ERF-Continental:
Since some days I am in touch with Wim Spruit who worked at Bestebreurtje also known as BestImportTruck.He informed me that the last new NGC sold was to Cees Willemstein and after that transaction the whole
inventory (mind the B-series were also on the market) was transported to Sandbach. More details to come.Unknown if spare-parts were kept for a long time.
Thanks A-J. That must have been 87-69-RB which I think was a 1976 NGC. Look forward to further details! 
Rowena:
Just as curious as you…which at that time would indicate the sales/inventory jammed for some reason?
Hopefully Wim also highlights some info on the company…Jan Bestebreurtje (passed in 2021) was in charge
for the imports (hence procurement) and Paul Bestebreurtje was the director in Rijsoord.
Perhaps more info will pop up regarding/through Jan Mes and Arie de Koning
Borrowed and bought some ERF-archives from Wim so what will bring us that
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
All seems to add weight to the theory that the decision had already been made to sacrifice our manufacturing base to the advantage of our foreign competitors for whatever reason.
Certainly no reason why the NGC couldn’t have been introduced with intercooled 350+ spec ■■■■■■■ and RTO 13 speed Fuller as standard at that point in time.Combined with a suitable advertising campaign directed against its competitors with extreme prejudice.
The whole basis of the EEC deal seems to have boiled down to UK oil and gas exports in exchange for manufacturing imports the rest is history.
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
Why do you think/know there was not an intention to sell to home market? Advertising? That smacks of complacent management?
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
All seems to add weight to the theory that the decision had already been made to sacrifice our manufacturing base to the advantage of our foreign competitors for whatever reason.
Certainly no reason why the NGC couldn’t have been introduced with intercooled 350+ spec ■■■■■■■ and RTO 13 speed Fuller as standard at that point in time.Combined with a suitable advertising campaign directed against its competitors with extreme prejudice.
The whole basis of the EEC deal seems to have boiled down to UK oil and gas exports in exchange for manufacturing imports the rest is history.
It was offered with a 335 ■■■■■■■ + 13sp (or 9sp) Fuller from the outset. The small-cam 350 would probably have rendered it thirstier than the 335 for very little more umph. Big-cam 350s and intercooling came later. Furthermore, it would have been cheaper to buy UK-built American engines from Schotts than to import new developments from US as they emerged. In any case, engine size is irrelevant to my original argument!
essexpete:
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
Why do you think/know there was not an intention to sell to home market? Advertising? That smacks of complacent management?
The home market was already covered by the previous model (5MW cabbed) which was already available as a domestic unit or as a full Euro-spec unit with a choice of RHD / LHD. The NGC was only ever made with LHD and for its first two years it was only available through agents on the Continent. Peter Foden is quoted as having said he would not build RHD ones. I think this was to do with the cost of running a production line of limited numbers in limited space and the need to keep the variables down. In '75 ERF offered it to home customers.
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
All seems to add weight to the theory that the decision had already been made to sacrifice our manufacturing base to the advantage of our foreign competitors for whatever reason.
Certainly no reason why the NGC couldn’t have been introduced with intercooled 350+ spec ■■■■■■■ and RTO 13 speed Fuller as standard at that point in time.Combined with a suitable advertising campaign directed against its competitors with extreme prejudice.
The whole basis of the EEC deal seems to have boiled down to UK oil and gas exports in exchange for manufacturing imports the rest is history.It was offered with a 335 ■■■■■■■ + 13sp (or 9sp) Fuller from the outset. The small-cam 350 would probably have rendered it thirstier than the 335 for very little more umph. Big-cam 350s and intercooling came later. Furthermore, it would have been cheaper to buy UK-built American engines from Schotts than to import new developments from US as they emerged. In any case, engine size is irrelevant to my original argument!
Crikey don’t take on carryfast in an exchange you’ll never win he knows everything about everything
Even though he’s never left these shores in a truck
robthedog:
ERF-NGC-European:
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
Something that strikes me as odd about the unveiling of the NGC in January 1973, is that I can find no evidence of an advertising campaign to whet the appetites of prospective customers. Why the secrecy? No press previews, press ads or hints of a new lorry. Not even a photo of a tarpaulin covered tractive unit. Granted, the 5MW-cabbed European served as a sort of advertisement for the European model, but the NGC was sufficiently more advanced to warrant considerable press coverage. It didn’t happen. Why? It must have taken two or three years to develop this truck. Clearly the cab was influenced by the Scania 140 and the chassis based loosely on ERF’s own new A-series unit. Was it incompetent publicity management? Was it a ploy to keep the project under wraps, given that that ERF had no intention of marketing it in the UK? It does seem an extraordinary way to announce a premium Euro-truck with potential to serve as our new EEC ambassador.0
All seems to add weight to the theory that the decision had already been made to sacrifice our manufacturing base to the advantage of our foreign competitors for whatever reason.
Certainly no reason why the NGC couldn’t have been introduced with intercooled 350+ spec ■■■■■■■ and RTO 13 speed Fuller as standard at that point in time.Combined with a suitable advertising campaign directed against its competitors with extreme prejudice.
