BEST 'ERGO' ?

newmercman:
So what was the best Ergo cabbed lorry then? So many to choose from…

For a restoration project and plaything I’d go for an AEC Marshall flatbed with a nicely sheeted load just above cab height, dark blue cab with Post Office red chassis, wheels and mudguards and because I just can’t help myself, it would have to have a chrome bumper :laughing: Second choice would be a Mercury, so the same but with an axle missing, third would be a Leyland Beaver, same colours, but maybe pulling a cylindrical stainless steel tanker, I prefer the narrower front mudguards on the Beaver over the wider ones on the Mandator, so that would be the only reason it would be preferable to teh Southall built model, well unless I could find a V8 Mandator and then all bets are off, that would be number one, two and three on my list :laughing:

Agreed best ERGO probably has to be the Mandator which isn’t saying much for the rest. :smiling_imp: Especially when you could probably order a Crusader with the AEC V8 in it if you really didn’t want a Detroit or a Rolls in it instead. :open_mouth: :laughing:

Carryfast:

[zb]
anorak:

Carryfast:
Blah…
No one’s arguing about the rights or wrongs of actual ‘construction methods’ it’s all about ‘design’ …blah blah

If you separate “construction methods” out from “design”, what do you have left? Styling. You have confirmed what I said earlier- you like the look of US vehicles, and assume that that makes them superior.

No if you seperate design from construction method you have design and construction method with styling being just one apect of design.Actually I think the look of the 1950’s KW Bullnose is one of the ugliest cabs ever ‘designed’.But functionally,from a driver’s point of view,it was a generation ahead of the ERGO regardless of it’s method of construction or it’s ‘styling’. :unamused:

Whatever you say Geoff the American motors were not designed for the UK,so the British motors whether you liked them or not were purchased by the UK hauliers and earned quite a few of them tidy money.
Cheers Dave.

kr79:
Mammoth major no contest.
Still not a patch on an eight wheeler from Watford though

I have a brief anecdote about a lorry builder in Watford, possibly the same one(!). Some time ago, I described some techniques for designing and making mass-produced parts, so that they fit together reliably in production, to a bloke who used to work on the shopfloor there. I used the example of all the holes in an assembly always lining up, the benefits being better quality products plus cost savings due to reduced scrap rates etc. He replied that, when he was there, there were blokes on the production line carrying hand-held drills with reamers in them. :unamused:

My dream Ergo would be one of these, with the 690 turbo engine and all the toys on that advert that I posted, including the massager in the passenger seat! Livery, since that has been mentioned- navy blue- brush paint and lacquer, 1200-flatted and compounded to a mirror finish, none of your girlie spray paint- red chassis and wheels, white roof. This would match the colours of the tartan rug on the engine cover. The only similarity to an American truck would be the chrome bumper, with a small stars-and-stripes sticker on it. Upside-down. :smiley:

Carryfast:
No if you seperate design from construction method you have design and construction method with styling being just one apect of design.Actually I think the look of the 1950’s KW Bullnose is one of the ugliest cabs ever ‘designed’.But functionally,from a driver’s point of view,it was a generation ahead of the ERGO regardless of it’s method of construction or it’s ‘styling’. :unamused:

Thank you for clarifying your arguments in favour of your American dream over European reality. Having (seemingly) conceded that the Ergo was a better-engineered job, you are left with “functionally, from a driver’s point of view…” Have you bothered to read the numerous posts from people who have actually driven both types of vehicle, all of them in direct contradiction to your assertion? For once, grant these people the courtesy of acknowledging their superior learning.

[zb]
anorak:

Carryfast:
No if you seperate design from construction method you have design and construction method with styling being just one apect of design.Actually I think the look of the 1950’s KW Bullnose is one of the ugliest cabs ever ‘designed’.But functionally,from a driver’s point of view,it was a generation ahead of the ERGO regardless of it’s method of construction or it’s ‘styling’. :unamused:

Thank you for clarifying your arguments in favour of your American dream over European reality. Having (seemingly) conceded that the Ergo was a better-engineered job, you are left with “functionally, from a driver’s point of view…” Have you bothered to read the numerous posts from people who have actually driven both types of vehicle, all of them in direct contradiction to your assertion? For once, grant these people the courtesy of acknowledging their superior learning.

