Cheltenham District 1934 AEC Regent I Weymann H30/24R
When my photos of the Cheltenham & District Albion Venturer CX19 No. 72, were published they attracted a comment from Ian Thompson which read as follows- “Three of the civilised and handsome Weymann-bodied 56-seat AEC Regents, mentioned by Chris, went in 1947 to fellow Red & White company Venture of Basingstoke, passing in 1951 to Wilts & Dorset. They were DG 9819 (No. 2) and DG 9820 (No. 3) of 1934, and BAD 30 (No. 10) of 1936. I remember seeing them (and secretly clambering aboard them in the AWRE Aldermaston bus park in 1955-56).”
Above are two photos of No.2, firstly looking immaculate with Cheltenham & District on 23rd May 1939 and then, about 1952, as ex-Venture 91, looking a little careworn on a filthy day, after Wilts & Dorset had taken over Venture.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
This later-life picture of DG 9818 brings back not only happy memories of AWRE Aldermaston bus park in the 50s, but also a question that has niggled me for years. I was never content with bus-spotting from outside and was always curious about staircases and upstairs seating layout. I very distinctly recall a decker whose staircase started in the usual way–three or four steps rising towards the offside rear corner–but then instead of turning to rise forward, it made a 180-degree turn to debouch upstairs facing the nearside. The two forward-facing seats opposite the top step were only singles. I don’t remember any incursion downstairs: the whole staircase fitted into the platform-well. My admittedly fallible memory recalls this bus as one of the Cheltenham trio, but when I asked a retired Cheltenham driver about it sixteen years ago he could recall no such layout; nor could Colin Martin, author of Cheltenham’s Trams and Early Buses (Tempus 2001) and other authoritative bus books. I’ve studied hard the photos of the DGs and BADs in Colin’s books and in Venture Limited by Birmingham and Pearce (1995) and in Wilts and Dorset, by Colin Morris and Andrew Waller (Hobnob 2006) and can see nothing that suggests what I recall. The DGs had only 24 seats downstairs and the BADs 26, but they all seated 30 upstairs, so there again there’s nothing to back me up. I begin to wonder whether the bus that I recall so clearly wasn’t an ex-Cheltenham after all, but then whose was it? All the E. Yorkshire Beverley Bar buses I’ve clambered around on seem to have had conventional stairs but with Roe-type square top steps. Can anyone disentangle me? Thanks! And thanks, Chris H, for the pictures.
Ian Thompson
10/02/11 – 10:16
These three AECs which went to Venture as nos 85, 88 and 91 all had Gardner engines on arrival at Venture. The front bulkhead downstairs had a large rectangular panel (with round corners) protruding into the lower saloon above the flywheel cover – presumably because the Gardner 6LW took up more room than the standard AEC. They sounded rather like tractors compared with the usual Venture AECs. The staircases did indeed turn through 180 degrees and the top step protruded into the lower saloon above the off-side sideways seat next to the staircase: it was rather oval-shaped and a good example of the metalworker’s art as despite the many footsteps no dents or bumps were visible. It was just large enough for a footstep. There was no danger of a passenger bumping a head as upon standing up the body was clear of the intrusion.
Michael Peacock
24/03/12 – 09:25
As a kid I remember traveling to school on these old AEC Regents. One of the features of the Weymann coachwork was access to the destination blinds on the top deck by undoing two latches thus enabling one to alter the route number. As some of the stops were shared by more than one route such action caused some concern to passengers and did not last very long as astute conductors would remove us guilty or otherwise.
Deryck
06/12/12 – 16:54
Somehow I managed to miss Michael Peacock and Deryck’s comments on the Cheltenham Regents that ended their careers with Wilts and Dorset, and have only just read them! It’s a relief to know that my recollection of the odd staircase wasn’t mistaken after all. I think this arrangement must have been a Balfour Beatty speciality, as it’s shared by the 1949 Notts and Derby BUT/Weymann H32/26R trolleybus at the West of England collection at Winkleigh, Devon, which I saw only two months ago. Given the above-average upper deck seating capacity, the nearly-180-degree staircase was obviously space-thrifty. Belated thanks to Michael and Deryck for shedding more light on these fascinating vehicles.
Provincial (Gosport & Fareham Omnibus Co) 1938 AEC Regent I Weymann H56R
On 31st December 1962, a heavy snowfall occurred in the Portsmouth area, an unusual happening, and the snowy conditions lingered on until the March of 1963. The immediate consequence in Portsmouth was that Portsmouth’s trolleybuses bounced on the snow-packed uneven and unsalted roads to the extent that the poles came off the wires, with motor buses having to take over for a day or so! On the other side of Portsmouth Harbour, having come to grief in a ditch, the first photo shows Provincial 48 (JML 784) about to be recovered from a ditch in Brookers Lane (outskirts of Gosport), unusually by a Royal Navy crane, on 2nd January. A Royal Naval Air Station was only a few miles away at Lee-on-Solent. The second photo shows the bus “in full swing” and about to land on “all foursâ” again. No.48 started life as a demonstrator, prior to being taken into “Provincial” stock on 01.05.39, being numbered 48 in October 1939. The accident was not fatal to the vehicle, for it lasted in service until 27.08.64, a creditable 25 years with Provincial in total.
Photos by kind permission of David Whitaker. Copy by Chris Hebbron, with vehicle’s history taken with his permission from Ray Tull’s “Provincial” website www.regent8.co.uk
19/05/12 – 15:38
There’s an active “interest” group ‘The Provincial Society’. They have a website as follows: www.provincialsociety.org
Sheffield Corporation 1935 AEC Regent I Weymann H56R
Another R H G Simpson photo which I think is worth sharing. Sheffield livery as you’ve never seen it before? Although many vehicles were taken into stock in 1935, this one was not part of a batch, and is possibly the only bus to appear this way in the fleet. It would appear to be an attempt at streamlining, indeed the front seems to be raked back more than usual, that might just be an illusion caused by the livery application.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson
05/04/13 – 05:59
A similar AEC Regent also with Weymann body albeit fully fronted was exhibited at the 1935 show in Leeds livery. This was later converted to half cab and was lent to London in the second world war.
Chris Hough
05/04/13 – 05:59
This was one of a pair – the other for Leeds – with this streamlined design which were, I believe, also show exhibits. This Sheffield example, at least, was originally full fronted but Sheffield had it converted to half-cab for the obvious and usual access reasons before it entered service. Weymann’s first double decker in 1931 was a demonstrator which became Sheffield No66 in 1932. 85 Regent/Weymann deckers followed until 1940 (208 a one off, the rest related to and culminating in the well known classic style). Apart from penny numbers from Park Royal, 10 Cravens and 19 from the Corporation Tramways works at Queens Road, all AEC Regents pre-war came from Addlestone. 197 post war Regent III and V came from Addlestone – along with 102 PD2s.
