Gardner ENGINES

[newmercman]

Do you think that head gasket problems were caused by cooling issues, such as the design of the water jacket, or from the higher combustion temperatures of turbocharged engines Or was it just that manufacturing processes are so much better now that it isn’t so much of a problem

A lot of problems within an engine have been solved by modern lubricants and coolants, liner cavitation used to be very common, now it almost non existant, crank bearings last a lot longer now, partly due to electronic fuel systems not overfilling the combustion chambers with fuel that would leak past the rings and dilute the oil, causing premature bearing failure and partly due to the better oils on offer now providing better protection.

cav551, you mention inadequate cooling on the Gardner, as I remember they had a reputation for running very cold, lack of heat was always a common complaint (for those of us young enough not to be in possession of an army greatcoat to drape over our legs )

[carryfast]

cav551:
Re-reading, I should have also chucked the Gardner LX into the earlier post and included the earlier AEC 9.6 and 11.3 to balance everything time wise.

To return briefly to the DAF development of the 680. Leyland had tried many different fixes for the head gasket problem, which DAF certainly improved upon. However even up until the change over to the Paccar engine, the DAF derivative of the 680 still had a reputation for head gasket failure and to a lesser extent for oil pump failure. Neither of these failures being an acknowledged Gardner weakness. As mentioned before what Gardner did suffer from was piston seizure, due to insufficient air and coolant flow through lightweight radiators - a ‘dog’ being given a bad name because of someone else’s fault.

Naturally one has to take into account that a headgasket doesn’t just fail because it is Wednesday, there has to be a reason. This reason normally lies outside the ‘core’ engine, but it can also be due to temperature variations within the engine, or to longer term stresses induced by temperature cycling; both of which are problems for the engine and chassis manufacturer to solve. It would certainly be the case that attempting to squeeze just that little bit more bhp out of the engine, would prove to be beyond the capability of the basic engine design as it stood at the time. This was a lesson that was learned with the development of turbocharging, but at considerable cost; in many cases to the vehicle’s owner. The ‘gaffer’ heard of these problems and decided, for the time being, to stick with what he knew - preferring to let others, as he saw it, take the risk.

I can understand a lot of that cav.I think retro fitting forced induction to any engine designed to run naturally aspirated will inevitably probably raise that issue of headgasket failure assuming everything else in the original design had sufficient stress redundancy to stand up to the extra pressures and thermal loads.However the issue can be either mainly be a case of insufficient clamping and support of the gasket between block and head in the design or the gasket specification itself ?.Certainly in my experience of the 2800 it never had any issues whatsoever with around 600,000 kms on the clock it ran like a train and it’s oil and water checks were just a formality and I’ve no reason to think that wasn’t also the case for it’s previous drivers during the 7 years before I started using it.Not forgetting that it was then pushed to even higher outputs with the 3300/3600 series.

If the reason had been the former of those two reasons then I would have thought that head gasket failure would have been a (very) common problem often at ridiculously low mileages maybe sufficient enough to make the wagon’s reliability in service untenable at the very least certainly for anyone hauling 38 t gross over the alps during the summer months ?.That’s assuming the issue wouldn’t have been found out at the endurance testing stage on the dyno and/or after during factory road testing .

However if it was the latter reason then it’s obvious that you’d get headgasket failure on a random basis affecting some wagons not others at no particular point over their service life with no actual regularity that would indicate an actual inherent design fault and that situation was nothing unusual during the early days of forced induction development wether on cars or trucks and possibly even today with variations in quality of gaskets.So maybe a case of engine development outrunning gasket strength/quality development at that time ?.

However if you’d have said the 2300 or the 2500 then definitely I’d have said overstressed and the only surprise is why it was just the water that often seemed to have oil mixed with it when it was checked on those and not something else blowing up instead.The usual reply when telling the workshops about it was don’t worry about it.

Having said all that even at the cutting edge of the big power truck technology my own experience showed that a big non turbo engine was often the preferred choice over a turbocharged one for that bit of extra reliability insurance.However I don’t think it was an option for the commercial sector and remain competitive in which case they had to jump some time and they probably could have done a lot worse than choose either the 2800 or the turbocharged ■■■■■■■ options to make that leap with .

