Feather Brothers (Bradford)
1939
Dennis Lancet 2
Plaxton C37F

I took this photograph in 1960 with a rather primitive optical instrument called the Bencini Comet S. It shows a Dennis Lancet 2 of 1939 with a Plaxton C37F body, seeing out its final days employed on contractor work based in a yard beside the main London- Brighton railway line on the southern edge of Coulsdon (south of Croydon). The site is unrecognisable today. This coach began life with Feather Brothers, Bradford (later part of the Wallace Arnold empire) in May 1939, a less than auspicious moment to embark upon a coaching career, and its wartime experiences are unclear. Somewhat later, it entered the fleet of A. Farrow and Sons, Melton Mowbray where it stayed from January 1951 to January 1956, before passing on to Coronation of Stapleford.
The interesting story of Farrow, together with a fleet list, may be found here:- www.farrows-coaches.co.uk
By 1960 this coach had been ignominiously demoted as seen above. The Lancet 2 was offered with two alternative bonnet lengths, the longer one to accommodate the Gardner 5LW, and a much shorter one for the Dennis "Big Four" 97 bhp petrol engine of 6.786 litres, or the 85 bhp O4 diesel of 6.5 litres. The four cylinder Dennis engines were very compact, and the short bonnet allowed the bulkhead to be moved forward so that the greater internal saloon length could accommodate an extra row of seats. Setting aside the Maudslay SF40, which, in theory, could seat up to 40 passengers, though a lower figure was more usual, the short bonnet Lancet probably offered the greatest capacity – up to 39 seats – on a conventional chassis in the late 1930s. One does wonder, however, if the cab was a bit constricted, though the bodywork could be extended to the extreme front, flush with the radiator, as on this Plaxton C37F example, which is clearly built on a short bonnet chassis. The bulkhead has no autovac which was more usual than a lift pump for the fuel delivery to the engine on vehicles of that period. I cannot establish from the photograph whether this coach has a petrol or a diesel engine, though, to be still in use during the 1960s, the O4 diesel option would be very much more likely. If only this splendid machine were still around today.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

10/10/13 – 08:10

Your "optical device" can’t, surely, have been more primitive than my first such instrument, bought for 2s6d in Woolworth’s in 1962. If the camera and viewfinder (such as it was) were pointing the same way, an approximation of the target might appear on the film, but it was usually very blurred. More often than not, it captured something off to one side or the other.

Pete Davies

10/10/13 – 15:30

Most interesting are the metal surrounds for the destination glasses – a shape which was still in use by Plaxtons well after WW2.

Chris Youhill

11/10/13 – 06:59

I had a Bencini, a triumph of appearance over performance, the reasonable quality lens being the best part.
As for the coach, the nearside bodywork being carried halfway over the wing is something I’d not seen before – did Plaxton stop this after the war? Sad it never survived.

Chris Hebbron

11/10/13 – 06:59

Very interesting to see an example of pre-war Plaxton bodywork although this is perhaps not a very flattering angle (no disrespect to Roger) but you could see the makings of an attractive design emerging. Another point of interest is the radiator, I wasn’t aware that Dennis had introduced this style before WW2. You tend to think of pre-war Dennis coaches having the massive radiator with the bar across the front.

Chris Barker

11/10/13 – 08:29

North Western took six Dennis Aces in 1934 with a very neat radiator which was a definitive forerunner of a change to the shape depicted in Roger’s photo.. NW’s 1936 delivery of Lancet IIs had exactly the same radiator as DAK 684.

Phil Blinkhorn

11/10/13 – 08:29

I wonder if the "enclosed pocket" caused by the extension of the bodywork over the front mudguard might have caused a bit of resistance to the flow of wind, therefore affecting the pulling power of the coach ??

Chris Youhill

11/10/13 – 14:16

As Phil indicates, the Lancet II with the slimmer radiator, slightly offset towards the nearside, was introduced at the 1935 Motor Show, where a Dennis bodied coach for a Staffordshire operator, A T Hardwick, was exhibited. I agree with Chris Y about the probable aerodynamic consequences of the extended panel work alongside the bonnet, yet this feature appeared on the products of several coachbuilders of the time.
DAK 684 was always parked within a fenced enclosure alongside the Brighton Road, and this was the best shot I could obtain. I did return several times for a better view, but then one day, sadly, the coach had gone forever.
I am digging out some of my old Comet S photos that, with modern digital software, are now a bit more useable (the Watton picture of an ECOC SC4LK is another with this camera). As Chris H suggests, the Comet looked the part, but its performance was much inferior to the old Brownie 127 that I used before. As a collector of old cameras, I have examples of both today.

