Gardner ENGINES

[bassman]

Hi,Franky

Thanks for that, it seems to clear the matter of motorway speed limits up.I had forgotten about the period when trucks were limited to 70mph, shouldn’t have done really as that was the period ,late 60’s ,when I started on HGV’s
Yes ,I remember the A1 being 40mph,even the dualled stretches, and I remember Pc. Flying officer Bean used to patrol the A1 between Colsterworth and Norman’s Cross, he had a reputation of booking drivers for doing 43mph.
Sometimes a Gardner engined truck was a safe one to drive.

Cheers Bassman

[tony_taylor]

The A74 was always a notorious road for getting nicked on even though there were signs every couple of miles warning of the 40 mph limit.

[harry_gill]

Tony Taylor:
The A74 was always a notorious road for getting nicked on even though there were signs every couple of miles warning of the 40 mph limit.

hiya,
Remember getting a warning coming South on Beattock I was doing 32 flat out
with an Octopus and drawbar loaded with spuds from Dundee 14 tons on the
motor and 6 tons on the trailer only got a telling off by the elderly policeman
and him informing me that the 40 limit “disnae apply to you Jimmy” it did slow
me down till I hit the A6 though, I think the copper must have gotten a canny
free breakfast at one of the many cafe’s on that stretch which had put him in
good humour, at least no fine or points on the licence that time.
thanks harry, long retired.

[rigsby]

i was dead lucky on beattock once , fully loaded , knocked it out of collar at the top of beattock and sat back to enjoy the ride . about half way down doing top side of 70 and a paddy shot past at warp speed , when i got to coats gate for a brew the police car was there with the, paddy booking him . i thought thank you paddy that could have been me !cheers , dave

[cja1]

rigsby:
i was dead lucky on beattock once , fully loaded , knocked it out of collar at the top of beattock and sat back to enjoy the ride . about half way down doing top side of 70 and a paddy shot past at warp speed , when i got to coats gate for a brew the police car was there with the, paddy booking him . i thought thank you paddy that could have been me !cheers , dave

Quote= CJA1] Hi Dave Memories Memories, how you doin Mate Chris.

[bking]

Gardner boat engines should have stuck with boats.About as much go in em as a dead mule.Once had one fire up bloody backwards.At first couldnt figure out what was happening,smoke belchin out the air stack.
Had to stall the bugger to get it to stop.Had an old atki 401 with the straight 8 in it pulling Huktra powder barrels out of Hull.Pulling over the tops on the M62 what a soddin nightmare sure I once had a bloke in a horse and cart flashing me to pull over so he could get past.Was supposed to be Turbo charged at300 brake horse think 250 of em were lame.Then the company I worked for bought a 401 with a ■■■■■■■ 290 big cam donkey,after driving that old bloody Gardner felt like I was in a Ferrari.

Pile of bloody rubbish.

[grumpy_old_man]

Once got done on the A1 near Darrington, 40 limit, me doing 48 (a full load of what was then 4 star pet.spirit) One Older copper, one young superstar who, after telling me I WOULD be done, proceeded to start to lecture me on how to drive a petrol tanker. It didn’t go well after that between me and him, IIRC £25 fine, 3 points Old ERF with a Gardner in it.

[leylandlover]

A Gardner story.When I worked at Richard Reads a driver came in to the yard and asked,Would someone look at my engine I think the jets are blocked! A 6LW.I got the job.Bonnet up just as Ivor Read passed by.He was the foreman at the time.Filters mate filters.Ivor was a filter fanatic,If the con rod was through the side he would still want the filters changed I found the advance ■■■■■■ lever had fell off.Richard was outside the cab when I asked Ivor,Do you think that this might be the problem? I can still see the smirk on Richards face as he walked away.Happy days.

[leylandlover]

Another Gardner story.I worked at Allenways coaches in Birmingham who also ran some Atkinsons with the 180 engines.Winter time the foreman insisted they only need 4 pints of anti freeze.Monday morning after a good frost 4 drivers came in.No bloody heater.Guess who got that job? Yes poor me.Collected 4 new water pumps from S Jones at Aldridge.3 of the square drives came out o/k but the 4th was a nightmare.I also changed one for Owens transport in a layby at Raglan in the snow

[saviem]

Evening all, just a bit more sort of history,

I think that the very first attempts at Turbo-ing the Gardner were by GKN transport division, on LWs, in the mid 50s, with BSA designed and manufactured Turbochargers. Apparantly with no ill effects.

Fascinating, how the well "engineered " fleets of that time were pushing the manufacturer. I shall away to ponder such memories with a large, (Stourbridge), chrystal glass of Bollinger, Bon nuit mes braves, Cheerio for now.

