I was having a conversation at the LOTS market on Saturday, about the preservation of Routemaster type buses.

In the days when the RM is no longer running on anything other than heritage routes, I personally feel that all RM types are worth preserving, or at the very least, the parts should be made available for the restoration of other vehicles.

I was totally shocked to hear the opinion that there are plenty of RMLs out there, and if a fully operational RML is cut up, or scrapped, its no big loss, because there are plenty out there.

The other part of this discussion was that RMs were worth preserving, but not so much RMLs.

From my point of view, the RTs were withdrawn when I was four. The RM type is what I grew up with. The garage trips to the seaside were on RMs. The long journeys my grandparents took me on, were on RMs. Although the Titan was the predominant bus as I grew up, they never had the beauty of design, the RM had, in all its different types.

So my question is, do the members of this forum feel, that there are plenty of RMLs out there, and the scrapping of some of those that still run is a warranted exercise?

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

Can of worms time...

The Routemaster is THE iconic London bus, new seen in most parts of the world and yes, every one should be preserved in some people's eyes; they are what we grew up with.

On the practical side, which is what people like myself and the other roy have to deal with, is the difficulty in getting parts to keep them on the road. Roy has made a very good point on here about the AEC 590 engines, a 1940s engine by design which was made to fit in lorries that had a maximum speed at the time of 20mph; they were never designed to still be running 60-odd years later along foreign motorways flat out!

That the RMs were designed with a service life which has been more than doubled is a tribute to those who designed and built them. In the years since privytisation, the overhaul regime has been far less stringent that it was in LT days, in many cases being kept to a bare minimum standard to keep the buses going. We are now reaping the rewards of that policy by struggling to keep things going.

There is no point preserving all the remaining RMs/RMLs/etc. because there's enough of them still running to show a representative selection to future generations. Similarly there is no point preserving the remaining RTs because there's enough decent RTs already in preservation. A number have been acquired and dismantled in the recent past by contributors on here; these have provided a useful but limited source of spares to keep the others going. The same will have to happen to the Routemaster parc in a short space of time to keep other going.

I know of 1 RM abroad that has been partially destroyed by fire, another that has blown up 2 engines in the last 4 months. who is prepared to donate an engine to keep one going? Or a body to repair the fire-damaged bus? Both had been modified to "exhibition" buses and were used to tour Europe. Both "could" be used as donor buses here, but the owners want a small fortune for them!

With the original question, in my view there is little point preserving any more RMLs, we have enough already. We have a number of the original batch still in existence, and plenty of the later batch preserved or still in service with people like myself. These represent all variants of original and modified versions. To future generations they will all look the same. Why have 200 of the same thing preserved? If they were BR Mk1 railway carriages, ok, you can use a lot in one train, but buses?

My bus number (if any): RML2532

There is a lot of logic in what you say Roy.

I think then that if this is the case, if any bus is dismantled, surely the owner should perhaps have the grace, to advertise it first, even if it is just for the parts.

I know this might not happen in the real world, as already seen by myself, but it is essential that a core number of vehicles are retained.

I have seen so many pictures of buses in scrapyards rotting away, and I hate to see that in the modern era, although in the case of the DMS, I would have personally driven them there myself!

The question is, how many preserved buses, is too many?

I don't personally agree that there's no point preserving any more RTs, because I've never seen that many anywhere.

All we need is a few good men, who are willing to save those RTs sitting in barns rotting away. I could never see myself finding one and saying, 'Nah! we've got enough.' If that's the case why are buses being brought back from abroad?

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

Going back many many years, I bought GS67 (1969, I was 17 at the time) for £100, a lot of money in those days. At the few rallies, there weren't many buses around.

Then when the RFs, there were loads at rallies, along with loads of GS's (84 built, 85 preserved). Then when the RTs came off, loads of those at rallies. Where are they all now? Recently it's been loads of RMs at rallies. Not many DMS's...

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Back in 1979, employees at Barking were given the chance to buy the RTs that were withdrawn.

My dad stuck in £50 and briefly became a part owner of RT4190. As a four year old I got to sit on an RT, albeit in the yard behind the garage!

RT4190 did appear at a few rallies over the years, before disappearing from the public eye.

Last I heard it was sitting in a barn somewhere in Essex, rotting away.

I will admit that it is vital that we preserve each era of our transport history, with prestige vehicles, but sometimes, it's nice to know there are other options out there if need be.