David Oldfield
05/04/13 – 09:01
…and then we complain about modern liveries! I suppose it was a one-off, but it does suggest that the continuing Hull livery came from another era.
Joe
05/04/13 – 15:34
Joe: It certainly wasn’t a one-off. Manchester for a period went the same way, and the influence persisted in the standard liveries of Huddersfield Corporation and Rochdale. In practice, we were very fond of swooshes back in the 1940s and 50s. Virtually every coach builder had their own pattern of shapes which allowed us to recognise whose body it was; of course in those days we simply called it ‘trim’. The ultimate development of livery application that bore no relationship to the lines of the body undoubtedly came from the Yeates works! I think we can get too rose-tinted about the liveries of that era. Where I grew up as a child – north Somerset – buses all looked the same, and as we took early holidays down in Cornwall there was no difference there either. Nothing really to arouse the interest, so it wasn’t until many years later that I started to develop an interest. Even then – I had moved north by that time – there was Crosville on the doorstep . . . I do feel that our affection for the old liveries is as much a longing for the variety of those years; the individual liveries were often themselves pretty boring – Liverpool, Manchester all red, London – but they did distinguish the operators from their neighbours. We used to admire those operators who took the trouble to continue to use a separate colour on the beading between the main colours, or apply the odd gold lining, but is this really any different from the way bits of colour are applied in today’s liveries? A post elsewhere makes the point that today’s young people will doubtless grow up with the same attitude towards the style of today as we did 50 or so years ago.
Alan Murray-Rust
06/04/13 – 07:35
Perhaps “streamlining” was an attempt to bring the new science of lowered wind resistance from planes, cars and even trains…. to the appearance of buses. We even had streamlined buildings, looking like ships. The fifties brought a new functionalism, but this, as you say, was lost on some municipalities, so intent on making a swish transition from the front of the bus to the sides… but wavy lines? I suppose it’s all a bit dorsal fin: but in 1935 that was in the future with vinyl, half tones, ads covering up windows and route branding….. at least we don’t paint the doors in fluorescent colours (much- or only the drivers?) …yet: but wait till the helfansafety experts get there.
Joe
06/04/13 – 16:45
As well as the Weymann bodied “streamline” AEC Regent in Leeds colours with a livery application very like the Sheffield one but in dark blue and turquoise Leeds also had a Roe bodied “streamline” bus at the same show. This too was painted Blue and turquoise but looked very different to the Weymann example with an almost tear drop shape and very stylised appearance. We forget today how big an impact the railways had on style at the time both LNER and LMS were starting to run streamlined locos like the Gresley Pacifics and such styling was common in both Europe and the USA.
Chris Hough
07/04/13 – 07:53
Like many of us, I also abhor the meaningless modern vinyl “imaging” on today’s buses and applaud the attempts by some 1930s operators and builders to try to make their buses look “modern”. However, I can’t think of any instances where trams had these “go faster” liveries applied. Some, of course, didn’t need them as they were superbly designed to look modern (eg. Glasgow’s Coronations, Liverpool’s Green Goddesses, etc). The master of industrial design at this time was Raymond Loewy whose US company opened an office in London in the mid-30s. Did Weymann approach them I wonder?
Paul Haywood
07/04/13 – 07:55
Joe, OK they weren’t fluorescent but LT painted entrance doors on dual door buses yellow until late 80s(?), and in the run up to the formation of WYPTE Leeds painted Atlantean 447 and Swift 1065 in an experimental “Leeds District” livery incorporating yellow entrance doors and red exit doors. The 30s streamlined liveries may not always have fitted the lives of the buses to which they were applied – but what I think makes them forgivable is that they were identifiably local/distinct, and they used strong/bold/deep colours unlike the flat and/or wishy-washy pastels used by two of the big groups today. But, picking-up on a point Alan made, I’ll stick my neck out and say that gold lining-out was just too fussy once rocker-panels had ceased to be a feature of bodywork.
Philip Rushworth
07/04/13 – 07:56
Joe Although not florescent London Transport painted entrance doors yellow for many years.
Chris Hough
07/04/13 – 09:52
Paul, I know I’m biased, but for me the mention of ‘modern-looking’ trams really has to start with the Sheffield Roberts ones.
Les Dickinson
07/04/13 – 16:54
Point taken, Les – yes, the Sheffield Roberts cars were smart indeed and I enjoyed riding on them in their final years, but for me, being four-wheelers, they lacked the majesty of the streamlined bogie cars. The whole 1930s period (before my time) fascinates me. For many, the sight of a streamlined tram or bus, or a visit to an art deco cinema, represented a vision of the future. We’ve all seen those early artists impressions of “How we will be living in twenty years” etc. where travel by monorail, gyrocopters and airships was assumed. When this bus was built, those visions would still be valid. The quest for increased speed on land, sea and air influenced designers throughout this period and this bus is a wonderful example.
Paul Haywood
07/04/13 – 16:54
I personally like the look of this bus. Did you notice the wind down windows. I only noticed these on a few Weymann AECs, (which also had a “booming” exhaust) on the 101 Arbourthorne route, climbing the very steep hill up East Bank Road, & some PD2s on the 69 route to Rotherham. The PD2s also had a complete destination & route number in the same big oblong route destination board. I have seen similar on other companies buses. They may be pre 1950s, with all Leyland bodies.
Andy Fisher
08/04/13 – 15:20
Andy, the PD2’s with the one destination box for route number and destination were the three so-called ‘stock sale’ PD2’s, that Leyland built on spec. for quick delivery to operators willing to forego their regular requirements such as standardized destination layouts in order to obtain buses quickly. The three that Sheffield managed to get, 601-3 (LWB 301-3), were put to work on the 69 service to Rotherham when it was decided not to relay the tramlines on the new road bridge at Tinsley, and thus abandoning for good the Sheffield-Rotherham tram service. The Sheffield trams ran no further than Vulcan Road after that, while the Rotherham single-enders ran only to Templeborough, and even they finished six months later, in November 1949. City, Sheffield, Templeborough and Rotherham, with the applicable route numbers, were, I think, the only destinations that the trio had on their blinds, so they were more or less route-bound to the 69 or the 169 to Templeborough. A friend has told me that apparently one of them quite often showed up to run a ‘cinema-extra’ to Nether Edge late of an evening, when the picture houses were turning out (before the days of television!) before running into the garage after working on the 69 all day, but just what it showed on the blind I’m not certain. I’ve got a photo of one of them on a stand in Castlegate showing just ‘City’ in big letters, but I don’t know what route is would have been on.
Dave Careless
09/04/13 – 06:41
And while we’re on the theme of streamlining in the 1930’s, let’s not forget those Flying Bananas on the Great Western Railway. For a railway that remained strongly wedded to steam traction, this batch of AEC (and later BUT) engined diesel railbuses had a charm and character all of their own. I know this is a bus blog, but I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself from eulogising about these splendid rail buses !