Next were Bulwark Transport, their ChiefEngineer, (Reg ■■?, I know, its an age thing). Very clever engineer, ex Leyland. Concerned about lack of power for the “new”, (post 64), high weight limit of 32tons, contacted CAV, about their new turbocharger. I believe less than a week later they had one to install! This was fitted to a Seddon, 150LX. This ended up turning out an average 190hp, with a fuel consumption reduction of .7% mpg! running as a 2+3,@ 32tons. Interestingly, these chassis all ran, (reliably), without a silencer, straight through exhaust, and very quiet!!

Several more were acquired, but I understand that Hugh Gardner became “incensed”, and dictated that no engines were to be supplied to end users who would, “re-engineer to turbocharge”. Now Bulwark were a major fleet at that time, and a volume Gardner user. Can anyone verify my memories?..gingerfold■■?

[zb_anorak]

Saviem:
Next were Bulwark Transport, their ChiefEngineer, (Reg ■■?, I know, its an age thing). Very clever engineer, ex Leyland. Concerned about lack of power for the “new”, (post 64), high weight limit of 32tons, contacted CAV, about their new turbocharger. I believe less than a week later they had one to install! This was fitted to a Seddon, 150LX. This ended up turning out an average 190hp, with a fuel consumption reduction of .7% mpg! running as a 2+3,@ 32tons. Interestingly, these chassis all ran, (reliably), without a silencer, straight through exhaust, and very quiet!!

Several more were acquired, but I understand that Hugh Gardner became “incensed”, and dictated that no engines were to be supplied to end users who would, “re-engineer to turbocharge”. Now Bulwark were a major fleet at that time, and a volume Gardner user. Can anyone verify my memories?..gingerfold■■?

Sorry, did not get the bit about the fuel consumption. Did it improve by 0.7mpg or 0.7%, or did the mpg reduce by 0.7?

What effect did it have on long-term durability, I wonder? I bet this was Mr. Gardner’s concern. I also wonder if he was tempted to put competitors’ engines on a full-life rig test, to back up his theories about the ill effects of turbocharging? Did Gardner do proper laboratory durability tests on their own prototypes, or did they just “wing it”?

[valkyrie]

This is an excerpt I wrote in my post on Page 10 of the Gardner Engines Thread : by VALKYRIE » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:58 am
"Gardner Engines And Turbocharging.

This Foden S18 FGHT6/50 4x2 Heavy Haulage Road Locomotive,PBT 973,is actually powered by a TURBOCHARGED Gardner 6LW Diesel Engine! It has a Simms turbocharger,which was fitted by it’s
original operator,L.V.Brooksbank and is now preserved by this heavy haulage company:-"
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p40328673 … 41#h1f3841

This Foden ballast road locomotive dates from 1955,and it’s turbocharged Gardner 6LW K-Type engine
produced around 130 - 140 BHP - Brooksbank,being in the heavy haulage business,needed all the power that they could get!

VALKYRIE.

[carryfast]

VALKYRIE:
This is an excerpt I wrote in my post on Page 10 of the Gardner Engines Thread : by VALKYRIE » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:58 am
"Gardner Engines And Turbocharging.

This Foden S18 FGHT6/50 4x2 Heavy Haulage Road Locomotive,PBT 973,is actually powered by a TURBOCHARGED Gardner 6LW Diesel Engine! It has a Simms turbocharger,which was fitted by it’s
original operator,L.V.Brooksbank and is now preserved by this heavy haulage company:-"
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p40328673 … 41#h1f3841

This Foden ballast road locomotive dates from 1955,and it’s turbocharged Gardner 6LW K-Type engine
produced around 130 - 140 BHP - Brooksbank,being in the heavy haulage business,needed all the power that they could get!

VALKYRIE.

ZB won’t like this at all.But I just couldn’t resist it.

Typical Gardner user logic why bother with getting something with more power the easy way,like the sensible firms did,when they could make something with less the hard way.

farm7.staticflickr.com/6224/6331 … ea3f_z.jpg

[zb_anorak]

Carryfast:

VALKYRIE:
This is an excerpt I wrote in my post on Page 10 of the Gardner Engines Thread : by VALKYRIE » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:58 am
"Gardner Engines And Turbocharging.

