• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

The age potential of a bus?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gingerbus1991

Member
Joined
30 Jul 2018
Messages
992
When operators renew there fleet members generally speaking some operator renew the buses at a younger age whilst other at an older age, I wonder how old a bus can litterally be operated, 5, 10, 15 maybe even 20 years before absolutely needing changed?

Surely with a half-life refurb many could go for 20 years with the right maintenance etc?

Or would stuff like the drive axle or steering give out before then?

I particulatly ask this as bus refurbs can give even the oldest buses a new lease of life
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
well the RM's were in operation from 1959 with the last being built in 1968 and weren't finally retired from normal service until 2005 meaning the youngest were 47 yrs old when withdrawn... and there are still 10 in operation on the heritage 15
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,546
Location
Elginshire
well the RM's were in operation from 1959 with the last being built in 1968 and weren't finally retired from normal service until 2005 meaning the youngest were 47 yrs old when withdrawn... and there are still 10 in operation on the heritage 15
The RMs weren't the same as your average "provincial" bus, though - they had a specialised maintenance regime, didn't they? There was a video on YouTube that showed their RT predecessors going through regular overhauls. Body was separated from chassis, each was overhauled and then married up with the next one coming off the line. (Question for the experts - did the registration number of the RTs remain with the chassis, or the body, and how did fleet numbers match up?)
When Stagecoach took over my local operator (1991, I think), the oldest vehicles in the fleet were probably M- and N-suffix Leopards, so they'd be around 17-18 years old, and they were imports from other SBG companies. I don't pay much attention to "modern" stuff these days, but the oldest vehicles I've seen kicking about are on 03/53 plates (when they're not disguised with cherished registrations).
Ultimately, the longevity of any vehicle comes down to how well it's looked after over its lifetime; ex-Lothian R-Type Olympians seemed to be fairly sought-after for school work, and they date back to 1988.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
With regards to the RTs, I believe engines, bodies etc were all swapped round on overhaul.
The company I drive for tends to keep buses for 15-20 years, the design life seems to be 12 years or so for lightweight buses (Dennis Darts etc) through to 25 years for heavier vehicles (Volvo's), although a local small operator a few years ago was running a couple of lightweight Ford R Series coaches that were 30+ years old.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
The RMs weren't the same as your average "provincial" bus, though - they had a specialised maintenance regime, didn't they? There was a video on YouTube that showed their RT predecessors going through regular overhauls. Body was separated from chassis, each was overhauled and then married up with the next one coming off the line. (Question for the experts - did the registration number of the RTs remain with the chassis, or the body, and how did fleet numbers match up?) ...
The RTs and RMs were just looked after like any bus fleet should have been. Swapping bodies, chassis (RT) and engines doesn't make them last longer, it was just a way of managing a large flow where some parts of the vehicles took longer to overhaul than others. You might consider that the London buses were specified to match the operational requirements, but the RTs were really only AEC Regent MKIIIs. Their through-life cost was probably lower than most other operators acheived despite their very heavy workload because the maintenance was undertaken properly.
The 10 heritage RMs have been re-engined, mainly for economy and environmental reasons.
 

Robertj21a

On Moderation
Joined
22 Sep 2013
Messages
7,518
When operators renew there fleet members generally speaking some operator renew the buses at a younger age whilst other at an older age, I wonder how old a bus can litterally be operated, 5, 10, 15 maybe even 20 years before absolutely needing changed?

Surely with a half-life refurb many could go for 20 years with the right maintenance etc?

Or would stuff like the drive axle or steering give out before then?

I particulatly ask this as bus refurbs can give even the oldest buses a new lease of life

Plenty of 20-25 year old buses still in use on schools etc. Many only got withdrawn from front line service work as they couldn't meet the DDA requirements.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
Plenty of 20-25 year old buses still in use on schools etc. Many only got withdrawn from front line service work as they couldn't meet the DDA requirements.
Sometimes the councils put age limits into school contracts too, there have been a couple of operators local to me that over the last few years have been told if they wanted to keep school contracts they had to update their fleet. One of them was running 30+ year old clapped out Metrobuses.
 

