mass of frontal metalwork alone must have added considerably to the unladen weight. Duple only partially redeemed itself with the Plaxton clones of the 1970s; the true Plaxtons still looked better. Donning my hard hat, I now await the impending onslaught from Duple aficionados.
Roger Cox
16/03/15 – 06:46
Roger, were you still in Halifax at the time the M62 was being constructed over Rishworth Moor/Moss Moor? For those not familiar with the area, between J23 and J22 the motorway passes under the B6114 in a deep cutting (the spoil from which was used to crate the embankment of Scammonden Reservoir, across which the motorway runs in a westbound direction immediately prior to the cutting). Creation of the cutting severed the B6114 and so, prior to the construction of the current over-bridge, a temporary road descending down the cutting, across the bed of the motorway, and up the other side was created (travelling westbound the tracks of the temporary road can still be seen clearly). The gradient of the temporary road was 1:5. Stay with me. In July 1968 Huddersfield JOC introduced its first two Countryside Tours: Tour B was designed to show the construction of the M62/Scammonden Reservoir/the B6114 over-bridge, and entailed buses climbing the temporary road. According to Cardno and Harling’s “Huddersfield – The Corporation Motor Bus Story”, on the first trip “Five of the seven fully-loaded single deckers failed to negotiate ‘the big dipper’ . . . the problem was caused by the flagman at the bottom of the incline whose job it was to control the traffic to ensure that heavy motorway machinery could cross the road unimpeded. he stopped the buses too close to the bottom of the incline . . .”. I remember reading, many years ago, in Julian Osborne’s “The Southdown Queen Marys”, that the pneumocyclic Queen Marys could fail to start on some of Brighton’s steeper hills, and were soon transferred away to flatter territory. Now my question is this: would the fact that the RESL had a semi-automatic gearbox have affected hill-climbing ability in comparison with Rogers 6LW-engined double-deckers? I’m assuming here that Roger’s 6LW-powered double-deckers were manual, and that the Huddersfield single-deckers concerned were (semi-automatic) Swifts/RUs/Fleetlines.
Philip Rushworth
18/03/15 – 07:09
Philip, you have raised a significant point about the hill climbing capabilities inherent in different transmission types. A friction clutch allows the driver to speed the engine a bit when pulling away on a gradient, whereas a fluid flywheel/epicyclic gearbox coupling limits the ability of the engine to rev beyond a certain level. As you say, the Southdown Leyland PD3/5s with Pneumocyclic gearboxes (dare we now call any of these full fronted Southdown PD3s “Queen Marys”?) became notorious for experiencing difficulty in pulling away from rest on steep gradients. They were relegated to flatter services and Southdown reverted to the manual transmission PD3/4 for later deliveries. However, if a fluid drive bus could get a run at a hill, allowing the engine to reach a reasonable speed before attacking the gradient, then it would go up satisfactorily. During the days of the lowest ebb of the British Leyland saga, when spare parts and new buses acquired the rarity value of hens teeth, London Country got hold of some of the ex Southdown PD3/5 machines and used them on the 409 route between Croydon and East Grinstead/Forest Row. This had some stiff gradients around the Caterham Valley, particularly Church Hill in Caterham, which has a gradient of 16%, about 1 in 6, but the approach from the bottom allowed a measure of speed to be gained before the steep ascent. These PD3/5s coped without trouble. The O600 did seem to deliver poorer torque at the bottom end of the rev range than the directly comparable AEC 9.6 litre A204/A218 and AV590 engines. The London Transport RTL was distinctly inferior on hills to the directly comparable RT. Attempts were made in 1952 and again in 1959 to allocate RTLs to the Country Bus & Coach department, but the insipid gradient performance of these machines soon led to their replacement by RTs. The Gardner 6LW was the supreme engine for low speed torque until the arrival of the 6LX, and the tale of the RE failing to tackle a hill, if true, must be put down to badly chosen gearing/rear axle ratios. In Halifax, the heavy (over 8 tons unladen) Roe bodied Daimlers of 1954 had their 6LW engines replaced by Leyland O600s, but the story is rather more complicated than one of “inadequate Gardner power”. At that time, as an economy measure, Halifax indulged in the practice of adding one part Coalene to two parts derv to propel its bus fleet. The 112 bhp K type Gardner delivered 10 bhp more at 1700 rpm than its predecessor, but it was very particular about fuel quality, and Coalene was never part of its designed diet. To add to the problem, this batch of Daimlers had 5.4:1 rear axles, rather high for the local Alpine operating territory. HPTD’s Leyland besotted new GM, Richard Le Fevre, replaced the Gardners with Leyland engines, and, under the new Asst. Engineer, a certain G.G. Hilditch, the back axles were changed to 6.2:1. The Orion bodied Daimlers kept their Patricroft power plants throughout their lives, as did the later and lighter, very fine, Roe bodied batch of 1956 (my favourite Halifax buses). The problem had not lain with the engines. Mercifully, the dubious indulgence of adding Coalene to the fuel died out in the early 1960s. I’ve driven 6LW powered Daimlers up the Halifax hills without difficulty, so the RE problem certainly lay beyond the engine, though I accept that such a coach would have been underpowered. Modern automatic bus transmissions employ a series of torque converters enabling the engine to rev freely in the starting ratio.
