Photo Courtesy Detroittransithistory.info
While never as popular as General Motors “New Look” transit coach introduced in 1959, Flxible Corporation’s concurrent New Look model had a fairly successful run. Over 17,000 were produced from 1960 to 1978. There was however, one slightly embarrassing episode that didn’t add much to the coach’s reputation.
Detroit GM New Look. Photo Courtesy Detroittransithistory.info
The Detroit Department of Transportation, then known as the Detroit Department of Street Railways (DSR), was and still is one of the largest urban transport operators in the US. While mostly favoring home-town GM for its fleet, in 1965 it decided to split a new bus order – with an 85 unit request from GM and 20 from Flxible.
Chicago Flxible – Similar to Detroit
The Flxible model was the F2D6V401, which equates to Flxible, “2” denoting 102 inches wide, Diesel, GM 6V-71 powerplant, 40 feet in length, with “1” standing for a transverse engine orientation.
The buses arrived in August 1965, and placed into service in September, but unfortunately a number of brake-related mishaps soon occurred. On the second day of service there was a brake malfunction on one bus. Then several weeks later, one of the buses with thirty-six passengers on board was involved in an accident when the brakes failed and it slammed into the back of a semi-trailer – a number of passengers sustained injuries. When one more brake issue occurred, DSR took the entire 20 buses out of service and had their mechanics do an in depth inspection – they found faulty brake valves on every bus. These were fixed, and they went back into service.
The problems however didn’t end there. In June 1966, the Detroit Free Press published a summary of the DSR’s ten-month internal evaluation report on the performance of the GM and Flxible models. During that period, the GM coaches averaged 44K miles while the Flx’s averaged 32K. Further, the GM buses were out of service for only three driving days, the Flx’s for 61. During the month of June, the GM buses missed no days, while the Flx’s were out 23.
Photo Courtesy Detroittransithistory.info
In August 1966, fed up, DSR decided to return the buses. Flxible reimbursed what DSR paid, minus an adjustment for the one year of service. DSR then ordered 20 new TDH-5303 buses from GM. Detroit never again placed an order with Flxible.
Cedar Rapids Bus – Still in DSR Livery
Photo Courtesy Detroittransithistory.info
Interestingly, Flxible refurbished these 20 buses and re-sold them to Cedar Rapids, where they gave fairly reliable service for the next 15 years.
Unfortunately for Flxible, they would face another major reliability hurdle with a large metro operator a little over a decade later.
Jim’s back on the bus track, great!
That whole windshield(s) set-up is so typical for city buses, brings me right back to my bus-riding days in the early and mid-eighties.
A sad thing, it sounds like initial Q.C. wasn’t being taken seriously by Flxible .
-Nate
Brakes on a bus, brakes on a car.
Breaks to make you a superstar.
The DSR calls you up, and says they wanna chat…
(That’s the breaks, that’s the breaks)
Lol! A very fitting song. First gen commercial hip hop music is the best generation.
So they were still ordering these big 40′ long 102″ wide buses with the 6V-71 in 1965. I couldn’t readily find what year the 8V-71 was finally made available on the transit coaches, but there is a reference out there that says that GM resisted making it available despite numerous requests from operators, but finally capitulated.
I never drove a 40′ new look bus with the 6V-71; Iowas City Transit had 12 35′ buses with the 6, and two later 40′ additions with the 8. The difference was pretty substantial, despite the extra weight.
There were gobs of the Flxibes in LA in the late ’70s and into the ’80s. It seemed they acquitted themselves well once they got the bugs worked out.
From what I was able to find Paul, GM first offered the 8V-71 in the New Look transit in model year 1968. They did a one-off proof on concept for San Francisco in 1967. Flx also added the 8V-71 in 1968, but offered the Cummins 165-285 V8 as an option prior to that – this was the predecessor to the long-running V-903.
Canada loved their 6-cylinder 40 foot Fishbowls, and kept ordering them with 6V71 power right up until production wound down in 1982-83. Even when several 8-cylinder units came up north secondhand from Santa Monica they were all converted to 6V71 or 6V92TA power before entering service. They weren’t quick, but they seemed to be durable and were generally liked by drivers.
Paul, you are exactly right about GM being reluctant to offer an 8V-71 in a transit bus, even a 40’X102″ job, reason given was the V-drive transmission couldn’t handle the torque. GM however would allow an 8V in a Suburban New Look with a manual transmission. This rankled Los Angeles’ public transit chief George Powell who very much wanted large transits with 8V’s so they could be used in city and ‘Freeway Flyer’ service (L.A.R.T.D. had some routes that encompased both). Legend has it when G.M. refused his request, Powell went to Flxible, and they built a large transit with a Cummins 555 V-8 and a Spicer Turbomatic transmission. Powell ordered a number of these Cummins powered Flxibles, and even went to far to specify the coaches would have no G.M. parts in them whatsover, including AC Delco starters and generators. Those coaches had quite the reputation for speed, and the story was the next time the G.M. Coach sales reps. were in L.A., Powell personally treated them to a hair-raising freeway ride in a Cummins powered Flxible! It is unknown what affect the trip had on the G.M. reps, because it was a few more years until GM made the 8V optional in the 40′ transits. A limited number of 5305’s were tested with 8V’s and the new Super-V transmission with that powertrain being a regular option on the 5307’s. I believe the first regular production T8H-5307’s went to San Francisco Muni, but the L.A.R.T.D. did eventually buy many.
Great add’l info Bob – thanks.
My pleasure, great article!
You are right, the Cummins V-8 Flxible first used was the 165-285. Those engines along with the 555 and 903 are all related.
Grew up with RTD in the Pasadena, Ca. area in the 60’s and 70’s. First buses I remember were green and steel sided GMs with 6V71s. Later, RTD went to Flxibles, yellow and steel sided with the Cummins V903s. Very different noises they made from each other. 🙂
I recall DC’s (and suburban Maryland/Virginia’s) Metrobus network had structural issues with their Flxibles in the late ’70s or early ’80s, which were reported on in the Washington Post at the time. I don’t know if these were the same ones noted in the article linked to in this post which mentions several other cities that had issues with the buses but not DC. The new-look Flxibles were one of the three buses Metrobus used when I was growing up, less common than the GM New Looks but more common than the AM General buses made when they were a division of AMC.
Living in NJ at the time, I recall these buses were taken out of service because of the frames cracking. At least that was how the local reporting told the story.