Firstly I don’t think I’ve said anywhere that the ERGO was ‘a better engineered job’,at least from the point of view of it’s cab design,than the 3VGT or a Scammell Crusader or even a 1950’s KW let alone a 1960’s one.I’m guessing that many of the people who are singing the praises of the ERGO are the same ones who agree that the reason why the Leyland group went down the tubes was because of it’s obsolete,inferior,retrograde, products and bad management decisions compared to it’s foreign competition.That competition being US in the colonial markets and European and Scandivian in the domestic market and at least the European export markets.The ERGO being one of those decisions.

[zb]
anorak:

kr79:
Mammoth major no contest.
Still not a patch on an eight wheeler from Watford though

I have a brief anecdote about a lorry builder in Watford, possibly the same one(!). Some time ago, I described some techniques for designing and making mass-produced parts, so that they fit together reliably in production, to a bloke who used to work on the shopfloor there. I used the example of all the holes in an assembly always lining up, the benefits being better quality products plus cost savings due to reduced scrap rates etc. He replied that, when he was there, there were blokes on the production line carrying hand-held drills with reamers in them. :unamused:

My dream Ergo would be one of these, with the 690 turbo engine and all the toys on that advert that I posted, including the massager in the passenger seat! Livery, since that has been mentioned- navy blue- brush paint and lacquer, 1200-flatted and compounded to a mirror finish, none of your girlie spray paint- red chassis and wheels, white roof. This would match the colours of the tartan rug on the engine cover. The only similarity to an American truck would be the chrome bumper, with a small stars-and-stripes sticker on it. Upside-down. :smiley:
0

hey, Nice pic Anorak,has the curtain come down almost??

Good night Eric,

Some one say why did the Swedes NOT think of a cab for a full range of truck as the Ergo was for 16 to 40 ton well sorry but AB VOLVO small tip-top as F86 type Kabine hytt was for 12 to 40 ton range of trucks from F84 ,F85,F86,F87 AND MANY OLDER models before system 8, whatever design defects in Ergo it was a tilt kabine 4 years before Scania and 10 years before Atkinson ect. and Volvos FL used the same low entry /easy access concept much later , Scania LB110 1968 had steps inside out of snow , wow but also did Albion LAD of 1958!!!

Lilladan:
Some one say why did the Swedes NOT think of a cab for a full range of truck as the Ergo was for 16 to 40 ton well sorry but AB VOLVO small tip-top as F86 type Kabine hytt was for 12 to 40 ton range of trucks from F84 ,F85,F86,F87 AND MANY OLDER models before system 8, whatever design defects in Ergo it was a tilt kabine 4 years before Scania and 10 years before Atkinson ect. and Volvos FL used the same low entry /easy access concept much later , Scania LB110 1968 had steps inside out of snow , wow but also did Albion LAD of 1958!!!

It was a tongue in cheek comment Lilladan directed to someone on here that wasnt too complimentary to the original ergo innovation in64 which he dismissed as total … :wink:

Best Ergomatic Cabbed-Lorry Model? PART 3.Page 7.TRUCKNETUK

tiptop495:
Hey to everyone, Wasn’t the ergo not built for the britain market and the US cabovers for the US.
I think the US cabovers were over here not the most loved ( i speak out of Belgium and think for much of the European markets, a big cab yes but with no space,hard suspension not the say nothing,much less comfort,long turning circles,difficult to find parts whereas all were US designed,almost no dealers and so on. Only Mack could set through mostly on earthworks,and it was a beast to drive too even the long distance models.
The Yank was only for the fanatic over here. Most were only double drive ( not Mack )so expencive to maintain
Yes the Volvo was originally designed for the US,but was here accepted. because of reliability power,driving comfort and gearshifting.
But from cab design, I find the DAF’s 2600 (jukebox) had a much better look for Europe.It could have been a number one top selling truck if it had been equiped with a stronger and better engine as the P680 but with a ■■■■■■■■■■■ with lower fuel consumption for our standards. And a tipping cab.
But everyone his own preference,it’s only my opinion here.So you can discuss here for ever.
Cheers Eric,