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

I too have an RT sitting in a barn in Essex. Like a lot of people here, I probably won't live long enough to restore all the vehicles I have, and the RT isn't top priority!

My bus number (if any): RML2532

The problem is a combination of age, skills and money.

Buses have a predominately working class following and affection. Something that differs a little from the railways. Consequently there are not too many who have the money and resources to fund preservation.
What has been achieved has been at great personal cost to some and given the sacrifices and shoestring budgets, almost a miracle.
But in those times now gone, a lot of parts were in abundance, cheap and a lot of stuff came out of LT one way or another.

Now all that has gone and parts and suppliers are getting fewer.

With space in London and other UK cities becoming both scarce and highly expensive, it is strangling the ability for almost anyone who indulges in preservation projects be it a huge bus or a mini-cooper.
Long term Storage costs are way beyond affordable and workshop facilities and a place to work out of hours ie at weekends etc are fast vanishing.

Those who have the skills and know how of older vehicles are vanishing fast. The pioneers of preservation are almost all deceased, many are too frail now and a great many on the cusp of retirement.

So the passionate enthusiasts who are younger and picking up the baton, learning the skills and acquiring all the knowledge are very few, probably too few.

The storage and facility costs are so great that it makes the actual cost of a rebuild prohibitive and diverts funds away from the actual project.

Then there's the cost of running the vehicle.

RMLs, I think, do still have a future. They are still very versatile and ideal for the growing heritage hire industry.
The extra capacity and the updated running gear makes them more economically sound for a business than an RM or RT.
It's an area that will grow as congestion and parking makes so many events from weddings to outdoor events both expensive and a pain by car.

But it needs to be squeaky clean, cowboys and corner cutters could do serious damage to the reputation and credibility. Most seem to be well aware of that and are exceptional in standards .

So for now the RML is still a viable working vehicle, The RT in top condition, a real classic choice and the RM in between.

But preserving is becoming a problem. Once it's done after years of painstaking labour, Then what? many have simply faded and rotted away, The owners too drained to want to do it again, not sure what to do with it, out of money and no plan in place to protect the vehicles future.

From my perspective ( and it is just my personal view ) things are looking a bit dark. I think a lot of good vehicles are going to end up in the hands of the butchers for corporate promotional use, and spat out as scrap after a few years or the end of a campaign, many are going to simply rot away, many will be scrapped due to storage costs and what's left will become almost to valuable to risk on the road.
I doubt the prudence of dismantling will occur although one bus will yield just one particular part and there might be 20 or 30 looking for that same part.

A lot to think about there, but I really appreciate the input from more than one source.

My ultimate feeling after listening to the comments so far, is that in an ideal situation, a number of RMLs should be preserved. In the event that there is not the resources to preserve a large quantity, provision should be made that a bank of parts are available for the future.

If possible maintenance and restoration skills need to be passed on, so that future generations can preserve the RM class in the same way that the predecessors have been. I doubt for instance there are many people around who worked on the original construction of models like the Guy Arab!

If private hire can help bring in the funds for preservation, then its all money going in the right direction. And of course there are other avenues, like renting to film companies, so that they can film the same bus going down the same road, over and over again, sometimes in the wrong direction, sometimes in the wrong timeframe, or at the wrong time of day! But if it helps preserve the future of London's transport heritage, I'm fine with that.

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

I was having a conversation with an extremely talented professional restorer a few days ago. He is driven almost to distraction by the long term attitude of 'Bus People' to particularly, but not solely, the mechanical side of their vehicles. Some of the Big Names are sometimes almost the same as the smaller ones. It would be going too far to say that 'as long as it gets through the MOT and looks pretty' then everything is hunky-dory. But for decades the general attitude has been that if a major component fails, then there is always another one sitting in a barn, a field, or a scrapyard somewhere that will 'get the old girl going again'. Not only that, but the failed component is weighed in for scrap to help pay for the replacement. So the result is what we find today - no useable core units left worth reconditioning, few consumable overhaul parts still available; because there has been no demand for them, so since it costs money to sit on the shelf it's gone in the bin. Or, and this has happened too many times 'just what is absolutely essential and not spending too much money' has been done, using up AND WASTING those precious few consumable overhaul parts and what's happened? - oh dear it's failed again. AEC head gasket blown? that's no problem folk lore says LT turned the job round in 8 hours, so quick plonk another on a bit sharpish and 'job's a good'un'. Except often it isn't, because the heads needed skimming, half the headstuds were so corroded that they needed renewing and no-one knows whether the heads are OK or not. Result do the job again and two more head gaskets required or ooops blown engine this time. But then in reality LT probably never did it that way, at a guess, if the heads came off, the same ones didn't go back on, freshly overhauled ones from Chiswick went on and if studs were iffy then the whole lump was changed.


