Safer Freight Package - Trucks can now be 2.55m

[boronia]

8 ft in the old talk, went up to 8' ft 2.5 inches. Not sure when it changed. Thought the Leopards might have been wide.

[Swift]

They certainly weren't London RF narrow but I recall an STA driver mentioning they were more narrow than the Mercedes and their bodies look to be less wide compared to the Mercedes when you look at them separate, despite sharing the same wheelbase and door widths.

[eddy]

When I read “When they were building trucks in Australia the technology was a couple of years old by the time it was tested in Europe and then put into their factory in Australia,” says Bruce. “As a result, we’ve had quite a jump in technology that’s available now in the trucks because we’re going straight to the European spec.” I thought it is goodbye to protection of our truck and bus makers. https://primemovermag.com.au/arrivals-and-departures/

[boronia]

They certainly weren't London RF narrow but I recall an STA driver mentioning they were more narrow than the Mercedes and their bodies look to be less wide compared to the Mercedes when you look at them separate, despite sharing the same wheelbase and door widths.

The RF and RT were to the then UK standard of 7' 6", the first 8'ers were the RTW in 1948 which were restricted initially to selected routes. The RMs were the first general use 8 footers. The DMS from 1971 were 8' 2.5"

[Tim Williams]

The over width Adelaide buses commenced during the MTT Adelaide period and it was often suggested that Mr Bunny Aust (Engineer or maybe Chief Engineer of the MTT) calculated that by building buses to 8' 6" width, the passenger capacity would be increased by "x" (?) numbers of people - this was just based on an increased internal volume! Generations of large (for the time) Adelaide MTT buses began with AEC Regal IV's which were 37' 6" by 8' 6" - in metric that is 11.43 metres in length by 2.59 metres in width.

Those MTT and some STA over width buses were:
AEC Regal IV's
Leyland Worldmasters
AEC Regal VI's
Daimler Roadliners
AEC Swift 691's
AEC Swift 760's
Volvo B59's
MAN SL 200's (Some only)

A lot of Adelaide roads are comparatively wide and straight, so that extra width caused no problems and despite an earlier comment, these buses were not built with any thought about being narrowed after their use with the MTT or STA, infact a couple of different methods of narrowing the buses for use in other states was used. Do remember that the M&MTB Melbourne also operated 8' 6" AEC Regal IV's & VI's, but they were short in length!

[tonyp]

The over width Adelaide buses commenced during the MTT Adelaide period and it was often suggested that Mr Bunny Aust (Engineer or maybe Chief Engineer of the MTT) calculated that by building buses to 8' 6" width, the passenger capacity would be increased by "x" (?) numbers of people - this was just based on an increased internal volume! Generations of large (for the time) Adelaide MTT buses began with AEC Regal IV's which were 37' 6" by 8' 6" - in metric that is 11.43 metres in length by 2.59 metres in width.

Those MTT and some STA over width buses were:
AEC Regal IV's
Leyland Worldmasters
AEC Regal VI's
Daimler Roadliners
AEC Swift 691's
AEC Swift 760's
Volvo B59's
MAN SL 200's (Some only)

A lot of Adelaide roads are comparatively wide and straight, so that extra width caused no problems and despite an earlier comment, these buses were not built with any thought about being narrowed after their use with the MTT or STA, infact a couple of different methods of narrowing the buses for use in other states was used. Do remember that the M&MTB Melbourne also operated 8' 6" AEC Regal IV's & VI's, but they were short in length!

It stands to reason that if a bus is wider overall, the aisle will be wider (assuming they don't widen the seats, very unlikely), so a wider aisle means more floor area and the possibility of a few more passengers and certainly better space for circulation.

Don't forget that these buses replaced the trams. Indeed, as in Sydney, I think they were called "tramway replacement buses", but only Adelaide made an effort to at least partly compensate for the loss of passenger capacity and efficiency that the trams had - hence Adelaide's wider buses with three doors. All other cities, including Sydney, replaced their trams with standard buses that had only about 2/3 of the capacity of a then-standard 14 metre tram and with only two doors, hence their ability for passenger churn was appalling compared to the trams. They relied on the trend of commuters increasingly gravitating to driving their own private cars to bring the patronage numbers down and of course that worked - for all of a couple of decades!

I don't have an old Adelaide tram's dimensions in front of me, but the Sydney trams were about 8 foot wide over the body and 9 foot over the running boards.

[Swift]

I heard the overwidth Adelaide buses in NSW were narrowed by simply tapering the bottom to the reduced width, so that means we just had over width buses with narrower bases to meet technicalities.
If it was that simple why didn't NSW get a whole hord of AEC Regal VIs, Swift 691, 760s and Volvo B59s like we did Leyland Worldmasters and to a lesser extent, AEC Regal IVs?

[boronia]

It is a long time ago now, but I recall reading, maybe in T&BT at the time, that some of the later models were specifically designed and built to be narrowed easily so they could be used in other states. Perhaps removal of a central spine along the roof.

[Tim Williams]

Tonyp's points are valid, regarding the replacement of trams with large capacity buses - it is though a great shame that all the tram lines were ripped up, the powers that be keep talking about reinstating a lot of these lines, I doubt that it will happen.

[moa999]

Interesting video on the 2.55m Perth Mercedes hydrogen trial buses
https://youtu.be/36yXoVZrgVo?si=Hdx5f2OWPxKpjz0b