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
14,191
Location
St Albans
I wonder what would have happened if the DDA came into force in the '50s. In those days London Transport procured buses that met the specifications drawn up from their actual needs. There might then have been a design that survived (suitably updated for modern emission requirements) to the present day. Not of course individual buses, 50+ years would be pushing the life of some components in normal service.
The fact is that LT led the development of buses fit for heavy service in city and suburban environments, and to a lesser degree, the NBC fleet was in most ways fit for it's intended purpose. Subsequent offerings by manufacturers were more what they wanted to sell rather than what the market wanted. The consequence was that buses tended to be designed for a minimally acceptable service life and despite there being a possibility of refurbishment, they had too much dated 'styling' to make that worthwhile.
 

PeterC

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2014
Messages
4,069
The RMs weren't the same as your average "provincial" bus, though - they had a specialised maintenance regime, didn't they? There was a video on YouTube that showed their RT predecessors going through regular overhauls. Body was separated from chassis, each was overhauled and then married up with the next one coming off the line. (Question for the experts - did the registration number of the RTs remain with the chassis, or the body, and how did fleet numbers match up?)
The registration number belonged to the chassis. IIRC so did the fleet number, there was a small plate with the body number somewhere near the engine.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,830
The RTs and RMs were just looked after like any bus fleet should have been. Swapping bodies, chassis (RT) and engines doesn't make them last longer, it was just a way of managing a large flow where some parts of the vehicles took longer to overhaul than others. You might consider that the London buses were specified to match the operational requirements, but the RTs were really only AEC Regent MKIIIs. Their through-life cost was probably lower than most other operators acheived despite their very heavy workload because the maintenance was undertaken properly.
The 10 heritage RMs have been re-engined, mainly for economy and environmental reasons.

The original engines were worn out too!
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
Oldest First Glasgow buses are Y reg i think . Im sure the Ailsas were retired in 2006 , must of been 22 plus years old .The Volvo Citybuses , the last few were G reg and retired in 2009 .
Oldest Bus Ive had recently was A reg Olympian on the 22 between Silverburn and Braehead .
 

pdq

Member
Joined
7 Oct 2010
Messages
800
Do buses age better and last longer than they used to? I grew up in Tenby with Silcox Buses, and have memories of going on buses when I was in infant school (so late 1970s) that seemed tatty and old fashioned; yet some of them were D and E regs - so max 14 years old. Later on, they had some M (1974) Bristol LHs that they used when I was in secondary school, so only 12-14 years old but feeling ancient and knackered. Yet I can get on a 54 plate bus today and it feels and looks modern. I knwo that maintenance and refurbish regimes come into it, but it seems to me that bus design has reached a point where they don't age as badly as they used to.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
Do buses age better and last longer than they used to? I grew up in Tenby with Silcox Buses, and have memories of going on buses when I was in infant school (so late 1970s) that seemed tatty and old fashioned; yet some of them were D and E regs - so max 14 years old. Later on, they had some M (1974) Bristol LHs that they used when I was in secondary school, so only 12-14 years old but feeling ancient and knackered. Yet I can get on a 54 plate bus today and it feels and looks modern. I knwo that maintenance and refurbish regimes come into it, but it seems to me that bus design has reached a point where they don't age as badly as they used to.
Depends on the vehicle and how they are looked after, based on what I've seen I don't think MCV bodywork will age well, especially the EvoSetis
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
Depends on the vehicle and how they are looked after, based on what I've seen I don't think MCV bodywork will age well, especially the EvoSetis
TBH bodywork has always tended to be the achilles heel of any bus/ coach design as any coach operator who'd run Plaxton bodied coaches in the 70's would tell you.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
well the RM's were in operation from 1959 with the last being built in 1968 and weren't finally retired from normal service until 2005 meaning the youngest were 47 yrs old when withdrawn... and there are still 10 in operation on the heritage 15

I'm of the opinion that the RM didn't last for a long time because it was particularly special - although it was clearly very robust - it lasted a long time because driver-only front-entrance buses caused serious congestion problems in central London. LT found this out to their cost when the DMS was introduced - initially they used fewer vehicles than the RMs and RTs they replaced, because they had higher capacity, but loading and unloading was so slow that they eventually used MORE vehicles when replacing crewed buses, to maintain frequencies.