On the other hand most of the Lorry People and the Car people who approach him (maybe because those who do have more money) take the opposite attitude and want their bits resurrected.

Having said all that, another conversation with a long term friend in the trade brings up the following: He always used to be thoroughly fed up with how he would take lengths to make sure everything was spotless, properly torqued, inspected and replaced if necessary, but Fred never cleaned anything and threw everything back together, and hence, did the job more quickly. Even more galling was that Fred's 'comeback rate' was no worse than his own. So sadly even care and attention to detail cannot always guarantee a first-time-fix, but it is more likely to.

In another conversation with roy the other day we were talking about a per-war Leyland that's had engine problems for quite a while. I know the owner, a keen preservationist and he asked my opinion on his engine recently. As I know roy had been working on it, I suggested he asked ro's advice.

However, roy didn't want to take responsibility for damaging beyond repair a particularly rare Leyland engine! So it went to another professional restorer who said the engine was beyond repair. so, on that front, we've now lost a nice pre-war Portsmouth Leyland.

Like my customer in Germany who keeps trucking his AEC engine RM along the autobahns flat out, he's blown up 2 engines in a short space of time and simply doesn't listen to advice. Conversely, he had a "spare" Cummins RML that he bought and sold on. in my opinion he would have been much better off converting that and dismantling the AEC RM, which had already been burnt out a few years back and been resurrected.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

That sort of logic, is exactly how things should be. Preserve what is worth preserving!

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

My other problem is I fall into the category mentioned in Jack Norrie's first line!!

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Morning all

It is subjective surely.From the owners point of view their bus is nearly always worth preserving or keeping on the road in service and, in the case of a Routemaster, when it isn't someone will nearly always buy it to attempt the same. What makes any of my three buses less worthwhile than anyone else's bus, car, motorbike or lorry, to me at least.
Why should anyone sell their property for less than market value? If someone wanted my bus for spares then as long as they paid what she is worth then do what they want with her thereafter. Those that need spares for their more important vehicle will of course think that others could be scrapped to donate parts. As usual the spares thing is seen as a problem. If AEC engines are so poor nowadays fit a Cummins! If another part fails have it made or find a modern replacement. There is always a way, it just depends on your thoughts about originality and of course your skill and of course how deep your pocket is. Perhaps next we can debate whether those without a proven skill base should be allowed to own a bus, but then what should that skill be, mechanical, electrical or body or simply the ability to drive it. Few have all those skills.
Personally I am happy with a refurbished RML (purchased nine years ago today as it happens). I tend not to take it to bus rallies, instead taking her to local non-bus events where non-bus people generally think she is superb in her as withdrawn condition. It is only bus snobbery that says it must be an as built, AEC RM of early stock or some other significance, but lets face it, the majority of Routemasters are ringers anyway.
And what of those that cannot afford to buy at the high prices they currently fetch. Scrap all the so called insignificant buses to keep others on the road will force prices up even more.

Where do my three buses fall in significance? In my ideal world they would be sold in the following order, Titan, then the RML and only then the very poorly Metrobus. I am sure you will all have different opinions. Those in the East of London often think Metro's are insignificant, those from the West think the same about Titans. And what is wrong with a DMS? Surely they are all significant in their own way to an individual.

As I said, purely subjective

David

PS. If only one Routemaster could be saved, which one should it be?

My bus number (if any): RML2276 M1001 T806

I was fortunate enough to have family around London, when I was growing up, so I experienced many different models.

In the east it was all Titans, but I enjoyed more the journeys on the 86 from Limehouse, which were RMs at the time. One grandmother used the 73, which was also RMs, and I used to marvel at the sight of them lined up on Stoke Newington Common.

Going to Wood Green, was originally a trip on RMs, which were replaced by Metros, which always struck me as being too noisy, but they still had their own unique sound.

For years, I'd wanted to go on an Olympian, and during my residence in Norwood, experienced them in their last throws, trying to get up Knights Hill, preferably with half the passengers, pushing!