But whatever the issues staying with the outdated naturally aspirated Gardner design wasn’t an option at that point either for the operators and more importantly for the manufacturers.

[cav551]

Off track, but in answer to Newmercman:

I am not qualified to give a definitive answer only express an opinion based on what I have hopefully learned over time. But it is a combination of some or all of the factors mentioned. For instance to use the AEC AV470 as an example (and this is only a partial answer): its head gasket problems were lessened when it was discovered that the head studs were stretching. The following engine (AV505) apart from having dry liners had shorter head studs. Several manufacturers revised the pattern of torquing the head nuts. Moving on to a later date as research progressed, a move was made to the idea of bolts instead of studs and to come up to date - stretch bolts and angle tightening.

Repeated bursts of full throttle acceleration followed by periods of idling are very hard indeed on an engine; as was found to be the case with the Paxman Valenta engine in the HST 125. Similarly, the AEC 204 9.6 suffered overheating problems with London Transport when first introduced. The company was to have a massive fleet of several thousand of these engines. Its experimental department, in conjunction with AEC, fitted transparent water jacket doors, which revealed poor, almost non existent, coolant circulation for the rearmost cylinders. A simple water rail directly feeding the rear of the back head was the solution.

Turbocharge the engine and the heat to dissipate increases, which is why an increase in boost pressure and fueling to raise output requires attention to be paid to timing and compression ratio.

To return to the Gardner, given an adequate flow of water through the heater radiator, Gardner claimed that heat would be forthcoming. The chassis builders however failed to engineer such a system.

[slab_murphy]

This was an interesting thread until carryfast spoilt it!

[cav551]

Cf brings up an interesting point re the 2300/2500. From memory of the time, I think these had the 8.25litre engine which would certainly be highly stressed. Certainly oil found in the coolant would more likely be a failure of the oil cooler - a common and annoying complaint. Relatively easy to fix the cooler, but cleaning out the system takes a long long time. Incidentally the chemical sold by DAF today costs in the region of £100 for 20 litres. I have recently had to do this job on an 05 reg 85CF (or CF85 I can never remember which way round) and the cleaning out was a real pain. Removed the radiator and block drain plugs - and nothing, blocked solid. Ground must be kept clean so steam cleaner not an option.

Practically all the major manufacturers suffer(ed) from this problem. Except of course Gardner who used an air to air oil cooler. Gardner of course did it the other way round, when the water pump decided to fill the sump with coolant.

[gingerfold]

Gardners were generally recognised as being cool running engines. Because of the high alumunium alloy content of a typical Gardner the company actually specified what the maximum oil and coolant temperatures should be. With a combination of ferrous and non-ferrous metals in an engine different metal expansion characteristics were very important.

[kr79]

I suppose everyone who has contributed to this thread is right in there own way. There’s no denying until the 70s gardners products were one of the best in the world but the new motorway age brought new chalenges and Gardner wasn’t ready with new products to face these challenges. I think I mentioned earlier the only Gardner powered truck I drove had the 270 turbo and it went as well as anything else in that power bracket and seemed fairly reliable .
This was on a 1988 foden tipper and I was told by then the gardner powered model was about 4.5k dearer than the same truck with an l10 ■■■■■■■ and by then the ■■■■■■■ had built a reputation for good fuel economy so it would take a lot to justify the premium.
I suppouse in reality putting the 180 and the later 201bhp gardners up against something with another 100bhp is like turning up to battle with a musket and everyone else has a machine gun.

[geoffthecrowtaylor]

CF don t understand what you mean by redundancy surely you mean capacity,however I was under the seemingly wrong impression that we were all wagon drivers not engine designers I m afraid it s all got too technical for me and with the ever increasing mine s better than your s I m going to say adieu mes braves and leave it to you learned gentlemen,regards Crow.

[zb_anorak]

cav551:
To return to the Gardner, given an adequate flow of water through the heater radiator, Gardner claimed that heat would be forthcoming. The chassis builders however failed to engineer such a system.

