Dayton TC48. Photo by Steve Morgan.
Trolleybuses (initially called trackless trolleys) were once a fixture on American streets, either replacing or supplementing iron-rail trolleys. Prior to WW II, the three primary US trolleybus manufacturers were ACF-Brill, Pullman, and the St Louis Car Company – all three of which began as producers of locomotives, trolley-cars, and/or rolling stock. But a newcomer was introduced in the immediate post-war period whose expertise was more in 4WD rubber-tired vehicles, and who would quickly rise to the top of the trolleybus sales charts.
1940 Ford M-H 4WD Conversion
M-H Indianapolis Factory
Like their gas and diesel equivalents, trolleybuses made in the 1920’s and ‘30’s were tired from constant, hard wartime use and ready for replacement when the war ended. M-H produced off-road trucks and was a successful aftermarket supplier and partner to the major manufacturers in 4WD conversions of their trucks and station wagons. It was looking for a market segment to enter to replace its extensive wartime contracts, and saw an opportunity in the trolleybus market. In turn, in 1945 it constructed a new factory in its hometown of Indianapolis.
TC48 – Philadelphia
The first buses emerged in 1946; the principal models were the TC44/46 and TC48/49, with the numerals denoting the number of seats. A single order for a 40-seat TC40 model was produced for San Francisco. The TC44/46 was thirty-six feet in length, the TC48/49 thirty-nine feet, and the TC40 thirty-three feet. General Electric motors and controllers were used, and they operated on 600/800 volts DC.
The buses were immediately successful, for several reasons.
Cost. M-H’s new factory in Indianapolis was for its time state-of-the-art, significantly streamlining the manufacturing process and allowing the company to lower per unit price. This at a time before government grants and subsidies when transit authorities had to fund the entire capital cost of their fleets.
Low Weight. Like the GM Old Look, M-H used stressed-skin monocoque construction resulting in a much lighter bus, allowing for faster speeds, less damage to roads, and smaller electric motors/components, increasing interior space. Total weight for an unloaded TC49 was roughly 20,000 lbs which was about 4.000 lbs lighter than its competitors.
Durability. Besides the monocoque body, the coach also utilized high-strength double-girder steel side-rails, along with multiple steel alloy crossmembers, which made for an extremely rigid design.
TC48 – San Francisco Bicentennial
A total of 1,624 trolleybuses were produced from 1946 to 1959.
It maintained its original styling during the production run, though some operators did their own modifications – SEPTA (Philadelphia) updated the electrical components and added a new front with dual-headlights from a GM New Look.
Ex-Chicago Mexico City
Testament to their durability, in my hometown of Columbus Ohio, thirty-two 1948 models were sold to Dayton in 1967. Twenty of these were refurbished (twelve used for parts) and continued to provide excellent service for another 15 years. In addition, the last of Chicago’s were retired in 1973 and Philadelphia’s in 1981. Some of these were then sold to Mexico City and continued in service until 1988. A portion were re-built with updated coachwork and remained on the road until 2002.
I had the opportunity to ride these M-H’s in my younger days — they were mostly silent except for the “”whrrrr” of the electric motor. The downside was they lacked an airbag suspension — it was all steel springs which meant a lightly loaded bus rode extremely hard and the silent motor was offset with a cacophony of bumps, bangs, and rattles. Pity the driver and passengers in a lightly loaded bus on a potholed road. The other thing I remember clearly were the large, dual-folding front doors, which allowed for entering on one side and exiting on the other.
Fun Fact: Is it “trolleybus” or “trolley bus?” The internet states either is acceptable – Merriam-Webster and the Cambridge dictionary say “trolleybus”, which I’ve used.
I sure remember these as kid growing up in Norwood Ohio, a suburb city of
Cincinnati.In 1964 They switched them out for the diesels. The poles that the wires were routed by were cut about 3 ft. from the ground. Later those would be removed. The 3 ft. sections made for a great vertical pipe that a 14 year old could pour a bit of gasoline into, strike the match , and drop it into the pipe to see what would happen.It felt like someone opened an oven door while your face was in front. Ask me how I know.lol
I loved riding on these buses in my youth. Here’s one from the TTC (Toronto).
I rode on one of those sometime in the late ’80’s (the Annette route); it was all right.
That’s a Brill.
As a practical matter, given the need at the time for overhead conducting wires, the idea seems redundant, even as the wires were already in place, I guess , for earlier trolley car versions. In a slower time, technology progressed slower too. On the other hand, today’s electric vehicles in terms of range, public access to charging stations and safe battery disposal haven’t advanced nearly as far as they need to in order to make wide spread adoption of electric vehicles practical. So we’re still using fossil fuel and will be sor some time to come.
If you have the wires, they require far less maintenance, and because they are lighter, are conceivably more efficient than either diesel or battery-powered electrics. Of course, that depends to some extent on how the power is obtained. San Francisco uses hydroelectric power from the Hetch-Hetchy Dam to power theirs, so the electricity is almost free – not always the case, but true in some cases.