Petras409
14/05/13 – 07:57
Andy. Only the first post war Regent III/Weymanns (527 – 536) had half drop windows. The others (1947/8) had sliders. Petras409. Strictly speaking, DMUs had underframes built by BUT with engines supplied by either AEC or Leyland – and in a minority of cases Rolls Royce.
David Oldfield
14/05/13 – 17:22
BUT (British United Traction) was a joint sales organisation set up by AEC and Leyland for the purpose of supplying railway and trolleybus equipment, in order to give the companies a more realistic presence in what were quite limited markets. It was a similar arrangement to that of MCW, formed by the one-time totally independent companies of Metro-Cammell and Weymann. As far as railway equipment goes, the BUT contribution was almost invariably engines and transmissions – but these were always proprietary (or suitably modified proprietary) items, BUT never having had any manufacturing plants. The engines supplied (for use in DMUs and railbuses) were manufactured by AEC, Leyland, or (in at least one instance) Albion – itself owned by Leyland at the time. The exception to the above appears to concern early DMUs 79740-50, given as of BUT manufacture. If this is correct, the underframes and bodies must have been built somewhere (there were several likely locations within the Leyland or ACV – parent of AEC – groups). Oddly, Park Royal (itself part of ACV) supplied the bodies for some DMUs and railbuses, apparently independently of BUT. As for Rolls-Royce engined DMUs, it may be that BUT was given the task of supplying the entire driveline and itself sourced the engines from Rolls-Royce – this is the impression given by the wording of current internet descriptions of the various DMU classes. The supply of trolleybus chassis by BUT effectively continued the erstwhile AEC range, and trolleybus chassis building at Leyland was dropped. As BUT was created in 1946, and the last GWR railbuses were constructed in 1942, it could not be said that there was any BUT input to the latter. The original engines were definitely of AEC manufacture, but replacement engines fitted later may well have been considered to be BUT, rather than AEC, products, of course.
David Call
19/05/13 – 15:28
Thanks for the update on the windows & route box. I am just an observer, not really knowledgeable. Now I have taken much more interest in researching Sheffield buses, I do appreciate your knowledge on these matters. You may find some of my comments a bit silly, but it is my lack of knowledge. I also do not come online that often, so you may not get an immediate thanks from me.
Andy Fisher
21/05/13 – 15:01
Following on from your information, I had a look in my tram book. The last tram from Sheffield to Rotherham was in 1948 , so presumably, these PD2s must have been of 1948 vintage. There was another PD2 all Leyland in the book, on another route. It had normal layout destination board, but with opening front upstairs windows. Can any of you people identify it for me please? I must confess to being an AEC fan, Leylands were not local untill the 1960 tram replacement tin fronts. That is unless we visited my auntie at Southy Green. The 97 & 98. They were also all Leylands. One had rounded ended opening lights, with interior lights covered in round, fluted lightshades, really smart. The other route was standard PD2s all Leyland design. They must have been 1940s buses, as it never was a tram route, so must have always been serviced by buses. I think the estate was built just after the war. Any help in identifying these busses would be appreciated.
Andy Fisher
22/05/13 – 07:21
The PD2s with opening windows would have been 656 – 667 – 1952 all Leyland PD2/10s. The three odd PD2s were indeed 1948 and doubly strange for being standard Leyland bodies in among Faringtons.
David Oldfield
24/05/13 – 14:04
Andy Fisher – regarding the smart interior lights with round fluted covers, I assume you mean like this – in this instance fitted in the preserved Crosville AEC Regal with Strachans body (seen here at the 2010 Kingsbridge running day). This sort of light fitting was also virtually universal on Trent’s many Willowbrook bodied double deckers.
Stephen Ford
25/05/13 – 08:26
In the main the engines supplied by BUT to power BR’s DMUs were horizontal versions of the AEC A221 of 11.3 litres or the Leyland 0680 of 11.1 litres. The transmission consisted of a fluid flywheel and a four speed Wilson epicyclic gearbox. These were very much ‘bus engineering’. It’s not true to say that the formation of BUT as a marketing organisation for trolleybuses saw the end of Leyland based trolleybuses. Whilst the majority of home market trolleybuses were based on AEC designs that were closely allied to the contemporary Regent bus chassis (the six wheel BUT used the front end of the Regent Three in conjunction with an updated version of rear end of the pre-war 664T), Glasgow did receive single deck trolleybuses based on, I believe, the Royal Tiger chassis or its Worldmaster equivalent.
Michael Elliott
25/05/13 – 17:15
Thanks for the info guys. Yes Stephen those lightshades were indeed the ones I remember.
Andrew Fisher
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
13/10/15 – 06:11
With regard to the Petre Street routes 34 and 35, these originally were Nos. 17 and 10 just post war. Incidentally, Petre Street was/is pronounced ‘Peter’ by locals ! ‘Hunsley Street’was also featured on the destinations. The terminus at the Wesleyan Chapel was of interest due to the alleyway by the side of the stop having an ancient water pump on it, painted green if memory serves me right. The tramway these routes replaced terminated at Petre St./Carwood Road, around half a mile or so before the Wesleyan Chapel bus terminus. There was a fatal accident outside the Ellesmere Road school in the 50’s when a man threw himself under a city bound Regent III (I seem to remember that it was 567 ?)
Sheffield Corporation 1937 AEC Regent I Weymann H55R
Quite a few of Sheffield’s Regent 1 intake of 1937/8 with both original and rebuilt bodies survived up to around 1960 with the majority being withdrawn in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s. One such survivor was No. 27 registration DWB 27, a Weymann bodied H55R example. This machine was new in 1937 and survived until 1958 in original form. To achieve 21 years in normal service in Sheffield’s hilly terrain was no mean feat and unsurprisingly at the time of withdrawal, 27 was one of Sheffield’s oldest service buses albeit probably mainly used on peak time extras and school runs in later life.
Copyright John Darwent
More Regent 1 examples of a somewhat more modest lifespan were No. 357 registration EWB 657 and 353 registration EWB 653 both of 1938 vintage with Cravens H55R bodywork pictured here in 1953 at Sheffield Midland Station between duties. I am unsure whether 353 had been modernised in some way as there is a difference in appearance between the vehicles and I have another image of 353 showing sliding toplights on both decks of a later era than the drop down windows of other Cravens vehicles of the batch.
Photograph and Copy contributed by John Darwent
21/08/14 – 09:08
With the exception of the war-time Corporation (Queens Road) bodied Regents, these were the only pre-war Regents not bodied by Weymann. I was eight in 1960 but do not remember seeing any pre-war AECs in service – apart, possibly, from the Roe re-bodies. 657 is a Cravens in original condition, 653 at the very least has a modified front if not totally rebuilt. This area in front of Midland Station was until the early 1950s used by C fleet routes (out of town) and possibly some B fleet as well. Buses awaiting service were parked, like 653 and 657, against the pavement which divided the area from the road.