Roger Cox

11/10/13 – 14:16

The extension over the front wing was quite common – especially on Plaxtons. It was also very often hinged to facilitate access to the engine.

David Oldfield

11/10/13 – 14:17

A quick trawl around the web would suggest that Dennis changed to the lighter style of rad grill during 1936. I’ve seen photos of Lancet I’s and II’s for this year.
Your right, Chris Y. The ‘pocket’ was hardly in the vogue for streamlining in the mid/late ‘thirties.

Chris Hebbron

11/10/13 – 14:18

What a delight to see this ex Feather Brothers Lancet!
I remember Feather Brothers so well, and their office at the bottom of Great Horton Road, and we used them frequently for day trips, so I could well have ridden on this vehicle. I am trying to remember just when they were absorbed by Wallace Arnold, but if my birth were to have been registered under motor vehicle legislation, then I also would have carried a "DAK" plate!

John Whitaker

11/10/13 – 14:49

1968 springs to mind for some reason John, but I don’t know why.

David Oldfield

11/10/13 – 16:10

Gentlemen, its amazing how time flies – Feather Brothers sold out to Wallace Arnold in March 1955 !! Fifteen vehicles were in the deal as follows:-
Dennis Lancet – 4, AEC Regal IV – 5, Bedford SB – 6.
I was at the Leeds depot of WA, and my first tour was in 1963 to the Isle of Wight from Bradford depot and the coach was 9196 NW in Feather Brothers livery from purchase new by WA. Talk about thrown in at the deep end with only a brief sheet, in the dreadful "Roneo" format of the time, of instructions for the whole week. This farcical document would have been hilarious if it hadn’t been so seriously deficient in timings and directions – I have it still and I shudder even now when I look at it from time to time. I recovered shortly after practically throwing the poor old clients and their baggage on to the last sailing of the day to the Island. The thought of narrowly avoiding, by seconds literally, having to find forty bed and breakfasts at 7.00pm is not something I’d recommend. Then I had to take the empty coach to Lymington (half an inch on the map and many complex miles around the Solent fjords)for cleaning and refuelling before finding B & B for myself and catching the ferry next day to Yarmouth and the Southern Vectis’s superb early model Lodekka right around the coast to Sandown. The vision of a management unable to organise a long convivial evening in an alcohol manufactory springs ever to mind !!

Chris Youhill

06/07/17 – 07:33

Sometime after the WA take over of Feathers, 2 of the Bedford SBs went to Hedley Howarth t/a Howarth Coaches Middlestown, direct or otherwise, they were Yeates Riveria bodies HAK 10 & 30, joining Bedford OB GWY 654 ex R Armitage of Long Lane Flockton, this OB has always been in my memory as GYG66 but not so from new information, successors to Howarth were G Ward Red Lion from Kirkburton then Trevor the importer of the ‘Swede’ recent photo of this from Huddersfield group on :bay, then Barry Todd. Due to the ‘time’ there do not appear to be any photos of Howarth due to the lack of cameras, if any do exist there is a crowd in front & not much bus. Looking for photos for a local history projec

Gem

07/07/17 – 07:41

Further to Chris Y’s information (11/10/13 – 16:10) about the coaches included in the WA takeover of Feather Brothers, a further Dennis Lancet was involved. KKW 999 was a Dennis Lancet UF exhibited at the 1954 Commercial Vehicle Show and was delivered to Feather Brothers, but was not licensed until WA took control. There’s a photo of it here visiting Wembley – https://flic.kr/p/eaxumu 

David Williamson

08/01/19 – 06:41

With regards to Coronation Coaches of Stapleford run by Kenneth Gerry Lee of Harston, who ceased trading in April 1962 when the company was taken over by Miller Bros.
Does any one have a fleet list of the vehicles owned by Coronation Coaches, they were known to also operate a Commer Commando BFB 79 and a Leyland Tiger PS1 with full front Burlingham body HTJ 270.

