DEANB:
I was surprised no one commented on which truck they would drive out of the F10/12 or Marathon
if given the choice by the boss ■■ Mind you i have probably answered that myself as i feel most
members on this thread are pro british trucks.
Missed that.
Which lorry would i choose? well as said it depends on the job, but generally i’ll choose the one with the best pulling engine every time.I was more than happy with a Rolls 290 engined Crusader at that time
Ironically,having driven the 265 in 24 tonners,I got flamed by the deluded AEC fan boy long ago for suggesting that the Rolls was a worthy contender to anything that the Swedes had to offer,maybe with the exception of the Scania V8,and that the Crusader was actually a better wagon than the Ergo in whatever form.
ramone:
Im not so sure its a pro British thing Dean but more of many drivers on here who drove British vehicles regularly getting fed
up reading how crap they were . Everyone knows the cabs were never as good as the Swedes but the new generation were a large leap forward compared with what they replaced. Would I prefer a F10 or a Marathon ,it depends on what job I was doing and more importantly the wage .Like for like I wouldn`t be too bothered to be fair because they were both good lorries ,both had faults both had good points.
You’ve missed the point that the ‘best’ of the Brits were actually at least as good as if not better than the Euro/Scan imports and other than cab/chassis design were basically in large part American trucks not Brit anyway.On that note the SA 400,Bedford TM and ERF NGC were all second to none or at least had the potential to be.Also bearing in mind that those state of the art examples were actually competing with primitive foreign stuff like the F88 not the F12 for a considerable period.
The issue is the opposite type of deluded bias which paints junk like the Marathon as being good based on silly comparisons with even worse more obsolete older generation Brit junk.All of which had no place on the roads of the mid-late 1970’s.In addition to those other Brit products obviously being deliberately crippled in what could only have been a conspiracy to help the competition.But to clarify this isn’t about Brit v Imports it’s all about actual specification regardless of which country it was made with the Marathon being obsolete by the mid-late 1970’s.With designs like the F12 being a bench mark in their combination of comfort and power.In which case it’s also clear that the TL12 couldn’t compete at that level regards torque requirements v ■■■■■■■ or Rolls or the Detroit 92 series,not surprisingly being crippled by its short stroke motor.While even the following T45 cab wasn’t exactly a competitive design either.
I think I missed the point a while back , I dont think you have ever been a lorry driver , more like youve worked in a factory listening into conversations in the canteen at break times dreaming of driving but not having the nous to do it.
Blimey so all the old pay slips I’ve still got and the class 1 entitlement on my licence must be someone else not me and I’ve stolen their identity.
While it seems obvious who’s actually driven the Bedford TM,F10 and the Marathon here including nights out with the latter two and it obviously ain’t you.As for an article suggesting a preference for the Marathon over the 2800.Isn’t this the same magazine that also trashed the Volvo F12 cab while just calling the Marathon’s less spacious let alone somehow ending up with a road test result in which a Marathon supposedly outran an F12 ?. I’d guess it’s more likely that anyone who believes that bs would be the ones who’ve never driven a truck in their lives,not me.
gingerfold:
The late Pat Kennett thought highly of the TL12 Marathon, but he was an ex-Leyland Motors service engineer, so he could have shown a bit of bias. In the main he was objective in his road tests so his comments do carry some weight.
You jogged a vague memory of me reading one of Pat Kennett’s excellent Test Match articles (or was it a Group Test?) with the Marathon and… and… I can’t remember.
For some reason I think it was up against the F10 and the E290 Sed-Atki 400, but that’s a wild guess that I will deny all knowledge of if challenged. Perhaps if you or NMM has a copy or a scan of that (or any comparisons TRUCK did with the Marathon) you’d be kind enough to whack them on here for an appreciative audience.
TIA
Ah! I can help you with that one. ;Behold, the 1978 Euro-Test. Here you go chaps . Robert
Robert what have i told you before about coming off your medication !!
You missed the second half of the test in the August edition !