I never liked the DMS, something about it never felt right, and I was glad to see the back of them. My dad suggested when I was in New York in 96 that I go on the sightseeing tour. 'Are you kidding,' I said, 'they're all ex LT DMS'!'

Still whatever I think of them, it is important to preserve some of them, because they are still part of the LT history, good or bad.

If a bus is going to be scrapped, let it be in the way the garages used to do, and use the parts, to help save the shortage of parts for other preserved vehicles. Owners of preserved vehicles may think about £ signs when selling, but let us hope there are some out there that want to sell with the right intentions in mind.

To answer the question of which RM I would save, if I could only save one I would choose either RM5, or RM25, because their continual service on routes over the years, truly embodies the real spirit of the Routemaster, as a bus that was built to last.

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

When I bought my GS at the age of 17 I had none of the skills, I couldn't even drive it (legally) until I was 21! Since then I've acquired the skills needed to do all the things mentioned above, learning by taking it apart to see how it works, then learning and picking up tips from others.

As to the future, my on worked with me when he left school, got a BTech in bus engineering, now preserves military vehicles, and has progressed to Assistant Fleet Engineer on the Southern Railway. A number of my contporaries' offpring have followed their fathers into preservation, Julian Bowden, John woodhams, Brian Speller, Tim Bubb, all their sons have followed their fathers interests.

The problem is there's a number of people who don't have offspring and don't really know what to do with their buses once they're gone! They don't have a "future generation" to leave them to.

As to the solution about "fitting a Cummins", not as easy as it sounds. I've recently discussed this with a customer abroad who wanted to do that; then we discussed that he had to find one (not easy), them hand make all the "conversion" parts such as the steering pump, header tank, exhaust downpipe...modify the cab side...or find something like a Mercedes engine that would fit, but would have to tick over at about 350rpm (not at all easy on a modern engine), with a maximum revs of about 1800-2000 (easy). If we throw money at things, anything is possible, but then you lose the originality and authenticity of the vehicle.

Maybe the yanks have the right idea, Cat engines with Alison gearbox?

Regarding prices, the vehicle is worth what someone is prepared to pay for one. Was it Christies sold one recently for about £90,000-odd including commission and VAT! Some abroad have sold for very good money, £45,000 and more, and euro60,000 for an RT recently! Hmmm.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

The only engine conversion that fits moderately easily is the Iveco, but then there is enormous prejudice against the Iveco; seen by the 'true enthusiast' as something totally inferior to a knackered AEC and definitely no better than what is stuck on the bottom of their shoe - so that one's ruled out of play straight away.

All LT employees could buy buses and cars in those days, if you knew who to talk to! You just contacted Chiswick Purchasing Office and asked for a tender form. Once you bought a car or van you were invited to tender for all subsequent sales. If you wanted a bus you were directed to garage(s) where withdrawn buses were stored and told to choose one, the wise ones allegedly, crossed the Foreman's palm with silver for access to the vehicle record cards.


Not sure why BK staff were offered RT 4190 as it wasn't ever a BK bus. It was last used as a trainer at Bexleyheath, it would however, have been available for sale at the end of the RTs although it was supposedly sold for scrap to Wombwell the day after it was withdrawn from Training duties at BX, but that could have been a clerical error at Chiswick.

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458 RM 1585, (M 961, M 271 - both sold) and several RTs

Funny you should say that Brian, as I recently found on Flickr a picture of RT4190 running on the 87. There is also a picture in one of the bus books, I forget which one, of it running down the Seven Kings Road!

It had the Garage Code BK on the side of it. We have pictures of it in an album somewhere, of it lined up with several other RTs in the yard at Barking, one with my dad in his inspector's uniform hanging out of the cab.

In the same set of photos, we have my dad sitting in a revolutionary new bus that had just been delivered to Barking. The Titan!

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

Never in service at BK, any photos on the 87 are after sale. It was preserved and shown as a BK bus but it never operated from BK. Upto 1969 it was always green!

On the photo you might be referring to of it a rally at BK, it says "Odd that staff at Barking Garage chose RT 4190 rather than one of their own long serving examples to buy". Perhaps the staff at BK knew that the RTs at BK at the end were not as good as RT 4190! It was in the area being allocated to Seven Kings 23/9/75 to 15/10/77 and ran on the 86s.