This has always puzzled me, whenever I read yet another post in which a driver complains of inadequate cab heating on Gardner-engined lorries. Even allowing for the great Gardner having 40% efficiency rather than 35 or so, that is still 60% of the heat going to waste! If half of this goes out of the exhaust (a rough guess), 30% still remains to be harvested. On an unladen run at moderate speed, the engine may be producing 50bhp, so that is 15bhp available to heat the cab. At such low loads, efficiency is worse so, in practice, there will be more.

If the temperature of the Gardner’s exiting coolant is lower than on other engines, to transfer the same heat one must either increase the flow rate through the heater matrix and/or use a matrix with a larger surface area. The flow restriction of the matrix must then be reduced, otherwise the job becomes self-defeating! All of this would be achieved by using a bigger heater matrix, with connections for larger-bore hoses. A driver-operated restrictor in the flow to the main radiator would ensure that the heat got to him, as long as the total pressure drop across the water pump was not increased as a result.

Replacement of the heater matrix with a suitable car radiator (and larger hoses) may work. Failing that, industrial heat exchangers are compact, reasonably cheap and can be specified, off the shelf, with whatever flow capability/heat transfer combination you want. This is all an achievable goal for an enthusiast on the preservation scene.

geoffthecrowtaylor:
CF don t understand what you mean by redundancy surely you mean capacity,however I was under the seemingly wrong impression that we were all wagon drivers not engine designers I m afraid it s all got too technical for me and with the ever increasing mine s better than your s I m going to say adieu mes braves and leave it to you learned gentlemen,regards Crow.

You get all sorts on here- engineers, mechanics, fitters, salesmen, operators- even drivers. How else would our discussions reach such a balanced consensus?

[carryfast]

[zb]
anorak:

geoffthecrowtaylor:
CF don t understand what you mean by redundancy surely you mean capacity,however I was under the seemingly wrong impression that we were all wagon drivers not engine designers I m afraid it s all got too technical for me and with the ever increasing mine s better than your s I m going to say adieu mes braves and leave it to you learned gentlemen,regards Crow.

You get all sorts on here- engineers, mechanics, fitters, salesmen, operators- even drivers. How else would our discussions reach such a balanced consensus?

Redundancy in this case just means over capacity.IE the capacity to accept being subject to more stressing,that isn’t being used up to that point,is redundancy.

It’s got nothing to do with mines better than yours etc etc it’s actually a great and very interesting topic and as for me I’ve always been a driver first and the engineering technical side was just what I needed to learn in that particular job by listening and learning from the ‘engineers’ and drivers,which is just a difference between working as a test driver in vehicle manufacturing as opposed to working as a driver running a load between point A and point B on general haulage or trunking.In just the same way that someone who’s doing heavy haulage and Hiab/crane type work needs to learn a different lot of requirements,as a driver doing that job,as compared to working on tankers or reefers etc.In my case although I couldn’t stand working in a factory and knew that driving trucks not building them was the place for me,I still find the automotive engineering/manufacturing side of the road transport industry a very interesting subject.

[carryfast]

cav551:
Cf brings up an interesting point re the 2300/2500. From memory of the time, I think these had the 8.25litre engine which would certainly be highly stressed. Certainly oil found in the coolant would more likely be a failure of the oil cooler - a common and annoying complaint. Relatively easy to fix the cooler, but cleaning out the system takes a long long time. Incidentally the chemical sold by DAF today costs in the region of £100 for 20 litres. I have recently had to do this job on an 05 reg 85CF (or CF85 I can never remember which way round) and the cleaning out was a real pain. Removed the radiator and block drain plugs - and nothing, blocked solid. Ground must be kept clean so steam cleaner not an option.

Practically all the major manufacturers suffer(ed) from this problem. Except of course Gardner who used an air to air oil cooler. Gardner of course did it the other way round, when the water pump decided to fill the sump with coolant.

That might explain it cav but there was also that typical emulsion on the oil filler cover that would point to head gasket issues but your comment shows that there might always be other possibilities and causes for a problem that weren’t always the obvious conclusion.In which case I can see how it might have been possible for a head gasket fault to be diagnosed resulting in a head off job when in fact it just needed a new oil cooler and a clean out of the cooling system. Which probably explains the workshops’ answer don’t worry about it about it considering that those heaps were (rightly) seen as expendable pieces of junk running on borrowed time just like the Gardner powered SA’s and ERF’s.

