Leyland National
Jules
The sucess of the National.
------------------------------------------
I am interested in thoughts and views on:
i) Passengers viewpoint
ii) Mechanic and Enginers viewpoint
iii) Commercial sucess / impact
iv) Preservation prospects
v) How you rate it against the competition
Please fell free to post your views on any or all of these subjects! The
more the merrier! Thanks!
-----
Jules
Bill Hayles
Jules <jul...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:01bea3b5$4b964560$LocalHost@default...
>Here's something for discussion:
>
>The sucess of the National.
>------------------------------------------
>
>I am interested in thoughts and views on:
(List snipped)
What about Driver´s viewpoint?
I clearly remember morale at London Country (where I was working) in about
1973 being at rock bottom. The most reliable single deckers we had were the
RFs, over 20 years old and being flogged to death. Everything supplied in
the previous 10 years had proved to be a load of absolute c**p.
By 1977, the arrival of hundreds of Leyland Nationals had turned the company
round, from an operational point of view, if not a financial one. The
Leyland National was comfortable, manoeuverable, pleasant to drive and
reliable. Drivers had confidence in it.
>i) Passengers viewpoint
The windows were too high, and so short people and children couldn´t see
out. The seats were basic. On the plus side, the heating system worked,
and they turned up (i.e. didn´t fail).
>ii) Mechanic and Enginers viewpoint
Can´t comment directly, but once they got used to them, our engineers liked
them and appreciated the standardisation.
>iii) Commercial sucess / impact
Without them, I doubt London Country would have survived. What other
vehicle, apart from the RF, was equally at home working a 404 through the
lanes to Ide Hill and a 704 to Windsor? What other vehicle could leave the
garage in the morning in confident expectation of returning that night
without the assistance of a tow truck?
>iv) Preservation prospects
Not in a position to comment.
>v) How you rate it against the competition
By far the best bus of the 1970s. The best since the Regal IV, 20 years
earlier, and better than any that followed (IMHO, of course)
As far as I am concerned, the RF was simply the greatest bus ever built.
But the Leyland National, even if it lacked the romance of the earlier bus,
was a first rate vehicle which got the job done.
Terry Harper
>Here's something for discussion:
>
>The sucess of the National.
>------------------------------------------
>
>I am interested in thoughts and views on:
>
>ii) Mechanic and Enginers viewpoint
>v) How you rate it against the competition
>
racks, low seating, like sitting in a pit, noisy overstressed engine. Not a
patch on a Bristol RELL6G.
I haven't changed my mind since. Probably designed by a committee. One ought
to be preserved as an object lesson in how not to do it.
--
Terry Harper
Acting Webmaster, The Omnibus Society http://www.omnibussoc.org
E-mail: terry....@btinternet.com
URL: http://www.btinternet.com/~terry.harper/
Christopher Brock
I think one major point against them was the often abysmal fuel consumption.
Apparently as Crosville received some of their first Nationals they were put
out on Crewe local services in place of RE's. Whilst the RE's were managing
about 15mpg the National's only did about 7mpg on town work - the result
being that one Sunday night Crewe depot unexpectedly ran out of diesel....
Chris Brock
Gravelly Hill
Ivor D. Jones
uting.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>As far as I am concerned, the RF was simply the greatest bus ever built.
>But the Leyland National, even if it lacked the romance of the earlier bus,
>was a first rate vehicle which got the job done.
>
Hmm, I'd have to add the qualifier 'single deck' to that. The RT was in
my opinion the greatest bus of all; the RF was very, very good, and
definitely the best single deck, but it don't beat the RT!
Nationals? YUK! Only travelled on one once, that was enough!
--
Regards
Ivor D. Jones
ivor....@europa1.demon.co.uk
DUNCAN ROBINSON
for the driver it was superb, (for those fortunate enough to drive well
maintained examples).mechanichly they were not high tech but were
undoubtedly up to the job. However they could not stand up to ignorant
operators and i know of several that should not have been allowed to operate
nationals as they were to good for the idiots involved! Stunts like running
them without anti-roll bars and many other similar things. far better these
people stick to trucks and other similar products from Bristol (sorry
RELL6G).