Like Moparlee, I also rode the TTC trolleys in Toronto when I was young. Most of the TTC fleet were new or used CCF-Brills, but the transit agency also purchased a couple of doze used (but pretty fresh) Marmon-Herringtons from Cleveland and Cincinnati in the ’50s. Here’s an image of both types at the Lansdowne car barn. The electrical components of the Brills were re-used in the replacement Flyer trolleys delivered about 1970, but the M-H buses were apparently simply scrapped.
Here in Vancouver, British Columbia, we still have trolley busses. They are very popular, too, because of their clean, quiet operation. All of the main routes are electric and diesel, or hybrid now, busses feed the main lines.
The trolly busses are very loved here and will no doubt continue to provide low cost, clean operation far into the future
Watertown, Massachusetts also still runs them. There are several pictures on the internet of their buses. As a child, I was fascinated by them in the 1940’s and 1950’s (Gosh, how o0ld am I?). The photo attached is a modern Neoplan running through the streets. I am still in love with these buses. The only think that always occurred to me is what would happen if the bus trolley slipped off the catenary. Well, one day, I saw that, too!
That looks like an AI image, and your statement about Watertown is incorrect; the MBTA has discontinued use of all trolley buses. The last runs on the 71 and 73 routes were in March of 2022.
Nice, I didnt know about Marmon Herrington being in the bus business, sounds like they knew how ok, Buses are bloody heavy at tare weight but a crowd of people isnt all that heavy compared with palletised freight, a monocoque saves a lot of weight, a mate has a MAN city bus from the 70s its 14 tonnes before he fuels it, it hasnt been weighed since 7 deepcycle batteries went in either.
I remember seeing these in Dayton in the ’60s. As it happens, I was visiting a friend whose father had been in charge of the Dayton Street Railway system.
Your Dayton picture looks like about 1980 judging by the two visible cars.
Naturally when I first visited San Francisco, in 1972, my first order of business was to ride a cable car. Back then there were no crowds and you could hop on almost anywhere along the line. Not today. Then I lived in The City between 1988-98 down Geary Street out into the Avenues. Gear Street didn’t have tracks nor power lines so no rail trolleys or bus trolleys only motor buses which I rode sometimes. I have actually never ridden in either type of trolley. MUNI, to this day, has the largest fleet in the country and possibly the world according to MUNI.
When I drove for Iowa City Transit in 1975-1976, they had one really old old-look bus as a backup. It had steel springs and yes, it rode very differently than the air spring old and new looks; as you said: downright harsh, unless there was a substantial load.
That new state-of-the-art factory was (I believe) the old Duesenberg plant on the property on the southwest corner of the intersection of W. Washington and S. Harding Streets. Here is a 1964 aerial view of the M-H plant found on in the pages of historicindianapolis.com. The street in the foreground is W. Washington, and the intersection with Harding is in the center left of the photo. The large dark building across Harding Street was eventually turned into loft apartments, where my daughter lived for awhile.
The Indianapolis bus company took the property for a maintenance facility in later years. The only one of the old buildings that remains is a long, low building along the Harding Street side, which I believe Duesenberg used for final assembly/inspection.
Trying the photo again
Here is the plant as depicted in an ad from 1941. This view shows Harding street on the left side and Washington on the right side. It looks like M-H filled in the spaces between some of the buildings with new space.
TORONTO FINALLY FINISHED WITH TROLLEYBUSES IN 1990. WE STILL USE STREETCARS IN 2024. THE TTC HAD WANTED TO GET RID OF STREETCARS IN THE EARLY 1970S, BUT VOCIFEROUS OPPOSITION FROM THE PUBLIC PUT AN END TO THAT. THE PRESIDENTS’ CONFERENCE CARS LIKE 1061 ABOVE, WE USED SOME IN REGULAR SERVICE UNTIL 1996. THE TTC HAS KEPT TWO FOR EXCURSIONS, REFURBISHED TO HOW THEY LOOKED IN 1951. WE NOW USE A NEW GENERATION OF STREETCARS FROM BOMBARDIER, THAT CAN INTO SERVICE A FEW YEARS AGO.
That bus in the first picture is like the one I rode weekly on the old #5 route of Dayton’s City Transit Company to downtown. As you rode north on the #5, there was a long hill from Oakwood into Dayton. The driver I usually rode with was “W. Stout” according to his nameplate. And he would take that trolley down the hill at what felt like 60 mph. Halfway down the hill, there was an oblique turn from Far Hills to Oakwood Avenue and he wouldn’t slow down. I sometimes wondered how he kept the poles on the wires or kept from tipping over the bus. Cheap thrills in the ’60s (fare was 10 cents). There are still several routes in Dayton that use trolley buses: Routes 1, 2, 4, 7 and 8. However, these are buses that take power from the overhead wires and charge batteries so the wires aren’t absolutely necessary for short distances.
Great article that brings back many memories, mostly good ones .
Electric buses never got cold in Winter .
Lack of AC wasn’t a big deal since you were already sweat soaked from the wait in the day’s humid heat .
-Nate