I got a cracking book on buses from the library last weekend.
It, in all its glory, is The British Bus Today and Tomorrow – which, seeing as it was published in 1983, should perhaps now be retitled Yesterday and The Day Before. Ahem.
It’s largely incomprehensible. Complex things, buses, and the Barbara Castle-led politics behind them, and the companies that made them, and the way in which they were made. Largely, my eyes glazed as I flicked.
(Who else, like me, enjoys old pictures of street scenes, because it lets them peer at the cars, the shops, the buses and the amount of people smoking?)
Excitingly, though, I did find something to connect with – the Leyland National single decker. You WILL know about this, as they were built from 1972 to 1985, and over 7000 them made it onto our roads. They were operated all over the country and, for their time, were blimmin’ clever.
The Leyland National was one of the first buses to use integral construction. Before then, chassis had come from one supplier, bodies from another. Hence the confusion. By merging Leyland with National, the new firm’s creation replaced a shedload of older buses, and invented a revolutionary modular construction process while they were at it.
By the 1980s, it had three-quarters of the single-deck bus market. It introduced ‘new standards of passenger comfort’, and was thus deemed a success. Mind you, it was almost killed early – the factory was barely building one a week in the early ‘80s. That’s in a factory designed for 40 a week. But things did pick up, and the old bus continued. And carried on its market monopoly, too.
Six things you (certainly I) never knew about the Leyland National:
1: MkI models had an 8.3-litre straight-six Leyland 510 turbodiesel. Bus companies hated it, as it was thirsty and, if not religiously maintained, smoked a lot. Let’s face it, how many bus companies stick to F1-standard maintenance schedules? Leyland’s later solution was just as brilliant, though. Reduce the power to reduce the smoke. Great.
2: Models between 1972 and 1978 had a rear roof pod. This contained the heating kit, which heated at roof level. Bit daft, given how heat rises. So, from 1978, the interior was revised and given cheaper but more effective under-seat heating. They also reduced the interior light count of these models. Well, it was the Winter of Discontent.
3: Two lengths of Leyland National were offered. The shorter ones could be spotted from squarer windows. There was also, from 1979, a facelifted National 2. This had more engine choice, including a more reliable 680 engine, and a radiator in the front.
4: It was built in Workington, Cumbria, on car-type production lines. Leyland reckoned on building 2000 a year. Not like them to overestimate things; eventual demand settled down to, yep, half that. Also typically Leyland, early ones were unreliable, mainly from that fixed-head, maintenance-hungry engine.
5: It was launched at the 1970 Commercial Motor Show, where a model plated ‘BL 1971’ boldly took centre stage. This example had twin door exits on the side – such was the flexibility of the bus, single or dual doors could be fitted.
6: Nationals remained in service well into the Millennium, usually fitted with Volvo or DAF engines. It was replaced by the Leyland Lynx. That’s another blog post entirely.
But there’s a reason above all why I love the Leyland National. It’s oh-so-distinctive engine rattle. You could tell when one was approaching without seeing it, every single time. So that’s me off to a future owner’s club meet, for sure.
If you’re me, salivate at the images here, too. Oh, and here. Lovely!
Advice from Ford’s Walter Hayes
How Ford put the boot into the Sierra
Ha, I know exactly what you mean about old road pictures. By the same token terrible 70s and 80s TV programmes are given a complete new lease of life if they feature some cars.
Only yesterday I was thinking about the various National derivatives on display in Hartlepool in the mid-80s. Heady stuff.
There was a lot more wrong with the early Nationals, than a thirsty, maintanance hungry engine. I drove the early long versions (LN`s) whilst working for London Country. There were numerous accidents caused by brake actuators releasing too slowly, causing front wheel lock ups in wet weather. They were hated in the wet. No weight was put over the front axle, making them too light at the front, and, you`ve guessed it, the front wheels to lock up in the wet weather. The engines would run away, with no way of stopping them, as the emergency stop wasn`t up to the job. They had a “fly on” parking brake. It was too easy to catch the handle when putting the vehicle into 5th gear, causing very rapid unscheduled stops, but you soon learnt to grab the handle and push it off quick. The passengers really loved the slippery plastic seats. All in all, we despised them, after the lovely old RF`s we used on Green Lines. In the end, the union blacked them until they were sorted out. Cue lots of hired “Corpy” buses. The later and shorter ones were actually much better.
Many thanks for your memories, Brian – they’re a wonderful addition to the piece: really appreciate your time! It’s a treat to read about how much was actually wrong with it – as a frequent passenger in the early 90s, I remember those slippery seats only too well (and how the lack of padding saw aches set in after just a few miles…). Alarming to read about the driving quirks, though… sounds like you were certainly kept busy behind the wheel!
Well if you want an owners club look no further than the Leyland National Group. I own a 1978 Leyland National. Its the long variant and a lot of Brian’s faults have been fixed in the later Leyland design. The lack of weight at the front was addressed by moving the batteries to the front. A pair of 624 batteries weighing in at a heft 80 kilos. With regards to the hand brake it does require a certain technique which can cause hand ache of doing many gear changes as you would expect on suburban work. Mine came with cloth seats and decent cushions.
I’m intrigued by the comment that the 510 was an 8 litre engine. I believe that there were two variants available as mine comes with a 10 litre 510 engine. The big factor in fuel consumption was down to the rear axle and the diff. Round town Nationals had a low speed diff and a top speed of 42 mph which was very thirsty. Mine a dual purpose example had a two speed diff also known as a high speed axle and could manage a good 65 mph. Indeed my bus averages between 12 and 14 mpg which is better than these new cleaner burning low floor double deckers foisted on us by Europe.
Really interesting stuff there Gavin – many thanks for the reply. Amazed by the fuel economy there: and to think some assume older automatically means worse!
For those interested in reading more by Gavin, check out his site: http://leylandnationalgroup.co.uk/