anymore non-air con Mercedes double deck around
-
Not very sure whether SV 30 got 0305 bus. But for Sv 143, they do got perm 0305 on it. It is not cameo..It is perm and that happen very long time ago in the 80s during the period when LO2x was introduced to SV 140/143..Originally posted by Airbus330Captain:Can someone backed him up whether bus 30 has O305 bus ? As far as my memory served , there is no O305 on svc 30. As for svc 143 , yes there is cameo O305 , I saw a few times on the service . -
From my memory, there was none on the service, not even cameos.Originally posted by Airbus330Captain:Can someone backed him up whether bus 30 has O305 bus ? As far as my memory served , there is no O305 on svc 30. As for svc 143 , yes there is cameo O305 , I saw a few times on the service . -
I think i can still differentiate between O 305 & Atantean in that case, because
the silver trim on the windscreen for the O 305 was thinner with thicker black rubber lining on both edges. Another less obvious sign is the 2-piece windscreen is less flatly aligned with each other on O 305 i.e. the glass is angled in a steeper slope meeting @ the centre pillar. Lastly the glass area seemed larger on O 305. If you can see through the windscreen, another hint which is which is the backside of the dashboard i.e. the shape & height are very different.Originally posted by iveco:THe LO2Xes used a different windscreen from the O305s and LAs. Anyway, if we had a LA and an O305, both without badges, we can't tell them apart if we look at the front since both have silver trimming for the windscreen. At least the LO2X has a distinctive front grill in addition to the black trimming on the windscreen. -
I do recall that unique unit from the much smoother more 'normal' automatic gearbox shifting behavior. The engine sound hints of Cummins whereas most if not all the others i riden on did sound & behave like Leyland in both engine & gearchange characteristics. Compared to Atantean, i found the gearchange less jerky but still nowhere as quick, smooth or as 'seamless' as conventional automatics. The pause seemed unneccessary to me as the longer you wait between gear changes, the greater the loss in acceleration, speed.
So what's the point (i.e. advantages if any) of such Leyland gearboxes ??
You're saying the noisy radiator fan idea came from Leyland as it's 'a part'
of the Olympian chassis ? Then again, what's the benefits (if any) of such a design compared to others who don't use such noisy fans ??
In the Leyland Victory least i can see some (limited though) point in their finger-operated semi-automatic gear selector, but in the Atanteans & those Olympians i hardly see any 'benefit' in terms of enhancing performance, gear change smoothness or quickness etc. ! Why need the semi-automatic mode when full automatic can do the job ? My bottom point simply is why the need for the Leyland type of gearbox design when the benefits over the conventional type of automatics don't seem to exist ?
To me merely having something different for the sake of just being different hardly makes any sense ?! Maybe that's why Leyland 'kaputed' ultimately when Volvo came & took it over, because Leyland couldn't get enough takers for its type of technology/products ?!?Originally posted by The_Bus_Guide:The 2-axle Leyland Olympian were the last true Leyland buses to be built. All used a Leyland TL11 engine and Leyland Hydracyclic automatic transmission. The exception, perhaps, was SBS 3554A which may have used a Cummins engine and an Allison gearbox. Whether Cummins or TL11, all have that loud radiator whine which, to me, is the personality of the Olympian chassis.
I particularly love the Leyland transmission because of the short pause in between gears. In Singapore, only the Leyland Atlanteans and Olympians did this which makes them unique. That's because, the Hydracyclic, just like the Pneumocyclic, can be configured as a semi-auto or a full auto. All the Olympians is Singapore were configured in the full auto mode but the gearbox still functions as if it was in a semi-auto mode. Hence, the short pause but without the need for the driver to switch gears. -
Typo should be Svc 76 not 78. I am quoting is the old svc 76 route not the existing one. The old 76 route is almost the same as the MRT route from JE to Cle.Originally posted by iveco:Svc 78 didn't get DDs until late 1998. By then, most of the O305s had settled down in HGDEP, with a minority in AMDEP. -
Definetly there was 0305 for svc 30 ( ranges from 706X). I could remember that one bus fanatic wrote to zaobao forum to query why SBS replace the then young fleet of 0305s with old Leyand DDs.The 0305 only served svc 30 for a short period.Originally posted by Airbus330Captain:Can someone backed him up whether bus 30 has O305 bus ? As far as my memory served , there is no O305 on svc 30. As for svc 143 , yes there is cameo O305 , I saw a few times on the service . -
Svc 146 had DD back in Jan/Feb 1988. DD fleet consists of 0305( very rare - approx 3 units) and Leyland DD. It should be svc 76 not Svc 78, I am talking abt the old 76 route ( Cle - Boon lay way - JE). Maybe you are too young at that time to be so obssesed with buses. : )Originally posted by tranquilice:Service 30 did not have O305 DDs.