In summary the leyland national was a fine vehicle and is a very
realistic preservation candidate, and should any body require any advice on
the technical side of maintaining these vehicles I will be pleased to
assist.(certain former N.B.C. companies are not excluded from this offer!)
cheers,
Duncan.
John Fisher
Brown and Cream/White with Surbuban Express name.
The chap who owns it wants photos of the original interior.
Bill Hayles
Ivor D. Jones <ivor....@nospam.uk> wrote in message
news:Ew5aISAH...@europa1.demon.co.uk...
>In article <7i6gka$qqd$2...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Bill Hayles <bill@bnwcomp
>uting.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>>As far as I am concerned, the RF was simply the greatest bus ever built.
>>But the Leyland National, even if it lacked the romance of the earlier
bus,
>>was a first rate vehicle which got the job done.
>>
>
>Hmm, I'd have to add the qualifier 'single deck' to that. The RT was in
>my opinion the greatest bus of all; the RF was very, very good, and
>definitely the best single deck, but it don't beat the RT!
I´d put it the other way round, especially as regards driving. The RF was a
Rolls Royce to drive when compared with the RT.
>
>Nationals? YUK! Only travelled on one once, that was enough!
I know that´s most peoples´ opinion, which is why I thought I´d get in
first. In the last analysis a bus is a tool to do a job. The National did
that job in a way that others of its era didn´t.
Paul Bishopp
relatively easy to drive. However those of us who drove the early models
remember their shortcomings too. First, if you had to anchor up a bit sharp
in the wet the front end went where it liked, due the the weight all being
on the back end.They used to paw the air.This was
adjusted (the weight distribution) on the later models.
Also, the ventilation system meant that as a passenger lit up on the back
seat, so the
smoke was cunningly directed thru the vent system and down onto the driver
at the
front.
All that said, a great drivers bus.I particularly liked the swivel on the
drivers seat so you could turn to face the passengers in bus stations etc,
or at busy stops.
Paul Bishopp
Bill Hayles <bi...@bnwcomputing.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7i8daj$8mu$3...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
RELL6G
<jul...@freeuk.com> writes
>Here's something for discussion:
>
>The sucess of the National.
>------------------------------------------
>
>I am interested in thoughts and views on:
>
>i) Passengers viewpoint
In the forward part of the vehicle the windows are rather high. Also
many examples have/had only roof mounted luggage baskets. The entrance
steps are quite high compared to a Bristol RELL
>ii) Mechanic and Enginers viewpoint
As far as the headless wonder (Leyland 510) goes almost constant
attention is the order of the day to ensure that they run properly and
don't sling sheets of black clag out! Over recent years the tightening
of emissions regulations has meant that the fuel pumps needed altering
to bring the emissions down, resulting in poor power.
That said Volvo, Gardner and DAF engined vehicles are quite a pleasure
to drive, even if the DAF version does eat prop-shafts ;)
From a body point of view every panel is unique to the type. Indeed some
specialist tooling is required for certain body repairs, not much scope
for the good old aluminium sheet and pop rivetter! Added to this the
majority of panels are steel. The window pans all round are very prone
to rotting.
>iii) Commercial sucess / impact
They obviously had an impact, they had to as the all conquering National
Bus Company declared that nobody shall have any more REs, the National
became the organisations standard issue vehicle so it was bound to be a
success. Not all that many went to non NBC operators when new.
>iv) Preservation prospects
As I have said before, I wouldn't preserve one if someone gave it to me,
especially a Leyland engined example, see the piece about unique body
panels - a preservation nightmare in itself as examples of the popularly
pranged and panels prone to rot would need to be acquired.
>v) How you rate it against the competition
Quite poor compared to the RE which the National was intended to
replace. Early models had appalling weight distribution, later ones
weren't that much better, both the engine and gearbox behind the rear
axle isn't too impressive. Front end slides were commonplace. Indeed
when the Mark 2 National was conceived the weight distribution was very
good - I believe the alterations were Bristol inspired, indeed a Gardner
engined National 2 is regarded by many as the ultimate RE.