John Wakefield

Potteries Motor Traction
1962
Leyland Leopard PSU3/3R
Plaxton Panorama C48F

C920 was one of a batch of five Leyland Leopard coaches to the recently permitted 36ft length delivered in 1962.
They were used on tours until 1968 when they were modified for one man operation which included fitting the roof mounted destination box. During my time at PMT they were allocated to Hanley Depot where they were reasonably suited to the longer distance services such as Hanley – Sandbach, Hanley – Crewe etc but not good on the more urban routes. My recollection is heavy steering, heavy clutch and heavy gear change – in fact they were just a heavy vehicle! The next batch of coaches were Reliance 590s, a much more lively and lighter vehicle to drive. (That should suit David O)!
The photo is taken in the preservation era on 9th September 1979 at the West Riding 75th Anniversary Rally at Belle Isle Depot in Wakefield. The programme records it as recently acquired by the Potteries Omnibus Preservation Society – I wonder if it is still around?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

08/09/13 – 08:30

You know me so well, Ian. Maybe that’s the real reason SUT got 333? Did it escape from an intended batch of six for PMT? Not only were they heavy, heavy, heavy, they had that low cramped driving position and – care of gear ratios – slow. I commuted regularly on the X48 to Manchester and initially it was on North Western’s early Y types on the same chassis. Only once did I get the feeling that they could be good with a driver who managed to DRIVE the thing – keeping the thing in third at the CORRECT revs and storming over the hills on Woodhead. Being an AEC man doesn’t prevent me saying that the Leopard eventually developed in its later years into a good coach – but they never got the ratios right on the standard Pneumo-cyclic box.

David Oldfield

PS: The roof box looks like one of those virtual reality head sets.

09/09/13 – 06:41

David’s comments about North Western’s early Y types is interesting. I regularly rode on those as a teenager on the X5 services to and from London and from a passenger’s point of view they were certainly lively enough on the flat and the more gentle gradients.
I also rode Western Scottish’s versions to and from Glasgow. The A6 over Shap and A74 over Beattock never seemed to present a problem, even when having to get around some fairly slow moving eight wheelers from Southall and Leyland which, when laden and often drawing a trailer, would really struggle.
Given Ian’s recollections regarding the heavy handling of the vehicle, it strikes me as a little odd that North Western, as a keen user of both AEC and Leyland, put all its coach eggs in the Leyland basket from the early 1960s onwards with the Leopard as the chosen chassis.

Phil Blinkhorn

09/09/13 – 09:00

The only area where the early Leopards were superior to the AEC was that they went in the direction you turned the wheel, where as the AEC’s had a tendency to wander. But you’re right about the later Leopard’s David, however, an AEC Reliance with a six speed ZF would knock spots off any Leopard, perhaps that’s why BL ‘not Leyland Motors’ killed if off?

Ronnie Hoye

09/09/13 – 14:15

SUT’s drivers hated 333 [it was the same age and identical to PMT C920] for the reasons stated. The next Leopards only arrived, in the mid ’70s, after NBC take over. I drove a 1976 example with a subsequent owner and was agreeably surprised by how it performed. By then a higher driving position, power steering and the 5 speed pneumo-cyclic box (not to mention a bigger engine) had addressed a number of the earlier criticisms. Ian’s (and SUT’s) criticisms were widespread but the Leopard did have some virtues – but maybe more for the engineer than the driver. It was, to quote a Commercial Motor journalist who was/is also an operator, a reliable plodder. When I once put Phil’s question to a North Western driver he said, "Well the Leopard – especially semi-auto – is nigh on idiot proof but not every one can drive a six speed ZF." Chris Y and Ian will agree that a ZF is not difficult if you drive properly (that is sensitively) but I know people, who ought to know better, who can’t! Lots of Leopard coaches had two speed rear axles. I always find these fun. There’s a sense of achievement using the splitter well – and this no doubt helped the performance of early Leopards. If you were a Leyland fleet, there was no doubt enough to keep you faithful – but I preferred the (Ribble) Leyland engined REs on the Manchester – Scotland services.

David Oldfield

10/09/13 – 16:30

I was still at Percy Main the first time I encountered an AEC Reliance with a ZF box, a Duple bodied demonstrator turned up, and those of us who were around at the time were invited to have a drive. We were all experienced with manual boxes, which on occasion required a bit of brut force and ignorance. We sat round for the pep talk, and we were informed that “You don’t need to grab the gear stick, all you need with a ZF is gentle guidance with the palm of the hand, and it will do all the work for you” Guess what? He was dead right.

