Lilladan:
The perkins V8 in the Ford and Mastiff was a 510 ( 510 CUBIC ins )(170 horse) , the one in the Scania was a 640 (640 Cubic inches) (252 horse) not the same engine , the Scania V8 had nothing at all to do with the AEC or Perkins , but I know a Swedish now retired driver that delivered a V8 block from Germany to Scania - Vabis at Sodertalje before the V8 Scania came out !
It is not unusual for designers to examine the work of their competitors. Indeed, they would be foolish not to. I wonder whose engine it was?
It was not from one of the main big firms , but interesting M.A.N. and Daimler -Benz came later with V engines from same design ! Scania -Vabis could not do the usual and copy Volvo on this one , as they did with transmissions and turbo charging , torque converters ect ect ect ect ect ! because Volvo knew the future was to stay with and improve the big straight six , the Scania V8 was not good for a good while , but this was when a Scania six 11liter could drop a valve at any moment ! and no , I don`t say Scania V8 was not original , I was not in the design team .
Lilladan:
It was not from one of the main big firms , but interesting M.A.N. and Daimler -Benz came later with V engines from same design ! Scania -Vabis could not do the usual and copy Volvo on this one , as they did with transmissions and turbo charging , torque converters ect ect ect ect ect ! because Volvo knew the future was to stay with and improve the big straight six , the Scania V8 was not good for a good while , but this was when a Scania six 11liter could drop a valve at any moment ! and no , I don`t say Scania V8 was not original , I was not in the design team .
Superb input, Lilladan. First-hand knowledge of the subject is always valued, even if the usual suspects disagree!
Thanks mr Z B , reading other posts , funny that people credit turbo charging and Intercooling to Perkins ect in the mid 70s , when in fact the first Intercooled truck was the late 70s DAF , followed by the 1979 truck of the year the Volvo F7 ! it took a while for Scania ,Perkins ,Gardner , Rolls ect to catch up , the worlds first production turbocharged truck was the Volvo Titan turbo of 1954 ! six years before the first Scania turbo lorry , British makers were very slow to turbo large engines ,although Leyland had the 690 turbo by 1968 they gave up on it untill the much later TL 11 ,the 1972/3 AEC TL12 turbo was good , very funny that someone thought the Scania 110 was economical , as it was very thirsty , the 111 was better but did not have the same go.
In my view the only engine for heavy trucks is a straight 6 in line long stroke. Cheapest less parts, easier to built, easy to work on, and so on … Ask a Scania mecanic the difference between an 110/111 or V8 140/141 to work on.
Short stroke V engines mean high revving, but was the only solution to upgrade power and prefered above turbo’s.
Think als the the US had the first turbo’s and Mack the first intercooler.
On the continent was it Volvo and Daf with the intercooler. But why Volvo couldn’t bring the first F10’s with intercooler insteed as using the weak TD100B engine ■■? The engine was already some years before in de GB 290 F88 with it weakness.
But Fiat and other managed it the make a good short stroke V engine (of course high revving till turbo’s on it came), de same as Mercedes 2500 revs and even the 140 Super did 2300 revs. And had less torque at higher revs as the F89.
As I said , the worlds first prodution turbo truck was the 1954 Volvo Titan turbo , M.A…N. had a turbo prototype just before this ,but only one was built and it was not put into production , Van Doorne and Volvo showed the world the next stage (aftercooling ,Intercooling or charge cooling ) yes the 330 HK F89 Volvo performed better over the road than the 350 HK Scania 140 V8 , some of this due to Volvo having the lowest transmission power loss in the Industry , and also as you say V8 `s tend to have less torque for a given capacity than straight sixes.
Lilladan:
As I said , the worlds first prodution turbo truck was the 1954 Volvo Titan turbo , M.A…N. had a turbo prototype just before this ,but only one was built and it was not put into production , Van Doorne and Volvo showed the world the next stage (aftercooling ,Intercooling or charge cooling ) yes the 330 HK F89 Volvo performed better over the road than the 350 HK Scania 140 V8 , some of this due to Volvo having the lowest transmission power loss in the Industry , and also as you say V8 `s tend to have less torque for a given capacity than straight sixes.
It would probably be fairer to say that there is a point in overall capacity where too many cylinders in whatever multiples becomes a liability not an asset because the stroke measurement is too compromised and can’t be compensated for by the increase in cylinder numbers.Let’s say for V8’s somewhere around the 14-15 litre minimum benchmark ? ,just as it’s around the 4 - 4.5 litre mark in the case of car engines.
On that note,given the right overall capacity,it’s difficult to beat the combination of specific output for stress levels that a V8 will provide compared to a straight 6.While that calculation obviously all goes pear shaped in the case of trying to use too many cylinders within a too small overall capacity limit. The classic comparison in that case being the Scania or Merc V8 v ■■■■■■■ 14 litre.Or now Scania 730 v Volvo.In which case the choice between 140 Scania at least v 14 litre ■■■■■■■ wasn’t that clear cut just as in the case of the larger capacity Scania V8 v 6 cylinder Volvo today.If it was that clear cut the V8 wouldn’t have survived past the 1970’s let alone this long
Lilladan:
As I said , the worlds first prodution turbo truck was the 1954 Volvo Titan turbo , M.A…N. had a turbo prototype just before this ,but only one was built and it was not put into production , Van Doorne and Volvo showed the world the next stage (aftercooling ,Intercooling or charge cooling ) yes the 330 HK F89 Volvo performed better over the road than the 350 HK Scania 140 V8 , some of this due to Volvo having the lowest transmission power loss in the Industry , and also as you say V8 `s tend to have less torque for a given capacity than straight sixes.