The clue was on the last page where it says " CONTINUED NEXT MONTH"
How time flies , I remember that advert and it doesnt feel like 40 years ago . 40 years on and everythings auto boxes and adaptive cruise control , 40 years before the advert well youd be lucky to have a windscreen
gingerfold:
The late Pat Kennett thought highly of the TL12 Marathon, but he was an ex-Leyland Motors service engineer, so he could have shown a bit of bias. In the main he was objective in his road tests so his comments do carry some weight.
You jogged a vague memory of me reading one of Pat Kennett’s excellent Test Match articles (or was it a Group Test?) with the Marathon and… and… I can’t remember.
For some reason I think it was up against the F10 and the E290 Sed-Atki 400, but that’s a wild guess that I will deny all knowledge of if challenged. Perhaps if you or NMM has a copy or a scan of that (or any comparisons TRUCK did with the Marathon) you’d be kind enough to whack them on here for an appreciative audience.
TIA
Ah! I can help you with that one. ;Behold, the 1978 Euro-Test. Here you go chaps . Robert
Robert what have i told you before about coming off your medication !!
You missed the second half of the test in the August edition !
The clue was on the last page where it says " CONTINUED NEXT MONTH"
Ah yes! Anyone got the August '78 issue of TRUCK mag in the loft? Robert
I was given, a while back, the full collection of the 70’s and some early 80’s Truck mags, I did buy the odd ones to read in the cab at the time and pretty much read all the articles even the ads but I have to say I got bored with these test articles and usually never read them to the end, maybe previously being a fitter I’d had it up to the back teeth with torque, fuel consumption and especially bhp figures. None of these made any difference to me when I was driving as long as the motor I had at the time was a healthy runner and clean inside, when it needed fuel I filled it in the yard or stopped at a garage and put some in, if it was flagging on a hill I dropped a gear, or two, if it needed something doing to it I filled a defect sheet in knowing I wouldn’t need to touch it myself. Maybe I was doing the wrong thing listening and singing along to Radio One (then much later Radio 2), checking the time for my next break or hoping the drop I’d just got to wasn’t on a break or chocca with other wagons and trying to work out where I might end up at the close of the shift.
Sorry if I wasn’t checking my fuel consumption, what revs and expected torque I should be achieving in each gear and wondering what the maniac who had just flew past me had at full throttle under his feet but most especially whether that F10 or 112 was any better doing the job than the 401 I was in at the time or when I was in a 112 whether that was far superior to the ERF’s, Foden’s, Seddons and Fords also using the same roads. In answer to the preferred vehicle of choice my only preference was to drive an Artic and what it was I couldn’t care, I had little interest in four, six or eight wheelers although I did drive them, if it was a home grown Brit or Jonny Foreigner it made little difference they all had their pros and cons and I did spend some time repairing, servicing and maintaining both enough to know there was also good and bad in both too. Certainly not enough to get excited about! Franky.
Not only did the 280 hp Marathon outrun the F12 but it also left the 2800 DKS let alone V8 Scania absolutely standing.
Luckily I was too busy pondering over figures like 0-50 mph in around 35 seconds expected from a 38 tonner in the day to take that much notice of Truck’s road test results.
Another great post Dean , where do you keep digging these up from ,your collection must be huge. I think Dennis mentioned that the 250 ■■■■■■■ could be thirsty , maybe they should have opted for the TL12 , more power and economy … hard hat at the ready sir
Another great post Dean , where do you keep digging these up from ,your collection must be huge. I think Dennis mentioned that the 250 ■■■■■■■ could be thirsty , maybe they should have opted for the TL12 , more power and economy … hard hat at the ready sir
Hello ramone, the trouble with the collection is finding what you are looking for !
Too much stuff already downloaded on the computer,and the filing system is a bit dodgy.
Half the time i know i have something but cant find it,and usually come across it when looking for
something completely different.