Despite multiple attempts to speed up boarding of driver-only buses, nothing ever seemed to work very well, and in very congested areas, the RM had a distinct speed advantage, despite its age and the cost of the two-person crew. Ultimately, the thing that saw off the RM was nothing to do with age or reliability - it was a combination of the bendy bus and the Oyster card.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
19,969
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Do buses age better and last longer than they used to? I grew up in Tenby with Silcox Buses, and have memories of going on buses when I was in infant school (so late 1970s) that seemed tatty and old fashioned; yet some of them were D and E regs - so max 14 years old. Later on, they had some M (1974) Bristol LHs that they used when I was in secondary school, so only 12-14 years old but feeling ancient and knackered. Yet I can get on a 54 plate bus today and it feels and looks modern. I knwo that maintenance and refurbish regimes come into it, but it seems to me that bus design has reached a point where they don't age as badly as they used to.

A very valid point - being from Northern England, I remember plenty of LHs and they were spartan and basic. However, they had varying lives (with a design life of only 7 years) and indeed, some of United's did get withdrawn and scrapped at that age, not helped by service cuts that rendered them redundant. Oddly, there were members of the same batch that didn't get scrapped and continued through deregulation and notched 18/19 years service!
 

Teflon Lettuce

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2013
Messages
1,750
A very valid point - being from Northern England, I remember plenty of LHs and they were spartan and basic. However, they had varying lives (with a design life of only 7 years) and indeed, some of United's did get withdrawn and scrapped at that age, not helped by service cuts that rendered them redundant. Oddly, there were members of the same batch that didn't get scrapped and continued through deregulation and notched 18/19 years service!
and then some went on to 2nd lives on the Channel Isles... I bet a few LH's notched up 25 yrs service
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
I'm of the opinion that the RM didn't last for a long time because it was particularly special - although it was clearly very robust - it lasted a long time because driver-only front-entrance buses caused serious congestion problems in central London. LT found this out to their cost when the DMS was introduced - initially they used fewer vehicles than the RMs and RTs they replaced, because they had higher capacity, but loading and unloading was so slow that they eventually used MORE vehicles when replacing crewed buses, to maintain frequencies.

Despite multiple attempts to speed up boarding of driver-only buses, nothing ever seemed to work very well, and in very congested areas, the RM had a distinct speed advantage, despite its age and the cost of the two-person crew. Ultimately, the thing that saw off the RM was nothing to do with age or reliability - it was a combination of the bendy bus and the Oyster card.

Another thing that saw off the RMs was disability legislation
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
The oldest thing ive driven was an R reg volvo olympian, those felt rather sturdy and long lasting
The Olympians were good buses, we had quite a fleet of them at one time. The best I drove were the Gardner engined Olympians, cracking machinrs. Sadly they had to go due to disability legislation.
 

route101

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
10,595
The oldest thing ive driven was an R reg volvo olympian, those felt rather sturdy and long lasting

One of the first buses in Glasgow to be in Barbie colours . The northern counties ones which glasgow had too looked heavy and solid .

FSE had one until a few years ago , last time i seen one in Glasgow
 

GusB

Established Member
Associate Staff
Buses & Coaches
Joined
9 Jul 2016
Messages
6,546
Location
Elginshire
Wasn't there an issue with operators "stocking up" on new vehicles before the Bus Grant was phased out? I also remember reading that there were various "MAPs" (Market Analysis Projects) that ascertained that double-deckers could be as cost effective as single-deckers if used correctly. My own local operator (Northern Scottish) obtained quite a few 'deckers in the early 80s. When Stagecoach took over, many of them were whisked away (ECW Olympians to replace VRs in Perth), and much of the former dual-door Aberdeen Citybus fleet was sent south after the "elimination of wasteful competition".

The oldest vehicles I recall in that fleet were E-suffix Albion Vikings, but they were gone before they were 15 years old.
 

CatfordCat

Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
639
The registration number belonged to the chassis. IIRC so did the fleet number, there was a small plate with the body number somewhere near the engine.

It was actually a bit more complicated than that when London Transport was overhauling RT, RF and RM family buses.

The same combination of registration, fleet and chassis number would always* stay together, but that identity would go in at one end of Aldenham and a newly overhauled bus would go out the other end pretty much as soon as the tax disc could be got to it. (At that time, the registration number plates on LT buses consisted of white letter / number transfers applied to a blank plate, so registration number plates were effectively made as part of the overhaul process and did not need to be moved from one bus to another. This did however lead to a few clangers that got out on to the streets before anyone noticed - most famously this one)

Some bus identities were out of circulation as 'works float' for years at a time to cover the legal identity of the kits of parts that were in Aldenham at any time.

