Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Devon General Omnibus & Touring Co Ltd 
1964
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
Willowbrook H39/30F

This very good looking Willowbrook bodied AEC Regent V of Devon General is I think about to start on its long distance run to Plymouth. It had not been in service very long when this shot was taken in the summer of 1964. It is on route 128 which was Torquay to Plymouth, the via blind reads Ivybridge and Totnes but on looking at a map it should be via Totnes and Ivybridge, still it will be right for the return trip. This route was one of the joint service long distance routes operated with Southern & Western National. Devon General also had an agreement with the largest city in their area Exeter, so Devon General buses did quite a few inner city routes and City of Exeter buses would be seen on some of the out of city routes.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.

It is possible that the intermediate display is printed so as to show the places only once, thereby being "wrong way round" on every other journey.  This was a fairly common practice where operators quite reasonably sought to avoid wastage of the expensive material.

Chris Youhill

It is a very smart body, perhaps slightly marred by the heavy look of the sliding windows.
Amazing how rear wheel ‘spats’ always improve the look of buses. Was this a common feature of Devon General?

Chris Hebbron

24/03/11 – 17:25

Most Devon General AECs had rear wheel trims (dustbins) fitted which improved appearance and made it much easier to keep the wheels clean.

Royston Morgan

15/05/13 – 15:29

Does anyone have any information on a very old green bus (could date from as early as the 1920s) which was sited in Wakeham’s Field in Shaldon, Devon in 1951. I came with my parents and sisters to Devon that year and we lived for nine weeks on the camp site whilst waiting for a house. We lived in an old bus for the final few weeks. It had been partly adapted as living accommodation. It had a former Admiral’s (or Captain’s) bathroom area installed – a quite grand mahogany wash basin which lowered down. I have recently seen one of these contraptions on the Antiques Roadshow. I think we still had to pour water from a container into the basin but it drained away after use into the area which would once have been the driver’s place. The bus itself had long seats on the right side as you went in – rows of them I mean, rather than the normal two x 2 each side. Each seat would have taken 4- 5 people. I think some of the windows may have been painted over – probably because there was no way of having curtains. I have never seen a bus of that design anywhere other than the Midlands in the late 40s.

Mary Grant

Photo reproduced with kind permission of Alan Lambert.

Copyright Reading & Co

Portsmouth Corporation

1949
Crossley DD42/5
Reading H52R

Portsmouth had four Crossley DD42/5’s (11-14) delivered in 1948 and two (15 & 28) in 1949. The first four had German Imperial Navy-type crosses on the radiators: the last two had CROSSLEY plates on them. They all had Brockhouse Turbo-transmitters and, according to Michael Hampton (who commented on a photo of a DD42/7 I submitted earlier) retained them to the the end of their service days. The locally-built Reading bodies they wore had also been fitted to 6 Leyland PD1/1A’s delivered earlier, in 1947/48. They bore some resemblance (especially at the front) to the Craven-bodied trolleybuses Portsmouth had at the time, there is a shot of one here.
As I recall, and unlike the DD42/7’s, they seemed to be very coy buses in the fleet, usually working routes needing only one bus, or peak-time reliefs or, as here, at Clarence Pier, Southsea, working the Sea Front Service on a cloudy or chilly day in May 1961, in place of the open-top TD4’s.
Incidentally, since only a few months separated the delivery of these 42/5’s from the 42/7’s, were there ever any DD42/6’s?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron

Thanks for posting the two Portsmouth Corporation Crossley’s. My how they bring back memories. When both these Crossley’s ran, I lived on the ‘Tipner Estate’, in Tipner Green. We always seemed to get the Buses on this route (service ‘O’ & ‘P’ that later became service ’13’ & ’14’), that were near their withdrawal time. The ‘Reading’ bodied Crossleys did indeed keep their Crossley Engines & Brockhouse Turbomotor Transmitter’s to the end.
As a kid, I would spend hours at ‘Range Green’ (their ‘Tipner’ terminus) as they used to reverse into the beginning of Range Green, to face the correct way in Tipner Lane for the return journey. You would often see the Driver standing up in the cab trying to move the stuck ‘direction’ lever, which looked just like a normal Gear lever which you pushed forward to go forwards and pulled back to reverse, between these was neutral. The trick for an easy change of direction was to knock the lever into neutral just before coming to a halt, then stop, then using the ‘Heel Pedal’ under the Drivers seat which was supposed to (but rarely did) stop the transmission from turning, snatch the direction lever quickly to the direction you want to go.

John

The O & P route was just the sort of quiet route these vehicles trod for year in and year out. Oh, and we always called Tipner, Tipnor – strange how it had two spellings.

Chris Hebbron

As it seems empty (look upstairs), do we take it that the rear suspension is a bit, shall we say, tired, or someone has left a very heavy parcel under the stairs? Or are all the passengers standing on the platform?