David Oldfield
21/08/14 – 10:57
Lovely photos of the Regent I which always make my heart beat a little faster! Why is there a space fillet between body and rad on 27? Was a slightly shorter body fitted later or what? I imagine it wasn’t re-engined with a Gardner 6LW engine!!! Photo 2 shows the typical unmatching front wings, so prevalent at this time! I also notice that the matching height headlamps lf 353 do not apply to 657.
Chris Hebbron
21/08/14 – 12:45
Sheffield continued to specify the 8.8 litre engines after the “7.7” had become standard. Maybe this explains the space fillet.
David Oldfield
21/08/14 – 15:28
Copyright Unknown
I think the radiator fillet was a general feature on all the Regent 1’s Chris, even the Roe rebuilds.
John Darwent
22/08/14 – 06:42
The extended bonnet as seen on these Sheffield Regents was standard for the 8.8 litre engine. This originally was the A165 indirect injection unit, but later, under pressure from the LPTB, became the A180 direct injection motor with Leyland style pot cavity pistons. The 6LW was even longer than the AEC 8.8, as may be seen on pictures of the London LT types and Huddersfield Regals so fitted. I suspect that the Sheffield examples were of the 8.8 indirect injection variety. Incidentally, I am intrigued by the picture of the two Regents parked side by side. How on earth did the driver of EWB 653 get out of the cab?
Roger Cox
22/08/14 – 08:20
Aye, there’s a bit of Sheffield black magic there, Roger. The Roe re-build bodies replaced Cravens bodies – which were, I would guess, of suspect build quality. This might also explain the modification/rebuild of 653.
David Oldfield
22/08/14 – 18:11
Good point re the driver’s door Roger. I have examined the original photo taken with my highly unsophisticated Brownie 127 way back when and there is no trickery. Another photo of 353 reveals an ordinary opening door – no sliding conversion – of course, if the cab had similar characteristics to my old Austin Mini, then the driver could have exited through the floorpan!
John Darwent
22/08/14 – 18:11
Well, either he got out before EWB657 reversed into place (people sometimes do that to me in supermarket car parks!) – or, to misquote the famous Yorkshire tale, “Ee, ‘e were thin!”
Stephen Ford
23/08/14 – 16:32
Copyright Unknown
Here’s an eclectic selection of Sheffield Corporation gems dominated by Regent 1’s, seen on the Pond Street bus park in the early 50’s. Featuring; 306 – 1938 Regent 1/Weymann CWJ 406 471 – 1941 Regent 1/Northern Counties HWA 51 496 – 1944 Daimler CWA6/Duple 4 – 1938 All Leyland TD5c EWJ 304 438 – 1940 Regent 1/Weymann GWE 658 474 – 1942 All Leyland TD7 HWA 384
John Darwent
29/08/14 – 15:25
I used to live by Brammall Lane, but went to school at Anns Rd. Heeley. To go to school I had a choice of 33 Hemsworth, (Regent 3 Cravens bodywork), 34 Graves Park, (Regent 3 Northern Coachbuilders), 35 Hollythorpe Rise, (Regent 3 Weymann). All had pre selector gearbox. However, there was a duplicate route 36 to Heeley Green. This was the original route of 1913, extended to Graves Park in 1926. You could have single, double decker’s or lowdeckers, pre or post war. It did not have a destination name, as these were all removed in WW2, & after that, there was no such route. The reason I loved this route so much, was it had to make a steep hill start at Anns Road stop. If it was not a pre selector box but a crash box, I would stay on the bus to Heeley Green. They would set off in 1st, but by the time they engaged 2nd,the bus had come to a stop. They then repeated the process many times to get to the top of the hill. I chuckled inside, many of the conductors also, as the driver got more & more frustrated. It made me late for school. Of course I blamed the buses for making me late, but it was worth it. Would someone explain how the pre selector box works please?
Brighton Corporation 1939 AEC Regent I Weymann H56R
FUF 63 is an AEC Regent I of the O661 variety, built in 1939. She is at Dunsfold on one of the occasions the Wisley event wasn’t at Wisley, on 10 April 2011. The second view is a close-up of the fleetname and Municipal Crest. I have memories of reading – many years go and probably in Buses magazine when it was still called Buses Illustrated – that the arrangement shown results from an agreement between these two local operators, but not Southdown, whereby the buses and trolleybuses run by the Corporation and by Brighton Hove and District had the same livery and fleetname. The distinguishing feature for most people was that the Corporation vehicles carried the Crest as well. I suppose they had different ‘legal lettering’. Histories of the Borough of Hove I have seen suggest there was some jealousy there, because Brighton was elevated to the status of a County Borough, while Hove – seen as more genteel – was not, and had to keep East Sussex registrations while Brighton was allocated its own. “So you live in Brighton?” and the response “No, I live in Hove, actually.” seems to stem from this and some sources attribute it to Lord Olivier who did live in Brighton. A former colleague went to work for one of the Sussex Councils, and moved to Royal Crescent, Brighton. Lord Olivier lived next door on one side, and Dora Bryan lived on the other side. The Titan 23 ACD next to 63 is a 1963 PD2/37 with a Weymann H37/27F body and was fleetnumber 23.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
05/11/15 – 06:41
What is most striking is how route information has been reduced over the years, especially important in a town with so many visitors. Bus operators should remember the old saying, ‘If you can’t tell, you can’t sell!’
David Wragg
05/11/15 – 16:49
Yes, David, I suppose there is ‘some’ improvement recently with the scrolling dot matrix display, but it’s still nothing like the London style or that shown on 63.
Pete Davies
06/11/15 – 07:05
But the London style is now just a single line display showing the destination.
Geoff Kerr
09/11/15 – 06:45
Of significance is that 23 ACD was the first double-decker operated as an OMO bus.
Dale Tringham
09/11/15 – 08:53
Ah, Dale! I bought some slides from your collection some years ago. Thank you for that piece of information. Was 23 “the first” in UK bus operations generally, or Brighton’s first?
Pete Davies
12/11/15 – 12:00
Brighton Corporation obtained a statutory dispensation enabling them to work this Titan driver -only in advance of general legalisation of double deck driver operation. Great Yarmouth waited until the law changed to operate their PDR1/2s driver only, and were the second.
Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.
Devon General 1950 AEC Regal III Weymann B35F
It is amazing how many buses after serving their time as public service vehicles were bought by private companies as staff transport vehicles. I have quite a few and I will title them by their original owner but they will also be categorised under “Staff Transport” as well, thus giving another individual section of vehicles on the website. If you have any shots of staff transport vehicles send them along, if you don’t know the history no problem it can go on the “Do You Know” page first I am sure somebody will know. One of the problems with staff vehicles is that they just served a purpose of transporting workers, and their appearance really didn’t matter, hence in this case the overall single colour which makes it look rather drab. But if you ignore that you can see the lower body panels giving the Weymann flared skirt body and the distance between the windscreen and the top of the radiator which makes it look older than it really was. You can also see that the passenger doors closed inside the body at the top of the stairs rather than the bottom flush with the body panels. A sister vehicle to the one above was sold on to an independent bus operator, when I am reunited with my old copies of Buses Illustrated I will add the details, all I can remember at the moment is that it was in a small market town and seemed to be an all white livery.
