bma.finland:
the g volvo was not liked by drivers becouse of the axle montage 30cm foward whit short elliptic springs did the motor bumpy ,just a tought about US specs in europe ,cheers benkku
There’s a difference between a totally British designed and built truck just using American ‘influenced’ cab design built on a British chassis as opposed to a British built American truck using American cab and chassis design.The 3 VTG project seemed to have been a case of the former not the latter.
As I’ve said putting the 3 VTG cab on the Crusader chassis maybe using the 700 fixed head and TL12,assuming that they could have been developed to be competitive,or using outsourced Rolls and ■■■■■■■ options if not,probably would have been a more competitive product that the Marathon was.It’s obvious that the money wasted on development and fixing the ‘issues’ concerning both the 500 engine and the ERGO cab set Leyland back to a level against it’s competition which could never be made up.
How on earth did the ergo set Leyland back when it was streets ahead of its rivals when introduced in `64,what set Leyland back was not improving it until its demise in 1980.It was the same basic design with a few modifications in the 16 years it was built thats what let it down it was never improved.Which of course leads to the question ,if it was so bad why did they sell so many and history shows they sold thousands .
Putting a concept cab on a Crusader chassis and then fitting a concept engine into it?The cab was a test bed they only built one 700 engine you seem to be assuming quite alot here and if this 700 engine was a flop just like the 500 what then.And why would the Crusader chassis be the one to use.Just because Scammell gave the option of a DD engine doesnt make the Crusader a world beater,it was just a motor panels cab sat higher on the chassis
Firstly the larger capacity,lower speed,lower stressed 700 would have had a lot more of a chance of meeting it’s design aims than the smaller capacity,higher speed,higher stressed 500 ever did.
The idea of the advantages,contained in the fixed head idea,to be able to make a leap forward in specific torque outputs,by way of high forced induction boost pressures,in an environment where the head to block joint issue was a real problem needing investment and time to sort out, v the drawbacks such as regular servicing etc seem to be arguably in favour of the integral block head type design as I’ve said ‘at that point in time’.Which then would have allowed breathing space to get on with developing the TL12 which was the Leyland Group’s only real credible contender in the in house engine range.
As for the Crusader chassis,even with it’s compromised fixed cab,it’s record in service seems to show that it was one of the Leyland group’s best with the ability to easily accept fitment of all types of engines with the added benefit of being able to do so without cooking them.So there’s no reason to think that putting the 3 VTG cab on it wouldn’t have made it an even better product.
Mueller seems to have been bright enough to have foreseen all that which is why Leyland’s answer to that Merc LP which I posted was examples like the 500 ERGO instead of the Crusader with the 3 VTG cab and ‘possibly’,depending on it’s endurance testing results,the 700 fixed head engine producing well over 300 hp at around 2,000 rpm with no blown head gasket issues to worry about.
Although having said that the already available and proven 8V71 T would have easily provided a lot more power than that,at less engine speed,from just 9 litres but then the Brits never could get their heads around the idea and advantages of two stroke diesels at the time.Which is one of the reasons why the Brits lost the colonial market to the Americans.
And as history shows all engines are now 2 stroke V8s
No it’s just that the two stroke Detroits gave their manaufacturer the money,breathing space and time needed to sort out a more market ‘and fuel’ friendly alternative in the 60 series etc which also weren’t exactly known for their unreliability and being overstressed for the power they put out just like those two strokes before them.
Although having said that no one knows what a longer stroke vesrsion of the 92 series might have done being that the thing at least outlasted the four stroke Rolls products such as being there before the Scammell Commander was introduced and also still being there to be put in it’s Oshkosh replacement.
No one said they had to follow the rules in doing it all themselves instead of just looking around to see what else might be available to save time and money.
The difference is that they obviously didn’t have an ‘advisor’ like Muelller and bean counters saying don’t use that it’s to big and heavy what’s needed is a copy of the Leyland 500.But it’ll need time and money spent on it to modify it with a detachable head.In which case it probably would have just kept blowing head gaskets instead of the engine.
newmercman:
The 60 Series was a John Deere design, now stop calling me saviem
While we are digressing from the original subject, which was why the Leyland Ergo should have been replaced four years after its introduction by a hand-built copy of an American cab, I have a question for someone who knows something about new Mercs. The Detroit 55 Series was the US version of the Brazilian Mercedes MB5000 engine, if I am not mistaken. This, in turn was the 12.8 litre inline six derivative of the OM400 Series European engine. The new Detroit 13 litre engine has since been launched in Europe as the Mercedes OM471. This suggests (to me, at least) that the DD13 was a development of the 55, so the OM471 can therefore trace its base design back to the original OM400. If not, and it is a completely new design, why did Mercedes not call it an OM601?
newmercman:
The 60 Series was a John Deere design, now stop calling me saviem
While we are digressing from the original subject, which was why the Leyland Ergo should have been replaced four years after its introduction by a hand-built copy of an American cab, I have a question for someone who knows something about new Mercs. The Detroit 55 Series was the US version of the Brazilian Mercedes MB5000 engine, if I am not mistaken. This, in turn was the 12.8 litre inline six derivative of the OM400 Series European engine. The new Detroit 13 litre engine has since been launched in Europe as the Mercedes OM471. This suggests (to me, at least) that the DD13 was a development of the 55, so the OM471 can therefore trace its base design back to the original OM400. If not, and it is a completely new design, why did Mercedes not call it an OM601?