Hey Lilidan,
Volvo was the real first turbo, most other had them only on papier from '55 / '56 on, only Berliet and Willème were sold, but not as good as Volvo’s were. In '62 Daf put one on an 120 HP which got 165 HK SAE and was not bad.
Outside the Scania 75 Super, all other had turbo problems at the beginning from late '60 on. That’s why most went to V engine’s for the 8hp ton regulation. And most were reliable but thirsty.
Today all V8’s have gone for trucks only Scania stays, but think this is still only a selling argument for fans.
Mercedes his OM500 serie had already gone and was not so long in production as other V engines. But the move to a 6 in line costs a penalty on engine weight for Mercedes, or let’s say a half DD engine ■■?
And yes Volvo had the aftercooler on the F7 pitty not on the first F10/12’s why ■■?
Hi Erik , the first DAF turbo was on the Leyland 0.350 Comet engine boosted from 100 to 165 HK later called the DAF 575 , Scanias first turbo was 1960 , most engine makers were very slow to admit small turbo Diesels were the answer ,when you look at the massive Fiat and American engines ect , yes Scania stuck with its V8 because its become a legend , it cost them a fortune but was right in the end ! , I had a LB141 for a few weeks , very heavy on fuel and it did NOT seem to have the 375 HK quoted ! the famous Volvo F86 needed a sleeper cab replacement and also a little more power ,this was answed with the F7 Intercooler , this was better on hills than the F10 Intercooler or not ! ,but yes it took some time for the F10 to be Intercooled . but the F12 Intercooler 385 HK was better on the road than the Scania 420 ! .
Hi Lillian,i am just to put the cat amongst the pigeons so to speak but our very own Foden had a turbo charged and intercooled engine in 1962,this engine was 4.8 litres producing 225 bhp,and around 600 lbf of torque
,that’s some 10 years before Messrs daf and volvo, and it was a production engine not a special build ,volvo had an experimental truck with an intercooled engine in october 1963 it was a 9.6 litre engine producing 325 bhp ,tests went on for a year then a larger 12 litre unit was tested at 400 hp ,but transmission technology was not advanced enough at the time to release it !!
That would be the Foden 2-stroke engine. Both AEC and Leyland were turbo-charging for special applications in the 1950s, such as the South American market where high altitude operating conditions warranted turbo-charging for extra power to compensate for lost power due to rarified atmospheric conditions. With all these statements there is no definitive answer to what manufacturer was first in the field with developments. The principle of turbo-charging was first mooted in the 1930s.
Hi gingerfold ,yes i think you are right manufacturers would try different approaches to combat a problem or a market lead ,am i correct i saying aec and Leyland had turbo charged engines in the Anders and Argentina ,would that of been the AH470 ?
gingerfold:
With all these statements there is no definitive answer to what manufacturer was first in the field with developments. The principle of turbo-charging was first mooted in the 1930s.
The introduction timescale was probably more a case of customer acceptance than what was possible in terms of engineering ?.
While the small capacity turbocharged diesel,in which turbocharging was used as a substitute for capacity,was a seperate side line from the general move to turbocharging.While predictably not being the success it seems to be being described as above.Such as in the case of such cheap and nasty ideas like the F7 and small DAF series like 2300/2500 with their as expected over stressed gutless engines and eventual customer resistance to match.
Hi carryfast ,i think it depends on operators requirements as the 70s we were still saddled with a 32t limit and the 86 ,f7 ,81 and 2300 were nearly a ton lighter than the 88,f10 ,111and 2800 ,so whilst i agree they were underpowered,there was no alternative and to be fair all those little engines did very well in service as those trucks sold in quite large numbers ,and the same engine principals are in practice today .
The F7 produced 32bhp per litre where now An average large 12 litre engine produces 40 bhp per litre ,may be the manufactures learnt lessons at our expense?
I reckon Carryfast needs an intercooler, as the air he blows is hot [SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND TIGHTLY-CLOSED EYES][SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND TIGHTLY-CLOSED EYES]
skane:
The F7 produced 32bhp per litre where now An average large 12 litre engine produces 40 bhp per litre ,may be the manufactures learnt lessons at our expense?
The difference is that,then or now,with the larger engine the ‘horsepower’ in question is made at lower engine speed than would be possible with a sub 10-12 litre engine.
Horse power is i think you will agree is secondary,torque is the figure you are really interested in as this is what the turbocharger and intercooler increase in conjunction with burn and injection rate
Modern day engines usually deliver rated max power at approx 2000rpm ,but will rev higher by about 4-500 more
Carryfast:
While the small capacity turbocharged diesel,in which turbocharging was used as a substitute for capacity,was a seperate side line from the general move to turbocharging.While predictably not being the success it seems to be being described as above.Such as in the case of such cheap and nasty ideas like the F7 and small DAF series like 2300/2500 with their as expected over stressed gutless engines and eventual customer resistance to match.
Them gutless & overstressed engines as you put it done rather well in their time.
Fully agree i think many a haulage company made good money from these little machines ,a race maybe they didn’t win but earnings and economy made them to be the forgotten hero
Hello Skane, yes the turbo-charged AEC AVT470 and AHT470 operated in the Andes, as did the Leyland turbocharged O.350, both in the 1950s. Bigger AEC and Leyland engines were also turbo-charged in those years for railcar and industrial purposes, not forgetting the AEC AVT1100 Dumptruk engine. It was metallurgical advances for the turbocharger rotor between the 1930s and 1950s that made turbocharging a practical and reliable means of boosting engine power.
