newmercman:
So, the $64,000 question…Were these Gardner Engines any good then
You’ll have to wait for VALKYRIES answer to that question.You can bet that mine wouldn’t be a million miles away from that. 
Here you go Geoffrey, get your Kleenex ready…
It’s a 1980 model K100, 350hp Big Cam ■■■■■■■■ 10spd, 4:11 rear axle ratio, $5,000, the price of a flat rack, a bit of import tax and it’s all yours 
You could take it on a vintage rally and blow all those old Gardners into the weeds
■■■■■■■ and CAT ended up as gardner, to small market to make engines for euro5/6, same as to gardner about 30 years ago. about us engines 
MACK volvo DD mb PACCAR daf 
CAt had to create a motor of own it seem,s
SISU used ■■■■■■■ as long they where avalebul and CAT was a big misstake now it,s MB ,regards benkku
Interesting Benkku, I posted on the ■■■■■■■ thread that they are soon to suffer from the same vertical integration in their home market that led to the end of Gardner 
seem,s the same happening in us now,the manufactor want,s to control al parts in driveline ,easyest way to controll emissions and fueleconomy,AND aftermarket,i,ll supose 
cheers benkku
Morning all, bma, nmm, never a truer word spoken!! Have a good day. Cheerio for now.
bma.finland:
seem,s the same happening in us now,the manufactor want,s to control al parts in driveline ,easyest way to controll emissions and fueleconomy,AND aftermarket,i,ll supose
Double your profits, for the same capital investment- sell parts, servicing, training of service staff. To do this, you must have the aftermarket to yourself, or the major part of it. Control it- a very good point bma.
Even if Gardner had decided to keep pace with the power demands of Europe, and built up sufficient sales volumes to sustain an adequate R&D budget, it would now be in the same situation as ■■■■■■■■ Their customers have gone vertical.
The only way forward, for an engine builder, would be to merge with a chassis builder, ideally one who habitually uses one’s engines. ■■■■■■■ seem to have missed the boat. In Europe, they may have been well-advised to buy ERF.
One will remember the beloved DAF used ■■■■■■■ lately when there was,nt potential enough in their own engine 
or what carryfast,cheers benkku
newmercman:
Here you go Geoffrey, get your Kleenex ready…
It’s a 1980 model K100, 350hp Big Cam ■■■■■■■■ 10spd, 4:11 rear axle ratio, $5,000, the price of a flat rack, a bit of import tax and it’s all yours
You could take it on a vintage rally and blow all those old Gardners into the weeds
No leave the ■■■■■■■ ones for those buyers who prefer them I’ll have one like this and then pull a few trailers with it which should at least earn more than I’m getting for the money in interest by leaving it in the bank. 
newmercman:
Interesting Benkku, I posted on the ■■■■■■■ thread that they are soon to suffer from the same vertical integration in their home market that led to the end of Gardner
The example of the other big US engine manufacturer shows that history seems to be repeating itself in that it went from independent engine supplier to being bought out by a big manufacturer for in house production.However it still ended up being allowed,by that manufacturer,to be used by it’s own competitors.The idea seems to have been it all meant sales which added to the balance sheet wether customers bought a GM truck or a Kenworth or Pete (or Chubb Fire or Oshkosh ).Also the idea of independent engine supply adds to competition and therefore drives development faster than in house only supply which history seems to show causes stagnation with exceptions like Scania and Volvo proving the rule.The fact is even those two weren’t in the same league for the combination of price/power outputs/reliability as ■■■■■■■ and Detroit during most of the 20th century.The problem for Gardner wasn’t that it was an independent engine supplier it was that it wasn’t a good enough independent engine supplier it’s just that it took the British customers a bit (lot) longer to realise it than the Australian and New Zealand ones. 
