This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article was accepted on 26 January 2020 by reviewer DGG (talk·contribs).
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
This article was edited without concensus and can be reverted without question.
This was changed to be about the name. Some Brit should re-write it. That individual truck info is also in the articles so I took it out here. Everything in "History" except the Fordson E83W is solid from my only paper source, Carroll, Davies. Sammy D III (talk) 02:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Edit add: There are also Thames buses?
Thames buses? There were certainly plenty of "mini buses" based on the Thames van (400E). The engine is in the middle of the floor, though, so (assuming it was configured as a 12 seater) two passengers had nowhere to put their legs and two more had difficulty knowing where to put their legs. So if you were required to be taken to school in one before 1965 (when the Ford Transit came along) ... you would have preferred to be a passenger in a Bedford CA. I guess the 400E configuration may have been considered cheaper to manufacture, though, since several British me-tooists of the time (Commer FC, Morris Commercial J4) copied the Thames configuration.
Bigger buses? The chassis of the ET17 truck was evidently used for buses, and bus builders sometimes did that, but - at least when I was young - they were rare in Britain compared to buses based on Bedfords and AECs. I guess during the decade after 1945 there may have been a lot of well maintained ex-army trucks looking for a good use, and with steel for building new vehicles in desperately short supply there would have been an incentive to build bus bodies on used truck chassis. In some corners the "British empire" - to judge by what happens when you google - there was a lot of that. I do remember visiting Malta in 1980ish and being amazed by all the wonderful light green - white bodied buses which appeared to have been basied on repurposed truck chassis. But that was speculation. I don't know much factual about those wonderful Maltese buses from (presumably) the 1950s/60s/70s.
As far as wikipedia is concerned, I think the minibuses are one way and another more or less covered in the (Ford) Thames 400E entry. But for the use of Thames chassis to support full-sized (by the standards of the time) bus and coach bodies, I agree that if someone will access a relevant source (or >1, even?) then a para here would be more than useful. It might even grow large enough over time to become a standalone entry. Be well.Charles01 (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Look what I found: [1], [2], and [3]. (Note the "View All" links on the right). No RS but a lot of background. And I found this for contrast.
Are you interested/knowledgeable about trucks? My paper source looks like a picture book (and is also sometimes titled "Book") but it's an adult guide to the industry from an international POV. For instance, the "A-Z of Trucks" section is about the companies, not individual trucks, and illustrations relate to the text. It's cheap here but not many libraries have it (maybe because it's a British book?). If you want, copyright permitting, I can scan and send you these four pages.
How long have these "Reply" tags been here? They're really (edit add: "would be") handy (edit add: "if they worked and I didn't have to go back to fix them"), no colon-counting. Sammy D III (talk) 21:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
1. This is the first time I've noticed one of these reply tags. I wonder if it will work.
2. I'm interested in trucks, as in I think I must be. As in when I attend an old timer show and there are old trucks there I'll happily photograph them along with the cars. But knowledgable? No. I remember having exactly the same wiki-exchange with Mr.Choppers maybe ten years ago. There does in my experience, seem to be a shortage of wiki-usable information online when it comes to vans and trucks. Tiresome.
3. So congratulations on finding those links to images of English/British coaches on Ford chassis. Looks like some interesting reading material there. But maybe, first .... I need more coffee
4. And if anyone reading this will be moved to access more sources - most likely needing to reference some not accessible online - and add a section on Thames buses and coaches, building (or not, as you wish), on elements of this talk-page discussion, please do it.