27/02/12 – 13:53
Oh how this photo takes me back to 1964 when I was 10. I remember traveling on Devon General A E C Regents from Buckfastleigh to Newton Abbot. I spent almost 2 years in Hapstead House a home for sick children on the edge of Dartmoor, I still have that unique engine sound in my head of the A E C Regent, thank you for reminding me !
Frank Saint Clair
28/02/12 – 08:03
May I also share memories of seeing these operating in Dawlish during 1955 when my parents and I were staying in my Aunt’s house on Haldon Moor. We used to walk down from the Moor in the mornings but my Aunt refused to walk back so we caught the bus each evening. In 1956 we bought a caravan in Shaldon, near Teignmouth and I clearly recall seeing several Devon General vehicles parked in a small square/stand. Sadly, being only 7/8 years old I didn’t have a camera and have never seen any pictures of the scene since. It’s a place on my list to return to. Have any of these DG AEC’s survived into preservation please?
Richard Leaman
29/02/12 – 17:23
Yes Richard one of the Regals survives there was a recent (2011) picture in a recent issue of Buses magazine
Chris Hough
25/08/19 – 07:47
Browsing again, I came across a photo of this vehicle taken at Newton Abbot bus station in rather better paint condition on 23/9/1961. I had been on a day trip to Buckfast Abbey (by car). These vehicles always looked to be giving everyone a severe frown!
Geoff Pullin
26/08/19 – 07:00
Buckfast Abbey … memories not of Diesel smells but treacle tart!
British Rail ran a staff bus between Sheffield Midland Station and Tinsley Marshalling Yard and at various times used this ex Mansfield District bus (fleet number 15), similar KRR 264 and KRB 88 which was an ex Midland General Leyland PS1 with a similar body. All ran in the colours of their previous owners. Later the work was contracted to Chesterfield Corporation who used one of their fleet of AEC Reliances to cover the duties. One of Sheffield’s 1957 Regent V/Weymann is behind, laying over at the terminus of service 60 to Crimicar Lane. This service had been extended from its former Leopold Street terminus in the City Centre to provide a useful link to the Midland Station. In the background one of the 1960 Alexander bodied Regent V is about to turn left into Pond Street Bus Station.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild
11/05/11 – 15:37
Fascinating. Was a regular user of the 60 between Crimicar Lane and Midland Station – especially on the said Regent Vs. Was never aware of – and therefore never saw – the British Rail staff buses of any description. PS1 would have been 1946 onward but Regal III would have been 1947 onward. Other than that, I’m no help at all with the date.
David Oldfield
11/05/11 – 19:32
Not a terribly helpful comment, but I believe C T Humpidge was responsible for the blacking out of the cross pieces on the destination indicators as seen on the AEC Regent V and he took up post following R C Moore’s retirement in May 1961.
John Darwent
12/05/11 – 07:00
Yet another fascinating Sheffield picture. In tram days, there had been additional cars on the Walkley section of the main cross-city route to Intake running between Walkley and the Midland Station, quaintly showing ‘LMS STATION’ on their blinds. When the buses took over from the trams on 8th April, 1956, the new 95 bus service was extended at the Walkley end from the old tram terminus along to Tinker Lane, and additional buses were put on between Elm Tree at the Intake end and Walkley (South Road) where the trams had terminated, but the connection to the Midland Station was severed. To reinstate that link between the railway station and the city centre, and no doubt to the delight of Fulwood passengers who up until this time had managed to get only as far into the city centre as Leopold Street, alternate journeys on the route 60 Fulwood were extended from Barker’s Pool down High Street and Commercial Street to the Midland Station. Imagine getting off your train to be greeted by just such a sight as this one, of a splendidly turned out AEC Regent V waiting on the station forecourt. The heyday of the bus, indeed.
Dave Careless
12/05/11 – 07:03
Ah what beautiful vehicles! There were 25 PS1’s new to Midland General in 1948 and 24 Regal III’s new to Mansfield District in 1949. The bodies were similar but the PS1’s were bodied by Saunders, withdrawal of these started in 1962 and was completed in 1964, Two went to British Rail, KRB 87/88 in 5/64 and 4/63 respectively. About a dozen of the Regals were transferred to Midland General in 1958 and whilst MDT began to withdraw their remaining ones in 1962, MGO kept their acquisitions until 1967, just short of 20 years service. They usually worked out of Alfreton garage on MGO’s ‘rural’ services E2,E3,E4 and E5 between Alfreton and Matlock, routes with some very steep hills, but their 9.6 litre engines could out-perform the later LS’s and MW’s any day! I remember being taken to Matlock on summer Sundays and I loved to travel on these, which were always kept in beautiful condition. On arrival at Matlock Bus Station, they kept company with Silver Service’s wonderful vehicles and North Western’s Bristol K’s. Matlock was a great place to visit then! Fortunately, one of the Regals, KRR 255 is preserved and I believe it usually resides at the Midland Railway Centre, Butterley, Derbyshire.
Chris Barker
12/05/11 – 07:05
The KRR Regal IIIs were new in 1949. KRR 255 is preserved and active.
Peter Williamson
26/10/11 – 10:45
After service with British Rail KRR 261 went to Sykes a dealer at Worsborough Dale South Yorkshire. Does anybody know if this dealer is still trading?
Gren
01/12/12 – 15:53
Am I right that Paul Sykes of Sykes is the same Paul Sykes who developed the giant Meadowhall mall in Sheffield & other ventures, one of the richest men in England? He probably doesn’t need to strip buses much now, but is the company or yard still going?
Joe
09/06/14 – 06:55
British Rail in 1949? oh no! Please gentlemen, surely it could only have been British RailWAYS ? Unfortunately that error seems to be perpetuated by most of the present day railway and model railway press. Despite that pedantic comment on my part, I have to say that I find this to be a marvellous site which I visit regularly. Thanks to all involved
JOJ184
09/06/14 – 11:09
JOJ184, I’m afraid you are making the same error as those you are complaining about. There is nothing pedantic about accuracy and you are being accurate. Far too many people, particularly those working for various media, who claim great education, research and gravitas, daily project errors onto the airwaves, into print and on line. Given their standing and the widespread unthinking acceptance by the public of what they read and hear, especially from rolling news and internet sites such as Wikipedia, historians and researchers of future generations are going to have their work cut out to reach the truth. Rant over!
Phil Blinkhorn
10/06/14 – 07:56
I’m not sure that anyone is being accurate actually. 1949 is the year the bus was new. The date it was photographed with BR is as yet unknown. It would be helpful if someone could post the date on which BR changed its name, then we might have a firmer basis for saying which name should be used.