Joe

I love the thought of 52+8 standing, 60 folk crammed on the platform (probably having to leave the conductor behind!) but it may be that the bus is pulling away from the bus stop and causing the apparent tilt backwards and perhaps towards the camera a little, too.

Chris Hebbron

This is true,’Tipner’ was the correct spelling for that Estate, but there was also a ‘Tipnor’ spelling for a road just off ‘Twyford Avenue’ (probably doesn’t exist after the placement of the ‘M27’ Motorway build in the 1970’s).

John

The Reading bodywork was a very ‘handsome’ affair with clean cut lines, and polished interior woodwork with  half drop ventilator windows but sadly, this body, was not the most rugged or durable in practice. This would explain the early withdrawal of the Crossley’s and the PD1/PD1A with these bodies. This may also explain why the ‘Reading’ Bodied vehicles kept their troublesome Crossley engines & Brockhouse/Salerni Turbomotor/Transmitter Converters to the end.

John

Yes, I always had a soft spot for the looks of the Reading-bodied vehicles.

Towards the end, even the Crossley bodies on the DD42/7’s suffered from body problems. I can recall sitting in the front downstairs saloon seats and noticing that fatigue cracks were appearing in a central spar which ran below the windows. Several buses had had the ‘dodgy’ part covered in varnished wood, one must hope after welding work had been done!

Chris Hebbron

The number of dodgy bodies – and coachbuilders – from the end of WW2 to 1950 is legion, for the most part due to or contributed to by the lack of quality parts and materials as a consequence of the war.

Interestingly enough, you could say that Crossley bodies were of two distinct types – both generally regarded as of high quality.

Due to immense Manchester Corporation influence, the majority of pre-war – and post-war to 1950 – bodies were on Metro-Cammell frames (then regarded as by far the best and most reliable all metal frames). This, of course, made them compatible with most of the rest of MCT’s fleet of Met-Camm bodies. After the AEC/ACV take over, most Crossley bodies were on Park Royal frames (another quality product) but made them (like similar Roe bodies) into PRV clones.

A prime example of dodgy coachwork was Windover which was luxurious "in the extreme" but fell apart rapidly with it’s "green" wood frames.

David Oldfield

I have to admit, I did not know that C.P.P.T.D. Had had trouble with the Crossley Bodies too ! I do remember, as a kid, aiming for the single seat on either side which was located in the centre of the lower saloon (only on those that hadn’t been up seated to standard layout). The rore of the transplanted 8.6 Litre Leyland Engine, and whine from the 1930’s (ex) TD4 ‘crash’ Gearbox’s. I never remember any of them breaking down even though the engine and gearbox was over twenty years older than the rest of the Bus !!

John

I don’t think the comment about Metro-Cammell frames is quite right. Pre-war yes, Manchester had vast numbers of "Crossley-MetroCammell" bodies. But both of the seminal works by Eyre and Heaps ("The Manchester Bus" and "Crossley") state that post-war Crossley bodies used Crossley’s own framing, and speak very highly of it.
The Park Royal framed Crossley bodies should have been of high quality, but many of them weren’t, because by then Crossley was in its death-throes, morale was low and nobody was interested in quality. Preston is one operator that had to do substantial rebuilding work on these bodies.

Peter Williamson

In my copy above, I posed the question as to whether there had ever been any Crossley DD42/6’s. By chance, I’ve found out that, in 1949, Birmingham Corporation took delivery of eight DD42/6’s and one DD42/6T. This was just before their great influx of Daimlers, Guys and Crossley DD42/7’s in 1950. So if Portsmouth’s DD42/5’s were delivered in 1949 and B’ham Corp’n’s were DD42/7’s in 1950, not many DD42/6’s could have been made in the interim, but some were.

Chris Hebbron

The comments from Chris Hebron about the DD42/6 Crossley’s, reminded me of an almost identical scenario with the pre-war Leyland Titans.
There were TD1 – TD5 Chassis then a handful of TD6’s for one operator, before the arrival of the TD7 in 1942. The War stopped further production ’til the post-war PD1 with its rather ‘clattery’ E181, 7.4 Litre Engine.

John

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

21/02/13 – 06:14

I recall reading once that Leyland’s 7.4 litre engine was originally developed for use in wartime tanks!

Chris Hebbron

21/02/13 – 07:14

Yes, Chris, and used in tandem – two at a time, like DMUs.

David Oldfield

21/02/13 – 08:43

Interesting. It may well be then, David, that all 7.4 powered buses were secretly part of the UK’s strategic military reserve!