[geoffthecrowtaylor]

Shame on you Anorak even drivers eh. and you surely meant lack of consensus.Crow.

[zb_anorak]

geoffthecrowtaylor:
Shame on you Anorak even drivers eh. and you surely meant lack of consensus.Crow.

My tongue was firmly lodged in my cheek, when I wrote that. I forgot to mention journalists, too. Sorry Nmm.

[grumpy_old_man]

Lawrence Dunbar:
0This is displayed on my conservetory wall & has been well admired over the years, something C/F Wouldnt be interested in but he will know there are lots of Gaffers, Drivers who benifited from the good old days when they were in their hayday, Regards Larry.

There was nowt wrong with a 150 Gardner when I got my first (about 61/62). I got a new Atki 8 legger, 6 speed DB box. It was a fine machine, always got me there and got me back.
In those days the choice mainly was AEC or Gardner. Given a choice I’d go for the AEC everytime, but my Gardner engined Atki was a good motor.

[cav551]

For anyone bored with it getting too technical - a Gardner journey I actually can remember, since I am bored sitting at home doing invoices.

A 5 LW powered Atkinson 16tonner with a very nice David Brown 5 speed box and an Eaton air-operated (blow your wig off) two speed axle. What wasn’t so nice was the contortion needed to get the left leg onto the clutch pedal. Nor was the air seat that good either, it seemed either you had to pump it up so hard that you couldn’t see out under the header rail, or with less pressure every time you fit a bump up you went, and crash down it came as it bottomed out.

Left Goudhurst at about 2 -2.30am with a 10 ton load of concrete sections of a building destined for Horton near Port Eynon on the Gower peninsula. I can’t remember the year, but it was late autumn so I had my ex Navy greatcoat, purchased from Milletts with me which was on to begin with. The downhill section of the A21 past Tonbridge was the first opportunity to get into 5th high so that was the first time we got past the dizzy heights of 35 mph. London was a pain with so many of the traffic lights going red when there was nothing much about at 4 am.Which meant I had to start all over again from 2nd low. On top of that the embankment was shut so it was up to Vistoria and down the Cromwell road.

We struggled up to Membury, to the accompaniment of a little warmth from the heater and plenty of bongo drums and then on along the switchback, breathing in all the fumes from the oil burners as they over ran down the banks, to Leigh Delamare where I stopped for a break. I always chose this one loaded because the getaway was flat, just like the Blue Boar was somewhere to avoid for the opposite reason.

Over the bridge and into Wales for the first time, where the morning traffic was picking up on a bright sunny day. Other than the number of wagons coming the other way loaded with steel I can’t recall much until I got to Swansea. What I can remember clearly is seeing a signpost telling me it was 22 miles to go. That was a joke, it took forever down narrow twisty roads with a gear change every few seconds it seemed.

The Quad was already there and the gang were wondering where I had got to, having expected me at 8, but, with an “oh if we’d realised it was that old thing we’d have had an extra hour in bed” and a bit of moving around the site the concrete was off. Finished the flask and sarnies and off to find a phone box. I rang Silver Roadways and got given a return load from the plate works a Velindre. Consulting the little red book revealed digs in Swansea and parking on a bit of waste ground in the middle of a road junction.

Day two: I got clear of Swansea reloaded by mid morning and back along the M4 in the rain,constantly wiping the mist away from inside the windows and mildly amused by the occasional puffs of steam as the raindrops sizzled on the top of the radiator.

And there it stops, because I can’t remember where the load went.

[dave_the_renegade]

Good story of your trip to Wales cav551.Lets have a few more from your other driving trips.
Cheers Dave.