--
RELL6G
4 emails change nospam 2 bcvr
Ian Jelf
<n...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>
>They obviously had an impact, they had to as the all conquering National
>Bus Company declared that nobody shall have any more REs, the National
>became the organisations standard issue vehicle so it was bound to be a
>success. Not all that many went to non NBC operators when new.
Am I right in thinking that Oxford/South Midland never received *any*
Nationals?
If this was indeed the case, how did they avoid the decrees from on high
at NBC?
--
Ian Jelf http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk
Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide
for the Heart of England and London
Graeme Selway
Ian Jelf wrote in message ...
>Am I right in thinking that Oxford/South Midland never received *any*
>Nationals?
You are correct - the only NBC operator in this position, I believe.
FWIW, once South Midland merged with Thames Transit, the company did operate
some Nationals for a while, albeit on loan from Devon General (around 1990,
IIRC).
Graeme Selway
Terry Harper wrote in message <7i6uh6$bbl$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>As an occasional bus user, my first impression was unfavourable.
By first impressions (as a school-kid) were that Nationals were far superior
to the REs and Panthers which were variously operated on the contract to my
school, although this was probably due to them being newer! The gear-change
often resulted in a sudden lurch resulting in much spillage of drinks!
>No luggage
>racks,
Western National's examples did have luggage racks fitted over the nearside
front wheel arch next to the door. This lead to an unusual 50 seat
configuration with a single side-on seat adjacent to the luggage rack. I've
never seen this arrangement on any other operator's vehicles. For such a
standardised machine, this seems surprising. Devon General subsequently
converted theirs to 52 seat with a tip-up seat for three/luggage rack
combination replacing the luggage rack and single seat.
>low seating, like sitting in a pit, noisy overstressed engine. Not a
>patch on a Bristol RELL6G.
Our school contract actually specified a fifty-seat bus (i.e. Leyland
National or presumably 53 seat RE), but due to Western National's insistence
on sending 47 seat Panthers or Leopards, 43 seat LHs or 46 seat (dual-door)
Nationals or REs, they lost the contract!
Ivor D. Jones
uting.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>
>>Hmm, I'd have to add the qualifier 'single deck' to that. The RT was in
>>my opinion the greatest bus of all; the RF was very, very good, and
>>definitely the best single deck, but it don't beat the RT!
>
>I´d put it the other way round, especially as regards driving. The RF was a
>Rolls Royce to drive when compared with the RT.
Well as I've never driven either I will bow to your superior knowledge
on that one, but as someone who grew up in the late 50's and early 60's
in London and travelling regularly on both buses I know which I
preferred!
RELL6G
<i...@bluebadge.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <79h2sTAx...@bcvr.demon.co.uk>, RELL6G
><n...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>They obviously had an impact, they had to as the all conquering National
>>Bus Company declared that nobody shall have any more REs, the National
>>became the organisations standard issue vehicle so it was bound to be a
>>success. Not all that many went to non NBC operators when new.
>
>Nationals?
>
>If this was indeed the case, how did they avoid the decrees from on high
>at NBC?
No idea really. Also Eastern Scottish (I think) refused Bristol VRs and
had Daimler Fleetlines instead.
Ian Jelf
<n...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>No idea really. Also Eastern Scottish (I think) refused Bristol VRs and
>had Daimler Fleetlines instead.
I seem to recall that many SBG operators had a dislike of VRs, ending up
swapping examples in exchanged for Lodekkas with English NBC
subsidiaries.
Sensible Scots....... :-)
Graeme Selway
Ian Jelf wrote in message ...
>Nationals?
>
>at NBC?
Presumably by convincing the powers that be that they did not need any more
single-deckers [1] and took VRs instead. They did take late-model DP(?) REs
IIRC (even up to N reg, I think) which I guess *could* have been Suburban
Express Nationals in different circumstances.
Regards,
Graeme
[1] how times change - plenty of single-deckers in the area now!
Terry Harper
<7ib216$lug$4...@nclient5-gui.server.virgin.net>...
