hiya,
Take cover CF no doubt there are some Sun readers on here,I for one,
I also read the Mail, and although you may think i’m lacking intelligence
I would zip my gob if all I could spout was garbage.
thanks harry, long retired.
harry_gill:
hiya,
Take cover CF no doubt there are some Sun readers on here,I for one,
I also read the Mail, and although you may think i’m lacking intelligence
I would zip my gob if all I could spout was garbage.
thanks harry, long retired.
I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma. 
You’re obviously not a Scouser though. 
Carryfast:
harry_gill:
hiya,
Take cover CF no doubt there are some Sun readers on here,I for one,
I also read the Mail, and although you may think i’m lacking intelligence
I would zip my gob if all I could spout was garbage.
thanks harry, long retired.I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma.
You’re obviously not a Scouser though.
hiya,
Bootle actually, not being very intelligent does that still come under the
Liverpool area ■■, did leave when I was a little lad, it was L/pool 20 in
those far off days.
thanks harry, long retired.
Carryfast:
I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma.
So says the man who calls the purchasers of a certain type of vehicle “Thatcherites”, in an attempt to counter the arguments of a diverse range of people who give no indication of their politics, but who have abundant experience of purchasing vehicles.
Increase the dosage please, nurse.
harry_gill:
Carryfast:
harry_gill:
hiya,
Take cover CF no doubt there are some Sun readers on here,I for one,
I also read the Mail, and although you may think i’m lacking intelligence
I would zip my gob if all I could spout was garbage.
thanks harry, long retired.I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma.
You’re obviously not a Scouser though.
hiya,
Bootle actually, not being very intelligent does that still come under the
Liverpool area ■■, did leave when I was a little lad, it was L/pool 20 in
those far off days.
thanks harry, long retired.
So you’ve never thought of going back for a look round and going in the local cafe for a cuppa while you’re reading the Sun. 
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma.So says the man who calls the purchasers of a certain type of vehicle “Thatcherites”, in an attempt to counter the arguments of a diverse range of people who give no indication of their politics, but who have abundant experience of purchasing vehicles.
Increase the dosage please, nurse.
I DON’T KNOW WHY YOU BOTHER.Where ignorance is bliss it’s folly to be wise.You just feed C/F’s overblown ego.
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
I sometimes read the Mail and the Mirror but the clever bit is being able to base a view on objective facts not political dogma.So says the man who calls the purchasers of a certain type of vehicle “Thatcherites”, in an attempt to counter the arguments of a diverse range of people who give no indication of their politics, but who have abundant experience of purchasing vehicles.
Increase the dosage please, nurse.
No it’s just when those ‘purchasers’,of those gutless backward heaps then try to put the blame for the fact,( that,not surprisingly,fitting those boat anchors in British trucks,actually cost the British truck manufacturing industry more than they were worth in lost development of something better and credibility later when those customers ‘eventually’ realised that theyd been wrong in putting fuel consumption ahead of productivety ),on underpaid skilled British workers striking when the only choice open to them was either walking away from the job for better pay somewhere else or striking for a better deal.Which according to ‘the experts’ seems to have been part of the issues which brought Gardner down.While forgetting that the same issues applied throughout the British manufacturing industry for the reasons I’ve given.
Gardner’s problem wasn’t it’s workforce it was the fact that it should have been closed down long before it was.While it’s customers should have been demanding and then buying better US based products from the domestic manufacturers so they could compete with the foreign invasion in just the same way as Kenworth Australia managed to compete with Scania and Volvo in the colonies.
As it is all we hear is how good Gardner was and then how it’s workforce then helped to bring it down while it’s customers walked away to buy the more powerful Scandinavian and European competition when they ‘eventually’ knew better.Within that contradiction is contained the argument that shoots the Thatcherites down. 
PART 12,GARDNER ENGINES,PAGE 39.
I’ve been going to reply to several posts on this Thread,but I’ve been busy doing some other things,including writing about Foden Sabrinas and Spaceships on another Website 
.
Gingerfold.Page 35.
According to Graham Turner,AEC-ACV was in trouble in 1957,but had totally recovered and was back in profit by 1962 and indeed had outgunned Leyland in the South African market .What spurred Leyland to merge with AEC was that AEC had had talks with BMC about merging,but since Leyland didn’t want this to happen,Leyland had talks with AEC.
Because BMC was nearly in the red in 1962,the AEC - BMC talks fell through,but AEC still felt
that it had to merge with someone.So we all know what happened:AEC very misguidedly merged with Leyland : .
