And just to diversify a little once more, here are some great Mick Jones pictures of Trans Arabia’s Yankee hardware of the 70 & 80s! 6x4 KWs and Macks galore! Robert
I’m sure Jerry Cooke could tell us the story behind this one!
Nice photos on KW, most probably suplied through Paccar Belgium, Rue Genève in Brussels where export-department had HQ
and where large quantities of trucks for oil-field-exploration and logistics were sold! ■■■■■■■ Distributor Belgium often piggy-
backed on the group of drivers delivering the trucks to their final destination. Same did DAF with orders to Iran and Turkey.
If you didn’t like stripping tilts in the Saudi desert, spare a thought for driver ‘Yoyo’ here, roping and sheeting with an ERF LV! Robert 
I have now posted some new Trans Arabia pictures on the LHD B-series ERF thread: watch that space! Robert 
En-Tour-Age:
Nice photos on KW, most probably suplied through Paccar Belgium, Rue Genève in Brussels where export-department had HQ
and where large quantities of trucks for oil-field-exploration and logistics were sold! ■■■■■■■ Distributor Belgium often piggy-
backed on the group of drivers delivering the trucks to their final destination. Same did DAF with orders to Iran and Turkey.
I believe that S Jones’s Saudi partner imported them directly from USA. Robert
Trans Arabia: ERF up there, with the best of 'em! Robert
Sorry that I ask as a newcomer over here, but could one explain why the 5MW was replaced by the 7MW
excluding the fact that comfort, til cab etc was perhaps an extra requirement? I have been told the ‘new’
grille (perhaps an idea of P.C. de Jong when visiting CDB and noticing the Scania LB-front) was a must to
have the NTC335 installed…but what about the 5MW from S. Jones as inputted on that relevant thread.
To my opinion there was nothing wrong with the 5MW and not a lot of work to upgrade comfort and tilt-
mechanism for the cab. It looked superb compared to the boxy (shed) look of the 7MW. By the way, ex-
Mack-dealer FTF managed quite well with the same cab?
En-Tour-Age:
Sorry that I ask as a newcomer over here, but could one explain why the 5MW was replaced by the 7MW
excluding the fact that comfort, til cab etc was perhaps an extra requirement? I have been told the ‘new’
grille (perhaps an idea of P.C. de Jong when visiting CDB and noticing the Scania LB-front) was a must to
have the NTC335 installed…but what about the 5MW from S. Jones as inputted on that relevant thread.To my opinion there was nothing wrong with the 5MW and not a lot of work to upgrade comfort and tilt-
mechanism for the cab. It looked superb compared to the boxy (shed) look of the 7MW. By the way, ex-
Mack-dealer FTF managed quite well with the same cab?
The short answer is almost certainly: fashion. The Scania-look and single-piece screen looked more modern. But the cabs were considerably different. The 7MW was taller, gave better ground-clearance, was much more sophisticated and above all it tilted - a must for '70s Euro-truck!
Don’t forget though, they were both made side by side until early '77, so you could have chosen either. I strongly recommend you read through this thread from the beginning. About 20 pages ago I wrote a piece about this cab, and I’ve just tried to locate it but I got bored with looking! So, don’t worry, I’ll reproduce it here for (this once) to save you searching. I’ll post it below. Robert 
The NGC 420 had its own version of the then ubiquitous Motor Panels of Coventry cab design, code-named the 7MW by ERF. This was Motor Panels’ Mark 4 version and it was the first ever British-built 2.5m wide steel sleeper cab. It was introduced at the 1966 Motor Show after which it began to appear on Dutch-built FTFs, British-built Scammell Crusaders, French-built Macks, Hungarian-built Rabas and, of course, ERFs with 5MW cabs and eventually, the NGC where it was named 7MW. The 7MW version of this cab was far better appointed than those offered in other models, it having been designed with long-haul operation in mind. It had a host of mod-cons not previously found in ERFs, being spacious with twin-bunks and having lower noise levels and a three-way roof-hatch designed to take an air-conditioning unit if required. The controls were more modern, with the indicators, lights, wipers and washers incorporated in the steering column stalks. Furthermore, it could be tilted to sixty-eight degrees for easy engine access. The driver’s seat had its own suspension, though the cab did not.
A piece in the spring 1974 edition (no. 20) of ERF’s in-house journal called Chassis magazine, refers to the ERF’s debut the previous year as follows:
Designed expressly to capture a larger share of the European market for ERF, following the foothold gained on the Continent with earlier models, the new ‘Europeans’ have cabs which woo the discerning Common Market lorry driver with a host of luxury features. Special suspension seats to iron out the jolts on long trans-continental hauls, aircraft-type fresh air nozzles, a cigar lighter, lockable glove compartment and provision for electric shaver point are among the standard creature comforts in the ERF ‘European’.
