If I may add a dose of impertinence to Monsieur Saviem’s line of questioning: why did Gardner not simply buy a few more machines and build the engines itself? If Kromhout et al could make money out of it, then surely Gardner could make more, for much of the fixed costs were already covered.
[zb]
anorak:
If I may add a dose of impertinence to Monsieur Saviem’s line of questioning: why did Gardner not simply buy a few more machines and build the engines itself? If Kromhout et al could make money out of it, then surely Gardner could make more, for much of the fixed costs were already covered.
Impertinence 
It appears that anything thta doesn’t conform to the theory that Gardner Engines were the best thing since sliced bread is viewed as impertinence by some 
The thread did disolve into a bit of a farce, if you are of the opinion that a discussion can only be ‘between the lines’ personally I think that a lot of good information has been revealed, some of it because of the tangential nature of Carryfast’s (let’s call a spade a spade) postings, so if those tangential posts were not made, who know’s if the responses with good information would’ve ever been posted 
If a thread does not happen to take a path that you’re happy with, here’s an idea…post something yourself that takes it in the direction you think it should go Don’t whine about someone else’s posts if you’re not putting anything of relevance yourself
That isn’t aimed at anyone in particular, just the rules of the site and some common sense, attack the posts, by putting your own view of the subject down in words, do not attack the posters, just because they post something you disagree with
Carry on as you were… 
Saviem:
The licence built Gardners had Kromhout, cast into the rocker covers, and I was told gave 140hp, a good power to weight ratio for 12tonnes! (at the time)!!!
That seems to have identified at least some of the reasons for Gardner’s problems and actually seems to support some of my arguments.What was needed was a minimum 10-12 hp per tonne design gross weight on all British manufactured trucks at least from 1961 although admittedly trucks made for the export market to pull roadtrains would have had that limit reduced ‘slightly’.
Wether that would have done anything to improve the sales of Gardner engines is another matter. 
Carryfast:
What was needed was a minimum 10-12 hp per tonne design gross weight on all British manufactured trucks at least from 1961 although admittedly trucks made for the export market to pull roadtrains would have had that limit reduced ‘slightly’.
In 1961, no manufacturer in Europe produced a top-weight lorry with more than about 200bhp (excluding odd military tractors, special type etc.) Who would have bought a 300+bhp Gardner, or any other type, at that time?
Here are some specifications to compare:
1958 6LX- 150bhp@1700rpm; 485lbft@1000-1100rpm.
1958 Scania D10- 165bhp@2200rpm, 455lbft@1200rpm
1961 Scania DS10- 205bhp, 550lbft.
Until about 1960, Gardner was well in the mix.
Were there any 8LXs built? I can’t find any reference to them.
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
What was needed was a minimum 10-12 hp per tonne design gross weight on all British manufactured trucks at least from 1961 although admittedly trucks made for the export market to pull roadtrains would have had that limit reduced ‘slightly’.In 1961, no manufacturer in Europe produced a top-weight lorry with more than about 200bhp (excluding odd military tractors, special type etc.) Who would have bought a 300+bhp Gardner, or any other type, at that time?
Here are some specifications to compare:
1958 6LX- 150bhp@1700rpm; 485lbft@1000-1100rpm.
1958 Scania D10- 165bhp@2200rpm, 455lbft@1200rpm
1961 Scania DS10- 205bhp, 550lbft.
Until about 1960, Gardner was well in the mix.Were there any 8LXs built? I can’t find any reference to them.
Only 4 years later the colonial markets were being offered up to 400 hp + options by the US competition.
While obviously 200 hp + seems to be documented as being available in both British export market products and German domestic market products before 1960.The British competition at those levels doesn’t seem to have involved any Gardner engine options.
That’s why it’s important to mix the demands and possibilities available in the export markets (outside Europe) with the potential ideas of what could/should have been happening,with at least British products,in the domestic,euro,and colonial markets on an integrated basis concerning rationalisation of design and componentry throughout.It’s obvious that Gardner wouldn’t have survived much after 1960 in that type of British truck manufacturing environment.
Although having said that it was mainly meant as a humourous view of Saviem’s power to weight comparison hence the .
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
What was needed was a minimum 10-12 hp per tonne design gross weight on all British manufactured trucks at least from 1961 although admittedly trucks made for the export market to pull roadtrains would have had that limit reduced ‘slightly’.In 1961, no manufacturer in Europe produced a top-weight lorry with more than about 200bhp (excluding odd military tractors, special type etc.) Who would have bought a 300+bhp Gardner, or any other type, at that time?
Here are some specifications to compare:
1958 6LX- 150bhp@1700rpm; 485lbft@1000-1100rpm.
