AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Opinions and Queries

9th January 1953, Page 48
9th January 1953
Page 48
Page 48, 9th January 1953 — Opinions and Queries
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Bus-body Styling

IT is to be hoped that many of the p.s.v. operators in this country who strive to reduce running costs in every possible way, will ponder for a while over the claims made for the Kiissbohrer-Setra integrally built coach, described by Mr A. Woolf in your issue dated December 5. Perhaps your costing expert S.T.R. could make a comparison between the running cost of this vehicle, which is claimed to return the fuel-consumption figure of 21 m.p.g., and the conventional British 9.6-litre underfloor-engined vehicle weighing some 8 tons and giving a fuel return of 12-14 m.p.g.

Mr. Woolf makes one statement in his article which does not seem to be in keeping with his appraisal of lightweight construction, that is the contention that Britain has the lead in body styling. It is the opinion of many modern designers and body designers that the vehicle which has a functional and practical appearance is aesthetically correct. My personal opinion of the type of body with a curved waist rail and cant outline with every window and body panel a different size or shape, is that it is neither beautiful nor practical. Some of the so-called observation coaches also seem to have approached the peak of folly in design.

Most people will, 1 think, agree that the French coaches and buses depicted in the article are handsome and businesslike in appearance, and it seems to be a good thing that a practical outline is synonymous with integral construction, which will soon have to be accepted universally.

London, W.13. E. J. COOKE.

[No reference to curved cant and waist rails was made by Alfred Woolf in his article. Swept pillars were referred to, as providing a better shape to the body than the straight type. Let us have symmetry, but not necessarily stark box shapes.—ED.1

Thanks for the Memory

voua Past Comments" in the issue of "The I Commercial Motor" dated December 26 were most interesting, but to me retrospective articles never seem to go back far enough. I have spent most of my life in road transport and in 1910, when I was 10 years old, someone brought me a copy of "The Commercial Motor." In that number I well remember seeing the report of a show at Lincoln and the many steamers that were described and illustrated. They included Robey, Tasker, Mann, Yorkshire, Foden, Clayton and Shuttleworth, Aveling and Porter, and even Leyland.

To me, it sometimes seems retrograde that concerns which made famous vehicles in their entirety now make only attachments. Taskers, for instance, which once made such impressive wagons and tractors, is now confined to " dangkrs," Clayton is making brake gear, important as the latter may be. There may have been petrol-engined vehicles at the show to which I have referred, but I do not remember these.

I found myself in the transition age from horse to motor; my father was carrying on with bridles and girth straps, and his prize-winning visits to Regent's Park with horsed outfits, long after I became versed with the intricacies of Ackerman steering, differential assemblies. Austins with a shaft to each rear wheel and MilnesDaimlers with internal-tooth-ring final drives.

R1 4 Look also at the many names that have come and gone, such as Straker Squire, Star, Hallford and Bean. So, please, next time you feel retrospective, will you try to take us back a little farther.

Ashford, Middlesex. W. BA VERSTOCK.

Modern Buses Preferred

AS a busman of some years' experience, I have been interested in the different opinions aired in "The Commercial Motor" regarding the frontal appearance of the present-day bus. My views may also be of some interest, inasmuch as I am an advocate of the modern style in all respects, except as it concerns the unfortunate litter who has to maintain some of the forward-engined, full-front models. These sometimes involve the removal of much panelling and grille work to carry out such a simple operation as inserting the starting handle to enable the engine to be turned while adjusting tappets, etc. However, this trouble is usually found in the oldtype chassis combined with a full-front style of body. It does not occur in the correctly designed body or chassisless types.

My idea of the " correct " bus is the American, which looks as if it has been built in "one piece," which, in practice, is often the case, for it does not comprise separate chassis, body, bonnet, radiator and mudguards.

A double-decker is more difficult to tidy up in respect of frontal appearance, owing to the ratio of height to width, but I prefer the full front with no radiator "style" added. I also think the engine should be at the rear, as is now almost general practice in America and is used on at least one English make. This gives full consideration to easy maintenance and quiet, fumeless operation.

Ilfracombe. R. M. ROGERS. A.I.R.T.E.

Disgruntled 3,000 Citizens

will reference to a paragraph in your issue dated " December 26, which concerned a protest against the proposed sale of "the British transport industry to private speculators" presented in the House of Commons by a Mr. Mellish, it was claimed that this was signed by over 3,000 "British ,citizens employed in Mitcham. Do these so-called British citizens realise that many of these private speculators had put their money, brains, initiative and some very hard work, often probably While these people of Mitcham were sleeping, into building the businesses which were compulsorily taken over, probably by the representatives of these same 3,000.

We are just recovering from the effects of the last war, which we are supposed to believe was fought for freedom—but whose? Apparently that of the Mitcham 3,000 and their associates. Without knowing them, and to do so would be distasteful to me, I would say that their motto is "What's yours is mine, and what's mine is my own." I still prefer the more British saying "Live and let live."

Wansford. .1. W. PETERS

" Roma " Service Station.

Tags

Organisations: House of Commons
Locations: Lincoln, London

comments powered by Disqus