Ronnie Hoye

11/09/13 – 08:30

As someone who worked for Southdown for nearly 22 years I had experience of various types of Leopard as well as an assortment of East Kent Reliance on South Coast Express work I have to agree with the previous comments.
The Leopard most certainly required considerable muscle to drive the steering and all the pedals were heavy to use although I found the large treadle throttle was comfortable in use and as Ronnie Hoye says the steering had no tendency to wander unlike the Reliance which needed constant attention but was lighter to use.
The two speed axle, which was fitted to all our Leopards both buses and coaches, did indeed help the performance especially on the O.600 engine models on the later O.680 engine models it really boosted the performance, although they were something that needed to be used properly to get the best out of them which sadly all too many drivers didn’t bother to do We had a batch of seven PSU5’s in 1981 which were fitted with a splitter box a much smoother operation, the main difference being that being part of the gearbox it changed as soon as the switch was operated irrespective of throttle position whereas the two speed being part of the rear axle would only change when the throttle was released taking the load off the mechanism, so could be preselected if necessary.
Having said all that about the Leopard I still found the Reliance much more enjoyable to drive the 6 speed box being a delight to use needing only the lightest of touches to get the best from it which after the effort needed on the manual Leopard was such a pleasure the brakes were also much lighter and progressive to use. The engine always felt much more free revving and, more powerful, I only drove one semi automatic Reliance after which I still preferred the manual version.
The later Leopards with 680 engines, pneumocyclic gearboxes and high driving position were indeed much better vehicles but never as good as the 6 speed Reliance

Diesel Dave

11/09/13 – 16:30

Well, I’ve said it before – i) ZF Reliance ii) RELH/REMH – (preferably 6L) iii) TRCTL11 Tiger iv) late Leopard. That is my hall of coaching fame – with apologies to Arab LUF fans. (I neither rode on nor drove any so I cannot have a view!)

David Oldfield

12/09/13 – 08:30

Couldn’t agree more Dave, the Leopard with raised driving position, 680 engine and 5 speed pneumocyclic gearbox made a very good bus or coach.
PMT had 20 Leopard buses delivered 1962/3 with manual gearboxes which weren’t bad vehicles. It was the five coaches converted for omo that just weren’t suited to their new role. The contemporary Reliance 590 buses although better than the earlier 470s still had problems with cylinder head gaskets/cylinder liner seal failures and the hydraulically operated clutches gave a fair degree of trouble. Much easier to steer and change gear on though!

Ian Wild

12/09/13 – 08:30

No need to apologise, David, since we are talking about different eras. I have only ever said that I think the Guy Arab LUF was the finest coach chassis of its time. As for late Leopards and Reliances, the only good thing to come out of the demise of the Reliance was the Leopard with 6-speed ZF gearbox, which is what it should always have had.

Peter Williamson

12/09/13 – 16:30

The 470 and 590 lost AEC a number of friends – despite the 691 and 760 addressing most of the problems – but the ZF Reliance (especially 691/760 powered) was a thoroughbred. Leyland still didn’t get it quite right, though, Peter.
The ZF used on the Reliance was an overdrive unit (5th was direct), that used on the Leopard had a direct 6th. [Rather like the strange unit used on the X reg Midland Scottish Leopards. Ostensibly a 5 speeder with CAV change (ie like Monocontrol and not the normal Westinghouse pedestal), it was more like a 4 speeder with a crawler below 1st. I drove one in preservation and it was odd to be able to start regularly in "3rd".

David Oldfield

11/08/14 – 17:32

AEC vs Leyland at North Western
Engineering staff at Macclesfield always told me they mistrusted AECs for always blowing gaskets. Leylands more friendly to maintain.

Bob Bracegirdle

06/03/21 – 07:09

During the early/mid 80s I travelled on National express coaches nearly every other weekend. They were mainly Leyland Leopard coaches, usually with 680s and the 5 speed air assisted box. Some did have 2 speed axles, but these were much rarer. The coaches had a. Huge gap between 4th and 5th, which affected there performance on motorway inclines, as the vehicle had to reduce speed to 50-55mph to change down. This was always where others coaches such as the Volvo B10s would come past. However, on the flat, many of these coaches would easily reach 80mph for long periods.
I once travelled on a Leopard with an early TL11 and air assisted box with twin speed axle, that was the fastest coach I ever travelled on. It only dipped to 70mph on the inclines not 55 and powered past the Volvo models by 5-10mph. It also held 80 on the flat.
Seems bizarre thinking of coaches going that fast, but at the time they would often been in the outside lane on the motorway going as fast they were capable of with the driver with his foot on the boards. The Leopards sounded great at speed, and growling around the London Victoria and Digbeth stations.
Amazing times.

Dr Chris Davies

13/03/21 – 06:36

I seem to recall that the restriction of coach/bus speed limits on motorways was because of a spate of minor accidents, then a biggy, when a coach went off the motorway and down some some sort of large drain vertically, killing a lot of pensioners. I think it was near Bristol. I think it took a while because they had to get the whole of the EU to agree the limits and a fair time for vehicles with speed governors to come along.

Chris Hebbron

15/03/21 – 06:30

I think the accident that Chris is referring to is this one:- www.independent.co.uk/

Nigel Frampton

15/03/21 – 13:36

The very one, Nigel. Thx for raking that out. Memory not so bad, after all. Now then, what was I going to do next??? Um!