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458 RM 1585, (M 961, M 271 - both sold) and several RTs

Wasn't that picture Brian!

In fact other sources I found said it ran out of Barking in its final months. Why blind up a bus with routes like 87 and 62, if its being withdrawn? It makes no sense.

It might have been an idea to change the blinds after it was taken away from Barking, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't the case.

Some quotes include;

RT 4190, AEC Regent III with Weymann body, is pictured here at Aldenham works open day, Sunday 16/9/1979. This RT was one of the last in service with LT and at the time was allocated to Barking. It is now preserved by the Barking garage RT group.

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

It wasn't ever out of Barking. Last garage it ran from in service was Bromley.
If you can find a picture of it in service at Barking I will be amazed. I'm on Flickr and have searched extensively for it. I have photos of it at Holloway, Seven Kings and Bromley.
The picture of it supposedly on the 87 by Bow Road UK on Flickr is after sale, it has dipping headlights and chrome nut guards on the front wheels.

Lots of buses carried blinds in preservation for garages never allocated at.

Since becoming red in May 1969 RT 4190 was at Alperton until 15/5/71 then Holloway/Highgate until 23/9/75 ; then probably repainted and transferred to Seven Kings 23/9/75; then to Bromley 5/10/77: then Harrow Weald 12/6/78.

Back to Bromley 15/7/78 then delicensed at Bromley 26/8/78 when its COF for PSV work expired.
It was relicensed as a private trainer and transferred to Brixton 2/2/79 after 4 months in store. It moved to Bexleyheath (BX) also as a trainer 30/4/79. It was finally withdrawn at BX 2/8/79. It wasn't one of that last RTs in service as it didn't have a COF after August 1978!

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458 RM 1585, (M 961, M 271 - both sold) and several RTs

Thanks for the information Brian.

I will gladly stand corrected. How RT4190 ended up in the yard at Barking will remain a minor mystery for now! (Or I could just ask my dad!)

Now in an attempt to recover the original point of the thread.

Do you think RMLs are worth preserving?!

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

Routemasters are extemely divisive. Some love them but equally as many loathe them. I had the choice of an RM or an RML when I bought 531. I prefer the original design. For me it is the ultimate design classic. The long version is still great, but.....in my opinion, not as good as the original. 3 feet longer and more awkward to park too! Worth preserving? Of course. A 50 year old classic which is entirely usable. 10 years ago, a service standard example with an Iveco could be had for around 5 grand. A good entry level bus to enter the world of bus preservation with. Today people ask 35k for good examples. Are they worth that? It would seem so, as they are selling.

The last development of the halfcab, years out of date when the last one entered service- the Atlantean was launched in 1958- and a worthy bus in its own right for preservation. Only the factions within the enthusiast movement who are anti RM anyway would argue otherwise.

My bus number (if any): RM531

I have to agree with you Steve.

Given the choice, I would rather preserve an RM, than an RML, but it's good to have both, if nothing more than to show the differences!


Ps. Thanks to everyone who has weighed in on this subject. It's important to gauge opinion, both pro and against.

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

"Are RMLs worth preserving"
This topic has been debated on here and elsewhere many times.
It's not really a relevant question is it? They have been and in great numbers. The professional operators do not seem to have spares problems as yet, "shortages" occurred when lots of people decided to retrofit their buses to as delivered condition all chasing a small number of parts that were largely obsolete. Eg Heater controls, bulb holders.

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458 RM 1585, (M 961, M 271 - both sold) and several RTs

The question is very relevant in my opinion, because there are those out there who just plain don't feel that they should be, for one reason or another.

Just because you personally don't feel it is relevant, does not mean that the question should not be open to debate.

The whole reason I started this thread, was because someone connected to the preservation community, told me last week that he would scrap every RML given the chance.

Logic then dictated that I canvas the people who preserved vehicles to see how they felt.

The question is not about how many exist now, or even if there is a shortage of parts. Today there are many examples still running around, but if people don't ensure that some are preserved, in 10 years we could be looking at the class almost disappearing.

If you feel it necessary, by all means hit me with more facts and figures, about current preservation statistics, but they will not answer the base question!

Presumably that same person in the preservation community would also scrap every "Tunnel" STL (now extinct), every pre-war RT, every BEA half-decker, every Bedford OB (because there's lots of them around)...or indeed anything else he doesn't like!