1958 Scania D10- 165bhp@2200rpm, 455lbft@1200rpm
1961 Scania DS10- 205bhp, 550lbft.
Until about 1960, Gardner was well in the mix.Were there any 8LXs built? I can’t find any reference to them.
Scania offering 205 bhp in '61,i would think running at much higher weights than us and we had virtually no motorways back then
ramone:
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
What was needed was a minimum 10-12 hp per tonne design gross weight on all British manufactured trucks at least from 1961 although admittedly trucks made for the export market to pull roadtrains would have had that limit reduced ‘slightly’.In 1961, no manufacturer in Europe produced a top-weight lorry with more than about 200bhp (excluding odd military tractors, special type etc.) Who would have bought a 300+bhp Gardner, or any other type, at that time?
Here are some specifications to compare:
1958 6LX- 150bhp@1700rpm; 485lbft@1000-1100rpm.
1958 Scania D10- 165bhp@2200rpm, 455lbft@1200rpm
1961 Scania DS10- 205bhp, 550lbft.
Until about 1960, Gardner was well in the mix.Were there any 8LXs built? I can’t find any reference to them.
Scania offering 205 bhp in '61,i would think running at much higher weights than us and we had virtually no motorways back then
We weren’t exactly running at very low GCW’s/GTW’s either and we did have dual carriageways and hills.No surprise that the typical Brit drawbar outfit wasn’t usually powered by a Gardner.
heritagecommercials.com/news … the-dream1
But the only reason why we weren’t using Leyland Hippo/Buffalo type outfits in competition with the Germans Krupp and Merc type ones was because of the poverty spec trucks which made up the demand in the domestic market at the time compared to ze Germans and the Gardner engine,together with backward uncomfortable cab design, etc was the main example of that issue.
The Leyland 680 Power Plus engine was rated at 200bhp and in the early 60’s it was,I believe,the sharpest most powerful engine in use within the general British transport industry,albeit not as frugal or as reliable as the Gardner 150LX but the 680 was a far better performer at 32 ton (and above !) in 8 wheeler and trailer form !! Cheers Bewick.
Out of intrest say around 1970 how much would a premium British tractor unit say Atkinson borderer with a Gardner engine cost compared to a new scania 110
kr79:
Out of intrest say around 1970 how much would a premium British tractor unit say Atkinson borderer with a Gardner engine cost compared to a new scania 110
My distant memory tells me that the 110’s and F88’s were a bit cheaper than the 180LXB chassis,they had to be as the Scandinavian offerings were still viewed with some sceptism by the established hauliers at that period.I also recall that the Scania was offered at net price or maybe just a small discount for a volume order.Scania,of course,did themselves no good by pushing the “80” as a 30/32 ton competitor to the 180LXB’s,although the 80’s were nice little motors on the face of it they were’nt up to the job IMO ! Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
kr79:
Out of intrest say around 1970 how much would a premium British tractor unit say Atkinson borderer with a Gardner engine cost compared to a new scania 110My distant memory tells me that the 110’s and F88’s were a bit cheaper than the 180LXB chassis,they had to be as the Scandinavian offerings were still viewed with some sceptism by the established hauliers at that period.I also recall that the Scania was offered at net price or maybe just a small discount for a volume order.
That maybe confirms a lot of rumours that were going around the British factories that not only were they turning out backward products based on that ‘scepticism’ of the domestic old guard customer base towards any ideas of introducing newer better products.But they were also turning out overpriced products even though the workers were actually being paid less than their foreign counterparts because of the combination of outdated production tooling,while the bankers and investors wanted quick and excessive returns on the small amounts of capital which they were prepared to invest in British industry.In addition to which were issues related to predatory pricing policies with products sold at a loss by the foreign manufacturers to get a foothold in the British market just like many other parts of British industry were being subjected to like the steel industry and the mining industry amongst others. .