Windrush.Page 35.
Several motorcars from the 1930s onwards were fitted with Gardner Diesel Engines,including a
1935 Lagonda LG45 4-door Saloon Motorcar,painted black,and powered by either a Gardner 4LK or
Gardner 4LW Diesel Engine,or even one of those special 4LK Car Diesel Engines,which produced 85
BHP at 3000 RPM and 175 Lbs Ft of torque at 1000 RPM.Reportedly only forty of these special
high performance engines were made.The above Lagonda was owned by travelling Yorkshire showman,
Walter Shaw,and these photographs could show that very same Lagonda:-
flickr.com/photos/13999789@N … 91417@N22/
Travelling showmen not only use Gardner 3LW,4LW,6LW,6LX,LXB,6LXC,etc,engines to power generators,they also use 4LK engines.One 4LK generator set that I remember well was owned by John Tuby,of Doncaster.It used to run his round stalls,childrens rides and refreshments canteen for years and years ,and I occassionaly use to watch and listen to this engine -I can hear it’s music now . I think that this 4LK is now preserved - I hope! - It was replaced with a modern Japanese soundproof Isuzu Diesel Generator Set in around 2003.
Windrush.Page 38.
“I have no personal experience of the 6LYT engine but I believe that it certainly had problems that presumably could have been overcome eventually had the factory continued. An old work colleague had the last Gardner LYT engine produced, fitted in a Foden, but he only used it on the show circuit and has now sold it on. The engine was certainly different to the standard LXC etc, the timing gears and pump drive were at the flywheel end for one thing, but Gingerfold will know a lot more about the engine and hopefully will explain its shortcomings. I suppose that it just didn’t have the development time afforded it as, lets face it, the LX, LXB and LXC engines were just basically updated LW’s which had been around for 50+ years and were well proven units, though even the 6LXC had teething troubles and required modifications in use (change of heads back to LXB type for instance).”
Gardner’s new 6LXDT-270-290 and 6LYT-320-350 Diesel Engines of 1984 had their development funds
cut by Hawker Siddeley,because of the 1980s recession,thus these engines were underdeveloped and had quality control problems.The 38 tonnes GTW for road haulage lorries had come in in 1983,Time had run out for Gardner,which was under pressure to come out with the new engine range fast!
As I’ve said before in an earlier post:Some of the engines were bad:The Gardner 6LYT of a Foden S10 fell to bits and pieces on the road;And some of the engines were good:Some Gardner 6LYT engines,for example,gave trouble-free service in Neoplan motorcoaches .
Perkins Engines of Peterborough took over Gardner in 1986,and the new range was modified and re-developed.Some of the engines were re-designated and uprated and the aftercooled and turbocharged YTI350 marine engine was developed from the 6LYT.The 6LYT had the potential to be developed to produce 400 BHP and more - and a bored-out version bored-out from 15.5 litres to say 16 to 17 litres or more could have produced 700 BHP or more .
5Valve.Page 37.
Another major factor that let Gardner down,apart making underpowered engines,and the long waiting lists for them,was that,unlike ■■■■■■■ which has overseas engine factories -and along with Detroit,Caterpillar and Rolls-Royce Perkins - competed in most if not all of the world’s automotive,industriaL,rail and marine engine markets,Gardner was mainly reliant on their homemarket.And therefore lacked the economy of scale.
Yes,Neoplan did fit many Gardner 6LYT Diesel Engines in to some of their motorcoaches,including
six Neoplan 922/Plaxton Paramount 4000 6x2 Double Decker Motorcoaches,operated by Yorkshire Traction,and both the engines and motorcoaches gave years of high-mileage service .
Although I was told that,due to a lack of Gardner service back up in Europe,at least some
Neoplan motorcoach operators had their Gardner 6LYT Neoplan motorcoaches re-engined with
Mercedes-Benz,Scania,■■■■■■■ engines,etc.
Newmercman.Page 37.
To receive an order from a well-respected military force,such as the American Army,or the Royal
Air Force,whomever,who demand the utmost reliability and performance from the equipment that they buy,be it radio communications gear,radar,military vehicles,military aeroplanes,etc,is a great accolade 
. I now quote you “You keep banging on about 8V92s and 3408 CATs, they’re both boat anchors too, unreliable and thirsty”… .I do know that the American Forces places great reliance on the Detroit 8V92 Two Stroke Diesel Engine,because it powers some major tactical transport military vehicles,including the magnificent Oshkosh M1070E Heavy Equipment/Tank Transporter :-
commercialmotor.com/big-lorr … he-oshkosh
And I’m pretty sure that the Caterpillar 3408 Diesel Engine is also reliable,powerful and frugal to some extent .
