Don’t twist my words, or is it your comprehension problem again?
Actually it was SDU who told you the two engines overlapped.
GM were the junior partner, with Penskl holding 60%.
The Series 60 was designed in house by DD, amidst plummeting sales of two stroke engines.
Still waiting for you to offer any citations suggesting JD had any involvement.
To add to the myth of the dirty two stroke Caterpillar also chose to walk away from its road going automotive 4 stroke diesel operations rightly stating onerous exhaust emissions legislation.
Bearing in mind the unreliability that compliance has created in all automotive diesel engine designs.
You actually ‘said’ that GM thought that the two stroke was such a lemon that it needed to be replaced by a 4 stroke ?.
While conveniently trying to airbrush from history the John Deere role in the exercise.Let alone the fact that GM truck and engine division effectively walked away at the point when it realised it couldn’t/wouldn’t work with the type of bovine excrement legislation that effectively killed well over half a century of GM two stroke engine development.
Obviously an 11 litre tractor engine was never going to do the job of an 8v92TA, let alone 12v92t, as the US military, among others who kept the faith, agreed.
To MTU’s delight.
If you can offer some proof I’ll retract my scepticism with a genuine apology.
Ah, but it worked!
The John Deere involvement was successfully air-brushed out. That is obviously why CF can show no actual evidence for it.
Just like other successful cover ups, the lack of proof is in fact actual proof that it is real!
The more real and important summat is, the less proof you will find.
2 Likes
Exactly what evidence would fit your definition of proof ?.
Exactly what evidence says it didn’t happen.
As opposed to documented references to JD’s involvement in the cam in head cylinder head design and electronic fuelling and improvement in piston ring oil control design ?.
Regardless of any of that the timelines prove that GMC abandoned the heavy truck sector in general before any emissions regulations affected its two stroke designs and at around the same time as the 4 stroke 60 series was introduced.
IE no evidence that the design stages of the 60 series coincided with any intention stated or otherwise, by GMC, to replace the two stroke with it.
The 60 series was simply just a development WIP exercise, using outside bought in technology, up to the point where GMC decided to walk away from both truck manufacturing and engine manufacturing both 4 stroke and 2 stroke.
Too expensive and too complicated to be worth making compliant isn’t the same thing as impossible to make compliant, whether 2 stroke Detroit or 4 stroke CAT.
A single reference merely hinting so would be far more than what you have offered thus far.
You are confusing two different GM divisions, the truck building and engine building.
You do get muddled up filling in the gaps, in your knowledge, from your vivid imagination.
GMC sold out to both Volvo and Penske at a similar time including as the 60 series was introduced.
The idea that the 60 series replaced, or was even designed to replace, the two stroke range is as much a myth as the high ( engine speed ) two stroke.
Let alone the supercharged, naturally aspirated, two stroke, which is by definition an oxymoron.
Whatever Sunshine, you enjoy your ignorant bliss.
It really isn’t ignorance to say that GMC walked away from heavy truck manufacturing, including ‘Detroit Diesel’ engine division, at around the time when the 60 series was introduced.It was all about Penske and Volvo from that point.
Also the Detroit design at least was little, if any, different in peak torque and power delivery than the 14 litre Cummins.But was way different in terms of its specific outputs.
Also the terms supercharged and naturally aspirated are mutually exclusive whether two stroke or four stroke.
GM at least didn’t confuse those two different terms in its terminology regarding naturally aspirated two stroke design.
Which just leaves the question of Fodens design.The author of Cav’s example seems to have bought into the usual myths in that regard.Or maybe not ?.
7 psi could/should mean inlet port pressure relative to atmosphere in the case of naturally aspirated diesels.
Or it could mean 7 psi forced induction boost over atmosphere ?.Which would obviously mean supercharged.
The author seems to have chosen not to clarify which suggests he doesn’t know or understand the difference and doesn’t realise the requirement to differentiate for his readers all these years later.
Ignorance indeed.
You are such a figjam, Carryfast.
CF is like the Terrier dog SDU ----- It always has to have the last yap ! that is until you give it some shoe toe right up to the 6th lace hole ! 
Yes Bewick, that’s why I push him for proof and he goes quiet for periods.
You have earned my highest respect, achieving what you did, without employing Carryfast. 
I can just see it now: Bedford TM Detroit-powered drawbar outfits with demountable bodies crawling up Shap, frightening the sheep…
1 Like
According to Wikipedia:
“Detroit engine was not a successful choice in the UK. Because of its high-revving characteristics, it proved unpopular with drivers, who were used to slow revving, long stroke, UK diesels. It was also disliked by operators because of its poor fuel economy.”
Indisputable evidence Carryfast was a steering wheel attendant, rather than a driver.
In this case it’s a naturally aspirated Foden not an 8v71N or 8v92T Bedford Ro.
All CAV needed to do was put Carryfast not welcome or required to comment on this topic seconded by Bewick .I wouldn’t have bothered.
You want proof that GMC sold out its engine manufacturing interests to Penske and its truck manufacturing interests to Volvo at around the time of the 60 series introduction.
Supercharged means forced induction.Turbocharged also means forced induction.
Naturally Aspirated diesel means lower inlet port pressure relative to atmosphere.Equivalent of vacuum.
There is no evidence that 2 stroke diesels deliver peak torque or peak power at higher engine speeds than comparable capacity 4 strokes.
If you don’t believe that then you won’t believe anything that I say suggesting otherwise.