Not wishing to derail the Pacer vs Pacer thread (http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=153787)- was the Leyland National a success, or a failure?
Brunel 1954:
Bevan Price:
My first experience of the Leyland National was probably in the late 1970s, and they were Mk1 Nationals run by Eastern Scottish. I remember when the Mk2s were introduced and I recall not liking them very much at the time because they made a completely different noise (bear in mind, I was probably about four years old at the time!).
The Mk1s had the Leyland 510 engine, which could be very temperamental, and they did suffer a bit from weight-distribution issues. The latter problem was solved by moving the batteries to the front of the bus, and the redesigned Mk2 also had the radiator relocated to the front, which would have helped matters slightly.
The Mk2 had the L11 engine, essentially an upgraded version of the venerable O.680 which was standard fare on the Leopard and Atlantean, and available as an option on many other chassis. The turbocharged TL11 was also available as an option and eventually Leyland reluctantly offered the Gardner 6HLXB, although this was perhaps too little too late.
Was the National so bad? Growing up in a SBG world where narrow-entrance, high-floor Fords and Leopards were the usual transport, the Nationals seemed so much more accessible with their wide entrances and low floors (relatively speaking). My local depot had three which were designated for the town service and they ran it for years successfully until some bright spark decided that minibuses were better.
Were they really that bad? Discuss.
Brunel 1954:
Bevan Price:
My first experience of the Leyland National was probably in the late 1970s, and they were Mk1 Nationals run by Eastern Scottish. I remember when the Mk2s were introduced and I recall not liking them very much at the time because they made a completely different noise (bear in mind, I was probably about four years old at the time!).
The Mk1s had the Leyland 510 engine, which could be very temperamental, and they did suffer a bit from weight-distribution issues. The latter problem was solved by moving the batteries to the front of the bus, and the redesigned Mk2 also had the radiator relocated to the front, which would have helped matters slightly.
The Mk2 had the L11 engine, essentially an upgraded version of the venerable O.680 which was standard fare on the Leopard and Atlantean, and available as an option on many other chassis. The turbocharged TL11 was also available as an option and eventually Leyland reluctantly offered the Gardner 6HLXB, although this was perhaps too little too late.
Was the National so bad? Growing up in a SBG world where narrow-entrance, high-floor Fords and Leopards were the usual transport, the Nationals seemed so much more accessible with their wide entrances and low floors (relatively speaking). My local depot had three which were designated for the town service and they ran it for years successfully until some bright spark decided that minibuses were better.
Were they really that bad? Discuss.
I've managed to avoid Luton in intervening years and try to avoid minibus travel too!