To the members in general.
I pointed out several pages back,as have other members,that it was the motor vehicle manufacturers that added the £1000 surcharge on to every Gardner engine that was fitted in to lorries,buses and motorcoaches.This scheme started in 1964 at the 1964 Commerical Vehicle Motor Show,and remained in force until the end of Gardner automotive engine production in 1994.
The motor vehicle makers wanted to encourage vehicle buyers to purchase ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
Perkins,Leyland,Rolls-Royce engines,etc,in to their new vehicles because :-
1.These engines were generally more powerful than Gardner engines .
2.These engine makers could deliver on time,and there would hardly be any waiting lists .
3.These engines were generally financially cheaper than Gardner engines - surcharge or no surcharge .
4.Because of Gardner waiting lists,underpowered Gardner engines and the general fuddy duddy Gardner attitude,vehicle makers who offered Gardner engines were losing sales big style to competitors such as AEC,Volvo,Leyland,Scania,Mercedes-Benz,etc.And we saw this in action in the re-printed Commercial Motor artice on Page 38 of this Thread:-
"Ron wanted to place an order for 20 B-Series 8LXB-engined units with ERF or, as a second choice, to purchase Foden lorries powered by the same type of diesel. In March he was told by ERF that he might get three units in 1975 and that the first would be delivered in June; Foden advised him that he would have to wait indefinitely."So Ron Sinclair bought mainly Volvo F88 Tractive Units instead .
Gardner:What a terriable,tumbledown,fuddy duddy way to run (if it can be called that! 
) it’s business.There is no wonder why Gardner went bust!
(In a frank comment on British Leyland, Ron Sinclair told me “We had a long and happy association with AEC before Leyland took over.” Yeah! And that was one of the main reasons why Leyland eventually went out of business,too! )
There have been three kinds of lorry,motorcoach and bus operator:-
1.The all Gardner engine fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits .
2.The Gardner and other engine marques fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits .
3.The non-Gardner engine fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits .
4.And today.So far as buying new motor vehicles are concerned,there is only one type of lorry,
motorcoach and bus operator:Fleets which have no Gardner engines.And these operators are satisfied and make respectable profits .
This Gardner Engines Thread is very interesting and educational.But it cannot alter the status
quo of the past,present and future as stated in the above four points …even though some
of the posters on this thread might have tried to do so!
As I’ve stated on this thread before,more powerful engines than Gardner engines did not have to
work as hard as Gardner engines,so in some jobs and/or conditions,the more powerful,say AEC,■■■■■■■ and Foden engines,returned more economical fuel consumptions than the Gardner engines - and there was less wear and tear on the clutches,gearboxes (less gearchanges) and on the vehicles in general .
A Foden two stroke diesel-engined lorry not only out-performed (naturally! ) a Gardner-engined
lorry in a Commercial Motor roadtest,but the Foden was also proved to be more economical,or at
least equalled the Gardner’s fuel consumption .And that was the status quo as well!
But do not get me wrong:As I’ve already said elsewhere in other posts on this Thread:I’ve
always admired Gardner engines,they were probably the Rolls-Royces of Diesel Engines,the
Gardner slogan was:Gardner: Efficiency, Durability and Refinement …,I would never have operated
underpowered Gardner-engined vehicles - but I would preserve at least one example .
VALKYRIE.
VALKYRIE:
5Valve.Page 37.
Another major factor that let Gardner down,apart making underpowered engines,Gardner was mainly reliant on their homemarket.And therefore lacked the economy of scale.There have been three kinds of lorry,motorcoach and bus operator:-
1.The all Gardner engine fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits2.The Gardner and other engine marques fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits
3.The non-Gardner engine fleets.These operators were satisfied and made respectable profits
4.And today.So far as buying new motor vehicles are concerned,there is only one type of lorry,
motorcoach and bus operator:Fleets which have no Gardner engines.And these operators are satisfied and make respectable profitsThis Gardner Engines Thread is very interesting and educational.But it cannot alter the status
quo of the past,present and future as stated in the above four points
of the posters on this thread might have tried to do so!VALKYRIE.
^ This.