>
>Western National's examples did have luggage racks fitted over the nearside
>front wheel arch next to the door
When I said luggage racks, I was thinking of the sort hanging from the
ceiling. 50 plus years ago, when I was going to school on Bristol Tramways
and coming home on Red & White, the Bristols had no luggage racks (nor
Clayton heaters) and little interior furnishing, whereas Red & White had
luggage racks, carpeted walls and heaters. A 5-speed Bristol was much more
fun to ride in than the 4-speed Albion, however. I sometimes came home on a
Bristol which followed a Red & White out of Monmouth on the Redbrook road.
Both stopped at Wyesham, and set off together, the Albion leading. The
Bristol was always in front before we got to the crest of the slight rise
before the drop down to River level at the terminal velocity of 49 mph. Both
Gardner 5LWs (85 bhp) of course.
Post war, with the ECW and similar Bristol bodies, we got luggage racks and
heaters on the Bristols. No longer blue, either.
Julian Hayward
>Jules wrote in message <01bea3b5$4b964560$LocalHost@default>...
>>
>>The sucess of the National.
I think the most obvious sign of success is the number that are still in
service, 20-25 years on. Not many with the big groups but there's often
a couple kept on as spare cover (I say that and then 6 more turn up at
Aldershot for regular service...) and plenty with small independents. I
was somewhat surprised to visit Walsall earlier in the year and find 30
pass me in an hour!
--
Julian Hayward 'Booles' on FIBS jul...@ratbag.demon.co.uk
+44-1344-640656 http://www.ratbag.demon.co.uk/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Doh! Stupid poetic justice!" - Homer Simpson
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Farrier
Going back a day or to, Oxford simply avoided buying Leyland Nationals by
buying Ford buses for rural services, second-hand REs from Bristol and PMT
and Leopard coaches from Yorkshire Traction, Midland Red and PMT for other
single-deck work.
>I seem to recall that many SBG operators had a dislike of VRs, ending up
>swapping examples in exchanged for Lodekkas with English NBC
>subsidiaries.
After one or two fatal accidents in Scotland involving runaway wheels and
pedestrians the SBG VRs received such a bad press that they were banished
south of the border.
For those not around at the time the Scottish Bus Group Bristol VRs
(something like 153 in total) were exchanged on a 1 for 1 with the National
Bus Company's final Bristol FLF Lodekkas, regardless of the owning company.
This was further complicated by the failure of SBG to stipulate the final
153 Gardner engined example. Some, on arrival, were found to have the
Bristol AVW engine, which was completely unacceptable to SBG. These buses
were sent back to England in exchange for the next newest Gardner engined
examples. The result was that Certain companies in England then had VRs that
they did not want and swapped them with other NBC companies for Lodekkas.
Quite a complicated, and interesting phase of the 1970s.
Tayside then sold its VRs south of the border to Burnley & Pendle, Proctor's
(Hanley) and National Welsh to name a few. It was many years before VRs
found themselves welcome in Scotland.
I remember being told that the gearchange from 3rd to 2nd (or was it 2nd to
1st) was so severe that the bolts holding the rear wheels on snapped on the
Proctors VR at least twice, sending the wheel off down the road, (or is this
an urban myth?).
Dave Farrier
Pete Humble
>In article <79h2sTAx...@bcvr.demon.co.uk>, RELL6G
><n...@nospam.demon.co.uk> writes
>>
>>They obviously had an impact, they had to as the all conquering National
>>Bus Company declared that nobody shall have any more REs, the National
>>became the organisations standard issue vehicle so it was bound to be a
>>success. Not all that many went to non NBC operators when new.
>
>Am I right in thinking that Oxford/South Midland never received *any*
>Nationals?
>
Yup.
>If this was indeed the case, how did they avoid the decrees from on high
>at NBC?
Easy. They didn't buy ANY single deckers.
Similarly, Midland Red never had any Bristol VRs because they didn't buy any
double-deckers.