Im totally confused . com :wink: but i think i know what youre getting at
As far as I’m aware, the new DD11/13/15/16 engine range ( the Daimler Group World Engine) is a completely new design.
The South American inline 6 range was known as the MBE4000/4500 in North America & trucks with this engine wear Powered by Mercedes Benz badges on their flanks.
There is a 50 Series which is an inline 4 version of the 12.7litre 60 Series, but the 55 Series is a new one to me.
newmercman:
As far as I’m aware, the new DD11/13/15/16 engine range ( the Daimler Group World Engine) is a completely new design.
The South American inline 6 range was known as the MBE4000/4500 in North America & trucks with this engine wear Powered by Mercedes Benz badges on their flanks.
There is a 50 Series which is an inline 4 version of the 12.7litre 60 Series, but the 55 Series is a new one to me.
I found this:
DETROIT, April 7 /PRNewswire/ – Detroit Diesel Corporation (NYSE: DDC) announced plans to manufacture the new Detroit Diesel 55 Series engine at the Detroit Diesel Corporation manufacturing facility in Redford, Mich. Production is scheduled to begin mid-1995.
Detroit Diesel Corporation Chairman Roger S. Penske said, “We are pleased to be able to continue to expand our manufacturing capabilities in Southeastern Michigan and to increase our workforce as a result of the decision to build the Series 55 engine at our Redford manufacturing plant.”
UAW Local 163 Shop Chairman Jim Brown said, “We are continuing to work together to ensure the future and job security of our employees through competitive agreements which allow us to expand our manufacturing base and better serve our customers.”
The Detroit Diesel Series 55 is a new design based upon the successful OM 477 engine. The engine has been designed to meet worldwide fuel economy, emissions, reliability and durability requirements for the heavy-duty Class 8 market. The 12.0 liter displacement engine is an inline, six-cylinder design, ranging in horsepower from 320 to 365 at 1900 RPM. The Series 55 engine incorporates unit pump fuel injection and Detroit Diesel Electronic Control (DDEC) engine controls.
As part of an agreement with UAW Local 163, the assembly of the Detroit Diesel Series 53 engine will be relocated to a new manufacturing facility associated with the Detroit Diesel remanufacturing center in Emporia, Kansas. The relocation will not affect customer orders. The investment in this facility demonstrates Detroit Diesel’s commitment to the continued development and production of the Series 53 engine.
Detroit Diesel Corporation is engaged in the design, manufacture, sales and service of heavy-duty diesel engines and engine parts. The company offers a complete line of diesel engines ranging from 5 to 2500 horsepower for the on-highway truck; coach and bus; construction, mining and industrial; power generation; marine; and military markets. The company had 1993 revenues of $1.6 billion.
-0- 4/7/94
October 1973, launch of Leyland Marathon. Late 1977, launch of Volvo F10. 1978 Launch of Volvo F12. Comparative sales of Volvo F10 to F12 in UK, 4 to 1. So the Marathon predated the Volvo F10 in the UK by a full 4 years. Surprisingly, the best selling years of the Marathon Mk.2 were when the Volvo F10 was being introdeuced into the market.
gingerfold:
The Marathon had a modified ERGO cab. Some days ago a poster asked for the production figures. Here they are
1973, Mk.1 Marathon (available Oct. 1973) production = 60
1974, Mk.1 production = 350
1975, Mk.1 production = 310
1976, Mk.1 production = 855
1974-1976 Mk.1 CKD production = 64
1974 - 1976 total Mk.1 production = 1,639
1977, Mk.2 production = 1,135
1978. Mk.2 production = 1,302
1979, Mk.2 production = 266 at Southall until end of March 1979. Assembly then transferred to Scammell
1979 - 1980, Mk.2 production 811 at Scammell until end of May 1980
1977- 1980. Mk.2 CKD 140
1977 - 1980, total Mk.2 production = 3,654
Total Marathon production = 5,293
Scammell Crusader announced 1968. Production ceased June 1981. Assembly at Guy Wolverhampton from 1975 to 1981. Total built there 1,998 approx. (assuming every number in the chassis number sequence was used). No figures for Tolpits Lane assembly are available, but Scammell could build no more than 1,500 chassis per annum of all types.
The Marathon’s popularity was certainly on an upward curve, throughout its production. Was this due to exports increasing, or was it simply preferences in the home market tending towards bigger cabs and engines? Where did the ckd kits go?