+
5.There are no engine manufacturers or designers today saying that the productivety/fuel efficiency equation could be improved by reducing outputs back again,to the level of power (torque) to gross weight ratios,which applied to max weight trucks powered by naturally aspirated Gardner engines. Which probably explains why loyal Gardner customers like Bewick walked away and went on to use turbocharged V8 Scanias and Mercs in total contradiction to the idea that using the underpowered Gardner engine in trucks was a better money maker.
Look here “CF” all this technical jargon is making my ■■■■■■■ teeth itch!!Can I just say that I stopped buying Gardner engined motors for other reasons as well,not only because of the engine.A main reason was the,then,dealers for ERF and Sed/Atk had become a complete waste of time and ,of course,both their ,then,offerings had fallen way behind Volvo and Scania who were,of course,both vertically intergrated manufactures which I had come to believe was the way forward.So,my son,it was never just a case of “sod Gardeners” as I’ve said previously,we never had a bad Gardner engine and those we ran did us an excellent job,and it’s quite obvious by the tone of your rantings you’ve never had much to do with the sharp end of a haulage business where economy and reliability were the difference between “profit and loss”.Fair enough,I had no further dealings with Gardner after the last two 265LXC’s joined our fleet in '84,maybe if I had persevered with Gardners and had been on the receiving end of what later transpired I might have formed a different opinion,but I didn’t run any Turbo’d Gardners so I can only speak of the time prior to their demise.The same apply’s to the reasons I kicked ■■■■■■■ into touch,the 250 ■■■■■■■ was one thirsty engine,but the 180/205 and 220 ■■■■■■■ were fine reliable engines !! So as far as I’m concerned “CF” you can stick the DD’s et al where the “sun don’t shine”,or in your case “where the monkey stuffed the nuts!” I reckon the vehicle buying policy we had,at that time,at Bewick Transport was as good as could be achieved bearing in mind the vagaries and general operating conditions we had to contend with.Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
Look here “CF” all this technical jargon is making my [zb] teeth itch!!Can I just say that I stopped buying Gardner engined motors for other reasons as well,not only because of the engine.A main reason was the,then,dealers for ERF and Sed/Atk had become a complete waste of time and ,of course,both their ,then,offerings had fallen way behind Volvo and Scania who were,of course,both vertically intergrated manufactures which I had come to believe was the way forward.So,my son,it was never just a case of “sod Gardeners” as I’ve said previously,we never had a bad Gardner engine and those we ran did us an excellent job,and it’s quite obvious by the tone of your rantings you’ve never had much to do with the sharp end of a haulage business where economy and reliability were the difference between “profit and loss”.Fair enough,I had no further dealings with Gardner after the last two 265LXC’s joined our fleet in '84,maybe if I had persevered with Gardners and had been on the receiving end of what later transpired I might have formed a different opinion,but I didn’t run any Turbo’d Gardners so I can only speak of the time prior to their demise.The same apply’s to the reasons I kicked ■■■■■■■ into touch,the 250 ■■■■■■■ was one thirsty engine,but the 180/205 and 220 ■■■■■■■ were fine reliable engines !! So as far as I’m concerned “CF” you can stick the DD’s et al where the “sun don’t shine”,or in your case “where the monkey stuffed the nuts!” I reckon the vehicle buying policy we had,at that time,at Bewick Transport was as good as could be achieved bearing in mind the vagaries and general operating conditions we had to contend with.Cheers Bewick.
I think you’ve missed the point which I was making,concerning the contradiction,in the fact that many previous Gardner powered truck operators,including yourself if I’ve read it right 
,made the leap in thinking from the type of power to weight ratios provided by something like a 180 or a 240-265 Gardner to something like a V8 Scania or Merc.My point is that many of the customers in foreign markets had made a similar type of leap in thinking a lot earlier. Which is one of the reasons why the American,Scandinavian,and European manufacturers got a head start on ours which ours would never have been able to make up even if the money had been there and if the British manufacturers could have somehow competed with the economies of scale which applied in the case of at least the US manufacturers.Especially Gardner being the furthest behind of them all.
However it would have been interesting to have compared the overall running costs of an 8V92,3406/8 or turbocharged ■■■■■■■ powered Kenworth with the V8 Merc running at 38 t gross.Although it’s obvious that turbocharging the Merc engine made it a much more powerful,and therefore more efficient,engine,than it had been in it’s naturally aspirated form.
But I think the colonial markets might have already answered that question,just as they had long before with the 8V71 and 335 + ■■■■■■■ etc etc,being that those operators were never in business to throw money away.
