Видео

Thanks Dave! I bet your bus sounds good too. We have a couple of similar units on the preserved Aln Valley Railway where I volunteer. All five carriages originally featured TL11 engines with SCG automatic gearboxes but these were replaced in the early 1990s with Cummins LTA10 engines and Voith hydraulic transmissions. Much more reliable but nowhere near as good in the “sound” department!

Thanks, yes the sound of a TL11 engine has a great distinctive sound and your recordings of them being used in a rail car takes it to the next level! Epic stuff. Thanks for the info, great stuff. Are any units preserved over there with a TL11 in them, probably not I’m guessing by your post.

@@destodave3076there were two 141 units preserved on the Weardale Railway in Northumbria but I’m not sure if either is still in existence. The Class 141 fleet were withdrawn by BR in 1995 and never received replacement engines or gearboxes.

It is a mechanical, four-speed gearbox but the gear changing is automatic.

AMT like Opticruise, i-Shift, AS-Tronic

No, unfortunately not, though I think there are one or two films on RUclips with this combination. I'll see if I can find the links for you.

The first train in this compilation has a Leyland engine with Voith hydraulic transmission. ruclips.net/video/NY4HIyAzEeI/видео.htmlsi=T2VEycwBBxruGaxl Sounds gruesome to my ear, as if the engine is being flogged!

I've just taken a look. The video looks really good but the engine noise is not quite like the real TL11 sound. Hopefully they'll get that right at some point as it's a great noise!

I think the Armstrong Powerhouse version (for Train Sim Classic) sounds better: ruclips.net/video/HyP-SMNeM7A/видео.html@@pacerfilms5920

I must agree, lovely sound! I'd not really appreciated the engine noise until they were gone.

@@pacerfilms5920 yeah I got it in train sim from Armstrong powerhouse

TL11 is amazing in a bus ruclips.net/video/4WoJBJQc_MM/видео.htmlfeature=shared

Great to hear that you know about the recording! I sent an email to RHTS to tell them about the recording a while back, but no one replied. It must have gone to a non-Pacer person 😀! I know what do you mean about the sound being pleasant. It does sound more interesting than the Cummins engine and hydraulic transmission. It’s a shame that the engine and gearbox were flawed. I’ve actually got some further recordings of 142084 on the same journey which also sound quite nice. By the way, I volunteer at the Aln Valley Railway and work on the maintenance of their 144 Pacers - glutton for punishment!

We’re thinking of putting some tables into 144016. Can you let me know the source of the tables used in your 142? The layout looks good on the RUclips film I watched! Cheers, Simon.

@@pacerfilms5920 I did ask some other volunteers down at RHTS where they sourced both the tables and the chairs, the tables I personally belive were salvaged from a BR MK3 coach and the chairs from a MK2. All the original Leyland bus seats were removed and disposed of before I joined RHTS. The tables have been retrofitted with working power outlets which gain power directly from the batteries, all of them work as I was there to witness them being fitted and tested.

Many thanks for this info - really helpful! 🙂

Would it be possible to get a photo of the bottom of a table leg to see how it is attached to the floor? Simon.hadden@alnvalleyrailway.co.uk

😂

Yes, the TL11 sounded very musical when coupled to the SCG gearbox. However, there was an epidemic of SCG gearbox failures that resulted in all Class 142, 143s and 144s receiving Voith Hydraulic Transmission between the autumn of 1988 and late March 1991. The TL11 seemed badly matched and was very noisy and sluggish. At college we dubbed the Voith converted units as being 'Voith--bugged' and everytime I caught a Class 142 during the conversion period I hoped it was a set still retaining SCG gearboxes. This video filmed at Wigan Wallgate in 1991 shows how noisy they were at 1m50s ruclips.net/video/lTJF4a4etkw/видео.html The Cummins LTA10R engines were fitted between March 1993 and April 1996. They were quieter and more powerful. With Cummins/Voith drivelines, the Pacers were transformed into good workhorses that lasted 20 years longer than their expected lifespan.

I know what you mean about listening to these all day - the noise is really pleasant! I’ve found some more recordings taken later on the same journey to Doncaster so I’ll digitise the highlights soon. There are a couple of station starts which are good and a bit of jointed track which is novel!

142050 was the sole unit built with Voith T211r hydraulic transmission as a trial, but still had Leyland TL11 engines. The first unit to get Cummins LT10R engines was Class 141 No. 141113 (earlier numbered 141012). It was fitted with with Voith transmission at the same time by Derby Works in 1987. The experiment was such a success that all class 142s, 143s and 144s were later so fitted. The other Class 141s retained their TL11 engines and SCG gearboxes until their withdrawal between 1995 to 1998.

@@HORNEBEEDUBLO The 141s survived until August 1997. Such a shame as I liked them

Fascinating! Many thanks for the comments.

You might be the man to consult. I was told the TL11 has AEC 505 derived heads. Would help explain the humming sound they make when winding down and their much smoother running over the 0680. Would help explain their tendency to pop head gaskets as well, which I only recently read in another YT comments section. A bus mechanic told me they leak oil worse than an AEC. No wonder they siezed up under BR. A shame they had issues as they were a beautiful refined yet grunty sounding and powerful motor.