I’m sure I read on this thread there was a £1000 premium on a Gardner engined erf in the 70s and I know by the mid 80s a foden 4300 8 wheeler had a 4.5k premium for a Gardner compared to a cat engine
newmercman:
[zb]
anorak:
If I may add a dose of impertinence to Monsieur Saviem’s line of questioning: why did Gardner not simply buy a few more machines and build the engines itself? If Kromhout et al could make money out of it, then surely Gardner could make more, for much of the fixed costs were already covered.Impertinence
It appears that anything thta doesn’t conform to the theory that Gardner Engines were the best thing since sliced bread is viewed as impertinence by some
The thread did disolve into a bit of a farce, if you are of the opinion that a discussion can only be ‘between the lines’ personally I think that a lot of good information has been revealed, some of it because of the tangential nature of Carryfast’s (let’s call a spade a spade) postings, so if those tangential posts were not made, who know’s if the responses with good information would’ve ever been posted
If a thread does not happen to take a path that you’re happy with, here’s an idea…post something yourself that takes it in the direction you think it should go
That isn’t aimed at anyone in particular, just the rules of the site and some common sense, attack the posts, by putting your own view of the subject down in words, do not attack the posters, just because they post something you disagree with
Carry on as you were…
@nmm, as we are now calling a ‘spade a spade’ I can only assume that the majority of your post was aimed at me and as far as I am aware I haven’t breached any rules of the site, I certainly haven’t received any email’s from admin or been put on pre-mod 
My post was a critique of Mr. Carryfast’s continual disruption of interesting threads that then leave other less knowledgeable people feeling unable to contribute, even the OP was ‘inclined to agree’ with my post so I think that speak volumes. As for me being unhappy because it is not going down the path I desire Well you couldn’t be further from the truth I’m a ■■■■■■■ man myself and have only ever driven a Gardner engined lorry, a Guy Big J, about 100 yds when my Foden S80 (220 ■■■■■■■■ wouldn’t fit under the bay at some steelstock holders in 1976. I am not a technician or an engineer but I have diesel in my blood and that come’s from sitting between my dad’s legs at 3yr old and steering a Leyland Super Comet Artic loaded with steel into it’s ■■■■■■■■■■■■ for the weekend, that was 1957, and I knew from then what I would do in the future. My apprenticeship into the haulage game started in 1970 at your typical local haulage company running about 20 artics from a variety of manufacturer’s and my memory’s of the Gardener engined trucks are that all the driver’s moaned about them being slow but the 3/4 that had ■■■■■■■■ engined truck’s only ever moaned about the job & money not the truck.
I didn’t know it was part of the forum rules that you had to contribute to a thread before you were able to make a post on it though that is a new one on me but as this thread had become too technical and had strayed so far from the OP’s topic that I felt unable to contribute but have really enjoyed, and learnt, a lot of interesting thing’s that I certainly didn’t know previously even from some of carryfast’s contribution’s
Anyway just to show that I do know a little bit of stuff about the Gardner engine I do have something to contribute, so here we go, back in the summer of 1966 I was on holiday in Ramsgate, as a family we always seemed to go to Kent for our holiday’s, so we were in a B & B and one of the other guest’s had this big Rolls Royce car parked right outside and was kind of being a bit of a show off with it. My old man was interested in this chaps car and I think he was a bit jealous also, but after chatting to chap for ages he lift’s the bonnet and low & behold it had a Gardner diesel engine in it, I can only presume it was a 4LK as shown in an earlier post in the Jaguar It was June 1966 and even though the weather was gorgeous everybody seemed to be in the B & B’s watching telly Can’t say I’ve ever really been into football Always been into trucks and always will be 
Regards
Dave Penn;
hiya,
CF I think you’ll find lots of wag and drag operators used Gardner
power, Sutton’s and Holt Lane are a couple that come to mind, I
was mainly Leyland and AEC powered but came across lots of the
Gardner powered outfits, are you British by the way??.
thanks harry, long retired.
harry_gill:
hiya,
CF I think you’ll find lots of wag and drag operators used Gardner
power, Sutton’s and Holt Lane are a couple that come to mind, I
was mainly Leyland and AEC powered but came across lots of the
Gardner powered outfits, are you British by the way??.
thanks harry, long retired.
He’s not “British” as we know it “H” 'cause 'es a Suverner 'aint 'e !! Cheers Dennis.
kr79:
I’m sure I read on this thread there was a £1000 premium on a Gardner engined erf in the 70s and I know by the mid 80s a foden 4300 8 wheeler had a 4.5k premium for a Gardner compared to a cat engine
The premium was reinforced by restricting the supply of engines or, at least, failing to increase production in line with demand. Implausible though it seems, this is factual (see Bewick’s earlier post). The sensible- one would have thought- strategy would have been to invest in whatever facilities were required to supply the extra volume of product, and take the profit.
Bewick:
harry_gill:
hiya,
CF I think you’ll find lots of wag and drag operators used Gardner
power, Sutton’s and Holt Lane are a couple that come to mind, I
was mainly Leyland and AEC powered but came across lots of the
Gardner powered outfits, are you British by the way??.
thanks harry, long retired.He’s not “British” as we know it “H” 'cause 'es a Suverner 'aint 'e !! Cheers Dennis.
And vat’s why I fink vat an AEC 8 wheeler was a better motor to pull a trailer wiv at least when it had a load on the back.Unless you’re saying vat ver fing was actually French,or even German , because it was made nearer to Calais van Manchester and where a Gardner powered Atki would av bin.
kr79:
Out of intrest say around 1970 how much would a premium British tractor unit say Atkinson borderer with a Gardner engine cost compared to a new scania 110
Evening all, a question to strain the old grey cells kr79!