This is my first visit to this thread for weeks and serves to confirm why Ive stayed away. I would have thought that Saviems first concept was the pro s and con s of operating not operating Gardner engines or at the very least the merits of this once popular diesel motor, not a bit of it we ve gone thru the whole range of everything from the compression ratio to the stroke to relative power outputs to max torque at y plus x rpm. you ve all gone beyond the pale the bottom line is if they were any good we would still have them ,put them to bed. Crow.
geoffthecrowtaylor:
I would have thought that Saviems first concept was the pro s and con s of operating or at the very least the merits of this once popular diesel motor, the bottom line is if they were any good we would still have them ,put them to bed. Crow.
Which is why the ■■■■■■■ N14,CAT 3406/8,Detroit 8V92 and Scania V8 have all outlived them by decades not just years and Saviem did ask what caused the loss of Gardner’s market and customers.
CF I m sure that Bollingersbest customer will disagree with that and lets not forget that it was nt a discussion about the relative merits of Gardners versus the US two strokes you keep referring to.
Solly:
Saviem:
Dear CF, you should, (but I expect that you are considerably younger than I), have worked in a family business, where your wages depended on each others efforts. What it was really like to be a driver, (chauffer routier…professional, a person of integrity and skill), Or in a" foreign" truck factory, with a communist union, where you learned all about “the workers”, (and how those luddites destroyed the whole effort! Dear CF, you are a sad person, and I feel pity for your lack of background…Excuse my intervention here…Saviem…but are you suggesting “The workers” were responsible for the downfall of British engine and chassis manufacturing?
No Solly, I was refering to my time, (compulsory “education”, before you could do a job in marketing/sales, in Saviem), working “on the line” at the old shipyard that was Blainville. And I loved every second of it!! Bloody hard graft, and working with people with an “eclectric” view of life, and like factory workers everywhere they could “set you up,” but what a great time, and What fabulous individuals, and what real experience, But who had given their loyalty to the CGT, French union, whose views on the “workers rights”, could only be compared to 200% of our own current ASLEFs! Frankly, and this is a personal view, in combination with their “sun loving, …lazy” colleagues in Venissieux, they actually destroyed the potential of the merged Renault Vehicules Industriels, from becoming an independent “main player”, in the world truck market. (untill the "reversed takeover, by/of Volvo?? (but that could have happened in 1975, and saved the French taxpayer trillions of Francs/Euros)!!!
Solly, in the UK, it was a combination of absolute greedy “crap” management, and a stupid greedy workforce, who only saw the “pay packet”, coupled with politicians who had zero “civic” interest, and nil interest or understanding of “our” industry, who in concerted combination allowed it to fail!! And then wondered why!! Words fail me.
rigsby, cav551, solly, bewick, [ZB], nmm,davepenn54, thank you, yours are the sort of contributions that educate and enrich these threads, as do those of SCANIA VOLVO, (sorry VALKYRIE), or perhaps Renee pilot, (BUT FACTS, WITHOUT CONTEXT HAVE LITTLE RELEVANCE TO MOST OF US)!!
I personally am drawn to those like the Taylor Brothers, ( and kin), cav551, Solly, Bewick, Nmm, davepenn54, rigsby, harry gill, dear bma (from across a cold sea), the well researched and knowledgable Gingerfold,and 5Valve, (whose knowledge is probably greater than all of us combined!! windrush et al, Gentlemen, your contributions, and those I have not remembered, have really given substance to the original question!
Merci, I shall away to a newly opened bottle of Bollinger, (Geoff, there is no equal, le Verve,…pas comment… un boutile de¬l` huile!! Cheerio for now.
Carryfast Bewick has mentioned that he has owned 10+ gardner engines over the years how many have you owned?
Saviem:
No Solly, I was refering to my time, (compulsory “education”, before you could do a job in marketing/sales, in Saviem), working “on the line” at the old shipyard that was Blainville. And I loved every second of it!! Bloody hard graft, and working with people with an “eclectric” view of life, and like factory workers everywhere they could “set you up,” but what a great time, and What fabulous individuals, and what real experience, But who had given their loyalty to the CGT, French union, whose views on the “workers rights”, could only be compared to 200% of our own current ASLEFs! Frankly, and this is a personal view, in combination with their “sun loving, …lazy” colleagues in Venissieux, they actually destroyed the potential of the merged Renault Vehicules Industriels, from becoming an independent “main player”, in the world truck market. (untill the "reversed takeover, by/of Volvo?? (but that could have happened in 1975, and saved the French taxpayer trillions of Francs/Euros)!!!Solly, in the UK, it was a combination of absolute greedy “crap” management, and a stupid greedy workforce, who only saw the “pay packet”, coupled with politicians who had zero “civic” interest, and nil interest or understanding of “our” industry, who in concerted combination allowed it to fail!! And then wondered why!! Words fail me.
