1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188 
OPERATOR EXPERIENCE
Page 133
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
LEYLAND ROADRUNNER RIGID. ORIGINALLY TESTED: 19/4/86.
ENGINE: LEYLAND 6.98DV 97hp, GEARBOX: TURNER T5-250 5-speed. BACK AXLE RATIO: 4.36:1 TESTED GVW: 7.49-tonnes.
OVERALL RESULTS: 16.77mpg/42.89mph. ORIGINAL TEST REPORT PLUS POINTS: Acceptable fuel figures/good handling/good manoeuvrability/good dash and switch layout/ good cab access/safe steps/good cross cab access/ good power steering.
ORIGINAL TEST REPORT MINUS POINTS: Gap in gearbox between 2-3 gears/ poor performance on motorway and hilly routes (in tested spec)Ibrakcs need to be more progressive/brake shudder/noisy cab (85dB)A/ poor torque/no rev counter.
All three operators are borough councils. The vehicles were purchased because of the tendered price and specification. The work tends to very low mileage, stop-start motoring with many different drivers and driving styles. The non-HGV status and truck-like appearance of the Roadrunner apparently endeared it to council staff.
Operator 1 spoke highly of the service the Roadrunner gave. It's plus points were quoted as the excellent manoeuvrability, handling, safe cab access and egress and the light handling. His minus points concerned the quality of the drivers seat which seemed to wear out quickly. This was put down to the nature of the work with drivers continuously getting in and out. Fuel consumption was given as an 'average 15mpg'.
There had been no major problems.
Operator 2 operates within a popular eastern seaside resort. His comments on the plus point of the vehicle almost exactly duplicated those of Operator 1. The Roadrunner had replaced a fleet of ageing Bedfords and his drivers "were obviously more impressed. The Roadrunner is light, superb to drive, visibility is excellent. The cab is comfortable, there is excellent cross cab access and the entry and exit is superbly safe".
This operator had experienced two clutch failures within the warranty period. He put this down to continuous riding of the clutch and felt that it was driving style rather than a vehicle defect. He put fuel economy at an average 14mpg and compared it favourably with that from the Bedfords.
Operator 3 again spoke highly of the vehicle. The operational requirement of all three seemed to coincide almost exactly. The only extra comment was with regard to the nearside glass panel which his drivers felt was an extra aid to visibility and particularly suitable for his operation. This operator could not recall any major problems and felt that the Roadrunner stood up well to a punishing operation. The number of different drivers and their varying driving styles did 'tend to find out the weak spots of any vehicle quickly enough. So far, the problems have all been minor ones. Average mpg was quoted as 15.
Dealer service in all cases was thought to be good and a reflection of the amount of business the council could generate. Prices for spares and service items held up well against competing vehicles or those the Roadrunner had replaced. As is the customer with most redundant council vehicles, tenders are invited for purchase and resale values were expected to fluctuate.