--
___ __o Pete Humble, JRI Europe, Ltd
_ \<,_ Email: peet AT dircon DOT co DOT uk
(_)/ (_) Any resemblance between the views expressed here
============= and those of my employers is pure coincidence.
Julian Hayward
peet.at.dircon.dot.co.dot.uk> writes
>
>Similarly, Midland Red never had any Bristol VRs because they didn't buy any
>double-deckers.
Didn't they have a couple of JOX-P registered Fleetlines?
RELL6G
peet.at.dircon.dot.co.dot.uk> writes
>>at NBC?
>Easy. They didn't buy ANY single deckers.
Apart from at least some Leyland Leopards (YFC 11-14R) and Ford R1014s
(WWL 503 - 10R) after the RE ceased to be available. (One's book only
goes up to the real R plate!)
<snip>
Pete Humble
I think that they Leopards counted as coaches, or at least dual-purpose. A
number of fleets took Fords at around the same time, as an experiment. They
were 10m buses, when, I think, there was only an 11.3m LN available, or else
it was seen as being too expensive for rural services.
Pete Humble
>In article <37540efa...@news.dircon.co.uk>, Pete Humble <spamfree@
>peet.at.dircon.dot.co.dot.uk> writes
>>
>>Similarly, Midland Red never had any Bristol VRs because they didn't buy any
>>double-deckers.
>
>Didn't they have a couple of JOX-P registered Fleetlines?
Yes, but they had been ordered by Harper Brothers of Heath Hayes, that they
had taken over.
David Sharp
in rather late to the Leyland National debate, so rather than reply to
individual comments I will just make a few comments that I hope will be
relevant. Having driven Isle of Man Transport's examples for 13 years they
have left a favourable impression upon me. I found them fast, comfortable,
easy to drive, very maneeouvrable for their length and I really enjoyed
driving them, far more so than the Leopards and Panthers that came before,
and the Dennis Darts subsequently.
The bus might well have been designed by a committee, but much of the
external input resulted in a fine ergonomic vehicle; after all designers of
the calibre of John Rackham don't come around very often. By far the most
unsatisfactory aspect of the National was the dreadful engine, a political
decision if ever there was one. It was many years before the LeylandO680 or
Gardner 6HXLB were offered, yet they could have been right from the early
days. To me the ideal engine from the Leyland empire would have been an
AH760 or TL12 (did they make a horizontal version?) from Southall
The Isle of Man versions were not well maintained, and the smoke and
noise from that engine was dreadful. As the engine heater plugs never
worked, starting from cold was always difficult, far worse than all other
buses in the fleet, and was particularly bad on a Monday morning after being
idle for 18 hours. Battery acid level was never checked, so inevitably
battery replacement was frequent.
As for whether any should be preserved, most certainly they should. The
biggest problem would be starting the engine after laying idle for some
time.
A successful bus? Certainly.
The best single-decker? Certainly not. The RF definitely wins that
one.I"m lucky enough to have one outside my back gate here on the Isle of
Man, and driving it is just as pleasurable now as it was when I bought it 14
years ago.
David Sharp
dsh...@letitia.enterprise-plc.com
Wendy Jervis
<dsh...@letitia.enterprise-plc.com> writes
> The best single-decker? Certainly not. The RF definitely wins that
>one.I"m lucky enough to have one outside my back gate here on the Isle of
>Man, and driving it is just as pleasurable now as it was when I bought it 14
>years ago.
What Alternator does the Leyland National use? Is it the Butec A100
Alternator with the R102 voltage regulator? Or do some LNs use the CAV
AC203 Alternators?
--
Wendy Jervis
we...@igloo.co.uk
http://www.igloo.co.uk/
MARK PRIEST
I haven't driven very many types of bus, but by far the best, driver
comfort-wise, I have to say is the National. They really did DESIGN the cab
area.