ERF’s 7MW cab stood much higher than the older 5MW at 2972 mm and had a protruding front grille, the better to accommodate that big ■■■■■■■ NTC 335. Because the grille protruded, it gave the impression that the front wheels were set further back than they actually were. This boxy front grille has always been a little controversial because it bore a striking resemblance to that of a Scania 140, with its square frame and lateral slats. Actually, the boxy effect was softened by the slightly bevelled top and sides of the grille panel. It appears that ERF was not content just to put up a competitor in the TIR-truck market, but that it strove to produce a competitor that even looked like its most successful rival, earning it the nickname: the ‘Sandbach Scania’. One can view this as a ‘bit of a cheek’ or as a spirited attempt to compete in a fierce market place — or indeed as a piece of entirely unconscious emulation. Some argue that the front end would have been more aesthetically pleasing if it had emulated the Scammell Crusader rather than the Scania. Handsome though the Crusader’s cab was, it would not have worked for the ERF because it was fixed, so the lower front panels were not designed for tilting and instead they swung out. The tall, external American-style grab handles which ran up the side of the cab behind the driver’s door were a great touch.
The cab itself was an ingenious design, being subtly layered upwards from a solid base, giving it an impression of strength. It was four-square without being slab-sided or utilitarian in appearance. Even the roof was fluted for strength, rather than plainly panelled. Its cab doors were cut short at the bottom like those of the Scammell Crusader rather than following the curve of the wheel-arches. These doors had a most interesting shape in that they formed a truncated ‘A’ design with massive hinges. They appeared to be slightly asymmetrical and inclined forward, though this might be an optical illusion created by the way the back of the cab raked slightly forward to give an impression of forward thrust. All this, combined with the well-proportioned near-vertical windscreen, the protruding front grille and the sun-visor gave the cab a very purposeful air. With the added effect of its imposing ride-height, this truck really looked as if meant business, yet there was nothing pugnacious or overly aggressive about it. The cab may not have possessed the graceful roundness of the 5MW but this particular ERF-Motor Panels creation gave the 7MW the appearance of a rugged truck entirely in keeping with its merchant-adventurer role. With its very efficient 7-inch Lucas double headlamps and triple windscreen wipers it was a classic ‘seventies cab, especially when it was fitted with a sun visor which seemed to counteract the protruding front panel and give the front end a much more balanced, harmonious and pleasing appearance — NGCs always seemed to look naked without that visor. Dutch NGC 420s wore those transparent plastic continental visors that came in all colours and appeared on the cabs of just about every make of lorry going.
Unlike other ERFs, offered for domestic consumption, the MW cab was made of steel rather than glass-reinforced plastic, as fitted to most of its stable-mates. The ‘M’ in MW is believed to have stood for ‘metal’. One of the main reasons for ERF producing metal, rather than GRP export cabs was a general foreign mistrust of plastic cab-shells. Germany, in particular, outlawed such cabs and with Britain just entering the European Economic Community it seems likely that ERF saw Germany as much too large a country to ignore. Of course, the downside was that metal cabs rusted away whereas GRP cabs did not. Unfortunately, the 7MW cab had no external access to wet-gear lockers under the bunk.
The British roof-mounted illuminated moulded headboard tradition appears never to have affected a 7MW cab, though Pountains, Corbishley and ■■■■■■■ added detachable ones. A blogger on Trucknet called John describes how the ‘European’ cabs arrived as flat packs from Motor Panels for assembly in the old Jennings workshops at ERF. These workshops were apparently quite antiquated with no storage area. John portrays a very busy scene with 4MW, 5MW and 7MW cabs being assembled and cab parts all over the place. All the interiors were fitted here, doors were cut down and step positions were changed according to which model they were to fit. Cabs were built one at a time. He reckoned the cab was good for its day.
Unlike today’s trucks, no information was written on the cab that would have helped to identify it. All that was written on an NGC 420 was: ‘ERF’, in big chunky white 3D letters. Those letters were framed in a pleasing white rectangular surround, a distinctive design which started with the A-series 7LV and finished in early B-series models, when the surround was dropped. Both letters and surround were apt to fall off after a while, leaving some older ERFs with no identifying marks whatsoever.
Robert
Well, here’s a laugh. I’ve just been on the photo-forum and I saw a thread called ‘Dirty trucks pic request’. I thought I’d add some of my own. But first I read through the whole thread, as I always do before contributing anything, and lo and behold I WAS RICHLY REWARDED by the sight of one of Colin Wallace’s gems: GEH 513N doing a hard day’s work! Here it is lads. Robert
Acceptable clarification that M(V/W) stands for metal, however merely a matter of
sequence, KV, LV, MV and then sleepers (MW) came in? Thus on cabs, A, B, C, E etc
for the chassis, however as ERF (P-E-T-E-R-B-O-R-O-U-G-H) states…not much has
been saved or appreciated when Sun Works/ERF ‘died’ then…unfortunately REVS
has less knowledge nor clue of heritage to dig that area…that source will dry up…
As stated in early pages, the number refers to axle-positions, 3, 5, 7M for set back
axle and even numbers for front set axle but that is known by now.
ERF:
Very interesting and technically correct thread - a nice change!.