If someone wants to preserve anything, that's their choice, and it's the choice of your contact to want to scrap them all if he could afford to buy them all he could then fulfil his dreams!

My dream is to continue operating RML2532 for wedding for as long as I am able to legally drive it and for as long as spares are available to keep it going! I'd also like to get my 2 BEA coaches on the road, and my OB, and my RT, but the RT is at the bottom of the list because there's a lot preserved and still in revenue service. The RT may well end up as a donor to keep others going, I don't know.

It all depends on finance, my health, and living long enough to do them all!! As for preserving any more RMLs, it's not a good idea unless one is found complete; there just aren't the parts to do the job properly, and it would be a pointless duplication of effort.

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Bottom line for me is to preserve some RMLs, but not all of them.

If we decided willy nilly not to preserve a type of bus, because someone doesn't like it, we wouldn't have any buses preserved.

I understand the points raised here, the age of owners, skills retained, cost, availability of parts, and so on.

I think I was in shock for quite a while after the person concerned told me he'd scrap every RML, even the ones in perfect condition, because of what he is currently promoting and also the venue I was at, that being the LOTS market.

In your case Roy, you have some amazing buses in your collection, and I totally see why you need to prioritise which you spend your time and money on.

Good luck with them all.

This is just going around in circles.

There are a few hundred RMLs out there, most are laid up and quite a few dismantled. and quite a few butchered badly for promotion work and some very carefully and tastefully converted for further use.

Anyone who says none should be preserved is, quite frankly, a complete idiot and probably one of those sorts that spouts out a load of nonsense under the auspice of being an authoritative member of some sort of preservation group.

However, maybe he or she has been misunderstood and what they mean is none should be preserved as they are still a viable working vehicle - which they are.

That said, Over the years, there's been quite a few pontificating views like that and more than a few on various committees of various organisations.

They usually have big gobs, small minds and like causing rifts. The key reason I do not participate in active preservation. They are seldom owners, or engineers, don't get their hands dirty and peddle incorrect 'knowledge'
These types are usually the ones who create divisions in the one area of preservation which could be viable for many with limited budgets, that of group ownership. So many have foundered because of awkward impossible sorts who simply make issues for no apparent reason but somehow manage to leave a trail of devastation.

The fact is, one has to take what these sorts say with a large pinch of salt. Or, walk away.

The best way is to do your homework, read the well written and documented books and yes, ask the questions.

gradually you will find and seek out those who do have great knowledge, offer constructive advice and know their onions. And there are certainly folk on this site and even the other channel who certainly do.

I think there have been good answers here and really shows the question is rather irrelevant.

How many RMLs or Vauxhall Viva's end up preserved is simply down to the individual. It's personal taste and that's that. Free do do what they like with what is their property. It is freedom of choice and preference.

However, as I mentioned before it is pointless 'saving' every RML or any other bus if one does not have the means to do anything with it, it is strictly for those with either all the various skills or very deep pockets or both.

There are quite a few buses stored away with owners waiting for that rainy day when means can allow. some awaiting the day when time allows.

As time passes, spare will be a bigger problem but as I said before it will be the same spares that will elude. Those that fail or wear beyond refurbishment, and those that get 'collected' by souvenir hunters and ebay opportunists.

So, a number of the buses I service abroad are RMLs; none of them are worth preserving as they've been so heavily butchered as to be almost unrecognisable inside. I'd suggest that the majority of these when they fail will become donors for what few serviceable parts are left for re-use and refurbishment.

The same could be aid of a lot of the "exhibition unit" buses at home. there's usually very little of the interior fitting left, and to try to preserve one of those would be folly; there simply aren't enough other "donor" vehicles around to provide the parts to rebuild one to "original" condition.

Much the same could be said of the BEA 4RF4s. As mentioned earlier, I have 2 which are more or less intact and have a full set of seats. There's another at the late Cobham, one in the Science Museum, both intact with seats. All the others I know of do not have seats, and this is where the difficulty is. the BEA seats are common only to the rear seats on a Green Line RF because the side fittings are different.

It's not beyond the wit of man to make new seat frames and luggage racks for these buses providing one has the funds and know-how to do so, and I'm co-operating with the other owners of BEA coaches to provide spares and information. The question is, what bus becomes a donor for the others?

The same question may well apply to the RML parc in not so many years time; it has already been discussed here!