AMERICAN HEAVY MOTOR TRUCKS.
Bearing in mind what I said in my previous posts in this thread,during the 1940s,1950s and for at least up to the mid 1960s,American heavy motor truck manufacturers probably produced the best heavy trucks and lorries in the world in terms of power,weight-saving,speed,cab design,durability and sustained long distance
heavy duty freight trunking. But,on the other hand,cab over engine heavy motor trucks had a somewhat harsh ride because of the forward set front axle,which in turn resulted in a poor turning circle.
Most of the American lorry makers fitted all steel welded and pressed steel cabs,while White-Freightliner
had aluminium cabs,but marques such as Peterbilt and Kenworth each designed their own welded aluminium
cabs later on,so these apparently were not as tough and rigid as the steel cabs.
However,steel cabs or no steel cabs,American lorry drivers had the luxuries of adjustable seats,heaters,
defrosters,air conditioning,armrests,radios,sound insulation,sleeper cabs,etc,etc.
I’ve remarked on this before,but Citizens Band Radio became big in America in the 1960s,and American
truck drivers could listen to music stations on their radios,or operate their CB Radios while trucking along the highways in their 200-400 BHP-plus Peterbilt,Kenworth,Freightliner,White,Mack,etc,cab over engine heavy motor trucks - courtesy of good sound insulation in their cabs! :exclamation: :smiley: At least some American COE heavy motor trucks built for export had normal mid-positioned steering axles :slight_smile:

SCANDINAVIAN,EUROPEAN AND BRITISH HEAVY LORRIES.
Following closely behind the Americans were the Scandinavians,Europeans and,some distance behind these,
the British commercial vehicle manufacturers.
Then along came Volvo with it’s American inspired Volvo Titan TIPTOP 4951/4956/Volvo F88-F89 heavy lorry
models,BUT what Volvo did with the F88-F89 lorries was to take the best features of American heavy motor
trucks and produced more refined designs of these,which resulted in the F88 and F89 lorry models :slight_smile:
Other lorry manufactures went the Volvo way and produced American-inspired and refined heavy lorries,such as Scania,Mercedes-Benz and Berliet,and when these new designs were imported in to the United Kingdom,British lorry makers had to get their act together and come out with new lorry models that were greatly inspired by their Scandinavian and European rivals :slight_smile:

LEYLAND GROUP ERGOMATIC CAB.
The one thing that I did not like about the Ergomatic Cab was that it took away the external identity and
individuality of the AEC,Albion and Leyland commercial vehicle marques! :exclamation: :unamused: :unamused: And by circa 1971 it was even worse! :exclamation: :The grand marque badges - AEC,Blue Triangle,Albion,Sure As The Sunrise and Leyland Shield had all been very misguidedly replaced with block letters on the Ergomatic cabs of these marques -
AEC,ALBION,LEYLAND :unamused: :unamused: :unamused: ,plus the AEC Yellowline (As Good As Gold) and Leyland Blueline
identities and gold-yellow AEC and blue Leyland nameplates. Absolutely ridiculous,especially when that time
was one of growing competition from the likes of Volvo and co.
As for the merits and otherwise of the Ergomatic cab,it was more comfortable all round than a coachbuilt
cabbed AEC,or Atkinson,whatever,and was a mechanics dream for engine,clutch and gearbox “get-at-ability”.
So the the Leyland group Ergomatic Cab was definitely catching up with the likes of Volvo and Peterbilt! :exclamation: :smiley:

AEC 3VTG CONCEPT PROJECT LORRY.
As I said in my last post,the wise AEC 3VTG Concept Project Lorry was the wise and inspired idea of the boss of AEC,Dr.Albert D.Fogg,who obviously wanted to copy Volvo with it’s refined American-style F88-F89
lorry models,and produce a refined American-style AEC heavy lorry range :slight_smile: And in the words of the great
Barry Norman:“And why not”… :slight_smile: And why not indeed,because other lorry manufacturers were doing the same thing :smiley:
The interior of the AEC 3VTG cab was well-appointed,with Bostrom Viking seats,a very comprehensive instrument panel and good cross cab access. The lorry’s engine bay allowed more air to circulate around
the engine than with the Ergomatic Cab,and it’s AEC 801 Series V8 engine had a much larger header tank,
radiator and cooling fan than the AEC Mandator V8.
Albert Fogg wanted to produce a better cab than the Ergomatic,and he was well on the way in doing this
with his AEC 3VTG Lorry :smiley: He realised that the Ergomatic was not big enough,it produced cooling problems
for the engines,especially in the tropics,it had design flaws and,according to Albert Fogg,it was not suitable
for long distance motorway journeys. So entered the AEC 3VTG Project-Concept-Prototype Heavy Lorry for all of the above reasons that I’ve listed :smiley:
But,as I’ve already stated,Leyland mismanagement very misguidedly scrapped the AEC 3VTG Programme :unamused: …and by doing so,it was yet another long,long,sharp,sharp nail in the unholy coffin of
the British Leyland Motor Corporation! :exclamation: :unamused:

AMERICAN HEAVY MOTOR TRUCK ECLIPSE.
Considering Volvo,Scania,Mercedes-Benz,et al,began producing refined American-style heavy lorries from the mid to late 1960s-early 1970s,the Scandinavian,European - and even certain British at least - lorry manufactures surpassed the American heavy motor truck manufacturers,at least in regard to standard long
distance heavy duty freight trunking lorries :slight_smile: But these days,in 2013,since the world’s lorry and motor
truck manufacturers have become more global,American,Scandinavian and European lorries and motor trucks are probably just as good as each other :smiley:

NUCLEAR WEAPONS TRANSPORTERS.
One of my favourite AEC Ergomatic lorries,in specialist form, are these:-
AEC Mammoth Major Six 760 TG6R Ergomatic long wheelbase 6x4 TCHD = Transport Cargo Heavy Duty TCHD Mk 1 Nuclear Weapons Transporter Lorries:-

In convoy…wonderfully fascinating,secretive and sinister :smiley: WOW! :exclamation: :smiley: :-

NORTH BY NORTHWEST WHITE FREIGHTLINER WF-64 BUBBLENOSE COE HEAVY MOTOR TRUCK.
And keeping with somewhat delightfully sinister activities,such as spies,nuclear weapons,etc,here is a still
photograph from one of my favourite spy films - and Alfred Hitchcock films as well - NORTH BY NORTHWEST,the climax of the famous aeroplane cropduster scene:-This aeroplane crashes in to a magnificent White Freightliner WF-64 Bubblenose COE Tanker-bodied 6x4 Drawbar Trailer Outfit,of Magnum Oil Co,and Cary Grant - Roger Thornhill - is crawling from underneath the front end of this lorry - one of the ancestors of the Volvo F88-F89 heavy lorry models :smiley: :-

Exciting! :exclamation: :slight_smile:

VALKYRIE

VALKYRIE:
AMERICAN HEAVY MOTOR TRUCKS.
Bearing in mind what I said in my previous posts in this thread,during the 1940s,1950s and for at least up to the mid 1960s,American heavy motor truck manufacturers probably produced the best heavy trucks and lorries in the world in terms of power,weight-saving,speed,cab design,durability and sustained long distance
heavy duty freight trunking. But,on the other hand,cab over engine heavy motor trucks had a somewhat harsh ride

SCANDINAVIAN,EUROPEAN AND BRITISH HEAVY LORRIES.
Following closely behind the Americans were the Scandinavians,Europeans and,some distance behind these,
the British commercial vehicle manufacturers.

