Let's buy a Bedford Val car transporter together

[Zelandeth]

Performance wise they're not too bad - at least that was my take home feeling. 

Gearing at the bottom end is really low so they get out of the way at junctions just fine.  Bumbling around country roads at 40-50 is perfectly possible...and as much as you're going to want to do in something that size really.  The VAL I had a shot of would just about hold an indicated 60 on the level, though was happiest at 50-55 really.

They handle well though and the gearchange (when set up right!) is decent, so you can maintain speed pretty well.

Bit like anything that size though, everything is a massive exercise in forward planning, so you try to avoid bleeding off any more momentum than you absolutely have to!

When we first collected the VAM the tracking of the two front axles was out relative to each other...that was quite possibly the most unnerving drive in a bus I've ever done as it squirmed around all over the shop depending which of the four steering wheels had the most grip at any given moment...

If you want a bus that flies though, get a very late Volvo B58.  They were in some cases fitted with engines expected to deal with the first of the heavyweight modern bodies like the Van Hool Alizee, yet like the one I knew well were fitted with an old school Plaxton Supreme III body...a couple of tonnes lighter than expected.  Result being a bus which can absolutely fly. 

Still gutted she got exported to Ireland and virtually immediately was damaged in an accident and scrapped.  Was a cracking old bus.

[rml2345]

9 hours ago, wuvvum said:

Would this not be painfully slow in modern traffic?  466 naturally aspirated cubic inches doesn't seem a lot for something that size - especially when the equivalent Leyland would have had 680.

Fair bit lighter than the equivalent Leyland to be fair. At least that one is a 466, the original VAL 14 was Leyland 0400 powered with 125bhp.

Were these not also well known for crap brakes? 

[HMC]

What would the AS COLLECTIVE buy if we were to run a gold bullion heist in 2019? 50 years on so doing the maths in ages of vehicles etc isn’t too hard. We need a bus that can take the alpine pass better. Bendibus? What about the minis? Perodua nippa? Plus obv the “3 farst cars”

[HMC]

We would also need cellulose paint so that big William can respray it without a professional ventillated spray booth.

[rml2345]

Late Dennis Javelin, three Kia Picantos and a trio of Jag XK8s? The Landy is too dear now so that'd need to be a Ssangyong Musso or something. 

[artdjones]

10 hours ago, wuvvum said:

Would this not be painfully slow in modern traffic?  466 naturally aspirated cubic inches doesn't seem a lot for something that size - especially when the equivalent Leyland would have had 680.

The 466 engine put out around 140hp,about 10 fewer than a Leyland 680, and the VAL wasn't a heavyweight coach.It weighed a ton less than a Leopard laden.I travelled a lot on VAL coaches as a teenager and they didn't feel slow,even the early ones,which had a Leyland 0.400 with 125hp.

 

 

[captain_70s]

Did @Sam Glover not own this at some point? Or am I thinking of another bus?

[cms206]

13 hours ago, busmansholiday said:

New as NDL360G.

Bedford / Duple, I'm sure there's space in one of the local Barnsley scrapyards for it. Never have been a fan, driven enough in service, never will like. 

 

I'm with BMH. Never been a Bedford fan, bloody awful things.

If it HAS to be a lightweight, a tilt engined Ford R. Better still a Javelin.

Even better still, a Leopard.

 

For those who do like such things though...

[cms206]

Apparantly it looks like this inside as well...

[wuvvum]

2 hours ago, artdjones said:

The 466 engine put out around 140hp,about 10 fewer than a Leyland 680, and the VAL wasn't a heavyweight coach.It weighed a ton less than a Leopard laden.I travelled a lot on VAL coaches as a teenager and they didn't feel slow,even the early ones,which had a Leyland 0.400 with 125hp.

Wasn't the 680 massively detuned in bus form though?  Would imagine it would be easy enough to wind the fuelling up - whereas with a 466, 140bhp is pretty much "it".

[cms206]

1 minute ago, wuvvum said:

Wasn't the 680 massively detuned in bus form though?  Would imagine it would be easy enough to wind the fuelling up - whereas with a 466, 140bhp is pretty much "it".

Leyland 680s, in later tune at least, were generally 180bhp for bus and 200bhp-ish for coach/HGV applications. Turbocharged and rationalised as the TL11, it came as 215, 245 or 260bhp.

[PiperCub]

13 hours ago, warch said:

I have absolutely no concept of the value and rarity of these coaches, although as I'm sure everyone on here is well aware it isn't exactly the iconic Italian Job model, which was fitted with a different body. 10 large does sound rather expensive unless it is in rather better nick than it appears in the photos.

Neither have I but IMO they tend to be quite over-priced as there are a few logistic issues with bus ownership as I had to point out to a former colleague of mine who was looking for me to go in with him on a purchase some years ago (a business venture that would never have worked!).  So the market is quite small.

1. Storage - WTF do you keep it? You can't park it in the street and most of us don't have gardens big enough (plus pissing off neighbours) Fine if you own a farm or know someone who does and it's free/near free

2. Maintenance - Bigger lifting/support kit and tools required, your 2Tonne trolley jack aien't gonna cut it! Plus spares costs & availbility can be an issue too.

3. Licences - As someone said, the rolling 30 year rule is as far as I understand, is only for actual PSV's (PCV's) registered as such, even then, as car licences have been restricted to 3.5T if issued after '97 and a bus weighs around 6 to 8 Tonnes, I don't know if you need a 7.5T ticket (as per car licences issued before '97). If you hold an HGV &/or PSV or your car licence is pre-97 this isn't a problem. 