My bus number (if any): RML2532

Just as a matter of interest do any of the RTs, RFs etc that were in use on the last day in service of the type survive at all, and are any in presentable condition?

It would be a shame indeed to see the last RMLs from Brixton disappear completely. I am particularly saddened to know that 892 ended up being butchered; although I am not certain it was in use on the last day.

Referring back to the prejudice against Iveco, several of the Brixton contingent seemed to be able to march on really quite well. 2366 or another with the same digits springs to mind. From what I can remember Robbie telling me 2692 was the best of the lot until it was run out of oil.

Certainly one prospective purchaser turned down a Cummins after test driving it and the Iveco he bought because his got up and went.

Interesting reading and very easy to be drawn into the trap of subjective thoughts on this post. Jack has summed it up very well, I couldn't agree more, and it is pointless trying to restore every RML out there, just who has all the money to do it anyway. I would hope that if there are owners out there with young families, that they are not spending small fortunes on their buses at the expense of other more important places it could be spent, we are after all talking about a bus.

Much has been written about the Iveco engine Routemaster however having owned both a Cummins and Iveco engine bus I prefer the Cummins. The main reasons for the preference are that the Iveco is extremely noisy with a very harsh tone and the Cummins is a better sounding engine in my own opinion. With regard to power both types seemed about the same to me, but the Cummins is probably the easier to maintain, the fuel pump on the Iveco being quite inaccessible, if you had to get to it.

To answer your question briefly Roy and not get off the topic too much, yes a number of the last RFs in service survive, RF 507 the last one survives as does 512 which has just had a total rebuild at Tilsworth,
RT 624 the last RT survives with Ensign and 5 of the last 13 RTs in service survive in preservation, the others were exported and all survive as far as is known except RT 2240 which was preserved in the UK then butchered for the Knight bus.

My bus number (if any): RTL 960, RMC 1458 RM 1585, (M 961, M 271 - both sold) and several RTs

Thanks to everyone for their input.

To clarify this was never about preserving every RML still out there, but a small group. I have no problem with scrapping a lot of them, while perhaps holding onto some parts for others. I just feel that the RML needs some examples to remain.

The person I spoke to was in favour of preserving RMs, but not RMLs. That is as clear as I can be!

And for my final moment, which is sure to get a reaction. Hands up if you're the person who has put almost the entire interior of an RML up for sale on that auction site that begins with the small 'e'!

From the pictures, there looked to be a lot of the original interior features present, bar the seat covers, and orange pole covers!

My bus number (if any): RML2561 (Well, at least the bits I managed to save!)

A lot of people took the chance to buy a traditional front engine bus more or less 25 years after they disappeared from the streets of not just London but the whole of the uk . Instead of buying a Lodekka , RT , guy arab etc ( to name a few) that might be partly restored and needing parts / or repairs the surviving RM/RML offered the golden chance to own a front engined bus that was in working order to start with . There are lots of RM's and RML's preserved , numbers will slowly dwindle as the RT's and RF's have but hopefully they will be seen in good numbers for the foreseeable future . A good test of this will be RM60 next July at Finsbury park when we'll see how many turn up , hopefully a good turnout .
There were a lot more RML's that standard RM's in service in the 90's and 00's hence the higher survival rates of the RML's , if there had been more RM's it would have been the case of very few RML's in preservation but still the same number of routemasters as a whole would be preserved . I can't see why the RML's shouldn't be preserved as it was the final development of the routemaster , or last built . If we just had rows of standard RM's the argument would be there's too many of them !
I was lucky to buy RML2391 , I would have preferred a standard RM and indeed could of bought RM1062 instead (wish I had at the time now) but I'm happy with my RML and the extra small window usually brings comments as to why its like it at vehicle shows.
At the end of the day you can preserve what you want and do what you want with it , its your choice and money .
It would of been nice if the early batch of RML's could have all been put in the hands of preservationists instead of some of the later ones as the whole batch was complete , probably too spread around the world now . That would have been a nice line up to achieve....!
Mark

My bus number (if any): RML2391

Thanks to all for this fascinating discussion. I think Mark's post brings it to it's natural conclusion and have decided to close and lock the thread. With so many erudite and lengthy contributions it gets a bit long to view easily. Feel free to start a new thread if you want to explore any of the issues raised in more detail. Thanks again to all contributors.

My bus number (if any): RMs 238, 471. 2213 & GS17