I didn't know service 146 had DDs!
I had only seen LO2x but not O305s on service 78 since the deployment of DDs from Nov 1998. -
Back in 1986, there was 0305 for Svc 30.Originally posted by Airbus330Captain:Can someone backed him up whether bus 30 has O305 bus ? As far as my memory served , there is no O305 on svc 30. As for svc 143 , yes there is cameo O305 , I saw a few times on the service . -
The Leyland Hydracyclic was created in 1975 and was initially used as a standard component on the Leyland Titan. It was derived from the Pneumocyclic and used fluid dynamics instead of air. The uniqueness of the Olympian chassis is that the engine is at the rear while the radiator is up front. This helps improve the enigine's cooling rate and is especially suitable for warm and humid climatic conditions. Proof of the Olympian's popularity was that over 30,000 units were produced and was the reason why Leyland kept on going despite troubled times. Note that the Olympian chassis was the only Leyland design which Volvo retained.Originally posted by hseochin:I do recall that unique unit from the much smoother more 'normal' automatic gearbox shifting behavior. The engine sound hints of Cummins whereas most if not all the others i riden on did sound & behave like Leyland in both engine & gearchange characteristics. Compared to Atantean, i found the gearchange less jerky but still nowhere as quick, smooth or as 'seamless' as conventional automatics. The pause seemed unneccessary to me as the longer you wait between gear changes, the greater the loss in acceleration, speed.
So what's the point (i.e. advantages if any) of such Leyland gearboxes ??
You're saying the noisy radiator fan idea came from Leyland as it's 'a part'
of the Olympian chassis ? Then again, what's the benefits (if any) of such a design compared to others who don't use such noisy fans ??
In the Leyland Victory least i can see some (limited though) point in their finger-operated semi-automatic gear selector, but in the Atanteans & those Olympians i hardly see any 'benefit' in terms of enhancing performance, gear change smoothness or quickness etc. ! Why need the semi-automatic mode when full automatic can do the job ? My bottom point simply is why the need for the Leyland type of gearbox design when the benefits over the conventional type of automatics don't seem to exist ?
To me merely having something different for the sake of just being different hardly makes any sense ?! Maybe that's why Leyland 'kaputed' ultimately when Volvo came & took it over, because Leyland couldn't get enough takers for its type of technology/products ?!?
The Olympian was offered with 2 engine options; the Leyland TL11 and the Gardner 6LXB. Gearbox, however, was restricted to the Hydracyclic. As for the semi-auto or full auto mode, its up to the operator's preferences. Considering the year of its development, it was considered one of the most advanced buses of its time. -
I find that the past popularity of Leylands mainly due not to any superior technical capabilities of their vehicles but more to 'politics' of the time whereby Britain & British colonies (like Hong Kong) were 'forced' to buy British, despite the obvious fact that many non-British makes then (now even of course) were superior to the old British junkies ! I believe that if left more to the free market to decide like many of the other makes, Leyland would have disappeared much sooner.
In theory, i agree that putting the radiator up front can make cooling easier & more direct but then there's been so many buses & coaches over the past 20 years with rear engines yet no radiator up front yet somehow these survive, whether in Europe, Singapore or Brazil etc., so there's tropical as well as cold climates.
For tranverse rear-engine buses, the Scanias have long existed with radiator even intercooler on the sides in the rear.
I notice that in the earlier Volvo B10M's, the radiator's up front but the later versions the radiator put along the sides, like most rear engined buses.
Unfortunately some such units of B10M's i note also has such noisy fans which sounds so much noisier both inside & outside than the engine itself !
As for Hydracyclic created in 1975, the O 305 existed since 1967 & the level of engineering like air-suspension & their much smoother & better performing push-button automatic gearbox etc. to me i find it still superior in technical advancement.
The Olympians are the better lot among Leylands, maybe the National slightly better. But i'll say comparing to non-British makes, these British products are overall still inferior & backward. So the gradual demise of the British automotive industry after WW2 comes as no surprise to me.Originally posted by The_Bus_Guide:The Leyland Hydracyclic was created in 1975 and was initially used as a standard component on the Leyland Titan. It was derived from the Pneumocyclic and used fluid dynamics instead of air. The uniqueness of the Olympian chassis is that the engine is at the rear while the radiator is up front. This helps improve the enigine's cooling rate and is especially suitable for warm and humid climatic conditions. Proof of the Olympian's popularity was that over 30,000 units were produced and was the reason why Leyland kept on going despite troubled times. Note that the Olympian chassis was the only Leyland design which Volvo retained.