4. Driving - Would recommend getting some tuition if you aren't HGV/PSV qualified & have not driven big vehicles before, it's not difficult to learn but you can do alot of damage with 8 tonnes of metal.

[martc]

20 minutes ago, Scotty2 said:

If anyone is interested I can post up a bit about VALs and my ones history.

Do you need to ask? Get it posted...

[LightBulbFun]

7 minutes ago, Scotty2 said:

averaged 15 mpg

that sounds surprisingly decent for such a coach/bus

for some reason I just assumed big bastards like this all do single digits!

and yes please on the thread about your coach  

[HMC]

“Get the wheels in line, GET THE WHEELS IN LINE....”

 

I bloody love that coach.

[wuvvum]

Bedfords generally are pretty decent on fuel, comparatively speaking.

[HMC]

When Peter Simpson bought a coach in pc in the 1990s I thought he was THE MAN.

I was only 13 though 

[HMC]

I’d have this if I could, my sometime school bus in the mid 90s. Leyland leopard plaxton derwent. They had a couple all registered MTE 27-33R. A driver told me they were quick for what they were as they had a fairly flimsy / lightweight body. Sort of a sports bus? Ideal for bullion or teetering over an alp/dolomite.

[Stanky]

Excuse my ignorance, but what was the advantage of 2 steering axles over one steering axle? There can't be much more weight over the front axles can there?

[cms206]

10 minutes ago, Stanky said:

Excuse my ignorance, but what was the advantage of 2 steering axles over one steering axle? There can't be much more weight over the front axles can there?

There was no advantage.

Bedford didn't have a front axle rated high enough it terms of weight to do a full size chassis; the YMT? overcame that issue and hence returned to a standard 4x2 layout instead of the VAL's 6x2.

[cms206]

Seriously though. Don't do buses, kids.

I owned several in my late teens and early twenties, three Leyland Nationals, four Leyland Leopards, a couple of second generation minibuses and a Dennis Lancet.

I'm now busless and penniless.

They are cheap to buy, but expensive to keep and store.

[quicksilver]

35 minutes ago, cms206 said:

There was no advantage.

Bedford didn't have a front axle rated high enough it terms of weight to do a full size chassis; the YMT? overcame that issue and hence returned to a standard 4x2 layout instead of the VAL's 6x2.

This is true. Bedford coach chassis shared parts with their trucks, they didn't have a truck with a strong enough axle or the budget to develop one specifically for a coach so they doubled up on lighter axles. By the time the YRT/YMT came along, gross weights for trucks had increased and a suitable axle was available in the truck range. Far from an advantage, the double axles were a disadvantage as it was very difficult to set up the brakes properly and avoid excessive tyre wear.

[artdjones]

1 hour ago, cms206 said:

There was no advantage.

Bedford didn't have a front axle rated high enough it terms of weight to do a full size chassis; the YMT? overcame that issue and hence returned to a standard 4x2 layout instead of the VAL's 6x2.

Also,they wanted to use 16" wheels for a low height of chassis,but needed four wheels,as the 16" tyres didn't have a high enough load rating to be used as a single pair on the front end.The engine is right up the front.

[Dick Cheeseburger]

4 hours ago, Scotty2 said:

I have one. Look up XUR 290K. The brakes need to be set up by someone who knows how to do it, but once set up they are OK. Telmar also helps. The price is more than optimistic... I intend to get mine painted in the original colours but time and funds don't allow at the moment.

If anyone is interested I can post up a bit about VALs and my ones history.

Hell yeah. Yours looks like the same era/model Val as Steve Lester's. 

[artdjones]

3 hours ago, LightBulbFun said:

that sounds surprisingly decent for such a coach/bus

for some reason I just assumed big bastards like this all do single digits!

and yes please on the thread about your coach  

A lot of coaches then did better mileage than moderns.The Bristol RELH with a Gardner engine did almost 14mpg on test with ballast equivalent to a full load and half a ton of luggage,and that was a genuine heavyweight coach.

[busmansholiday]

2 hours ago, cms206 said:

Seriously though. Don't do buses, kids.

I owned several in my late teens and early twenties, three Leyland Nationals, four Leyland Leopards, a couple of second generation minibuses and a Dennis Lancet.

I'm now busless and penniless.

They are cheap to buy, but expensive to keep and store.

I only managed to own four Plaxton bodied Reliance's at the same time (plus involvement in a trolleybus) alledgedly with others, but it was always me that bought them etc.

It's a pretty quick way to dispose of money, as @cms206 has said.

[HMC]

Wow That’s great fleets you guys had / have @cms206 @busmansholiday . Does being in the industry make a big difference with handling bills/ sourcing bits?

[lesapandre]

4 hours ago, Scotty2 said:

Will do when I am back with access to my PC. They drive very well (handling) but don't like hills. I took mine to Germany and back a few years ago averaged 15 mpg. Cruise all day at 50 -55. 

Germany. Why? Sounds a great tale. This thread has uncovered all kinds of untapped bus-iness?

And 4 coaches - at once? 

[sierraman]

Lovely looking bus but worryingly there’s no mention in the text about how recently it’s been on the road. Judging by all the shit round it in the barn it’s not seen the road for a long time. £10k is madness on it either way. £2k perhaps but even then keeping that on the road would be a mammoth undertaking.

[sierraman]

Just had a look, last taxed in 1992... but the ‘engine runs fine’. If that sees the road again I’m Peter Simpson.