robert1952:
Which brings us neatly to the thorny problem of knowing what its original engine was. The caption to the photo apparently stated that it had a ■■■■■■■ 250, which is highly unlikely because we know of no others fitted with one. However, it is still possible for the following reasons:
They (250s) were offered, in theory, in the publicity brochures.
The Sherbourg hill story appears to be nonsense because the lorry never went abroad.
No one has yet been able to tell me what the original engine was before they stuffed a ■■■■■■■ 350 plant engine in it.
You wouldn’t want to replace a 335 with a 350 unless it blew up; but you might want to replace a non-turbo 250.
Robert
I reckon ERF was reluctant to supply 250s for some reason- possibly because they did not want the reputation of their flagship product diluted. If that were not the case, there would be loads of 250s, just like there were loads of 88s and 110s. Those models far outnumbered 89s and 140s, because most operators wanted 250bhp under a big cab. Maybe that was ERF’s strategy- to create a vehicle which was a 140/89 competitor, and no driver would mistake it for anything else. 250bhp customers could have LV cabs. Only guesswork, but 100% guaranteed correct.
robert1952:
Which brings us neatly to the thorny problem of knowing what its original engine was. The caption to the photo apparently stated that it had a ■■■■■■■ 250, which is highly unlikely because we know of no others fitted with one. However, it is still possible for the following reasons:
They (250s) were offered, in theory, in the publicity brochures.
The Sherbourg hill story appears to be nonsense because the lorry never went abroad.
No one has yet been able to tell me what the original engine was before they stuffed a ■■■■■■■ 350 plant engine in it.
You wouldn’t want to replace a 335 with a 350 unless it blew up; but you might want to replace a non-turbo 250.
Robert
I reckon ERF was reluctant to supply 250s for some reason- possibly because they did not want the reputation of their flagship product diluted. If that were not the case, there would be loads of 250s, just like there were loads of 88s and 110s. Those models far outnumbered 89s and 140s, because most operators wanted 250bhp under a big cab. Maybe that was ERF’s strategy- to create a vehicle which was a 140/89 competitor, and no driver would mistake it for anything else. 250bhp customers could have LV cabs. Only guesswork, but 100% guaranteed correct.
Spot on, Anorak. In the opening chapter of my first NGC book I argued that the probable reason for no apparent take-up of the lower-powered NGC options was that the cheaper 5MW-cabbed alternative was already proven and available. Not only that, they had RHD to boot! There were plenty of 220 and 240-powered 5MWs floating about. All the evidence strongly points to the NGC being intended as a direct alternative to the Scania 140. Robert
vwvanman0:
M20 truck photos has newly listed a photo on ebay of an M Burkhard Zurich CH.
Unsure if its been on the many pages here.
Steve
Cheers! Just clocked that myself as I’ve just been browsing that site - and yes, it is on this thread. But thanks for flagging it up old mate: it’s the vigilance of bloggers like you who keep this show on the road! Happy New Year . Robert
Carryfast:
A logical explanation might be that the first buyer was prepared to put up with the downsides of a relatively heavy unladen lhd European spec unit for use on just uk work to get the upsides of the European cab.Then ordered a typical poverty uk engine spec as part of that.Which was then noticed as being ideal by its later owner for international work who then upgraded its engine spec to match.In which case no point in going for a 335 if there’s something even more powerful and more cheaply available like a plant engine.I’d guess that the change would also have needed an upgraded transmission spec to go with the higher torque output.
Interesting theory, CF, except that it was the latter operator who used it on UK domestics. Happy New Year! Robert
I’ve lost the plot somewhere between DB’s comments concerning it being described as 250 powered ‘before’ it then ended up in Horridge’s ownership doing ‘Euro work’.With it only from that latter point on being 335 and/or possibly 350 powered ?. Which sounds more logical than it being specced with a 250 for international work and then being fitted with 335/350 power for uk only.
Having said that I could understand the possibility of an old school operator in the day,like many others,preferring to stay with an NA engine whether doing uk or international because of over conservative perceived advantages and it then later being noticed by its later buyers’ as a great cheap buy for proposed uk 38t gross operations at that point.Also bearing in mind it’s obvious use with tri axle trailers shown in the later photo which seems consistent with that line of thought.In which case the change to 335 and 9 speed seems like a red herring to me.With it more likely having been just been converted from 250 power when it left its early uk/international working life to cheaply sourced 350 and 13 speed and high ratio final drive for use on uk 38t gross work in that case.Which seems like an ideal cheap solution for something which will run all day at 38t gross at 65 mph pulling a tri axle trailer.
Just to tidy up KRH 153P for a moment - my ‘transformation’ list should of course now read:
The white cab with a broad red & white waist-band has now been painted in Phil Horridge’s livery: red cab with white roof and black bumper.
One of the two roof-mounted air-horns has been removed.
What appears to be a home-made sun-visor has been replaced by a factory original.
The ERF letters have been reinstated.
The rectangular ERF letters surround is missing.
The rectangular fog-lamps have been removed from the bumper.
The circular spot-lamps have been removed from the bumper.
The circular Les Routiers stickers have been removed from the bumper.
The Oz-style stone-guards have been removed from the windscreen.
New mirrors have replaced the old ones.
A grille-mounted TIR-plate has been affixed.
Carryfast:
A logical explanation might be that the first buyer was prepared to put up with the downsides of a relatively heavy unladen lhd European spec unit for use on just uk work to get the upsides of the European cab.Then ordered a typical poverty uk engine spec as part of that.Which was then noticed as being ideal by its later owner for international work who then upgraded its engine spec to match.In which case no point in going for a 335 if there’s something even more powerful and more cheaply available like a plant engine.I’d guess that the change would also have needed an upgraded transmission spec to go with the higher torque output.
Interesting theory, CF, except that it was the latter operator who used it on UK domestics. Happy New Year! Robert
I’ve lost the plot somewhere between DB’s comments concerning it being described as 250 powered ‘before’ it then ended up in Horridge’s ownership doing ‘Euro work’.With it only from that latter point on being 335 and/or possibly 350 powered ?. Which sounds more logical than it being specced with a 250 for international work and then being fitted with 335/350 power for uk only.
Having said that I could understand the possibility of an old school operator in the day,like many others,preferring to stay with an NA engine whether doing uk or international because of over conservative perceived advantages and it then later being noticed by its later buyers’ as a great cheap buy for proposed uk 38t gross operations at that point.Also bearing in mind it’s obvious use with tri axle trailers shown in the later photo which seems consistent with that line of thought.In which case the change to 335 and 9 speed seems like a red herring to me.With it more likely having been just been converted from 250 power when it left its early uk/international working life to cheaply sourced 350 and 13 speed and high ratio final drive for use on uk 38t gross work in that case.Which seems like an ideal cheap solution for something which will run all day at 38t gross at 65 mph pulling a tri axle trailer.
I thought it started out as a 335 + 9-sp Fuller. We know for fact that it ended up with a 350 + 13-sp Fuller : a logical sequence, then. The only spanner in the works has been the suggestion (from a caption) that it started with a 250. The articles, books and blogs that I peruse for my research are littered with wrong engine outputs so the 250 is almost certainly a red herring but I cannot afford to rule it out until something more concrete emerges. Cheers, Robert
I’ve had this ERF Earls Court 1974 brochure filed away for ages and have never thought to pop it on this thread. I do so now because it shows the NGC (on page 6) in context. Cheers! Robert
. Robert
Which sounds more logical than it being specced with a 250 for international work and then being fitted with 335/350 power for uk only.
But its useful, as it is nice and clear. Also, the bottom pic is bigger than the one we had before. Cheers!