LEYLAND GROUP ERGOMATIC CAB.
As for the merits and otherwise of the Ergomatic cab,it was more comfortable all round

AEC 3VTG CONCEPT PROJECT LORRY.
As I said in my last post,the wise AEC 3VTG Concept Project Lorry was the wise and inspired idea of the boss of AEC,Dr.Albert D.Fogg,who obviously wanted to copy Volvo with it’s refined American-style F88-F89
lorry models,and produce a refined American-style AEC heavy lorry range :slight_smile: And in the words of the great
Barry Norman:“And why not”… :slight_smile: And why not indeed,because other lorry manufacturers were doing the same thing :smiley:
The interior of the AEC 3VTG cab was well-appointed,with Bostrom Viking seats,a very comprehensive instrument panel and good cross cab access. The lorry’s engine bay allowed more air to circulate around
the engine than with the Ergomatic Cab,and it’s AEC 801 Series V8 engine had a much larger header tank,
radiator and cooling fan than the AEC Mandator V8.
Albert Fogg wanted to produce a better cab than the Ergomatic,and he was well on the way in doing this
with his AEC 3VTG Lorry :smiley: He realised that the Ergomatic was not big enough,it produced cooling problems
for the engines,especially in the tropics,it had design flaws and,according to Albert Fogg,it was not suitable
for long distance motorway journeys. So entered the AEC 3VTG Project-Concept-Prototype Heavy Lorry for all of the above reasons that I’ve listed :smiley:
But,as I’ve already stated,Leyland mismanagement very misguidedly scrapped the AEC 3VTG Programme :unamused: …and by doing so,it was yet another long,long,sharp,sharp nail in the unholy coffin of
the British Leyland Motor Corporation! :exclamation: :unamused:

AMERICAN HEAVY MOTOR TRUCK ECLIPSE.
Considering Volvo,Scania,Mercedes-Benz,et al,began producing refined American-style heavy lorries from the mid to late 1960s-early 1970s,the Scandinavian,European - and even certain British at least - lorry manufactures surpassed the American heavy motor truck manufacturers,at least in regard to standard long
distance heavy duty freight trunking lorries :slight_smile:

VALKYRIE

The reference to the scrapped AEC 3VGT is spot on.As is the reference to US designed products in general although it’s obvious that the cab over design is always going to be a compromise compared to a conventional wherever it’s made.In which case I think it’s arguable as to wether US designs were ever actually ‘eclipsed’ by British or European ones at all.The colonial markets where they’ve always competed head on with each other suggests that’s not the case. :bulb:

However the ERGO was really just a blind alley and a total waste of development budgets for the Leyland group for all the same reasons that scrapping the 3VTG idea was a contributory factor in it’s demise.As I’ve said for Leyland the logical progression would have been to possibly use the conventional Hippo in the domestic market as well as the export markets then the fixed cab over Crusader design at least until the 3VTG had been developed hopefully then pre empting and leading onto a competitor to the DAF 2800 and Volvo F10/12 range etc later instead of the pointless Marathon and Roadtrain designs.