This Foden S18 FGHT6/50 4x2 Heavy Haulage Road Locomotive,PBT 973,is actually powered by a TURBOCHARGED Gardner 6LW Diesel Engine! It has a Simms turbocharger,which was fitted by it’s
original operator,L.V.Brooksbank and is now preserved by this heavy haulage company:-"
ccmv.aecsouthall.co.uk/p40328673 … 41#h1f3841

This Foden ballast road locomotive dates from 1955,and it’s turbocharged Gardner 6LW K-Type engine
produced around 130 - 140 BHP - Brooksbank,being in the heavy haulage business,needed all the power that they could get!

VALKYRIE.

ZB won’t like this at all.But I just couldn’t resist it.

Typical Gardner user logic why bother with getting something with more power the easy way,like the sensible firms did,when they could make something with less the hard way.

farm7.staticflickr.com/6224/6331 … ea3f_z.jpg

Haha.

According to Monsieur Saviem’s last post on here, the DIY turbo Gardners actually gave good fuel consumption, as well as the extra performance. Given that, as he mentions, Hugh Gardner was aware of these modifications, I would be interested to find out what his objections were, and if Gardners had actually done any development work to justify their decision not to use blowers.

[gingerfold]

There are several recorded and verified accounts of “standard” Gardner engines being retro-fitted with turbo-chargers by operators, particularly in the early 1970s. Mostly they were experiments conducted by the larger fleet Gardner users such as Bulwark, as stated by Saviem, and Rank Hovis McDougall also trialled one in a Foden in my time at RHM. Other experimenters included such talented engineers as John Killingbeck. All these retro-fits were carried out to the chagrin of Hugh Gardner who immediately retaliated by invalidating any warrenty claims against these engines.

Other British engine makers using turbo-chargers on their engines back in the 1950s included AEC and Leyland. In AEC’s case it was originally for engines destined for South America, which was a relatively large and very loyal market for AEC. In countries such as Peru in the Andes lorries were operating at high altitudes where the air is less dense, so turbo-charging was a means of increasing the volume of air into an engine. The more air you put into an engine then the more complete is the combustion of the fuel. As a consequence power output is increased at sea level altitude. AEC also fitted turbo-chargers to common design automotive engines used for certain industrial applications such generators and pumps. The large Dumptruk AVT1100 engine was also turbo-charged. Both AEC and Leyland were using turbo-chargers on railcar engines in the 1950s, and I think (open to correction) that the Leyland tank engines were turbo-charged. Both the failed AEC V8 and Leyland 500 series developments were originally designed to incorporate turbo-charging.

[saviem]

Morning all, [ZB], the fuel consumption improved by 7%, (lack of spectacles, and abysmal keyboard skills)!! The Chief Engineer was Reg Rogers, ex Leyland, and a long involvment with buses.

A C Bain, at Leighton Buzzard, increased the engine speed on their 6LXs, for more power, whils`t down the road, Dawsons fitted rev counters and oil coolers, to their export spec Foden tractors, along with rear anti roll bars, on the underslung sprung Foden axle, with low profile fifth wheels. They stated, “we have not yet found out the ultimate life of a Gardner”

I expect as I spend the day cutting hedges in the comfort of my Deere, more memories will come! Cheerio for now.

[zb_anorak]

Saviem:
Morning all, [ZB], the fuel consumption improved by 7%, (lack of spectacles, and abysmal keyboard skills)!! The Chief Engineer was Reg Rogers, ex Leyland, and a long involvment with buses.

A C Bain, at Leighton Buzzard, increased the engine speed on their 6LXs, for more power, whils`t down the road, Dawsons fitted rev counters and oil coolers, to their export spec Foden tractors, along with rear anti roll bars, on the underslung sprung Foden axle, with low profile fifth wheels. They stated, “we have not yet found out the ultimate life of a Gardner”

I expect as I spend the day cutting hedges in the comfort of my Deere, more memories will come! Cheerio for now.

Thanks very much for these insights into the detailed history of the commercial vehicle industry. I have been gradually absorbing the Commercial Motor archive, since it went online, and very illuminating it is. Your knowledge takes things a step further, and the search engine works better!

gingerfold:
There are several recorded and verified accounts of “standard” Gardner engines being retro-fitted with turbo-chargers by operators, particularly in the early 1970s. Mostly they were experiments conducted by the larger fleet Gardner users such as Bulwark, as stated by Saviem, and Rank Hovis McDougall also trialled one in a Foden in my time at RHM. Other experimenters included such talented engineers as John Killingbeck. All these retro-fits were carried out to the chagrin of Hugh Gardner who immediately retaliated by invalidating any warrenty claims against these engines.