Peter Williamson
10/06/14 – 07:57
Phil, whilst wholeheartedly agreeing with your comments above I think JOJ184 has misinterpreted the heading caption to the photo. While it is somewhat misleadingly put as British Rail 1949, the year is actually referring to the AEC Regal III/Weymann build date. If you look closely at the side of the bus it is sporting the double arrow logo of British Rail and would have been taken sometime after 1965 hence on this occasion British Rail is the correct terminology. Strange how the board was still known as “The British Railways Board” long after the name British Rail came into use.
If I recall the British Railways rebranding took place around 1965 and included the change of name, the both ways logo and a typeface- Rail Alphabet. This justified a memorable edition of Design Magazine. It was a major step forward- clear and attractive. Apart from London Transport and its successors I’m not sure if any other combination of transport providers has ever done anything like this: logos have been generally messy, undistinguished or unnoticed and liveries- shall we say- lacking in design coherence and simplicity. Some, like SYPTE’s red and yellow or Lincolnshire RC / YTC’s purple and yellow were just awful.
Joe
10/06/14 – 07:59
For the record, JOJ184, British Railways changed its trading name to British Rail in 1965. So none of this thread would include WAYS!!
Chris Hebbron
10/06/14 – 08:02
Wasn’t the Sheffield Midland-Tinsley staff shuttle worked subsequently by SUT (using East Midland buses on summer Saturdays, when all SUT’s coaches would be in demand), and then by Booth & Fisher? I imagine the need for the contract came to an end when BR realised just what a white elephant Tinsley marshalling yard was. And I’m sorry to be a pedant here: but, Phil and JOJ184, the British Rail reference is correct as the picture must date from after the British Rail corporate launch in 1965 . . . as the bus is clearly sporting the BR double arrows.
Philip Rushworth
10/06/14 – 08:03
I’ve answered my own question. Wikipedia says that British Railways traded as British Rail from 1965. My copy of BBF5 is dated April 1965 and shows KRR 261 still with Mansfield District. Therefore the photograph must have been taken in 1965 or later, so that “British Rail” is probably correct.
Peter Williamson
10/06/14 – 15:56
The point about the discrepancy between the date of the bus being built and the date of the photo is well made, as is the fact that the vehicle bears the British Rail logo, dating the picture to 1965 or later. With regard to the British Railways Board and the British Rail name, Peter Williamson has it spot on. British Rail was a trading and marketing name so, had this been a non nationalised company it would have been listed at Companies House as British Railways t/a British Rail.
Phil Blinkhorn
10/06/14 – 15:57
Paul Sykes the bus scrapper is also Paul Sykes the builder of Meadowhall and now chief backer of UKIP
Chris Hough
11/06/14 – 07:48
“British Rail” may be chronologically correct for the photograph, but it is still grammatically gormless. I still resent the term “Rail Station” which, to me, indicates a repository for bulk steel strips, not a boarding and alighting point on a particular mode of transport. Would Gerard Fiennes, if writing today, entitle his book, ‘I Tried To Run A Rail’? I can just about accept “Train Station”, which is compatible with “Bus Station”, but the correct term for the transport infrastructure is ‘Railway’, whatever the marketing morons would wish to thrust upon us. (Dr Johnson is dead; long live Dr Johnson.)
Roger Cox
11/06/14 – 07:50
For clarification, I took the photo on 10th February 1968 hence well into British Rail days
Ian Wild
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
24/02/15 – 15:02
EFE produced a model of an AEC Regal in British Railways livery. It has the registration HKL 842 (Sheffield?) and the code 851-SOM on the sides. Does anyone have any information about this vehicle?
Ian Rawstron
25/02/15 – 06:04
HKL would be a Kent registration Ian.
John Darwent
25/02/15 – 06:05
If you look at: //www.classicbuses.co.uk/mdreg.html and scroll down a bit there is a detailed history of the whole batch with a couple of photographs. It was new to Maidstone & District.
Midland General Omnibus Company 1949 AEC Regal III 9621E Weymann DP35F
A classic combination of AEC Regal III and Weymann body. Chassis number 9621E481 was combined with a 35-seat front-entrance Weymann body, M4122, and appropriate seating to allow dual-purpose use. Worthy of note is the ‘MGO’ badge replacing the more usual AEC triangle and also the additional chrome-work of which Midland General were so fond. For me, the blue and cream livery was enhanced by this additional, but tasteful adornment. This superb vehicle was caught at Showbus 2016.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson
03/11/16 – 07:11
This Regal was one of a batch of twelve 174-185 with Midland General all of which were transferred from Mansfield & District in 1958. So it would have originally been in a Green and Cream livery and may of had a MDT badge on the grill and was fleet number 9, not sure if the chrome work is original or added by Midland General at a later date.
M A
03/11/16 – 14:49
There were some Leyland PS1s with similar bodywork placed in service by Crosville Motor Services which were diverted from Midland General. They have the same style of chrome work and more of it on the side panels. Photographs to compare may be seen on the SCT’61 website: //www.sct61.org.uk/index/operator/cv Photo 30 shows preserved LFM 302. Photo 31 of LFM 303 in quite a battered state after Crosville had sold it to a contractor.
David Slater
08/11/16 – 16:12
Mention is made of the MGO radiator badge in the picture of KRR 255. I attach an image of such a badge, as the picture does not show it off very well.
Sheffield Corporation 1948 AEC Regal I Weymann B34R
A few early post war Sheffield single deckers found their way to Contractors on withdrawal and this example is with H Camm. It is seen on the car park near Pond Street Bus Station in 1963. The bus would have been a regular performer on Peak District services during its Sheffield career, particularly on the 37 to Bakewell and the 84 to Buxton as it was a C fleet bus.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild
09/03/16 – 15:23
I’m surprised not to have seen a comment yet on this fine vehicle, so here goes! This AEC demonstrates that the designers of a really good-looking vehicle put function in very first place, but also let a good eye dictate the details, all of which they’ve achieved to perfection. Interesting that this posting comes so soon after Roger Cox’s unearthing of that poor Austin K3 with its April Fool Nightmare “coachwork”—which I hope one day turns out not to be by Bush and Twiddy. I’ve always found buses far more interesting than coaches simply because there’s so much less scope for “stylists” to let their imagination run riot on a vehicle that has to meet as many demanding criteria as a service bus must.
Ian Thompson
15/03/16 – 06:22
Yes Ian and Ian, splendid buses that stir childhood memories for me on the Bakewell 40 via Calver Sough and 84 Buxton. Living at Ecclesall, as a small child I was occasionally treated to a trip to Bakewell with my mother and of course the favoured seat would be at the front behind the engine and the heater.
As far as I can remember, this batch buses had the whopping Clayton Heaters affixed to the bulkhead but I may be wrong as I don’t remember any other post-war buses carrying these heaters.