I dont really see how these test’s are accurate ? How can you time two trucks between two points
like the Doncaster to Derby section. If you are held up in the middle lane overtaking then the times
mean nothing ■■
I suppose they give a general view but thats about it.
I’m surprised the article didn’t go along the lines of we know the Marathon can out run a Scania V8 and the F12 so what chance has the F10 got.Trust us these Swedish imports don’t stand a chance against the might of Leyland.
Meanwhile the over stressed 9.6 litre F10 motor was fragile compared to 12 litre + motors blimey who would have thought it.
Re ^^^ above test. It’s easy to forget what a lovely drive the F10 was - I did many miles in them. Allowing for the sort of traffic variables that Dean points out, there’s not really that much to choose between them; so much is down to personal preference. As I’ve said before, I didn’t drive the Marathon but I would almost certainly have preferred it for its constant-mesh 9-speed Fuller 'box alone. The new generation of synchro-boxes in the '70s were pretty ropy in comparison, no matter who made them (Scania’s 10-speed 'box was probably best, but only in LHD lorries because of the gates were raked leftwards). Gearbox preference cannot be ignored: if you look at the Euro-Test further up the page, you have the F12 and the SA 400, both of which I’ve driven; and I have to say that I would go for the (LHD) SA 400 with the ■■■■■■■ / Fuller because it suits my driving style (fossil that I am!). Needless to say, I am thinking like a driver here, rather than an operator, but even as an owner-driver I’d want to enjoy driving the damned thing! You’ll be relieved to know that my C+E entitlement has now expired! Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
Re ^^^ above test. It’s easy to forget what a lovely drive the F10 was - I did many miles in them. Allowing for the sort of traffic variables that Dean points out, there’s not really that much to choose between them; so much is down to personal preference. As I’ve said before, I didn’t drive the Marathon but I would almost certainly have preferred it for its constant-mesh 9-speed Fuller 'box alone. The new generation of synchro-boxes in the '70s were pretty ropy in comparison, no matter who made them (Scania’s 10-speed 'box was probably best, but only in LHD lorries because of the gates were raked leftwards). Gearbox preference cannot be ignored: if you look at the Euro-Test further up the page, you have the F12 and the SA 400, both of which I’ve driven; and I have to say that I would go for the (LHD) SA 400 with the ■■■■■■■ / Fuller because it suits my driving style (fossil that I am!). Needless to say, I am thinking like a driver here, rather than an operator, but even as an owner-driver I’d want to enjoy driving the damned thing! You’ll be relieved to know that my C+E entitlement has now expired! Robert
Your point about how much difference the choice of gearbox makes seems just as relevant today Robert. As all lorries are now safe, comfortable etc., it’s mainly the little things about them that people tend to focus on.
However, the main point of praise or scorn levelled at modern trucks now seems to be the (automated) transmission - it’s either fantastic (step forward I-shift) or terrible, perhaps tolerable at best (certain ZF, Scania & Merc installations). To me the transmission now is the main influence on the driving experience.