rigsby, cav551, solly, bewick, [ZB], nmm,davepenn54, thank you, yours are the sort of contributions that educate and enrich these threads, as do those of SCANIA VOLVO, (sorry VALKYRIE), or perhaps Renee pilot, (BUT FACTS, WITHOUT CONTEXT HAVE LITTLE RELEVANCE TO MOST OF US)!!
I personally am drawn to those like the Taylor Brothers, ( and kin), cav551, Solly, Bewick, Nmm, davepenn54, rigsby, harry gill, dear bma (from across a cold sea), the well researched and knowledgable Gingerfold,and 5Valve, (whose knowledge is probably greater than all of us combined!! windrush et al, Gentlemen, your contributions, and those I have not remembered, have really given substance to the original question!
Merci, I shall away to a newly opened bottle of Bollinger, (Geoff, there is no equal, le Verve,…pas comment… un boutile de¬l` huile!! Cheerio for now.
And we should never forget your contribution Saviem, yes we should never forget because you also seem to talk a lot of sense, keep up the good work!
Saviem after many years of visiting les francaises and sharing their gastronomie et les vins rouges et les fromages et paquets du Gitanes et disque bleus and amongsttheir many liquers Marie Brizard none of which has sod all to do with Gardners i am at the moment being entertained by a Canarian music group singing and playing of all things Tom Jones Delilah and they made a good job of it. There is yet another Fiesta taking place in the village where i live and right now Stevie Wonder, i just called to say i loved you , what a diverse world we all live in, magnifique,alors un whisky blendee bien sur ,apres dormir, Buenos Noches Amigos, hasta manana;CROW
Saviem:
Solly:
Saviem:
Dear CF, you should, (but I expect that you are considerably younger than I), have worked in a family business, where your wages depended on each others efforts. What it was really like to be a driver, (chauffer routier…professional, a person of integrity and skill), Or in a" foreign" truck factory, with a communist union, where you learned all about “the workers”, (and how those luddites destroyed the whole effort! Dear CF, you are a sad person, and I feel pity for your lack of background…Excuse my intervention here…Saviem…but are you suggesting “The workers” were responsible for the downfall of British engine and chassis manufacturing?
No Solly, I was refering to my time, (compulsory “education”, before you could do a job in marketing/sales, in Saviem), working “on the line” at the old shipyard that was Blainville. And I loved every second of it!! Bloody hard graft, and working with people with an “eclectric” view of life, and like factory workers everywhere they could “set you up,” but what a great time, and What fabulous individuals, and what real experience, But who had given their loyalty to the CGT, French union, whose views on the “workers rights”, could only be compared to 200% of our own current ASLEFs! Frankly, and this is a personal view, in combination with their “sun loving, …lazy” colleagues in Venissieux, they actually destroyed the potential of the merged Renault Vehicules Industriels, from becoming an independent “main player”, in the world truck market. (untill the "reversed takeover, by/of Volvo?? (but that could have happened in 1975, and saved the French taxpayer trillions of Francs/Euros)!!!
Solly, in the UK, it was a combination of absolute greedy “crap” management, and a stupid greedy workforce, who only saw the “pay packet”,
Maybe it was having been called a ‘stupid greedy workforce’ a few times too often,that caused the ones who couldn’t be bothered with all the aggro of trying to keep themselves in a living wage,to chuck the job in and go elsewhere where their srvices might have been a bit more valued.I think your time working with those French workers (who some say maybe British workers should have followed the example of,in which case maybe the British work life balance and living standards might have been a bit closer to those of France let alone Germany) which gave you a false impression of the relationship between the management and workforce (as opposed to the greedy crap bankers who ran the show) in most British factories.
Which is why workers like me,who were actually there,are happy to defend managers like Stokes and those who we worked with on the shop floor against the type of ill informed politically motivated bs.Which those with your type of views try to throw at those,who were actually trying,against all the odds (and as in my case sometimes succeeding) to keep the British truck manufacturing industry and the economy afloat,at least long enough to at least cover it’s costs and liabilities and to at least make a dent in our GDP issues and the trade deficit (which joining the EEC added to) let alone put it into surplus. 
.