The Olympian was offered with 2 engine options; the Leyland TL11 and the Gardner 6LXB. Gearbox, however, was restricted to the Hydracyclic. As for the semi-auto or full auto mode, its up to the operator's preferences. Considering the year of its development, it was considered one of the most advanced buses of its time. -
The O.305s until 1984 had a lever to control the gears. Yes they were vey much advanced over Volvo, Leyland and Hino and UD. It took a long time for other operators to catch up. Automatic gearboxes were rare at the time, and very expensive, and the semi-automatic was clearly advanced, being a clutchless manual with a fluid flywheel. Hydracyclics were the closest to autoamtic gearboxes.
-
What lever to control the gears ?? You mean the gear-knob-on-stick type instead of push-button ? On the OF 1417 introduced here around 1980 that type was used. Believe it was Allison 4-speed full automatic.
I recall riding on i believe was the earliest O 305 in Singapore (with Willowbrooke double-deck body) which was launched here around May 1982. I still keep that 2 full page Straits Times launch ad. put up by Cycle & Carriage which shows the left side view of the O 305. The dashboard was similar to that in the next 200 or so units to be ordered for delivery starting from 1984 to 86 & based on what i saw & also on the gear-change characteristics of the early unit i took on route 165, i'm fairly certain in early 80's era they already used the push-button type of full automatic by M-B for M-B.
My thinking is that why Leyland used their own type of semi-automatics back then instead of full automatics like M-B, ZF or Allison etc. was due to the lower performance outputs of the largely backward Leyland engines (like those used on Atanteans) they probably figured with semi-automatic the vehicle performance might be slightly better with less 'drag' on their engines i.e. for their type of old engines semi-auto will do as they lack the performance levels of the more modern engines to make optimal use of a full automatic gearbox anyway ! Also in their favour is the possible lower costs of a semi-auto box.
In other words, my belief is that if Leyland had better performing engines like the Germans, Swedes etc. then, they would have used the superior full automatics instead. By the way, any other makes of buses/bus-chassi used these Leyland semi-autos ? Very rare i'll say. I wonder if these Leyland boxes were really that fantastic, other makers would dump the more expensive types & queue up & buy from Leyland instead ?? Leyland then most surely would be most happy to sell since then they're not in too good form financially anyway ?
But going by history, that didn't seem so.Originally posted by Windy_hates_B10TLs:The O.305s until 1984 had a lever to control the gears. Yes they were vey much advanced over Volvo, Leyland and Hino and UD. It took a long time for other operators to catch up. Automatic gearboxes were rare at the time, and very expensive, and the semi-automatic was clearly advanced, being a clutchless manual with a fluid flywheel. Hydracyclics were the closest to autoamtic gearboxes. -
this is off my memories and data i collected so far
0305s were brand new on services like 10 154 30 143.
subsequently some 0305 did feeder svc in jurong in 1986s, say 334 and 240.
at this time i recall 99 having 0305s too
ZYX -
Yes you are rite. In addition, 76 and 146 did have some 0305s.Originally posted by ZYX2005:this is off my memories and data i collected so far
0305s were brand new on services like 10 154 30 143.
subsequently some 0305 did feeder svc in jurong in 1986s, say 334 and 240.
at this time i recall 99 having 0305s too
ZYX -
I don't recall 146 having any O305s. Only LO2Xes. Svc 76 did have O305s.Originally posted by IsIsTRD:Yes you are rite. In addition, 76 and 146 did have some 0305s. -
Originally posted by iveco:I don't recall 146 having any O305s. Only LO2Xes. Svc 76 did have O305s.
-
Have lah...very few, 2 to 4(rego 7046, 7105, 7094) buses back in 1988 when I was in Sec 3. Btw u can also find Svc 147 having 0305 during those days.Originally posted by iveco:I don't recall 146 having any O305s. Only LO2Xes. Svc 76 did have O305s.
I still could remember clearly that I board the Svc 146 0305 at Toa Payoh Int that very first day it converted from SD to DD buses. It was a Sunday sometime back in Feb 1988.
Why I could remember Feb 1988 because I fail my first 'A' Maths test.
-
Ya.. SV146 was using 0305 for a short period only. Anyway, is SBS7105, the 0305 with black window frame, which is same black frame as LO2x?Originally posted by IsIsTRD:Have lah...very few, 2 to 4(rego 7046, 7105, 7094) buses back in 1988 when I was in Sec 3. Btw u can also find Svc 147 having 0305 during those days.
I still could remember clearly that I board the Svc 146 0305 at Toa Payoh Int that very first day it converted from SD to DD buses. It was a Sunday sometime back in Feb 1988.
Why I could remember Feb 1988 because I fail my first 'A' Maths test. -
7105 was using the black frame. Sv 146 was withdrawn shortly after that and SV 166 was extended to CLe.Originally posted by lemon1974:Ya.. SV146 was using 0305 for a short period only. Anyway, is SBS7105, the 0305 with black window frame, which is same black frame as LO2x?