Superb drivers seat (the standard one) with reclining back and plenty of
height adjustment; Somewhere to stretch out your left foot into (and support
it); Lovely nimble steering wheel raked just right ( people who retro-fit
Lynx wheels should be shot) ; Lovely light steering-(until the idiots
started messing about with the Steering rams); Door controls easily to hand;
Brilliant heating system (those that complain about cold feet ought to visit
the Doctor); I don't think the drivers envoironment has been bettered- the
Lynx was an absoloute disaster. What on earth posessed Leyland to build that
heap of JUNK ? Those windscreen blind spots- a throwback from the 40s and
50s! Those ridiculously cheap and nasty cab sliding windows that started
rattling after a fortnight; cable (!) operated cab heating and demisting
controls-get real! Demister control valves off a car ! Glued on panels and
windows-for goodness sake, what the hell was going on at Leyland? And the
biggest joke of all the suspension system (or lack of one). You'd get a
better ride on most Blackpool trams than on a Lynx. I've lost count the
amount of passengers who've complained to me about the ride on Lynxes (when
I could hear what they were saying, that is). At least the National can hold
it's head up high in that department. I'll always remember the Leyland reps
who came to sort out the myriad of problems with the Lynxes we
had ( including chassis cracks and continual spring breakage). One used to
tell us of such dis-satisfaction with the Lynx, that operators were begging
Leyland to build some more Nationals! Enough said.
Being an engineer, I've frequently encountered the 'grumbles' about the 510
engines. I personally always liked them, and I always think that the bonus
of having no cylinder head gaskets (and all the associated troubles) is
grossly overlooked. In my opinion the engines' letdown was the quality of
the parts used in its' construction (even when new) , and subsequent
overhaul by all and sundry backstreet boys. An 'overhauled' engine quite
often means only replacing a failed item- nothing more- the rest is left
untouched. It's little wonder the engine has such a reputation. Granted, the
pre-heater system, if not maintained was not much good, but then neither
was driver training-
(getting them to use it at all). They'd rather sit there grinding away on
the starter than press a button for 30 seconds (I could never understand
that mentality). And what is it about we British? we leave buses outside all
night in the freezing cold and expect them to start first turn of a key next
day without using a cold-start.? And worn out 150,000 mile units to start
first time?.
The fuel pump (and to a certain extent injectors) must take the blame for
the majority of smoke related niggles. Pumps were very fussy to set up.
When the pumps were set by someone who knew what they were doing there were
never any problems. I would have liked to have seen a Bosch pump used
upright. The smoke thing though is more a sign of the namby pamby times we
live in. People never used to take any notice of smoke coming out of
anything- but these days every bloke on the street is an 'expert' on bus
exhaust emissions. Does anyone complain about the clouds of black smoke
coming out of your average 38 tonner? or for that matter your Class 47 at
full pelt? I don't think so. So why target buses? Any Ford Sierra pumps out
more clag and nobody bats an eye.
And as for the conversionists- Crosville and their beloved Gardners! They
soon realised what a mistake it was to fit THAT engine. They dumped the
buses the first chance they got. Gardner engines- to me mean vibration,
overheating and oil leaks galore- avoid! Nationals so fitted turned into
lethargic slumps. The TL11 had potential.Pity they killed it off so soon.
The Nat.2's were so characterful with the 680- but oh the problems! Fuel
pump mountings, drives, compressors coming loose, injector pipes, water
leaks , front radiator......for those that perservered-well done. The
copycat DAF engined ones lacked guts and were so terribly cut down
performance was almost non-existant (accountants worry more about MPG than
buses running to time). Currently Volvo engine fitted examples are the bees
knees- but what a shame they came so late in the bus's life cycle. Even they
are cut down though, and aren't really on a par with the 510's when they
were new.
Midland Reds N1s and Crosvilles DPs were absoloutely superb when new (there
may have been others with 200hp's). The acceleration was phenomenal. Oh to
ride on a preserved one with fuel pump set to that spec.! I doubt it will
ever happen, it's all so long ago most people can't remember what they were
REALLY like before they started messing about with them. Same with the
steering. These days people think the ones with light steering have
something wrong with them, they're that used to the meddlers efforts. It is
supposed to be POWER steering after all.