I notice quite a number of MV and MW photos from my Flickr photostream have appeared - it’s a good job my friend rescued these prints when he did. No regard was paid to ERF history when the old Sun Works site was cleared…robert1952:
Throughout this brief evolution ERF was clearly marketing an evolving A-series based tractor. Rumour has it that some late NGC 420s may have received B-series chassis but the B-series was itself basically an A-series with an SP cab. Robert0Jack Cooke would take serious issue with you over that statement Robert!.
Alan Turner’s A-Series chassis of 1970 was redesigned extensively by Cooke for the heavier duty steel cabbed vehicle range, and it was these developments that found their way into a very different chassis under the B-Series. One key point is that the A-Series chassis was found to be unsuitable for rigids. From 1972, following unsuccessful testing of four rigid 4x2 load carrier / drawbar chassis, the plan to ‘roll out’ the A-Series chassis design across the entire ERF load carrier range was abandoned - an embarrassment for ERF as trade press statements issued in 1970 and 1971 had stated it would be so. Cooke went back to the drawing board and almost completely redesigned the A-Series into a chassis that was suitable for all two, three and four axle vehicles across the full ERF load carrier range. It was this new chassis that was christened ‘B-Series’.
As I am “new” over here but quite an oldtimer with 64 years on the clock…I appreciate and comfort the clarification to be crisp for both cab- and chassis-
typification, preventing all of us assume on ourselves. Actually this extensive thread (a compliment to all contributors to produce this number of pages on a
‘single’ type of lorry) should result in a good summary, to avoid polution with wrong data and assumptions later corrected or clarified.
Then hand it over to appropriate responsible people of REVS as YOU all here did research and unfortunately not the development, but with thanks to the late
Mr. Sheratt, Turner and Cooke! Further all operators gave their valued feed back out of operation, however ears and eyes shut when feedback from Europe
as of the continent, where the majority of NGC’s went…
excellent pics Robert, keep’em comin,
cheers
gaz
En-Tour-Age:
Acceptable clarification that M(V/W) stands for metal, however merely a matter of
sequence, KV, LV, MV and then sleepers (MW) came in? Thus on cabs, A, B, C, E etc
for the chassis, however as ERF (P-E-T-E-R-B-O-R-O-U-G-H) states…not much has
been saved or appreciated when Sun Works/ERF ‘died’ then…unfortunately REVS
has less knowledge nor clue of heritage to dig that area…that source will dry up…As stated in early pages, the number refers to axle-positions, 3, 5, 7M for set back
axle and even numbers for front set axle but that is known by now.
Care has to taken with all ERF classification, because it changed over time and often showed little logic. ‘A’ refers to the chassis, not the cab, whereas ‘LV’ refers to the cab. ‘B’ refers to the whole model. The whole thing is mess, which is why I always refer to any ERF vehicles with as much precise info as possible, to avoid confusion. Robert
En-Tour-Age:
ERF:
Then hand it over to appropriate responsible people of REVS as YOU all here did research and unfortunately not the development, but with thanks to the late
Mr. Sheratt, Turner and Cooke! Further all operators gave their valued feed back out of operation, however ears and eyes shut when feedback from Europe
as of the continent, where the majority of NGC’s went…
Many of the contributors to this thread ARE the responsible people of REVS. Many of us are members. Jerry Cooke, who is a member, has made astonishing contributions to this thread either with his own postings, or via my interviews with him.
I’m fascinated to see that you think Sharatt, Turner and Cooke (Jack) shut their eyes and ears to European feedback. Where did you find that out? Robert
As I am “new” over here but quite an oldtimer with 64 years on the clock…I appreciate and comfort the clarification to be crisp for both cab- and chassis-
typification, preventing all of us assume on ourselves. Actually this extensive thread (a compliment to all contributors to produce this number of pages on a
‘single’ type of lorry) should result in a good summary, to avoid polution with wrong data and assumptions later corrected or clarified.
Then hand it over to appropriate responsible people of REVS as YOU all here did research and unfortunately not the development, but with thanks to the late
Mr. Sheratt, Turner and Cooke! Further all operators gave their valued feed back out of operation, however ears and eyes shut when feedback from Europe
as of the continent, where the majority of NGC’s went…
[/quote]
Alexander, I am happy you joined with good feedback and new information! Could not agree more on REVS as I had several
attempts to share information/documentation but strange enough without the expected acceptance nor co-operation. Good
to hear Robert has/had some influence/contact with them but to me they are TOTALLY not impressed by this heritage and
piggyback a lot on what WAS written, even with quite a lot of discrepancies in the relevant articles, e.g. Wobbe Reitsma as
a good friend of Robert and without him (to be expected) book would be ‘only’ a déja-vu on some early volumes of REVS.
I meanwhile emailed you an extraction of the CDB-files on Belgium/Luxemburg on both 5MW, 7MW and B-series sales-figures.
Not bad to experience CDB was that active, even in Holland and France then!
Hiya Robert.