ERF-NGC-European:
Re ^^^ above test. It’s easy to forget what a lovely drive the F10 was - I did many miles in them. Allowing for the sort of traffic variables that Dean points out, there’s not really that much to choose between them; so much is down to personal preference. As I’ve said before, I didn’t drive the Marathon but I would almost certainly have preferred it for its constant-mesh 9-speed Fuller 'box alone. The new generation of synchro-boxes in the '70s were pretty ropy in comparison, no matter who made them (Scania’s 10-speed 'box was probably best, but only in LHD lorries because of the gates were raked leftwards). Gearbox preference cannot be ignored: if you look at the Euro-Test further up the page, you have the F12 and the SA 400, both of which I’ve driven; and I have to say that I would go for the (LHD) SA 400 with the ■■■■■■■ / Fuller because it suits my driving style (fossil that I am!). Needless to say, I am thinking like a driver here, rather than an operator, but even as an owner-driver I’d want to enjoy driving the damned thing! You’ll be relieved to know that my C+E entitlement has now expired! Robert
You can still drive pre 1958 vehicle Robert, my Albion is 1957 so my late Father let his licence lapse but he could still drive it on his car licence, and yes the F10 was a very comfortable vehicle to drive and a very well laid out cab but I found the brakes very poor, this was on a 1984 model first of the “next generation” after the flat roofed versions I think. I found the Scania 10 speed range change no problem, not even “dog leg 6th”! but the ride was not as good as the Volvo, Cheer’s Pete
ERF-NGC-European:
Re ^^^ above test. It’s easy to forget what a lovely drive the F10 was - I did many miles in them. Allowing for the sort of traffic variables that Dean points out, there’s not really that much to choose between them; so much is down to personal preference. As I’ve said before, I didn’t drive the Marathon but I would almost certainly have preferred it for its constant-mesh 9-speed Fuller 'box alone. The new generation of synchro-boxes in the '70s were pretty ropy in comparison, no matter who made them (Scania’s 10-speed 'box was probably best, but only in LHD lorries because of the gates were raked leftwards). Gearbox preference cannot be ignored: if you look at the Euro-Test further up the page, you have the F12 and the SA 400, both of which I’ve driven; and I have to say that I would go for the (LHD) SA 400 with the ■■■■■■■ / Fuller because it suits my driving style (fossil that I am!). Needless to say, I am thinking like a driver here, rather than an operator, but even as an owner-driver I’d want to enjoy driving the damned thing! You’ll be relieved to know that my C+E entitlement has now expired! Robert
You can still drive pre 1958 vehicle Robert, my Albion is 1957 so my late Father let his licence lapse but he could still drive it on his car licence, and yes the F10 was a very comfortable vehicle to drive and a very well laid out cab but I found the brakes very poor, this was on a 1984 model first of the “next generation” after the flat roofed versions I think. I found the Scania 10 speed range change no problem, not even “dog leg 6th”! but the ride was not as good as the Volvo, Cheer’s Pete
That’s a comforting thought Pete! I may be wrong but I think I read somewhere that the date had now advanced to January 1960. Thoughts of AECs with Thornycroft gearbox technology start to tantalise me! Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
Re ^^^ above test. It’s easy to forget what a lovely drive the F10 was - I did many miles in them. Allowing for the sort of traffic variables that Dean points out, there’s not really that much to choose between them; so much is down to personal preference. As I’ve said before, I didn’t drive the Marathon but I would almost certainly have preferred it for its constant-mesh 9-speed Fuller 'box alone. The new generation of synchro-boxes in the '70s were pretty ropy in comparison, no matter who made them (Scania’s 10-speed 'box was probably best, but only in LHD lorries because of the gates were raked leftwards). Gearbox preference cannot be ignored: if you look at the Euro-Test further up the page, you have the F12 and the SA 400, both of which I’ve driven; and I have to say that I would go for the (LHD) SA 400 with the ■■■■■■■ / Fuller because it suits my driving style (fossil that I am!). Needless to say, I am thinking like a driver here, rather than an operator, but even as an owner-driver I’d want to enjoy driving the damned thing! You’ll be relieved to know that my C+E entitlement has now expired! Robert
I don’t think there’s any dispute whatsoever that the evil import Synchros were a total liability to them.Myself also sharing your view of constant mesh v synchro in which I just don’t get ‘drivers’ moaning about the former let alone preferring the latter.However for me the horrible steering characteristics caused by the silly small wheel dictated by the equally silly obsolete Ergo cab outweighed the gearbox issue alone.Let alone nights out with the cramped short sleeper Marathon v the F10.Especially given an instinctive double de clutch driving style regardless which really does have a considerable effect on reducing a lot of the worst aspects of synchros.On that note I did see that the test at least referred to the ‘twitchy’ nature of the thing’s steering which I put down to the effects of that silly steering wheel and being the deal breaker for me.Even before I parked up for the night lumbered with that awful cramped cab.As for the F10,Volvo should have standardised on the F12 only and offered it with a 13 speed Fuller option.
. Robert