That 55 Series may have been rebranded as the MBE 4000, that’s the engine used in the class 7 trucks. The 60 Series was available at 320/370hp, so I assume that it was known as the MBE to avoid having two engines from the same manufacturer at the same power rating. Although we are talking about the USA, so it may have been badged DD at first to gain acceptance, later becoming a Mercedes Benz once the rednecks had got used to it:?:
Marathon CKD kits went to Australia for certain. Don’t know if any went to New Zealand. I did have some photos of 6x4 Marathons in Australia, but I gave them all away to Robert Harris of the AEC Bulletin.
newmercman:
That 55 Series may have been rebranded as the MBE 4000, that’s the engine used in the class 7 trucks. The 60 Series was available at 320/370hp, so I assume that it was known as the MBE to avoid having two engines from the same manufacturer at the same power rating. Although we are talking about the USA, so it may have been badged DD at first to gain acceptance, later becoming a Mercedes Benz once the rednecks had got used to it:?:
I thought the MBE4000etc. designation originated in Brazil, with those engines being rebranded as Detroit 55s for the rednecks, although I may be wrong! My reason for this nit-picking is that I suspect that the “new” Merc engine is not as new as they say it is. Not because I want to run Mercedes-Benz down in any way- more that, if the base engine design is that of the OM400, then the 1960s engineers deserve even more credit for creating such a long-lived piece of work.
I will do some digging myself. The DD range is quite vast from 11 to 16 litre, so it’s not a modular design, the 15 & 16 litre versions may be the same block with the larger version having a longer stroke and overbored cylinders, but that won’t apply to the smaller versions.
Freightliner are introducing a ‘new’ vertically integrated autoshift transmission, the same one that was new in Europe almost 7yrs ago, so the 55 Series and DD range may well have their linage traceable to the 60s design. The Americans also won WW2 single handedly evidently…
There doesn’t seem to be any connection between the new generation of Daimler/Detroit engines which seem to be a joint US/German design project from the outset in which the Germans have obviously used their usual ( correct ) idea that it’s all about the amount of development budget that’s thrown at the product at the design stage.IE the Germans have won the peace because they’ve always had the bankers on their side unlike the Brits.
As opposed to what seems to have been an isolated case of sticking a Detroit badge on an old retrograde Merc design in the case of the 55 series compared to the older two stroke designs.
Or for that matter the 60 series which seemed to have been a case of using all American engineering and design to produce a ‘different’ product,as opposed to a ‘better’ one,compared to the old two stroke series depending on point of view in that most modern road transport application designs are a compromise mostly based on emmisions and massive fuel cost increases as opposed to the most cost effective combination of output and reliability.
gingerfold:
Surprisingly, the best selling years of the Marathon Mk.2 were when the Volvo F10 was being introdeuced into the market.
Having worked for an operator who was running a Marathon together with a first of the line F10 I think,the way he ran the operation ( spend as little as possible ),it would probably just have been a matter of cost in that the Marathon could be bought and probably run cheaper than the Volvo at the time.
Ironically in this case obviously not.
IE that cheap to buy and run uncomfortable Leyland would probably have turned into an expensive liability when it was time to re sell it.In addition to that the guvnor,by his own admission,knew that the thing was an uncomfortable heap when nights out were required in which case it was operated on the basis of rotating it’s drivers between it and the Volvo.All of which seems a reasonable reflection concerning at least some of the reasons why and when Leyland started losing ground against it’s foreign competition during the early years of the foreign invasion.All of which would/should have been foreseeable long before that point in time.
Carryfast:
Ironically in this case obviously not.
IE that cheap to buy and run uncomfortable Leyland would probably have turned into an expensive liability when it was time to re sell it.In addition to that the guvnor,by his own admission,knew that the thing was an uncomfortable heap when nights out were required in which case it was operated on the basis of rotating it’s drivers between it and the Volvo.All of which seems a reasonable reflection concerning at least some of the reasons why and when Leyland started losing ground against it’s foreign competition during the early years of the foreign invasion.All of which would/should have been foreseeable long before that point in time.
What a load of tripe,I doubt you’ve ever driven one, uncomfortable? no I really liked the driving position and the comfort, nights out? well the bed in my mk1 was wider and more comfortable than the F10 , which we also ran at the time.
Yes the F10 looked flash and the marathon was no frills but to say it was uncomfortable is rubbish !
Carryfast:
Ironically in this case obviously not.
IE that cheap to buy and run uncomfortable Leyland would probably have turned into an expensive liability when it was time to re sell it.
The 35yr old 1978 one I drove still survives XNX 581S ,the F10’s that ran with it at the time were all dead and buried at 10yrs old !
Not in her original colours but the ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ power is original!
The Detroit 55 Series was the US version of the Brazilian Mercedes MB5000 engine, if I am not mistaken. This, in turn was the 12.8 litre inline six derivative of the OM400 Series European engine. The new Detroit 13 litre engine has since been launched in Europe as the Mercedes OM471. This suggests (to me, at least) that the DD13 was a development of the 55, so the OM471 can therefore trace its base design back to the original OM400. If not, and it is a completely new design, why did Mercedes not call it an OM601?