John Darwent
17/03/16 – 05:08
I think most if not all early post war single deckers for Sheffield JOC (B&C fleets) had the Clayton bulkhead heater fitted. I too travelled on these to Buxton and Bakewell and on similar PS1/PS2 on the Manchester services. Do you remember this type of bus being fitted with rear wheel chains to cope with snowy weather? They made one hell of a noise on Ecclesall Road.
Ian Wild
26/03/16 – 05:05
As a teenager in the mid 60’s I made the trip from Denton (east of Manchester) to Sheffield on the 39. A leisurely ride including a break at the Snake Inn. I was always fascinated by the blind which showed “Sheffield via Ashopton” but I could never work out where was Ashopton. It was only some time later that I discovered that Ashopton together with Derwent were drowned villages and lay at the bottom of the Ladybower reservoirs but nobody had bothered to update the destination blinds. I note Ian Wild’s comment that PS1/PS2 were used on the Manchester services: I am sure that the bus I rode on that day was an AEC because the radiator caught my attention. There were no AECs in the part of Manchester where I lived at that time. Could it have been a one-off allocation I wonder?
David Revis
27/03/16 – 16:35
David, I suspect that your memory serves you well. In some personal memories of Dennis E Vickers, a former Sheffield bus operator and enthusiast, he well remembers one of his first journeys over The Snake (Route 39) on an ageing Sheffield 1947 AEC Regal 1, sitting behind the large circular heater on the front bulkhead of the rear entrance half-cab saloon as it whined and rattled over the moors.
John Darwent
29/03/16 – 07:01
Hello John, thank you for your confirmation that AEC’s did work the 39. The photo at the head of this thread is definitely the type I rode in. It would be good if someone could provide a photo of this type in Sheffield colours…..please. I did make an error in my original post: it was the mid 50’s and not the mid 60’s when I made that trip. Sheffield still had trams running then Are the personal memories by Dennis Vickers in book form or can they be accessed on the internet?
David Revis
02/04/16 – 07:05
Copyright Unknown
Here’s a picture of a couple of Sheffield’s Regals David. As far as the memories are concerned, they are neither in book form nor on the net unfortunately. They were a short article in an amateur periodical of a local enthusiasts society many years ago. If you will let me have an email address, I will happily send you a scan of the rather faded ‘remains’ of the article.
John Darwent
03/04/16 – 07:32
A very interesting Sheffield 54 ex demo AEC.
Ken Wragg
04/04/16 – 06:39
John, Many thanks for digging out the photo: it is much appreciated. It also confirms my boyhood opinion that even in 1957 (I think) they looked so old fashioned.
Ken, an interesting photo indeed. It looks as if it’s a half-canopy front; would that have been unique to Sheffield I wonder?
David Revis
05/04/16 – 06:45
I have no idea whether this bus is a half canopy or not it is a photo from my great uncle Frank Brindley a freelance press photographer who took a lot of bad weather photos all I know is this bus was a AEC demo bus.
Ken Wragg
08/04/16 – 06:21
Photo Courtesy of the Tom Robinson Collection
Quite right David, Sheffield’s Weymann/Regal 1 No. 54 was indeed a half-canopy front and as such was unique in the Sheffield fleet. The late Charles Hall FCIT in his Sheffield Transport ‘bible’ stated that this was a demonstrator ‘on loan’ from January 1940 until brought into the fleet in December of that year as number 54. It was believed to have been at the last Pre-War Commercial Motor Show. 54 was apparently a well-liked and reliable vehicle, lasting until 1955 in service before being converted into a canteen bus with withdrawal coming in January 1961.
Maidstone & District Motor Services Ltd 1945 Bristol K6A Weymann H30/26R
In the years before the BAT-Tilling rift in 1942, the Maidstone & District company developed quite a liking for the Bristol double deck chassis. Initially, the GO5G type was tried, 12 going to the main fleet and 4 to the Chatham & District subsidiary in 1936. They did not impress. The bodies were removed in 1938 and the chassis were sold on to Bristol Tramways. Despite this inauspicious start, Chatham & District then took 41 with highbridge bodies and Maidstone & District 12 with lowbridge bodies of the new K5G type from the end of 1938 up to the outbreak of war in September 1939. When Tilling and BET split, Tilling group fleets retained the policy of standardising on Bristol/ECW machinery, whilst the BET companies sourced their vehicles from various manufacturers. However, the exigencies of wartime production did not grant the indulgence of much choice in such matters and operators largely had to take what they were given, though the Tilling companies preferred to minimise their intake of non Bristol double deck machinery. Nevertheless, Chatham and District managed to obtain 5 and Maidstone & District 7 examples of the total of 85 unfrozen K5G buses produced in 1942. Towards the end of the war, matters were relaxed to a certain degree, and, within the limitations on offer, operators were able to express a preference for the model that best fitted into the fleet profile, though this was not always heeded by the authorities. During and immediately after the war, the Bristol concern produced a limited number of utility K type buses in three sanctions, but these lost the 5LW engine in favour of the 6 cylinder AEC A202, a version of the 7.7 (actually of 7.58 litres) specifically designed to fit in place of the Gardner. The W1 sanction consisted of 150 chassis, the W2 of 100, and W3 of 200. The W1 and W2 sanctions were equipped with the earlier style of high mounted radiator, but the W3 buses had the new lower mounted PV2 bonnet and radiator. Maidstone and District became an enthusiastic operator, accepting 30 of W1, 19 of W2 and 5 of W3. After the war, Maidstone and District continued to take deliveries of the K6A until the sale of the Bristol company to the government led to the withdrawal of that make from the open market. In recognition of the qualities of the Bristol chassis, Maidstone & District embarked upon a rebodying programme for the unfrozen K5G and utility K6A fleet, but the pre war examples were sold out of service in the mid 1950s. The rebodied K5Gs retained their high mounted radiators, but the rebodied W1 and W2 sanctions of K6As were fitted with the low mounted PV2 radiator. In most cases, new H30/26R bodywork of very attractive design was supplied by Weymann, but the later rebuilds received the decidedly less appealing Orion type. Curiously, many of the later buses of 1946/7/8, which retained their original bodywork to the end, were sold out of service earlier than the rebodied wartime machines. The photograph above shows chassis number W2.038, DH 152, HKE 860 of 1945 with a PV2 radiator and Weymann H30/26R body that replaced the original high radiator and Duple H30/26R in May 1953. It is seen in Tonbridge in 1960 on its way to the village of East Peckham, once a major centre of the hop growing industry. This bus stayed in the Maidstone and District fleet until 1966.
Sadly the limitations of the Comet S camera lens prevent me from identifying the splendid car following the bus.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
16/03/15 – 06:50
What a fantastic shot. The long since built over Tonbridge Garage had several examples of these old Bristols which seemed to have been used to cover just about anything (at Tunbridge Wells they had distinct allocations). Route 88 was allocated OMO Reliances and provided a useful connection to the nearest major hospital at Pembery, and connected with route 33 at the East Peckham end of the route. On the offside is the road taken by Tonbridges regular Bristol allocation, Route 100, a 20 minute frequency town service with LL6A single deckers.