quote=“VALKYRIE”]Best Ergomatic Cabbed-Lorry Model? PART 3.TRUCKNETUK

AMERICAN HEAVY MOTOR TRUCKS.
Bearing in mind what I said in my previous posts in this thread,during the 1940s,1950s and for at least up to the mid 1960s,American heavy motor truck manufacturers probably produced the best heavy trucks and lorries in the world in terms of power,weight-saving,speed,cab design,durability and sustained long distance
heavy duty freight trunking. But,on the other hand,cab over engine heavy motor trucks had a somewhat harsh ride because of the forward set front axle,which in turn resulted in a poor turning circle.
Most of the American lorry makers fitted all steel welded and pressed steel cabs,while White-Freightliner
had aluminium cabs,but marques such as Peterbilt and Kenworth each designed their own welded aluminium
cabs later own,so these apparently were not as tough and rigid as the steel cabs.
However,steel cabs or no steel cabs,American lorry drivers had the luxuries adjustable seats,heaters,
defrosters,air conditioning,armrests,radios,sound insulation,sleeper cabs,etc,etc.
I’ve remarked on this before,but Citizens Band Radio became big in America in the 1960s,and American
truck drivers could listen to music stations on their radios,or operate their CB Radios while trucking along the highways in their 200-400 BHP-plus Peterbilt,Kenworth,Freightliner,White,Mack,etc,cab over engine heavy motor trucks - courtesy of good sound insulation in their cabs! :exclamation: :smiley: At least some American COE heavy motor trucks built for export had normal mid-positioned steering axles :slight_smile:

Hey Valkyrie, You have right the Yanks were the better in the '40’s and '50’s; They sidetracked almost everyone. Most we had were British and US brands over here,but other were trying as French and German brands,later came Daf and the Sweeds and of couse the cheap Italian Fiat,which you could have 3 for 1 Scannie at the same price.But the high Dollar,no need for high powered engines,no metric parts sidetraced them at the end of the '50’s till the binnings of the '60’s. in the eartworks they stand up longer until Mercedes and MAN came stronger and stronger and delivered front wheel drives too.Only Mack and (White in less less extent) could keep it’s share until the end of the '70’s.A haulier bought ones three Macks in the '90’s conventionals with double drive which was a disaster,too heavy ,bad turnning circles,becomming parts and so on. they had to built 2 axle trailers for less weight and tyre wear because of the 3axle mack’s. and after a while they were discard because no driver wanted to drive them. So they caused the haulier a big setback in money earning with them.At the end they only had cost money insteed of earn money. And selling them were a disaster too,only fanatics wanted them but for less less money as they were worth. So they are left in the corner of the yard. And maybe now sold for nothing.

Cheers Eric,

The t45 may not have had the macho presence of an American style cab but especially in interstate form was a pretty decent workplace for the era.
Remember the ergo was a generation of truck design before what that prototype would have been

kr79:
The t45 may not have had the macho presence of an American style cab but especially in interstate form was a pretty decent workplace for the era.
Remember the ergo was a generation of truck design before what that prototype would have been

And the DAF LF55s have an uncanny resemblence to the T45 Cruiser cabs

The daf 85 tipper used a lot of the design from the constructor too.

So Leyland should have stuck with the motor panels non tilt cab Crusader rather than the Marathon because ■■? i dont think the interior of the Marathon was any worse than any other British made lorries of the time.The build quality wasnt up to some of the imports standards but i remember a test in 1 of the transport magazines in the late `70s with the headline “no mere stop gap model” or something similar where it received a glowing report

marathon interior.jpg

kr79:
The daf 85 tipper used a lot of the design from the constructor too.

It seems some love to bash the british designs at any opportunity .I think Leyland designed the first rear engined double decker back in the late 50s which double deckers of today are still based on.I used to pull a glass carrier trailer and was told that the complex design was first developed over here but the funds were never made available so the french and germans stepped in.AEC had a rear engined version of the Routemaster almost completed around 68 only for Leyland to quash it,how many different models have London bus companies tried and failed with since the demise of the Routemaster and of course AEC.It all comes down to money being made available to continually develop and improve .Volvo never stood still ,once the F10/F12 models were introduced they began to improve them then looked to replace.Ive just had a quick look at the new XF Daf ,the cab is now 25 years old but due to investment they have improved them over the years and they still cut it with the best .like ive mentioned on here before why didn`t Leyland do the same with the ergo ,when the marathon was introduced they should have used it on all models at different heights

ramone:

kr79:
The daf 85 tipper used a lot of the design from the constructor too.