The whole basis of the EEC deal seems to have boiled down to UK oil and gas exports in exchange for manufacturing imports the rest is history.It was offered with a 335 ■■■■■■■ + 13sp (or 9sp) Fuller from the outset. The small-cam 350 would probably have rendered it thirstier than the 335 for very little more umph. Big-cam 350s and intercooling came later. Furthermore, it would have been cheaper to buy UK-built American engines from Schotts than to import new developments from US as they emerged. In any case, engine size is irrelevant to my original argument!
Crikey don’t take on carryfast in an exchange you’ll never win he knows everything about everything
Even though he’s never left these shores in a truck
A timely reminder! I’ll shut up while I’m winning. I’d rather be happy than right! 
Ladies, Gents,
Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.
With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.
ERF-Continental:
Ladies, Gents,Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.
Well put. That’s exactly how I see it too.
ERF-NGC-European:
intercooling came later.
Just to point out that 350 + small cams were intercooled.
ERF-Continental:
Ladies, Gents,Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.
Why bother introducing a new product range if you can’t cope with the success it might bring? The development costs would have effectively been a waste of money. Bizarre business planning from where I sit.
Dennis Javelin:
ERF-Continental:
Ladies, Gents,Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.Why bother introducing a new product range if you can’t cope with the success it might bring? The development costs would have effectively been a waste of money. Bizarre business planning from where I sit.
But they did cope with the success of the NGC abroad by keeping the model simple (ie LHD choice of only two engines and gearboxes - unlike all their other models which had multiple choice everything); by delaying its introduction on the home market and by establishing both dealerships and service networks across Europe. It didn’t sell in big numbers but the development was a continuation of that of the A-series and overlapped that of the B-series (which came out a year after the NGC) so not quite a waste of money.
Carryfast:
ERF-NGC-European:
intercooling came later.Just to point out that 350 + small cams were intercooled.
They were aftercooled. But I take your point. Aftercooling was just an earlier version of intercooling.
ERF-NGC-European:
Dennis Javelin:
ERF-Continental:
Ladies, Gents,Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.Why bother introducing a new product range if you can’t cope with the success it might bring? The development costs would have effectively been a waste of money. Bizarre business planning from where I sit.
But they did cope with the success of the NGC abroad by keeping the model simple (ie LHD choice of only two engines and gearboxes - unlike all their other models which had multiple choice everything); by delaying its introduction on the home market and by establishing both dealerships and service networks across Europe. It didn’t sell in big numbers but the development was a continuation of that of the A-series and overlapped that of the B-series (which came out a year after the NGC) so not quite a waste of money.
If it only sold in small numbers would it have been considered a commercial/financial success or perhaps a loss leader?
Dennis Javelin:
ERF-NGC-European:
Dennis Javelin:
ERF-Continental:
Ladies, Gents,Bear in mind that ERF’s production capacity was hindered…as well as floorspace, so Peter Foden made a right decision
to NOT enable customers being exited…causing severe production-restrictions for the bread-butter-business.With all respect…at the end of the day it’s on sales…chassis X with Gardner, chassis Y with RR, chassis Z with whatever
export to R, and so on…ERF was a magnificient company but restricted by its own success…inevitably not that good in
making every customer on this globe happy.Why bother introducing a new product range if you can’t cope with the success it might bring? The development costs would have effectively been a waste of money. Bizarre business planning from where I sit.
But they did cope with the success of the NGC abroad by keeping the model simple (ie LHD choice of only two engines and gearboxes - unlike all their other models which had multiple choice everything); by delaying its introduction on the home market and by establishing both dealerships and service networks across Europe. It didn’t sell in big numbers but the development was a continuation of that of the A-series and overlapped that of the B-series (which came out a year after the NGC) so not quite a waste of money.
If it only sold in small numbers would it have been considered a commercial/financial success or perhaps a loss leader?
Difficult to say because ERF developed the B-series alongside it. The NGC was supposed to be the big TIR long-hauler and the B-series was just supposed to replace the domestic A-series. However, eventually ERF developed the big LHD sleeper European(ised) version of the B-series and it very quickly replaced the NGC. Shortly after that ERF pulled out of Europe and stayed away for several years.
ERF-Continental kindly posted this on the Clearing House thread.
It shows the availability of the elusive ‘olive green’ NGC that monsieur ‘Saviem’ reported some years ago. The description is detailed and agrees with the published advert (which I have added, below).
For some reason there are changes of detail are erroneously recorded against No.81 on my register in that it appears to have had an RT (not RTO) 9509; and was registered in 1976, not 1977.
This vehicle remains a mystery. We thought at first it might have belonged to Prooi of Barendrecht but it was later shown that they only ran a B-series ERF. It remains to be known who owned it first and to whom it went subsequently.
I will dig further towards details on the supposed Prooi-NGC
A road-registration for the NGC of Groen in Nieuw Lekkerland
Perhaps some details (year/month of registration) are worth to notice