Other British engine makers using turbo-chargers on their engines back in the 1950s included AEC and Leyland. In AEC’s case it was originally for engines destined for South America, which was a relatively large and very loyal market for AEC. In countries such as Peru in the Andes lorries were operating at high altitudes where the air is less dense, so turbo-charging was a means of increasing the volume of air into an engine. The more air you put into an engine then the more complete is the combustion of the fuel. As a consequence power output is increased at sea level altitude. AEC also fitted turbo-chargers to common design automotive engines used for certain industrial applications such generators and pumps. The large Dumptruk AVT1100 engine was also turbo-charged. Both AEC and Leyland were using turbo-chargers on railcar engines in the 1950s, and I think (open to correction) that the Leyland tank engines were turbo-charged. Both the failed AEC V8 and Leyland 500 series developments were originally designed to incorporate turbo-charging.

One can understand a manufacturer refusing to pay for repairs to engines which have been “souped up”. Clever though the modifiers undoubtedly were, their engineering expertise cannot have been anywhere near as great as a firm which does it for a living. Can it? I would like to see Gardner’s design calculations or test reports, showing evidence that turbochargers were detrimental to the life of their engines.

Regarding the failed Leyland Group efforts, my reading of those old magazines reveals that the other British engine designers were no better. They all seemed to deviate from the European norm which, through the 1960s, was in-line sixes up to about 12 litres then V8s above that, with or without a turbocharger. The British obsession was with size- they wanted the engines compact, so there was excited talk of small, high-speed V8s. Fodens were still flogging their two-strokes, seemingly confident that there was a future for them. Leyland’s problem was, they had the resources to get their flawed ideas off the drawing board and into production. I dare say that is a broader subject than that of this discussion.

[carryfast]

[zb]
anorak:
One can understand a manufacturer refusing to pay for repairs to engines which have been “souped up”. Clever though the modifiers undoubtedly were, their engineering expertise cannot have been anywhere near as great as a firm which does it for a living. Can it? I would like to see Gardner’s design calculations or test reports, showing evidence that turbochargers were detrimental to the life of their engines.

It’s probably mostly information that Hugh Gardner had in his head in the days of slide rules not computer print outs and has therefore gone with him and what was on paper has probably gone with the the company.

But logic says you can’t pick and choose between agreeing with the fact that Hugh Gardner knew what he was doing in the design of his products,for the outputs they were designed for,and his definite ideas that they weren’t designed for forced induction.If he was wrong then it’s obvious that every Gardner engine from the 1950’s on would have been turbocharged on the basis of natural selection.

But there’s no getting away from the fact that even the turbo charged Gardner in VALKYRIES’s post wasn’t as powerful as the naturally aspirated Diamond T motor and obviously what ‘could’ be retro fitted to a Gardner powered wagon could also have been retro fitted to a Diamond T.But the operators obviously didn’t need to resort to that in the case of the Diamond.Hence the fact that firms like Pickfords preferred to use those than turbocharged Gardner powered Fodens.

[gingerfold]

Carryfast:

[zb]
anorak:
It’s probably mostly information that Hugh Gardner had in his head in the days of slide rules not computer print outs and has therefore gone with him and what was on paper has probably gone with the the company.

Hand written note books of experimental data for all the Gardner engine designs dating back to the 1890s still exist. Every individual engine build and test data sheet still exists. Every Gardner engine built was run, tested, and the data recoeded before it left the factory. Virtually all the Gardner archive is in the care of the Anson Engine Museum at Poynton, Cheshire.

[carryfast]

gingerfold:

Carryfast:

[zb]
anorak:
It’s probably mostly information that Hugh Gardner had in his head in the days of slide rules not computer print outs and has therefore gone with him and what was on paper has probably gone with the the company.

Hand written note books of experimental data for all the Gardner engine designs dating back to the 1890s still exist. Every individual engine build and test data sheet still exists. Every Gardner engine built was run, tested, and the data recoeded before it left the factory. Virtually all the Gardner archive is in the care of the Anson Engine Museum at Poynton, Cheshire.

If it’s right then all it would need,to get an answer to the questions,concerning wether Hugh Gardner was right or not,would be to send the relevant data,concerning all the relevant componentry such as piston,conrod,bottom end bearing and block design,cylinder liner design and head sealing/clamping etc etc,to a modern day deign consultancy like Ricardo.Where they would probably be able to put the data into modern day computer calculations which would provide an exact answer as to the type of BMEP output figures,which the designs could reliably withstand,over their expected life time,in a matter of minutes.Personally I think the computer would agree with Hugh Gardner’s outlook concerning the issue of applying retro fit forced induction to his designs.

But I’d be even more ‘interested’ if it actually proved him wrong by showing that his designs actually did have had the redundancy in stress capacity to have reliably accepted far greater BMEP outputs than originally designed for and provided.