Save another Val

[Inspector Morose]

So, back I am with a little tidying up of the information.

 

I can't seem to find any direct reference to the chassis codes so I can only assume it was VAS, VAM and VAL for Short Medium and Long chassis. (well, you live and learn) There was an amendment that a number was placed after the designation signifying the engine so the first was a VAL 3 with a 300ci PETROL engine. Production models started out as VAL 14 with the Leyland 0400 engine and the chassis ended as the VAL70 with Bedfords own 466ci engine.

In 1968 the designation models were changed completely to fit into the new computer system the VAL70 becoming WRQ.

 

No.1 lash up, the petrol prototype VAL VAL3.61/ was registered 457DYK and fitted with a longer Duple Bella style body. Later this body was refitted to chassis VAL14.62/2 but it is thought that both chassis were the same one just uprated to production specification.

 

Milbrook was not opened until 1968 so chassis VAL14.62/1 472DYK (fitted with a MCW Topaz metal framed body) was tested at the previous facility at Chaul End, Luton.

 

16" wheels were used which were the same as the corresponding TK model. 17" was proposed but never implemented. 

 

 

The model was replaced by the mid engined YRT model. This, along with the shorter YRQ, was of unusual layout as it had a mid, underfloor mounted engine but the engine was vertically mounted instead of the more usual horizontally mounted as in other coaches and buses of the period. Strangely enough, as the VAL was being phased out of production, a new twin steer TK chassis was introduced to cater for the brewery industry and utilised, along with twin steering axles, a low chassis and 16" wheels.

 

Interesting bus related things have been discovered while trawling my references. Not known to many was the intention to produce a double deck integral using Bedford running units (including the GM 6V-71 engine and Alison gearbox). Studies were carried out in 1975 with the intention of a pilot of 2 in early 1976, one of which was to be exhibited at the commercial motor show in that year. Similarities with the infamous integral double deck buses of Dublin were not a coincidence as this was indeed the same project, instigated by Van Hool - McArdle. Bedford did not think it could compete in the hugely competitive UK double deck market at the time so dropped out of the project as the economies of scale so loved by Bedfords accountants were not there.. The vehicles did eventually get built to terrorise the streets of Dublin with their howling two stroke screams but were built by Bombardier.

 

Another snipped of Bedfords ability of using what it had got instead of making something new was found in their truck range. The KM was basically the heavyweight version of the TK and more power was needed for this model as the gross train weight for lorries had just been increased to 32 tons. This was eventually met by the use of the Detroit Diesel 6V-71 but before this a proposal to use two 466ci diesel engines mounted as a single unit, side by side was put on the table. One KM chassis was suitably modified and the prototype built and tested but it was found that it was too flexible to be a commercial proposition and the scheme was dropped in favour of the GM unit.

[quicksilver]

Lots of interesting info on the whys and wherefores of the Chinese six layout, thanks. I thought the YRT was the replacement for the VAL though - these were both 11m 53-seaters but the VAM was only 10m usuallly with 45 seats and was succeeded by the YRQ. The VAM and VAL were front-engined but the Y-series switched to underfloor engines. I've always understood the S, M and L to mean short, medium and long but never found out what the VA part means so does anyone know?

 

Incidentally, the wheels on the VAL are the same as those on the little J2 'Peanut' coaches discussed in another thread recently.

[Inspector Morose]

It was - see above for the corrections. It does seem that the model was the VA for no discernible reason apart from the first model to be produced, the VAS was the next model to be produced after the TK. That explains the V bit (nobody likes using U as a model type) so I can only assume the A bit is a designation of vehicle type with K being goods and A bus or coach.

[quicksilver]

You must have been typing at the same time as me I didn't know any of that stuff about the Bedford connection with Bombardier or the side-by-side 466 engines - how the heck did that even work, some kind of U12 arragement?

[Inspector Morose]

Literally two 466 engines side by side, geared together. they sat where the GM engine sat in the KM as in completely behind the cab as opposed to under the rear parcel shelf of the TK style cab. As in the V6 engined KM, the chassis was lengthened too. The whole V6 KM and other proposals were only to be a stop gap model as the TM range was nearly ready for production at that date.

[Dick Cheeseburger]

 

I can't seem to find any direct reference to the chassis codes so I can only assume it was VAS, VAM and VAL for Short Medium and Long chassis. (well, you live and learn).

 

Bloody hell, did I just teach you something about buses?!

[Inspector Morose]

As I said, you live and learn! Things pop up that takes you unawares every now and again.

It has been known that on two other occasions in my life that I was possibly wrong too but they haven't been proven.

[Inspector Morose]

I've just found out that the Metro-Scania nearly didn't exist. It was very nearly the Metro-Bedford!

[Dick Cheeseburger]

As I said, you live and learn! Things pop up that takes you unawares every now and again.

It has been known that on two other occasions in my life that I was possibly wrong too but they haven't been proven.

Glad to be of service

 

On a different note, I'd forgotten about this Fred. I wonder if any were saved?

 

http://autoshite.com/topic/10939-save-these-70s-buses-coaches-from-the-scrapman/

[Noel Tidybeard]

could it be as simple as the engine was vertical in its mounting?

[Inspector Morose]

Possibly but all Bedfords had vertical engines, right up to the end of production.

First "big" Bedford postwar was the S type with the SB as the bus equivelant.

Then came the T type normal control (TJ) but no proper bus version.

Then came the TK forward control and the bus equivalent became the VAS VAM and VAL. It's like there was a definite split at his point as the SB was quite related to the S type truck but the VA series was quite different chassis layout wise to the TK. In fact the VAS was very like the SB but shorter in length.

All confusing. It got easier to understand when the new designations came out in '68. At least there was some logic to it.

[Dick Cheeseburger]

Holy thread resurrection. I was perusing old coaches/other vehicles I can't justify owning/storing the other day, and I spotted an update on this coach.

Despite its history, it looks like it'll end up as yet another car transporter, assuming it's even completed at some point...

 

 

[TomJ]

On 24/01/2017 at 19:03, garethj said:

When I was doing the 3D model I couldn't even find out what size the wheels were!  That's a stack more information than was previously available, so thank you.

Hi, I'm looking for a 3D model of a Bedford VAL. Can you help?

[garethj]

42 minutes ago, TomJ said:

Hi, I'm looking for a 3D model of a Bedford VAL. Can you help?

Sorry, it took months of work to get this completed so I can’t share it.