All in all one of the best buses of recent times, despite what some people
say. Usually they are people that are miffed Nationals replaced their
favourite types. Rarely do they come to see just how good they were. And
all those NBC fleets who got rid of them after 12 years.....(!) Bet they're
kicking themselves
--
Mark Priest <EE1...@email.msn.com>
David Sharp <dsh...@letitia.enterprise-plc.com> wrote in message
news:ewM53.100$KZ2....@news.enterprise.net...
> The best single-decker? Certainly not. The RF definitely wins that
> one.I"m lucky enough to have one outside my back gate here on the Isle of
> Man, and driving it is just as pleasurable now as it was when I bought it
14
> years ago.
>
> David Sharp
> dsh...@letitia.enterprise-plc.com
>
>
Stephen Down
there is something about which I can (more or less) authoritatively reply: I
have travelled a lot on Lynx Is and National IIs.
The Lynxes tended to rattle a bit, but they were usually doing about 45 on a
badly surfaced road (I think whoever devised their timetables was a little
optimistic), but nevertheless I found them fairly comfortable. And they were
certainly quick. My experience of Nationals is that they are much slower,
noisier, and seem to absorb bumps worse than Lynxes. OK, this may be because the
Nationals are older, and I'm too young to remember when they were brand new. But
I'd still prefer a ride in a Lynx.
RELL6G
<EE1...@email.msn.com> writes
>David and viewers
>I haven't driven very many types of bus, but by far the best, driver
>comfort-wise, I have to say is the National. They really did DESIGN the cab
>area.
To an extent yes. Then there is the ever so slight issue of where one
puts one's fare charts, running sheet and other literature. Of course
the obvious place is the dashboard thus concealing all the fault lights,
air gauges and speedo.
>Superb drivers seat (the standard one) with reclining back and plenty of
>height adjustment; Somewhere to stretch out your left foot into (and support
>it); Lovely nimble steering wheel raked just right ( people who retro-fit
>Lynx wheels should be shot) ; Lovely light steering-(until the idiots
>started messing about with the Steering rams); Door controls easily to hand;
Beg to differ on the steering wheel issue. The original and horribly
thin wheels are no good if the steering is heavier than it should be.
Also the drivers hand is more clenched on them.
>Brilliant heating system (those that complain about cold feet ought to visit
>the Doctor); I don't think the drivers envoironment has been bettered- the
So, I gather you have not driven a National complete with terrible
draughts around the cab then? It seems odd that the heat is forced down
from the roof given that it rises. I would also say that repeated
operation of the platform doors contributes to what can be a very cold
environment for the driver. The saloon area is largely unaffected by
this, so in that respect it is a reasonable system.
<Snip piece about the Lynx>
>Being an engineer, I've frequently encountered the 'grumbles' about the 510
>engines. I personally always liked them, and I always think that the bonus
>of having no cylinder head gaskets (and all the associated troubles) is
>grossly overlooked. In my opinion the engines' letdown was the quality of
>the parts used in its' construction (even when new) , and subsequent
>overhaul by all and sundry backstreet boys. An 'overhauled' engine quite
>often means only replacing a failed item- nothing more- the rest is left
>untouched. It's little wonder the engine has such a reputation. Granted, the
>pre-heater system, if not maintained was not much good, but then neither
>was driver training-
>(getting them to use it at all). They'd rather sit there grinding away on
>the starter than press a button for 30 seconds (I could never understand
>that mentality). And what is it about we British? we leave buses outside all
>night in the freezing cold and expect them to start first turn of a key next
>day without using a cold-start.? And worn out 150,000 mile units to start
>first time?.
Strange how a Gardner will nearly always fire on a cold morning while a
510 whirrs around for ever ;)
>The fuel pump (and to a certain extent injectors) must take the blame for
>the majority of smoke related niggles. Pumps were very fussy to set up.
>When the pumps were set by someone who knew what they were doing there were
>never any problems. I would have liked to have seen a Bosch pump used
>upright. The smoke thing though is more a sign of the namby pamby times we
>live in. People never used to take any notice of smoke coming out of
>anything- but these days every bloke on the street is an 'expert' on bus
>exhaust emissions. Does anyone complain about the clouds of black smoke
>coming out of your average 38 tonner? or for that matter your Class 47 at
>full pelt? I don't think so. So why target buses? Any Ford Sierra pumps out
>more clag and nobody bats an eye.