Dennis is right on the general pricing policy, Scandanavians v UK. Particularly the nett price marketing attempt by the Importers, to escape the ludicrous “how much discount do I get”, mentality that had beset the UK manufacturers dealerships. Remember also that rampant inflation had beset the economy, labour disputes were rife, and as a consequence component supply to manufacturers was sporadic to say the least. I stand to be corrected, but I seem to remember in 1971 that Leyland chassis prices increased five times!!
As a benchmark, a vehicle manufacturer would supply “his” dealers with a standard product at list price less 20%, with an agreed period of credit before payment was due.The dealer then sold to an end user at list price, less an amount of discount based on trading history, or if the end user operated a competitors product, say a range of list less,10%, 12.5% or 15%. If a large volume was involved, then discount could be list less 17.5%, or even greater if “Factory support”, in terms of over riding bonus was available. Normally if a part exchange was involved then the dealer would retain say 2.5% of his margin, and use the remainder to wards the overall value of the part exchange, but the operator would receive no additional discount.
But bear in mind with the rate of inflation, a chassis may have been delivered to the Dealer at one price, but when it came to be a “live sale”, the list price may have been plus5% upwards on the original price! So there was room to move, either in terms of additional discount, or increased part exchange allowance!
In the case of Scania, and Volvo, selling into a market where overall retail cost of product was lower than in their domestic market, but having inflationary pressure by virtue of sourcing components from the UK, they controlled the inflationary cost of their product by keeping the chassis prices relatively static, but loaded the overall component prices , sold through the Dealership parts departments in relative terms. As a simple illustration, Some of you will remember the astronomic prices of F88 brake drums, in comparison to those of domestic manufacturers.
To develop Dealer profitability it was essential to incorporate a healthy “front end” profit element in chassis sales. Hence the move to market at nett prices, with no “shown” discount. For Scania it was fairly easy, a small number of Dealer/Importers, all intent on establishing themselves, and not keen on joining the “hurly burly” of the UK vehicle scene, with its inherent low margins. However this was to change when Scania took over the exclusive importation itself, in the late 70s.
Volvo however found it more difficult, larger network, greater volume of product, and an independent Dealer network, under the main importer, Ailsa Truck. The Volvo Dealer who I worked for in the early 70s had as a main strength the incredibly good after sales area. This sold us more lorries, new and used, than anything else. And we sold at nett. Then came the first discounting, if I remember correctly, Tates, then Crossroads, were the first to break rank, and the rest is history…a gradual decimation of margins!
So that is a bit of background, but the detail, now that does test the little grey cells, 1970, ■■■■■■■ 205, Borderer, 5500, 180LXB 6500, 1972 Seddon Rolls220, 6600, F86 6600nett, F88 7500nett . The Scania equivelents were slightly more expensive, and the 180LXB option similar to the F88. Those that actually paid their own money out will shoot me down if my memories as bad as my knees!!
Happy days, and full of memories, most of them happy, but now a little ago! Cheerio for now.
Again from my distant memory I believe that Gardners were quite wrongly blamed for the “premium” that was charged by the assemblers for a Gardner powered chassis.It was,in fact,the likes of Foden,Atkinson and ERF that took full advantage of the situation and it was they who charged a “premium” and passed the perceived blame back to Gardner!! Gardner spares,from memory,were no dearer than ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ in some cases. It’s a bit like to-days travel agents “jacking up” the price of holidays in the school holidays and then blaming,most unfairly,the Hoteliers, Airlines etc !! When the greedy ■■■■■■■■ bulk buy all their holidays well in advance at usually deep discounts ! Cheers Bewick.
Saviem:
kr79:
Out of intrest say around 1970 how much would a premium British tractor unit say Atkinson borderer with a Gardner engine cost compared to a new scania 110Evening all, a question to strain the old grey cells kr79!
Dennis is right on the general pricing policy, Scandanavians v UK. Particularly the nett price marketing attempt by the Importers, to escape the ludicrous “how much discount do I get”, mentality that had beset the UK manufacturers dealerships. Remember also that rampant inflation had beset the economy, labour disputes were rife, and as a consequence component supply to manufacturers was sporadic to say the least. I stand to be corrected, but I seem to remember in 1971 that Leyland chassis prices increased five times!!
The ‘rampant inflation’ happened after that Saviem because it was joining the EEC and the 1973 Arab Israeli war that caused it when the Arabs doubled the price of oil overnight by cutting back supplies.
It was 9.5% in 1971 but 24% in 1975.The difference was that the unions were still keeping wages inline in 1971 which actually helped the economy unlike later when they effectively gave up trying and then let Thatcher get in.No surprise that unemployment went through the roof and inflation was 18% in 1980.