Patrick Armstrong
17/03/15 – 16:51
Wonderful-looking decker, and I bet the reality was just as good as the appearance. I was momentarily fooled by the “East Peckham” destination and imagined that the bus was on hire to London Transport, but somehow the landscape seemed not to bear that out, so I googled E. Peckham and found it just to the west of the Paddock Wood–Maidstone railway line—the very line I hope to use to get to the SE Bus Festival on the 28th of March. Has any of our members been to this event, and if so how d’you rate it? The list of vehicles expected to attend looks very impressive. Last time I went to Maidstone was to see the trolleybuses before they disappeared, so I’m a bit out of date.
Ian T
18/03/15 – 07:01
Lovely photo and attractive bus. It was a very sensible conversion job by M&D. However, it always looks odd to me to see Bristol K’s without ECW bodies!
Chris Hebbron
18/03/15 – 07:02
There can’t have been a world of difference between the Bristol K6A and the AEC Regent II. Presumably the Bristol gearbox and transmission produced a somewhat different sound but surely the performance would have been similar? Is there anyone who has experience of driving both?
Chris Barker
19/03/15 – 07:18
Ian T: IMO, the South East Bus Festival is definitely worth attending. The site is huge and features a perimeter road used by some of the vehicles to give rides to the public. The vehicles are not jammed in lines and there are good photographic opportunities. There is spacious covered accommodation for sales stalls and displays such as models, slide shows and there are talks by professional busmen – Roger Davies of Classic Bus fame has appeared, for example. Plenty of other vehicles such as lorries, tractors and classic cars are also on display. You can find a list of bus entries on the Arriva website and will see sister vehicle HKE 867 has been entered. It usually is on the free rides circuit so you should be able to sample it! One last bit of advice – wear warm clothing and bring your own refreshments! The site is on the top of the North Downs and can be breezy.
Malcolm Boyland
21/03/15 – 07:03
I would also agree that the South East Bus Festival is worth attending. Where else can you have a ride on a pre-war Leyland Titan and the latest hybrid?
Nigel Turner
21/03/15 – 15:44
Malcolm and Nigel: many thanks for you info and advice. The event sounds too good to miss. Chris B: I’ve never driven a K6A but I’ve been lucky enough to ride the very lively Thames Valley 446 (DBL 154). Bus engineer pal Graham Green of Reading reckons that the AEC 7.7 goes better in other makers’ vehicles than it does in AEC’s own. I’m sure the 5-speed gearbox in the Thames Valley K6A reinforces that impression. How does the Daimler CWA6 compare with the CWD6? My guess is that the Daimler engine’s 13% greater capacity gives little advantage in performance.
Ian T
22/03/15 – 06:43
There is a (very) short video of the sound of a restored Lincolnshire K6A at this site (scroll to the bottom):- www.lvvs.org.uk/dbe187.htm The engine was rigidly mounted in both the K6A and the Regent II, but the mellow sounding Bristol constant mesh gearbox contrasted with the scream of the AEC straight cut gear D124 crash gearbox. Both types employed the triple servo braking system, and both, again, were noted for relatively light steering characteristics. The Daimler CD6 had a capacity of 8.6 litres and a nominal output of 100bhp at 1750 rpm, but the quality varied greatly between individual examples. Like the contemporary and even more problematical Crossley HOE7 engine of identical bore and stroke (copied from the pre war Leyland unit), it performed best in single deck chassis. However, OBP does have an expert who can give an informed opinion of the Daimler engine from personal experience. Please step forward Chris Youhill.
Roger Cox
22/03/15 – 06:43
Very interesting piece particularly as I once owned an ex Hants & Dorset 1945 K6A open topper fitted with an AEC engine (see my description under ‘Hants & Dorset 1945 Bristol K6A‘). By the way, the touring car following the bus is almost certainly a Riley Nine from the early to mid 1930’s.
John Barringer
22/03/15 – 09:20
I am sure that you are right about the Riley, John. On the first Sunday in October each year I travel down from East Anglia to the old Croydon Airport building for an ATC reunion. A fellow “old cadet” brings his splendid open tourer Riley Nine in British Racing Green. I plan to get one when I win the Lottery – not this week, sadly (can you believe that the same thing happened last week as well?!).
Roger Cox
22/03/15 – 14:25
Well done, John B, for identifying the car as a Riley Nine – my frustrations are over! There was always something special (and quirky) about Rileys, before the advent of ‘badge engineering’! Roger C – I’ve said before that I grew up in the Morden that was LTE’s Daimlerland post-war. I recall that on the front inside of the driver’s cab above the windscreen of D140 was the chalk message, “D140, the fastest D of them all”. It was one of the dozen CWD’s in the 281-strong fleet. You could always tell the CWD’s from the CWA’s, because the inspection holes in the bonnet-sides of each type were in a different place. So there might have been some extra performance with them. Of course, any advantage disappeared when the engines were replaced by more driver/maintenance-friendly ex-STL AEC engines, around 1950!
Chris Hebbron
23/03/15 – 07:08
Doncaster had some K6A’s and CVD6’s of similar post-war -1948- vintage. The Bristols seemed confined to the straight up and down former tram Highfields route whilst the Daimlers went further and served the more varied and longer Skellow routes. I am prompted to note this because Roger reminded me of the agonised sound of the AEC gearbox and the impression of great revs in a short time on starting off, without any great forward progress. The Daimlers on the other hand seemed much more refined and even speedy: unfortunately their smell of hot diesel at rest, especially with the special cooling device (engine side panel resting on mudguard) in use cannot be replicated on this site- roll on smellerama…
Joe
25/03/15 – 16:25
Just a note about the car identified above. It is a 1929/30 Riley Model 9 Tourer as you have recalled. It is an early car and is a desirable “Eligible” car for Vintage Sports Car Club membership events. In good condition they are a delight to drive as was/is my 1937 12/4 Falcon version!
Richard Leaman
10/10/18 – 05:15
What is also interesting is the different styles of Weymann body fitted. The post war KKK Bristols (apart from one) had what was the post war equivalent of the pre war five bay Weymann body (similar to the LT post war STLs). Some of the HKE rebodyings had the same style. There then followed the 1951/2 version (as above) which had deeper windows. This style was also fitted to the rebodied Guys (again except one) and Daimlers as well as the high radiator Chatham Traction K5Gs. There then followed the 1953 four bay style (as exemplified by the preserved K6A) and then finally the Orion. The last two body styles were only fitted to the low radiator Bristol K6As. The LKT lowbridge Bristol K6As also had a lowbridge version of this style of bodywork fitted from new. All the vehicles were 7 foot 6 inches wide requiring a special narrow version of the Orion body.