A very good point indeed about the namby pamby attitude to emissions,
couldn't agree more. And yes some of those Class 47 locomotives are
quite a (spectacular) sight - vertical sheet of black clag and flames
:-)
>And as for the conversionists- Crosville and their beloved Gardners! They
>soon realised what a mistake it was to fit THAT engine. They dumped the
>buses the first chance they got. Gardner engines- to me mean vibration,
>overheating and oil leaks galore- avoid! Nationals so fitted turned into
>lethargic slumps. The TL11 had potential.Pity they killed it off so soon.
Basically I would think that Gardner conversions were lethargic as no
modification was made to the driveline, which is set up to take the
considerably higher revving 510 engine. ISTR that later series 2
Nationals built with Gardners were very good vehicles.
As for overheating that is the fault of the cooling system, again the
slower revving Gardner under a Mark 1 National will not spin the rear
mounted cooling fan as quickly as a 510 would.
>The Nat.2's were so characterful with the 680- but oh the problems! Fuel
>pump mountings, drives, compressors coming loose, injector pipes, water
>leaks , front radiator......for those that perservered-well done. The
>copycat DAF engined ones lacked guts and were so terribly cut down
>performance was almost non-existant (accountants worry more about MPG than
>buses running to time). Currently Volvo engine fitted examples are the bees
>knees- but what a shame they came so late in the bus's life cycle. Even they
>are cut down though, and aren't really on a par with the 510's when they
>were new.
Must disagree with the DAF comment. Ones I have driven have considerable
torque, so much so that they ate the standard prop shafts! As far as I
know the L11 and TL11 were derived from the 0.680.
>Midland Reds N1s and Crosvilles DPs were absoloutely superb when new (there
>may have been others with 200hp's). The acceleration was phenomenal. Oh to
>ride on a preserved one with fuel pump set to that spec.! I doubt it will
>ever happen, it's all so long ago most people can't remember what they were
>REALLY like before they started messing about with them. Same with the
>steering. These days people think the ones with light steering have
>something wrong with them, they're that used to the meddlers efforts. It is
>supposed to be POWER steering after all.
IMX when the steering becomes (dangerously) light this is down to a
knackered power steering rack.
>All in all one of the best buses of recent times, despite what some people
>say. Usually they are people that are miffed Nationals replaced their
>favourite types. Rarely do they come to see just how good they were. And
>all those NBC fleets who got rid of them after 12 years.....(!) Bet they're
>kicking themselves
Doubt it, given constant maintenance and at the correct schedules then
they do keep going. If that doesn't happen then their reliability is
markedly reduced.
Ivor D. Jones
<sjd...@york.ac.uk> writes
>While I can't comment on the technical and drivers'-view aspects of your post,
>there is something about which I can (more or less) authoritatively reply: I
>have travelled a lot on Lynx Is and National IIs.
>The Lynxes tended to rattle a bit, but they were usually doing about 45 on a
>badly surfaced road (I think whoever devised their timetables was a little
>optimistic), but nevertheless I found them fairly comfortable. And they were
>certainly quick. My experience of Nationals is that they are much slower,
>noisier, and seem to absorb bumps worse than Lynxes. OK, this may be because the
>Nationals are older, and I'm too young to remember when they were brand new. But
>I'd still prefer a ride in a Lynx.
>
>MARK PRIEST wrote:
>
>> a
>> better ride on most Blackpool trams than on a Lynx. I've lost count the
>> amount of passengers who've complained to me about the ride on Lynxes (when
>> I could hear what they were saying, that is). At least the National can hold
>> it's head up high in that department.
>
I must confess I'm too new to bus driving to have ever driven a
National, but I regularly drive Lynxes, and (apart from that cab window
rattle!) I love 'em! I know I'd rather drive a Lynx than the Volvo B6's
and B10's we've got! They've certainly got a LOT more acceleration away
from rest.