Roger Cox
19/03/15 – 07:14
Coalene was a product of the Coalite company, a smelly plant I recall passing near Chesterfield whenever we visited this fine town to see friends. I have a feeling that Sheffield Corporation also used it in their buses for a while. On the whole, it was only sold ‘locally’. For cars, I always fuelled up my car in Chesterfield with ICI petrol, which I never saw elsewhere, but regretted this as it was much cheaper that other brands. I assume it was a by-product of their chemical activities.
Chris Hebbron
20/03/15 – 07:24
Chris H, quite correct, the Coalite plant was at Wingerworth near Chesterfield. It covered a vast area and closed down many years ago but work still goes on there to this day, detoxifying the land.
Chris Barker
17/01/21 – 07:21
Fascinating reading and I have just read the notes on the switchback diversionary route of the B6114 between Ringstone & Dean Head. The gradient was a true 1 in 5 (20% in the new mode) and the Halifax Leopards (231-238 batch etc) needed 1st gear on both sides. This was a thrilling ride to a teenage bus enthusiast in the 1968-1971 period. Even more exciting was in icy conditions – but the bus always made it – what a contrast to today’s buses! On a Sunday afternoon, the 59 from Elland to Ripponden diverted in each direction vis Dean Head and displayed the number 58. The only regular passengers (besides me!) were 3 elderly ladies who attended the afternoon service at Dean Head Church. Very happy days – any other ageing bus enthusiasts remember travelling on this service?
Eric Sykes
18/01/21 – 05:48
This vehicle has just undergone an internal make over at IoW Museum including new floor covering and newly re-moquetted seats.
Roger Burdett
26/04/22 – 05:54
Very interesting to read of Coalene use in the 1960’s. I think it may have solved a mystery that’s puzzled me for years. As a young lad visiting relatives in Sheffield I’d always enjoy riding the buses – especially the musical AEC’s on the 75 route as they powered up to Meadowhead top. Besides thinking Sheffield blue and cream was ‘the’ best livery, I was always intrigued why Sheffield buses had a certain smell to them? It was suggested it could emanate from the furnaces of the steelworks and it somehow ‘stuck’ to the passing buses. To be honest I think very few people I spoke with at the time had ever actually noticed! I still remember the smell – which I found not unpleasant…..thanks to reading these posts I suspect Coalene sounds like the culprit!
Robert Wainman
01/05/22 – 07:34
I remember seeing this coach parked in Ventnor bus station on an island visit in around 1991; it was notably vintage even then but in showroom condition. Regarding steep hill performance, in my youth I was a daily rider on Bristol City route 3, up the steep Red Lion Hill into Knowle. Always a KSW or an older K, some Gardner 6LW, some Bristol AVW. Dependent on load, and the driver’s skill in engaging non-synchromesh bottom gear when down to walking pace, it would often fail to make it, come to a stand, and then make a spectacular hill start with much vibration and noise. Now I think of it the prospect of making a hash of it and running backwards doesn’t really bear thinking about.