[geoffthecrowtaylor]

Good one Anorak ha ha ,even i m laughing. Can I if I may stray back to your oil cooler theory and also slide back to Volvo engines. We ran those F88s andF89s from 1974 until the last one retired in 1997 thats 23 years in that time not one single case of oil cooler failure yes once we did have water in the oil so much so you could have said oil in the water the cause bottom liner seals easy to find out which one sump off and just look where the water is dripping from. Easy to fix but a lot of spanner work involved and obviously a liner puller needed we had one which had been made by a mechanic friend of ours albeit for a ■■■■■■■ but it did the job Apart from the work involved it wasn t a cheap repair either liner seals head gasket etc. No head gaskets blown but the main problem with the TD100 and TD120 was the top liner seal which was about as thick as the ring on a French letter this caused other problems but as i m off to the boozer in a few minutes some other time BTW CF why didn t you pressure test the cooling system. Regards Crow.

[grumpy_old_man]

Carryfast:
That might explain it cav but there was also that typical emulsion on the oil filler cover that would point to head gasket issues but your comment shows that there might always be other possibilities and causes for a problem that weren’t always the obvious conclusion.In which case I can see how it might have been possible for a head gasket fault to be diagnosed resulting in a head off job when in fact it just needed a new oil cooler and a clean out of the cooling system. Which probably explains the workshops’ answer don’t worry about it about it considering that those heaps were (rightly) seen as expendable pieces of junk running on borrowed time just like the Gardner powered SA’s and ERF’s.
[/quote]

Well, I’ve read with interest quite a lot of your ramblings, It’s my opinion that you are talking out of your backside. A road haulage man with such bigoted views and opinions hasn’t an ounce of credibility.
Just my opinion.

[zb_anorak]

We can take it as read that Gardner fell behind the times- there is no pleasure to be from dancing on their grave. As we have so ably demonstrated above, their engineering lead finally expired around 1980 (apart from in the area of power output, in which they had nothing to match the 240bhp engines of 1965). There is no need, other than for the sake of gratuitous repetition, to state the obvious performance advantage of a 307bhp DAF DKS over an 8LXB (any 8LXCT operators out there are welcome to say, “Yes, but…”). Any numerate schoolboy, who has watched 5 minutes of Jeremy Clarkson, will be qualified to understand that. Far more value will be gained from examining the technical and commercial details contributing to Gardner’s fall from grace. For example, did the 8LXB have any maintenance/durability advantages, compared with the Scania 110 or Volvo F88? Bewick, are you still there?

[cav551]

That’s good of you to say Dave, but not a lot really stands out except when I stuffed it into the side of a dustcart and found myself suddenly sitting in the open air, otherwise it just kept plodding on. I did get a bit carried away and didn’t proof read properly since 35 was the top speed in LOW range. It broke down just the once, when the gear lever came away in my hand; but that was in the yard.

As I said it didn’t like the bank after the Blue Boar although I think I ‘got’ a TK there once, but I hadn’t stopped and he had.

The loads got mixed up once and I got 14 ton of concrete which should have gone on an AEC Marshall and he got my 9 ton load. Funnily enough it went like a train that day and we both had a night out in Lowestoft.

I Brought it back from Bournemouth apparently with a load of ceramic tiles on the floor.

I had the lorry back again in 1976 and I’ve still got a log book which tells me that on Tuesday 6th of April I had a “Scotch”. I ‘booked on’ at 10 am - it says- and stopped the night at Kendal at 21.45. 306 mile 8.25 hrs driving. So that must have been a load and go. Wednesday finished at Renfrew so my guess is that I must have been very late into Glasgow fruit market, then onto a wholesaler in Rutherglen and another in Renfrew. 6hrs and 172 miles.

I can actually recall some of the next day. 0545 start with a scenic ride most of the day and deliveries to wholesalers in Dunblane, Kinross and Edinburgh.Then back down the 702 and a deliberate diversion to go past the Devil’s beef tub and finishing at Morecambe, which is where many of the Kent and Sussex lads made for. We most definitely had a good night on the town. 254 miles in 8.5 hrs. With an ever reducing load the old shed was going well.

Next day start at 0515 into Hulland Ward for a back load and book off at Darenth for a dodgy… The book says 280 miles and 9.5 hrs, but that would have been adjusted most likely and the lorry could have been at home. Run in Saturday morning.

The only other job I recall was running back, both fully freighted from Hulland Ward, with an 8LXB Borderer which did 53. He was on his second cuppa at Scratchwood, but only 20 minutes in front.

As far as I know KKJ 290 E still exists in preservation.