Chris Hebbron

Bolton Corporation
1961
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
Metro Cammell H40/32F

Taken in Bolton bus station this Regent V is working route 81 Four Lane Ends I’ll come back to the destination later. This was one of a batch of six Regent Vs they were the first and only AECs that Bolton took delivery of since the solitary AEC Q of 1933. Their post war double decker fleet apart from the odd batch of Daimlers CVGs and quite a few Crossley DD42/3s have been Leyland Titans and Atlanteans. All Bolton vehicles passed over to SELNEC on the 1st of November 1969. One of the Regent Vs registration SBN 767 fleet number 167 as been preserved and there is a very good shot of it here and guess what the route number and destination is.

Linking this post with the Bradford post and Chris Youhill’s most recent comments.
Nothing beats a Roe decker for me but, as I have said previously, I fully agree with Chris that the Orion is much maligned. Apart from the first "lightweight" models, the Sheffield examples were always well turned out and finished. I too, have a soft spot for them.
These Bolton examples look to be in the same mould, but are strangely out of place in this fleet. I never remember them in my time in Greater Manchester from 1971 to 1980.

David Oldfield

Sister vehicle SBN 767 is currently in the care of the Bolton Bus Preservation Group but is off the road awaiting restoration. BBPG’s active fleet includes former Bolton Transport East Lancs bodied Atlanteans 185 and 232 and similar (but longer and delivered in SELNEC orange) 6809.

Neville Mercer

11/05/11 – 07:13

Yes the sister vehicle is still barely in existence however it is in a very poor state after being abandoned on a farm for a number of years. I’m led to believe that the farm owner is due to cut up and scrap the remains due to the fact that the owner/s haven’t paid any rent for the vehicle.

A. N. On

12/05/11 – 07:10

I believe the route the bus is working on is a short-working of the old SLT trolleybus route from Bolton to Leigh from Howell Croft bus station. I think the full route to this day is still numbered 582.

Dave Towers

14/09/12 – 06:52

Just to get things correct the location is Howell Croft South. Howell Croft was split in two when the Town Hall, seen in the background, was doubled in size. The 81 was in-fact a short-working on the 82.

Malcolm Gibson

03/11/14 – 06:31

A short lived colour scheme … seemed odd at the time … but when a few of the older Leylands were painted in this scheme … definitely odd!!

Iain H

03/11/14 – 16:27

The colour scheme was Ralph Bennett’s first as Manager, based on the Plymouth scheme from whence he came.

Phil Blinkhorn

04/11/14 – 06:44

This colour scheme on this chassis/body combination gives them quite a Hebble look.

John Stringer

05/11/14 – 06:32

It always puzzled me why Bolton bought these, as they were completely non-standard. The pre-Atlantean fleet was quite a mixed one really, as though they couldn’t make their minds up quite what they wanted – although basically Daimlers and Leylands with MCW or East Lancs bodies, hardly any two batches were the same – 30′ Daimlers with rear entrance MCW or front entrance East Lancs, PD2s with full-front MCWs, PD3s with rear or front entrance East Lancs, or full fronts, etc.

Michael Keeley

05/11/14 – 11:33

I think that often when an operator – particularly a municipal one – purchased an odd batch of vehicles that seemed ‘non-standard’ to mystified enthusiasts it was usually to do with the tendering process resulting in an offer they couldn’t refuse (in the interest of saving ratepayers’ money) or the manufacturer being able to offer more attractive delivery dates than the preferred supplier.

John Stringer

05/11/14 – 15:37

John makes an excellent point. Many a manager who, for excellent engineering or operational reasons, wanted a particular vehicle type, found himself over ruled by his committee for political or "economic" reasons. One of the most crass decisions was that of the Manchester Committee which denied Albert Neal his desired Tiger Cubs and forced the Seddon bodied Albion Aberdonians on him, breaking their own Leyland/Daimler only purchase rules and then, as Leyland owned Albion, having them listed as Leylands and having the Albion badges which Seddon had affixed, removed.
Of course the vehicles had a long, distinguished career – long in being kept as often as possible in the depot, distinguished in being of poor finish, ride and serviceability.

Phil Blinkhorn

06/11/14 – 06:10

Manufacturers sometimes did bid low in an attempt to penetrate a "glass wall" of long standing custom and practice in purchasing followed by some municipalities. Municipal General Managers did succeed in getting their own way much of the time, as could be seen from the often dramatic change in favoured manufacturer following the appointment of a new GM, but Transport Committees were the ultimate power, and a low quotation would have been mightily tempting to the custodians of ratepayers’ money. (One can imagine the heated reaction in camera from a GM who had suffered the imposition of an unwanted vehicle type in the fleet.)

Roger Cox

20/07/15 – 05:38

Yes, I always thought the same as Michael about Boltons fleet. They seemed to have a lot of small batches which were all different, some 27 feet long, some 30, some with tin fronts, some St Helens moulded fronts, and some exposed radiators and also the same with Daimlers. When they changed to Atlanteans they seemed to become more standardised, some of the earlier ones had Metro Cammell bodies, then they seemed to standardise on East Lancs.

David Pomfret