Chris Hebbron

H W Hunter and Sons
1952
Leyland Royal Tiger
Plaxton C43F (1966)

Hunter’s were a family run business who went for quality rather than quantity. They bought well in the first place, and as we’ve seen before on this site, their vehicles were well looked after and meticulously maintained. ZV 2428 is probably an age related registration that was issued when the original was transferred to someone’s car. That number is on a vehicle that is part of the N.E.B.P.T. Ltd collection. The vehicle in question belonged to H W Hunter and Sons, and is a Leyland Royal Tiger that they bought new in 1952, it came to them as a Burlingham Seagull, and being 1952, I presume it would have been a centre entrance. In 1966, they had it rebodied by Plaxton as a C43F. This vehicle, EJR 791, has an identical history, so the question is, is this in fact the same vehicle, or was it one of a pair?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

30/06/13 – 09:42

Ronnie, nice view!
I remember some vehicles in what was then the Les Gleave Group being lengthened and rebodied in the 1960s. Roman City in Bath did the same trick – using Harrington – on at least one Royal Tiger they bought from Ribble. EJR 791, according to the PSVC preserved bus listing for 2012 is indeed ZV2428, at that time with Universal, Portlaoise.

Pete Davies

I thought ZV and similar registrations are what are popularly known as "Paddy Plates" (I claim Irish blood and am allowed to say this) -Irish registrations with the great advantage of not revealing the (venerable?) age of the coach. These seem/seemed popular with small operators who used them as "personalised" plates.

Joe

01/07/13 – 07:18

The ZV2428 Number probably means that this coach spent some time in Ireland. The ZV plate is used here for imported vehicles that come under a "vintage" registration class which covers vehicles over 30 years old.

David Jones

01/07/13 – 07:35

Mention of the Les Gleave Group lengthening and rebodying a number of Leyland Royal Tigers brought to mind this photo of one of these coaches taken in Eastbourne in the mid sixties registered 2048 LG the body style indicates the work was carried out around 1961/62.
There is a photo of an identical coach at that time belonging to Campings of Brighton registered 501 WLG taken at the 1964 Brighton Coach Rally posted on the SCT 61 Photo Gallery section covering Plaxtons.

Diesel Dave

01/07/13 – 10:50

Only Northern Ireland plates can be used in Britain in the way Joe describes.
ZV is used in the Irish Republic, as David suggests, when registering a vehicle older than 30 years.

Geoff Kerr

02/07/13 – 07:35

It is the same vehicle. EJR 701 is a Leyland PSU1/15 which was new to Hunter’s in March 1952 as their no 19; it had a Burlingham C41C body. In January 1966 it was rebodied by Plaxton to C43F and renumbered 27. In June 1977 it was acquired by OK Motor Services. In January 1984 it was transferred to Lockey’s which had itself been acquired by OKMS in October 1983 and was functioning at the time as an OK subsidiary; EJR carried the ‘Lockeys Burn Line’ fleetname, but OKMS livery. In August 1985 it, together with the rest of Lockey’s extant fleet, returned to OKMS with whom it remained until June 1987.

Alan Hall

06/07/13 – 16:02

I like the zero-(or possibly negative-)offset front wheels on the lengthened Royal Tiger from Diesel Dave, which give the bus a real heavy-vehicle look. One reason that I dislike wheel-trims (especially those ghastly wobbling chrome things) is that they obliterate much of a vehicle’s identity and character, and can add difficulty to a historian’s job. Thankfully, no such nonsense with 2048 LG!

Ian Thompson

28/04/15 – 07:02

This vehicle (if it is the same one) now carries registration RCI 541 (a traditional Laois plate) and is still with Universal, Portlaoise (John O’Brien). https://www.flickr.com/photos/midlanddeltic/17225777661/
I have found a couple of pics showing it carrying ZV2428 which, as suggested above, is a "heritage" plate for imported / re-registered vehicles. //victoryguy.smugmug.com/keyword/ZV2428;zv2428/

Sean Marshall

13/11/21 – 06:09

Pete Davies: In your post of 30/06/13 you have implied that Roman City had an ex-Ribble Royal Tiger lengthened and rebodied by Harrington. The only Roman City vehicle I know to have been rebodied by Harrington was FRN 982, a Tiger Cub, not Royal Tiger, ex-Scout, rather than Ribble, and it retained its original length (more or less).
The ‘Wikipedia’ page on Harrington refers to the vehicle as being ex-Ribble, so that may be where you got the Ribble connection.

David Call