However I think like us the US will regret it’s ties to the European/Scandinavian truck manufacturing industry in the long term if it doesn’t have the sense to cut and run,or at least force the continuation of the independent supply of engines,by it’s big 3 engine manufacturers,while it still might have the chance.
don,t forget big mercedes and iveco where as late whit turbos as gardner, but they sold lorries not only engines,and scania ds10/11 from -58 to -95 whit turbo from 190 to 400 hp,is not that aproof of good enginering,as well as volvo TD96 /TD100 ,think yankees are out for that reason ,cheers benkku
bma.finland:
don,t forget big mercedes and iveco where as late whit turbos as gardner, but they sold lorries not only engines,and scania ds10/11 from -58 to -95 whit turbo from 190 to 400 hp,is not that aproof of good enginering,as well as volvo TD96 /TD100 ,think yankees are out for that reason ,cheers benkku
A naturally aspirated Merc V8 v turbocharged Detroit 8V92 .Although a ■■■■■■■ big cam 400 would have done the same job of defeating ze master race.(Or the Swedes at the time).
Too right ze Germans wouldn’t have wanted eiter of those running around in the Euro market competing viz zem.But those Italian traitors knew better.
■■■■■■■ are commonly referred to a ■■■■■■■■ over here, all down to the 400 Big cam you’re so fond of Carryfast, they had a bad habit of self destructing
then about need of horsepower our old 141 whitout limiter was faster then our 460 on same route whit 60 tn, 560 can do it on same time ,the road is same and the condissions for 20 years now,so i,ll think it,s a very fear opinion 
whit 40tn can,t see you need more then about 400 to do the work,that you did 20 years ago whit 250/300 hp in same time ,my opinion only,and thats a argument for gardners at their time. the drivers did like i do ,wake up 5 minits earlyer and your in time ,cheers benkku(tought we have an 420 not a560 on the work, in that specified part of road time diferens is medium 2min and the 560 is heavyer in weight and fuel)
newmercman:
■■■■■■■ are commonly referred to a ■■■■■■■■ over here, all down to the 400 Big cam you’re so fond of Carryfast, they had a bad habit of self destructing
Don’t blame me I’m only basing my ideas on where the market went not on what I know myself which is why I posted that example of my preferred engine option in that KW.Although in my case it was usually branded as all smoke and no go although that’s based on comparison with Detroit not Gardner .Or the 903 which was another matter and are you sure that isn’t what they’re referring to . 
But seriously there’s probably always contradictory answers based on good and bad monday morning ones and pay day ones about every single engine type ever built .
bma.finland:
then about need of horsepower
youtube.com/watch?v=UYZPc-GA9Ps
8.41-8.50
The fact is Gardner didn’t ever produce a reliable engine that provided anything like around 10 hp per tonne when it mattered during the 1970’s or after.Even if they had have done most buyers here probably wouldn’t have specced it anyway at that time including one of it’s loyal customers on here.Who then jumped ship when he eventually knew better and then bought the scandinavian competition.
don,t argue whit you carryfast couse “you know everything betveen syfilis and broaken hearts” cheers benkku,(is there enything you don,t know better )
bma.finland:
don,t argue whit you carryfast couse “you know everything betveen syfilis and broaken hearts”
What I do know is that if you’d have compared the products and value for money of the euro and scandinavian products with their US competition during the 1970’s at least there’s no way that you could make the figures show that the euro and scandinavian products provided a better combination of price,outputs and reliability than their US competitors let alone the actual production outputs and valuations and balance sheets of the respective companies.
However Gardner was in a league of it’s own in it’s combination of what any customer with any sense wouldn’t want in a truck,at least in terms of outputs and productivety, and being the type of company which anyone with any sense wouldn’t have wanted to invest in at that time.
but in the end there is no gardner detroit is mercedes mack is volvo ■■■■■■■ and cat are out of europe ,kenworth,s and petes move whit DAF ,and the american flag is down,sorry,scania volvo mercedes iveco and daf(paccar)rules western word,THAT;S A FACT,isn,t it how do you change that to your favor,cf man of knowledge,hej benkku(and wrighting isn,t so god i,m a finn, so i,m arguing whit one hand thied behind my back)
Hiya …gardner was,nt even bothered about truck sales, they made engines for the waters where there was no
nasty little minisry or vosa men to moan about black smoke or emissions. i know of a chap(now passed on) who
could sell 25year old gardner engines to china by the thousand.he was worth millions.
John