It seems some love to bash the british designs at any opportunity .I think Leyland designed the first rear engined double decker back in the late 50s which double deckers of today are still based on.I used to pull a glass carrier trailer and was told that the complex design was first developed over here but the funds were never made available so the french and germans stepped in.AEC had a rear engined version of the Routemaster almost completed around 68 only for Leyland to quash it,how many different models have London bus companies tried and failed with since the demise of the Routemaster and of course AEC.It all comes down to money being made available to continually develop and improve .Volvo never stood still ,once the F10/F12 models were introduced they began to improve them then looked to replace.Ive just had a quick look at the new XF Daf ,the cab is now 25 years old but due to investment they have improved them over the years and they still cut it with the best .like ive mentioned on here before why didn`t Leyland do the same with the ergo ,when the marathon was introduced they should have used it on all models at different heights

Hi Ramone. The difference between the Marathon cab and its lower-mounted siblings on the Buffalo etc. was not that great, as far as I can see- it had a different dash and the steering column was attached to the cab, not the chassis. One of the posts above describes the Buffalo having a steering column which remained in place as the cab was tilted, although, by this stage in the Ergo’s evolution, the seat and floorpan had become part of the cab. I daresay that, if the 500-series Leylands had had a full floor, with the steering column attached to the cab, it would have been superior to what it was- the interior would have been like a Marathon, but with a higher engine hump, to allow for the lower mounting.

I think the reason that this was not done is due to the timing of the introduction of the two types- the 500 series was launched in 1971 (or earlier, I may be wrong here) and the Marathon came out in 1973. Bearing in mind that the whole lot was expected to be replaced well before the end of the 1970s, why would Leyland go to the trouble of engineering a third variant?

It all comes back to the decision not to do a “big” version of the Ergo in the first place. Monsieur Saviem- get your derriere into gear and force your “man on the inside” to join the discussion!
:stuck_out_tongue:

ramone:
So Leyland should have stuck with the motor panels non tilt cab Crusader rather than the Marathon because ■■? i dont think the interior of the Marathon was any worse than any other British made lorries of the time.The build quality wasnt up to some of the imports standards but i remember a test in 1 of the transport magazines in the late `70s with the headline “no mere stop gap model” or something similar where it received a glowing report

Did the peanut bar not have a small-Dia steering wheel at the time :question:

kr79:
The t45 may not have had the macho presence of an American style cab but especially in interstate form was a pretty decent workplace for the era.
Remember the ergo was a generation of truck design before what that prototype would have been

It really is ironic and unbelievable that people ( rightly ) blamed the Brits for not competing with their foreign competitors and then fall back into exactly the type of thinking which took place back then that they’re moaning about. :confused:

The idea of making something that’s ahead of your competitors,before your competitors do it, is/was the object of the excercise.The fact is the Ergo,Marathon,and T45 were all running behind the state of the art,let alone ahead of it,as it stood,at the time when they were designed and introduced.The end result of all that being that the Marathon and T45 ended up losing to the Euro/Scandinavian products ranged against them both in the domestic and export markets.While they all also lost out in the Colonial export markets in the face of US competition.

In the case of the ERGO there seems to have been very little time difference between it being introduced onto the market and the 3 VGT design being worked on if the 1968 date is correct.While the Crusader seems to have been introduced to the market around that time too.It seems obvious to a trained monkey that the money wasted on the development of the ERGO should have been put into bringing development and introduction of the Crusader forward and then getting the 3 VGT cab design into production all before 1970.The next development would have been building a competitor to the DAF 2800 and Volvo F10/12,Scania 110 etc before they did it and the 3 VGT design would have been a better place to start that development from than the ERGO.While as I’ve said the T45 was never built to succeed it was just a last gasp admission of failure to get some money in to clear all the outstanding debts before shutting up shop and leaving DAF to get on with it.

Carryfast:
Blah… It seems obvious to a trained monkey… Blah

The last resort of the wrong- boasting about your qualifications. :laughing: