Copyright John Stringer

Gore’s of Southport
1951
Leyland Royal Tiger PSU1/15
Burlingham Seagull C37C new – C41C ??/??

Gore’s Coaches was the trading name of the Southport & Birkdale Motor and Carriage Co. Ltd. of Southport.
I was quite taken aback to come across this late survivor of the Royal Tiger/Burlingham Seagull marque in such fine fettle outside Liverpool Lime Street Railway Station, whilst on an enthusiasts’ visit to Birkenhead and Wallasey on 13th June 1971. This one deserved to have survived into preservation – I wonder what became of it ?

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

17/02/13 – 07:34

Super picture and beautiful vehicle – doesn’t look twenty years old, more like twenty months.

David Oldfield

17/02/13 – 13:31

Very nice, John! Thanks for posting. Reading Corporation (I see you don’t list any from that fleet yet, Peter) had assorted single deckers, even into the RE era, with the Burlingham trademark on the front. Flattery gets you everywhere!

Pete Davies

17/02/13 – 17:31

Any Burlingham will do for me – apart from the hideous flying pig (c1959) on Bedford/Ford chassis!

David Oldfield

18/02/13 – 11:00

It would be a hard job to make one of these look bad, but no doubt some of todays ‘Corporate Image Experts’ would have a good try.

Ronnie Hoye

18/02/13 – 12:08

Yes Ronnie, but imagine one in National white – that would be bad enough!

David Oldfield

18/02/13 – 12:11

Pete D: There are a selection of Reading views in Roger Cox’s gallery Reading Corporation Transport

Alan Murray-Rust

18/02/13 – 16:24

Thank you, Alan, but Roger’s views (good as they are) don’t appear in the column to the left, so a newcomer to the site may not know there are any of this operator without a closer study. I’ve found a few to submit for consideration and will fire them off to our Editor in the course of the next few weeks.

Pete Davies

19/02/13 – 15:23

Very true, David, the National all white reminded me of the factory finish commercial vehicles were delivered in prior to painting. It’s not so much all one colour that’s the problem, choice of colour could make all the difference on what were very similar vehicles. Take a Plaxton body for example, National all white? drab and anonymous, Glenton on the other hand were quietly restrained and dignified.

Ronnie Hoye

19/02/13 – 15:23

PSVC gives this coach as withdrawn by Gore’s in 11/72, with no further owner recorded. Evidently reseated to C41C at some time prior to this photo, but recorded as C37C, as given above, when new.

David Williamson

22/09/14 – 14:37

I am not a bus or coach driver, just a casual visitor to this site, but it occurred to me that there is a serious front overhang on the coach above. Did it not make it difficult to drive? I once drove a 3 ton truck on a one off 20 mile trip. That gave me the sensation of being slightly drunk. I would have thought that you would have felt completely plastered, driving the above!

Martin Robinson

28/10/14 – 16:52

There is a Burlingham Seagull advertised on eBay at the moment. //www.ebay.co.uk/itm/201202508209?clk_rvr_id=721251652239
I don’t know how accurate the listing is.
It says 1958 Bedford SB8 Classic Vintage Coach yet further down it says it has a Leyland 350 engine.
Did they put Leyland engines in the Bedford chassis?

John Lomas

29/10/14 – 06:59

They did fit Leyland engines, John, but I doubt the Leyland 0.350 is original. I don’t think the SB13 (with 0.350) was available in 1958 – more likely an SB8 (with 0.330). The 0.350 was probably a retrofit. 1958 was actually very close to the end of SBO and introduction of SB5 and SB8. I’m not expert enough in this part of Bedford’s history to be sure of dates – I only know the specifications. The SBG morphed into the classic SB3 (300 Bedford petrol), the SBO became the SB5 (330 Bedford diesel) and the SB8 (0.330 Leyland diesel) was an addition to the range. I believe the SB13 (0.350 Leyland diesel) eventually replaced the SB8 but everything was outlasted by the SB5 which continued (albeit with a new, indecipherable code) until the bitter end in 1985.

David Oldfield

29/10/14 – 06:59

Yes, Bedford SB8 and SB13 models had Leyland engines.

David Hick

29/10/14 – 15:56

Forgot to mention the rare SB1 with 300 Bedford diesel engine.

David Oldfield

29/10/14 – 15:56

The Bedford dealer, Arlington, had begun offering conversions of the ‘Big Bedford’ S-type goods chassis with the Leyland O350 (5.76 litre) engine from as early as 1952. Bedford themselves began to offer a Perkins R6 (5.56 litre) diesel option in both that model and the SBO coach chassis from 1953. In 1957 Bedford introduced their own 330 (4.92 litre) diesel engine to replace the troublesome R6, resulting in the SB1. At the same time they began to offer the Leyland O350 officially as an option, resulting in the SB8. In 1961 they replaced their own 300 diesel with the increased capacity 330 (5.42 litres), resulting in the SB5. By 1962 Leyland had replaced the O350 and its larger bore equivalent the O375 (not used by Bedford) with the revised O370 (6.05 litre) and O400 (6.54 litre) units respectively. The O370 went into the SB as the SB13, and the O400 into the twin-steer VAL, and later the VAM as well as various goods models.

John Stringer

29/10/14 – 17:04

….. and of course Leyland then produced their own version of the SB13 – the Albion Victor VT41L, with the O.370. Those who ran them held them in high regard but, like many models, they were a little late on the market and only lasted about three seasons before the VAM/R192 style lightweights took over from the traditional SB style motor for independents.

David Oldfield

05/08/18 – 07:45

I have just come across the messages sent four years ago concerning Bedford coaches fitted with a Leyland engine & I would just like to vouch how good that combination was.
When Bedford deleted the option to specify a Leyland power unit in 1967/8 ie the Leyland O400 in the four wheeler VAM14 & "Chinese Six" VAL14 in favour of their own 466 engine to me it was a retrogressive step. The Bedford 466 engine was original developed for the introduction of the KM lorry in 1966. The 466 was not a bad engine, but not a patch on a Leyland unit especially VALs. With this disservice by Bedfords a good number of coach firms move onto the Leyland (& indeed Perkins) powered Bristol LH & its longer brother, the LHL.

Andrew Spriggs

07/08/18 – 06:03

Andrew. I think most people – and certainly most operators – agree that the VAL14 and VAM14, because of their 0.400 engines, were better than the VAL70 and VAM70, with the Bedford 466. The Ford R series began to catch up with Bedfords and, possibly overtake them (literally) from this time on. Bedford’s heyday was really from the OB through to the SB3.

David Oldfield

09/08/18 – 07:18

Yes I agree with you David, as the Ford R series really gave Bedford a run for their money especially with the turbo engine & six speed gearbox on Fords. In the later years of Glenway Coaches, Fords served the company well,drivers only complaints were the turbo would cut out for no reason & a sloppy gearbox (having to fish for gears). Fords would fly along on the flat on the motorway, get to a gradient & then old AEC Reliances would fly past in the middle lane leaving the modern Ford standing.
Going back to the original thread of Leyland Royal Tigers (bit before my time), the only one I recall was a 1952 model that had been rebodied in the mid 60s with a Plaxton Panorama body, my friend drove that one, he liked it apart from heavy steering & not too good brakes.

Andrew Spriggs

Copyright Pete Davies

Wilts & Dorset Motor Services
1954
Bristol LWL5G
ECW FB39F

LAM 107 was built for Wilts & Dorset in 1954. By the time I photographed her, on a dull Sunday afternoon in March, 1976, she had been relegated to the role of staff transport for Husband’s Shipyard, of Marchwood. The village is opposite Southampton’s Western docks and the military base there was home to the MULBERRY harbour project for D Day. In this view, she had been modified to have an Eastern Coachworks FB39F body and was LWL5G mechanically. Her successor at Husbands was a Bedford VAL which had been new to Blue Bus of Willington.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

This was modified in 1959 to make it suitable for OMO. Apparently they were known locally as "conkerboxes" but I have no idea why.

Paragon

16/02/13 – 07:25

Well this one has obviously seen better days but I think that with this style of full front added, the standard ECW/Bristol L was transformed into a very nice, modern looking bus. I’m surprised it wasn’t done to a greater extent by Tilling companies, although some of them perhaps thought it was money that didn’t need to be spent!

Chris Barker

18/02/13 – 17:32

The comment about conkerboxes reminded me of my time with Bristol Omnibus Co. We called the L5gs with the nearside cab window adjusted for O.M.O.duties conkerboxes, rattling old crates as they were, completely devoid of any mod cons and very tiring to work on, the side window conversion resulted in a very painful neck at the end of a shift. I often wonder why I have never seen one so converted at a rally? By the way I believe that the conkerbox nickname related to the sound effects produced sometimes when engaging the "overdrive" 5th gear, a bit like a loose cannon ball in a steel tank. They really were noisy old things to drive, nice to see at rallies, but to have to drive constantly a real pain, luckily we only had a few of them to put up with, the rest of our steeds were LS5gs and MW5gs, which comparatively speaking were much more acceptable, of course they were all light years away from the REs yet to appear in the fleet.

Dave Knapp

14/02/14 – 17:07

On the subject of Excetera, the buses have personal number plates with letters ETC, the accepted abbreviation for "et cetera", but the company spells its name eXcetera. No idea why!

Andy

Copyright John Stringer

United Services
1958
Dennis Loline MkI 6LW
East Lancs. H37/31RD

One of a batch of 34 Lolines delivered to Aldershot & District in 1958 numbered 336-369 (SOU 445-477), SOU 473 was withdrawn by them in 1969. It was then bought by W. R. & P. Bingley of Kinsley, who along with Cooper’s of South Elmsall and Everett’s of South Kirkby traded under the name ‘United Services’. It is pictured here resting at Bingley’s Upton depot in April 1973.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

13/02/13 – 04:47

Here is a photograph of this bus when in service with its original owner, Aldershot and District. It is seen in Farnham Road bus station, Guildford in 1961. The Aldershot fleet was generally impeccably turned out, so that the tree damage to the front dome is surprising. The Loline I was a close copy of the Bristol LD Lodekka, but axles, clutch and gearbox were all of Dennis design. Unlike the Lodekka, the Loline always had a full air braking system. These Lolines were thoroughbreds to drive, better in every respect, in my estimation, to the Leyland PD2 and PD3, and the AEC Regent V machines that I had encountered at Halifax. Though equipped with the modestly powerful Gardner 6LW, which A&D rated at the full manufacturer’s setting, they were good performers, and, with a top speed touching 50 mph, quite fast for the time (1958) when they were introduced (and when the legal maximum speed for a PSV was 30 mph). The high quality East Lancs bodywork completed the specification of a supremely capable and reliable bus.

Roger Cox

13/02/13 – 04:50

Just between duties or withdrawn? Certainly not the pristine condition one normally associated with her original owner!

Pete Davies

13/02/13 – 14:43

I suppose that replacing a dented panel or wing to maintain standards of presentation was one thing, but straightening out a roof dome once battered by trees would be rather a big job – time consuming and therefore expensive, and the chances were that once done there was a distinct likely hood of it returning again with the same problem soon after.

John Stringer

15/02/13 – 12:06

Good to see these pictures of a superbly well-proportioned bus with, as Roger points out, first-rate innards to match. And if the 6LW was modestly-powered on paper, 112GHP (Gardner horsepower) was worth 125 of anyone else’s. Two of this batch fortunately survive: SOU 465, a regular attender at events, and SOU 456, still under restoration.
I prefer the Loline I radiator-grille shape to the later square-with-rounded-corners design.
I’ve got a Loline maintenance manual with sectional drawings of a bewildering variety of alternative gearboxes. Apparently they even offered a six-speed version, which I’m sure was never fitted to a production bus. I’ll post them here soon.

Ian Thompson

15/02/13 – 17:07

Ian, your extensive knowledge of, and fellow enthusiasm for Dennis machinery is very welcome on this site. I certainly never knew that a six speed option was available for the Loline. That would have given a 6LX powered bus an extraordinary performance. The generally accepted view is that the Loline was little more than a licence built Lodekka, but this is an over simplification, particularly in the case of the Loline III. I think I am right in believing that even the Loline I had a gearbox (the ‘V’ type?) that lowered the transmission line without the need for transfer gears as fitted to the Lodekka. The Loline transmission would have thus been more positive and efficient than the Bristol equivalent. The pre Hestair Dennis company had a high level of engineering expertise, but its commercial policies were very indecisive and often misguided. The firm nearly fell victim to a takeover by Seddon before Hestair became interested. Had that happened, or had Leyland made a move to gobble up the Guildford manufacturer, the outcome would surely have been oblivion. ADL may be a different animal from the Dennis of fond memory, and, alas, the superb fire engine business is no more, but it is the only significant bus chassis manufacturer now left in the UK.

Roger Cox

16/02/13 – 07:16

I think SOU 473 was bought by Everett’s in spring 1969, and later passed to Bingleys when Everett’s ceased to operate. I have no record of the takeover date or SOU’s withdrawal date, if anyone knows, please tell me! This was a superb bus to travel in, very speedy and much more spacious than any previous United Services vehicle. The rear door was air-powered, sliding forward into a pocket – when opened whilst decelerating for a stop, it crashed heavily onto the front of the pocket, no chance of dozing off despite the comfortable seats.

Roger Townend

16/02/13 – 07:17

I have a Loline sales brochure from about 1960 and this shows that the standard gearbox offering was the 5 speed V type. Interestingly a 4 speed SCG epicyclic was also offered but I have no knowledge of it ever being fitted. In 1967 Halifax took 5 Lolines with 6LX engines and a five speed overdrive epicyclic gearbox. The GM at the time, Geoffrey Hilditch, described them as having "a useful turn of speed". I believe he meant that it went like the wind!

Paragon

16/02/13 – 10:15

Were these Halifax Lolines not the same ones which they sold to West Riding when they were only two to three years old.

They must have run out of wind rather quickly.

Andrew Beever

16/02/13 – 13:38

Andrew, I recall reading some years ago that the Halifax batch were bought for a specific purpose, namely a specialised route needing vehicles of this specification for the best performance. This, I believe, they did well. However, once the PTE came into existence, my memory is that the route or the perceived needs changed, and the batch ended up on local routes. They weren’t suited to this role at all! This meant that their early sale to West Riding was convenient for both PTE and W. Riding. I am only going on memories of what I have read, not local experience, but others may have more specific details. In the early days of Classic Bus magazine, there was a three-bus test drive including an AEC Renown (King Alfred), a Bristol Lodekka(Hants & Dorset) and a Dennis Loline (Aldershot & District. The drivers were expecting Lodekka or Renown to win out, but the Loline beat the others into the corner!

Michael Hampton

16/02/13 – 14:42

In 1962, on two occasions, I took a bus from Southsea to Milford (Surrey). I can’t recall the Southdown vehicle to/from Petersfield, but do recall the A&D Lolines north of Petersfield on the challenging A3 route. They were comfortable, quiet and performed very well.

Chris Hebbron

16/02/13 – 17:00

Remember that West Riding were in a pretty bad way with their Wulfrunians and acquired a lot of second hand Lodekkas to keep them going…so a few Lolines added a certain standardisation. …. the other story (SCT61) is that the Lolines were for the Calder Valley and when Tod came on board, even they couldn’t get in the newly integrated garage.

Joe

16/02/13 – 18:10

By their very nature, the Halifax Lolines were best suited to lengthy, high speed runs, which were not characteristic features of the local Halifax topography. Whilst they were suitable for the inter urban ‘B’ services such as the 43 to Huddersfield or the 48/49 Brighouse – Hebden Bridge, these busy routes were well within the capabilities of the PD2s, PD3s, Regent Vs and Fleetlines in the fleet. The Lolines migrated to the Meredith and Drew contracts where their remarkable road performance (GGH admits to these machines being capable of 55 mph plus) proved entirely suitable to the task, but, of necessity, a conductor had to be carried on what was essentially a coach service. When West Riding, desperate for Wulfrunian replacement stock, made an enticing offer, they were sold on in 1970. However, Geoff Hilditch, in his book "Steel Wheels and Rubber Tyres" (Vol 2) states that "this would not have happened had we then known of the Millwood (i.e,Todmorden) garage problem that would face us in 1971 They would have been ideal for the Halifax – Todmorden – Burnley service." There was nothing wrong with the buses. They were just unsuited to much of the tortuous route system that was indigenous to the Halifax area.

Roger Cox

17/02/13 – 07:27

…..and, of course, the North Western Lolines – along with the Renowns – were for long distance routes rather than urban stop/start.

David Oldfield

17/02/13 – 07:28

A "cartoon-style" line-drawing of one of the Halifax Lolines was used as the basis for a recruitment poster during the early 1970s: "I’m blue because I have no driver" – featuring blue Loline with weeping eyes/headlights. This was painted onto a blank window panel in Crossfield Bus Station near the 76 (Bradford v Queensbury) stand. I remember, as my 6/7 year-old self, thinking why didn’t they picture a Regent/Titan/Fleetline instead of a "made-up" double-decker – of course by then (post Hebble-Halifax JOC merger) the Lolines had moved on, and I’d never noticed/come across them. But what made the artist/HPT choose one of their most un-typical buses? Other similar advertisements included one for the 68/X68 to Sheffield featuring one of the Seddon Pennine RU DPs, and one for private hire featuring – I think! – one of the ex-Timpsons Park Royal Royalist Reliances . . . I said "I think", perhaps it was just a Panorama Elite.

Philip Rushworth

17/02/13 – 07:29

Ian mentions above that one of the two surviving Aldershot and District Loline I machines is SOU 465. Here is a picture of this bus taken on 25 June 1967 in Petersfield. It is operating the lengthy 24 route to Guildford on which Chris would have travelled to reach Milford. I, too frequently sampled this route and its Loline Mk.Is in the days before I acquired a PSV Licence. Later, as driver with A&D at Aldershot circa 1966-68, I did drive on the parallel route 6 between Aldershot and Petersfield (Steep village), though Loline IIIs had taken over by that time. Interestingly, the only joint operation into Aldershot was Route 12 to Reading, which was shared with Thames Valley. When an Lodekka suffered a defect or failure at the Hampshire end of the service, it was replaced by a Loline, and very often the Thames Valley driver was reluctant to hand it back again later in return for the repaired Lodekka. I genuinely cannot recall any instances of a Loline failing at the Reading end of the route though I expect this must have happened now and again. Aldershot & District had much higher engineering standards than Thames Valley.

Roger Cox

17/02/13 – 08:50

That’s a lovely photo which brings back lots of memories, Roger. I recognise the place well. Thx. It was a long route – the better part of 30 miles in total, hilly and twisting in places, all taken with panache. I worked in Guildford and had a soft spot for the old ‘All Aboard & Risk it’, as it was nicknamed! And an Aunt-in-Law was once a clippie with them during the war, around Woking.

Chris Hebbron

17/02/13 – 08:51

I think you may be right about engineering standards, Roger.

David Oldfield

17/02/13 – 12:23

Your mention of "I’m blue because I have no driver",Phlip, reminded me of a quiz a couple of years ago on a blog I follow. I’ve found it here. I did badly! See HERE: //tinyurl.com/c97j9kf

Chris Hebbron

18/02/13 – 08:26

Roger’s comments about engineering standards at Thames Valley remind me of the set of pictures I have of a whole variety of other operators’ vehicles which had to be drafted into Reading to help out because of vehicles off the road, firstly in May and September 1973 (London Country RTs and some Royal Blue MWs) and then again in April 1974 and August/September 1974, when a variety of buses came from Ensign Bus, (ex Portsmouth, Swindon, S&M of Hadleigh, LT) together with a couple of Reliances and a couple of Lolines from Reading Transport. It appears that the merger with A&D didn’t result in a migration of engineering standards to Reading!

Alan Murray-Rust

18/02/13 – 10:57

It may have been coincidence, or simply made the situation worse: it was that period in the early seventies which was also the period of (British) Leyland’s worst "hour" – not only take it or leave it but you can’t get it (spares) and we won’t make/supply it (Bristol RE). Thames Valley were not the only operator in that position. Leyland disease – oh I’d forgotten late deliveries as well – certainly affected Sheffield/SYPTE and others as well.

David Oldfield

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

20/02/13 – 05:57

Those six Halifax Lolines may have contributed to Dennis’ survival as a manufacturer today (even if in a different form). Mr GGH (as he is referred to above) was impressed by his contacts with Dennis, and on moving to Leicester a few years later, encouraged Dennis to develop the Dominator double-decker as an antidote to the "leylandisation" of the British bus manufacturing industry. Dennis had only dabbled in the bus market from c. 1950 until then, but from the mid/late 1970s developed new ranges to suit the new challenges. And the rest, as they say, is history. I guess "Mr GGH" was embarking on a wider plan than he realised, thus making it still possible to buy a British-made bus today.

Michael Hampton

20/02/13 – 09:35

In 1963 the magazine Commercial Motor published the results of a road test of 447, an Aldershot and District Mk3 Loline. It produced the best fuel consumption figures of any double decker tested by the magazine since the Second World War.
Fully laden with the equivalent of 68 passengers the testers obtained 12.75 mpg at two stops per mile and 9.25 mpg at six stops per mile. The fleet average for A&D Lolines at that time was 13.5 mpg.
One of the testers was the well known transport author Alan Townsin and he describes travelling on an undulating stretch of the A3 at an average speed of 32.4 mph and obtaining 15.7 mpg. He gives the top speed at about 47mph.
He describes all controls as "very satisfying" and had that "indefinable feel of a thoroughbred vehicle"
Praise indeed.

I think it is Paragon

21/02/13 – 06:22

I drove Loline Is and IIIs from Aldershot Depot in 1966-68, after which I returned to the administrative side of the bus industry. Without doubt, the Loline was a superb bus, predictable, stable and refined. The A&D Loline III was rather livelier than the Mark I by virtue of the lighter bodywork by Alexander or Weymann, and its Dennis gearbox had a modified gate that emulated the Reliance pattern, making the engagement of overdrive rather simpler. Those fuel economy figures are way beyond the reach of "modern" buses, and, I suspect, the reliability statistics for today’s machinery are equally inferior. Progress? What progress?

Roger Cox