@@jamesfrench7299 AFAIK the heads (and most of the engine) were copie... *ahem* ...... "derived" from the DAF MB1100 (might have that model wrong, been a long time but certainly spawned from DAF DNA), AEC's tended to be more curvy and slimmer heads but not being familiar with the 505 I can't be accurate on that (we did AEC 760's which were a world away from anything Leyland). There's not much physical difference between 0680 and TL11 heads. The castings on the TL11 were a little more boxy and squared off to match the beefed up squarer looking block but otherwise identical and you could interchange valves, springs, guides etc between 680 and TL so there isn't that much of a change except cosmetically, although TL11 heads had thicker head studs (5/8" if memory serves, as opposed to 9/16") to allow for higher torque and prevent stripping of threads.... bigger studs didn't cure the bloody head gasket issues though, although we found the secret sauce for that was to be re-torquing the heads straight after the test run while it was still warm, and then again after 1 month in the vehicle, didn't seem to get many gasket failures after we did that, we also changed the liner protrusion from the book figures which I also think helped the gasket issues. As for leaks.... All Leylands used to come with a lifetime supply of leyland embossed rags !!, simply awful, so many points of failure, but with care you could make them quite dry... we gave 2 year warranties so had to figure out ways to make them dry(er) otherwise we'd be forever going to oil leaks, but wasn't easy and most often just accepted as leaky. I think most of the oil disappeared out the exhaust TBH and as vapour out the the breather, piston oil control rings weren't the best, blip the throttle on a leyland that's been idling for 10 minutes and you'll always get a puff of smoke from the oil passing the rings. The BR engines were usually dry externally so again I think they burnt most of their oil. AEC were actually much better, the rear crank seal in particular (760 engine) was just genius, didn't even have a seal yet stayed dry !! but overall the AEC was a much better engineered engine and fewer shafts and pipes to seal compared to leylands. As for difference in sound, and smoother running....... Apart from TLll being a heavier casting, the heads are nearly identical, as was the induction and exhaust manifolds (assuming were talking about non turbo TL11's) so I couldn't attribute anything on the top end that might change the sound, maybe the beefier blocks and heads changed it a little. What might cause a bigger difference is the induction hoses and filter as those were very different designs and really did change how they sounded especially the rear engined National 2, compared to mid mounted 680. The fuel pumps and injectors are also different between 680 and TL11 (often a rotary DPA pump on 0680, TL11 had in line F&M's and slim injectors) so I'd put my money on that being perhaps the main reason in smoother running and throttle response, the F&M injection gear was always noticeably more responsive and smoother. Oh and I think National 2 ran the engine air induction right to the front (?? can't fully remember, might be wrong) because National 1's failed frequently simply due to sucking in dirty air from the back behind the road wheels so on the MK2's they ran the intake to the front.... but anyway that long intake tube I think caused a lot of that wonderful deep growl we hear, like a reverse trumpet with 11.1 litre lungs.

@@d3b536 whatever they did, the TL11 was a dramatic modernisation. It was much more AEC 760 like in character sound wise. I used to ride Swifts with 760 motors. They were unique to Australian operators. Adelaide had 66 hooked to ZF 2 HP 500 two speed automatic boxes entering service in 1978. Phenomenal sounding is an understatement. I used to ride in 5 speed SCG versions run by Sydney private bus lines. I was a lucky boy. I caught Leyland Tigers most equipped with 245 hp versions of the TL 11. That operator had 20 of them and seemed to get a good run out of them, though he reportedly had very skilled Leyland specialised mechanics. Also went to school in Bedfords, Nationals (510) and AEC Swift 505s with the 4.1:1 axle ratio. Lovely music they generated. You say the 0680 rear mounted in a National 2 was different to one in a Leopard? I beg to differ! See this footage of a London Red Arrow example in this 1985 footage. ruclips.net/video/UNFanyQT2QU/видео.htmlm07s. A couple of the AEC Swift 760s I recorded in 96. ruclips.net/video/2408AXIhK4k/видео.html

@@jamesfrench7299 My favourite was the Tiger 245 and 260's and then the National 2's, then national 1 with the Leyland grenade (510... Hated the engine but loved the character), just loved the sounds they made. Gardner also to a certain extent due to it's longer stroke and lower revving nature, such a low booming torquey beast. I think I was mis-understood. I don't think the difference in sound was purely from the type of block and heads used (whether 680 or TL11), you can use either block as the basis for a National or Leopard and it will sound the same in that configuration (so a TL11 block will sound the same as a 680 if configured as a Leopard for example) but obviously a Leopard sounds completely different to a National.. but not due to the block, it's all the other stuff.... Induction & Exhaust pipes, Fluid coupling, injection equipment, closer tolerance injection pump & compressor drive.... etc etc....those changed the sound and smoothness considerably more than the core block used. In the same way a Mid mounted Tiger 218 sounds different to a rear mounted Leyland Lynx 218, both are identical TL11 'Tiger' engines but sound very different in the different positions.

The 195s use ZF Ecolife, SCG disappeared a long time ago

@@FM60260 I think that the ZF gearboxes are similar in principle to the SCG gearboxes but are 6 speed. I remember reading that the ZF gearboxes are 10% more fuel efficient on routes with plenty stops compared to the Voith hydraulic setup.

Zf ecolife gearboxes sound like plagiarized scg gearboxes with slammed gear changes. Volvo ishift gearboxes to be plagiarized hydracyclic boxes from the 1980s.