The visible brass plate carried the chassis number that matched the log book for that registration number, but these also either got moved from one chassis to another, or new ones were made to match the registration number of the newly overhauled bus. There was a 'secret' chassis unit number on another brass plate, so LT knew what was what.

The body number was applied (to RT and RM group buses) in white transfers, on the inside of the canopy (the driver would be able to see it if s/he looked left, if that makes sense) - RFs must have carried it somewhere but I can't remember where.

While I don't think anyone has ever produced evidence that LT had legal authority to do these identity swaps, but the (then) Ministry must have known about it, and in the early 70s when Aldenham was overhauling buses for London Country, they didn't do identity swaps with them.

The only exception (other than possible flukes) was that buses that had a 'GB plate' having done an overseas tour usually got to retain their original chassis / body / identity - RT 1702 and (I think) one other survive in preservation.

Quite a bit more about it on the Red RF website (written more about RFs but relevant to RT and RM types as well.)

* - before anyone else says it, there were some RFs that got their fleet numbers changed around when converted from bus to Green Line or vice versa, or converted for OMO with the idea that all Green Line RFs ought to be in one block of numbers, or something like that.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
Wasn't there an issue with operators "stocking up" on new vehicles before the Bus Grant was phased out? I also remember reading that there were various "MAPs" (Market Analysis Projects) that ascertained that double-deckers could be as cost effective as single-deckers if used correctly. My own local operator (Northern Scottish) obtained quite a few 'deckers in the early 80s. When Stagecoach took over, many of them were whisked away (ECW Olympians to replace VRs in Perth), and much of the former dual-door Aberdeen Citybus fleet was sent south after the "elimination of wasteful competition".

The oldest vehicles I recall in that fleet were E-suffix Albion Vikings, but they were gone before they were 15 years old.
I've heard that some operators stocked up on bus grant vehicles too. Also what operators would do with coaches was to specify them more as dual purpose vehicles with bus grant doors, destination displays etc so they qualified for the grant. They would use them on tours over the summer and do the necessary bus mileage over the winter as to qualify the vehicle had to do a certain amount of mileage on stage carriage work.
 

Journeyman

Established Member
Joined
16 Apr 2014
Messages
6,295
Another thing that saw off the RMs was disability legislation

...and changing attitudes to safety. There were several deaths a year caused by people falling off the platforms. In these more litigious times, it was creating serious problems.
 

Olympian

Member
Joined
12 May 2009
Messages
275
The Olympians were good buses, we had quite a fleet of them at one time. The best I drove were the Gardner engined Olympians, cracking machinrs. Sadly they had to go due to disability legislation.
I used to love driving Olympians, but much preferred those with Cummins L10 engines as they had more power. I did though have a soft spot for driving the very first Olympian ever built, on a Q-plate and with a Bristol VR style front panel, even though it was Gardner powered.
 

TRAX

Established Member
Joined
2 Dec 2015
Messages
1,648
Location
France
The design life of a bus is considered to be 20 years without any major changes (rebuild, major refurbishement). Bus engines are designed to last for one million kilometres without any major changes there too. The actual lifetime mileage of a bus changes drastically depending if the bus is used on urban, suburban, or ´country’ lines.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
What the company I work for generally does, and I would imagine most other companies are similar, is that the newer vehicles get used on either the high mileage routes or good paying town runs and older vehicles are used for lower mileage turns
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,135
The design life of a bus is considered to be 20 years without any major changes (rebuild, major refurbishement). Bus engines are designed to last for one million kilometres without any major changes there too. The actual lifetime mileage of a bus changes drastically depending if the bus is used on urban, suburban, or ´country’ lines.
One of our buses has only done about 300000 miles and is on its 3rd engine.
 
Joined
27 Apr 2018
Messages
52
My local operator recently took a large number of 2002 Optare Solos out of service in varying conditions, so on that basis, they lasted 16 years.

I would expect more heavyweight buses, such as Volvo B7RLEs or double deck buses to last nearer 20 years in service, with a few early losses for cannibalisation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top