Carryfast:
How does products like the Marathon 2,or even the T45 on introduction,v DAF 2800 and Volvo F12.Or allowing GM to ■■■■■■■ the Bedford TM with the obsolete Detroit 71 series.Or applying ridiculous under gearing to ■■■■■■■ powered vehicles in addition to not using the latest best power/torque ■■■■■■■ engine options available.Failure to standardise on the Fuller 13 speed box.Allowing ‘type approval’ issues to hamper such product development let alone eventually remove the option of using such components altogether…
Those were decisions made by Leyland to satisfy its customers, while maximising its own profits. They were nothing to do with a Government conspiracy. Michael Edwardes, in his book, praises the Government for not interfering too much. Type approval would have helped a large, vertically-integrated company like Leyland compete against assemblers using US engines.
After a period of relative calm, you have struck another rich vein of silliness.
If you want to believe that Michael Edwardes wasn’t just a puppet of the establishment in all this that’s your choice.
How would type approval interfering with the introduction of products like the E320 or its big power BC1 predecessor have helped Leyland when all it had within its own armoury to go up against the F12 was the TL12.Thereby meaning that it had to be an assembler itself or go under.The same applied in the case of the primitive Ergo Marathon cab and not much better T45 .In that MP probably could have provided a better/cheaper option as in the case of the SA.
Make no mistake,with the exception of Bedford,the future of UK truck manufacturing was dependent on the assembly model and there’s no reason to think that wouldn’t have worked just as well as it did for manufacturers like Kenworth.Given the government commitment to UK industry that it would have required to do it.
Carryfast:
…Unlike putting the TL12 T45 let alone the Marathon up against the F12.While the common link seems to be a deliberate instruction from high places along the lines of do everything possible to run down the Brit industry v its foreign competition but don’t make it look too obvious.Giving the imports a decent ( more like massive ) head start in terms of product development,while hiding it as best they could in industry media reports,seeming to be one of the main methods they chose to do it.That and starving us of investment capital.IE make no mistake my contention is that the issue of us being ‘behind the times’ was no mistake,accident,or coincidence,it was deliberate.As also seeming to be a hypothetical at least view held by gingerfold.
The GB Government did its best to make British Leyland strong, at all stages in history, at least until it ran out of patience and left it for the foreign vultures. If you read Michael Edwardes’ autobiography, he has praise for both Labour and Conservative administrations. Even the unions deserve some credit for their efforts- their more reasonable, conciliatory stance in the 1980s was a great help. There was no conspiracy to kill off British manufacturing. Why would there be?
How does products like the Marathon 2,or even the T45 on introduction,v DAF 2800 and Volvo F12.Or allowing GM to ■■■■■■■ the Bedford TM with the obsolete Detroit 71 series.Or applying ridiculous under gearing to ■■■■■■■ powered vehicles in addition to not using the latest best power/torque ■■■■■■■ engine options available.Failure to standardise on the Fuller 13 speed box.Allowing ‘type approval’ issues to hamper such product development let alone eventually remove the option of using such components altogether.Failure to offer V8 options in uk manufactured Ford and GM car products to make them more competitive with German imports.Then transferring uk production of uk built Ford and GM car products to Germany anyway.Allowing BMC to ■■■■ the life out of BL car division.Crippling Rover and Triumph products by failing to make best use of the Rover V8 engine let alone flawed poverty design like the SD1 with its ugly hatchback body and live rear axle design.In addition to other examples of starving UK industry of investment Capital.Also maybe a few other examples which I’ve missed which gingerfold might like to add.All fit the script of the government ‘doing its best to make UK industry strong’.
IE surely that mantra would have meant the Marathon 2 had an SA 400 type cab development,300 + hp ■■■■■■■ engine and 13 speed Fuller box as standard.In which case who needed the TL12 powered short sleeper T45 let alone the even more primitive Ergo derived Marathon 2.
As for the reasons.It’s clear enough that numerous geopolitical and economic reasons existed.In large part based on erroneous European ‘security’ issues which meant keeping the Germans onside ( happy ).In addition to economic ones regarding the US wanting its exposure to European war debt paid off ASAP obviously even if that meant at our expense.Ironically neutral Sweden and no hoper Netherlands being two of the largest beneficiaries of that in terms of truck manufacturing. [/quote
But on the face of it,it should have worked.Make everything in house.
railstaff:
But on the face of it,it should have worked.Make everything in house.
Not if outsourcing provides a better solution as in the case of Leyland with at best the Ergo derived cab of the Marathon and too short stroke TL12 to put up against the F12 and DAF 2800.With the T45 not being much better on introduction when it mattered.
While it was Bedford that had the best chance of making the in house model work by using the turbocharged Detroit 92 series followed by the 60 series in the TM.In both case what we actually got in the form of the marathon 2 and the 71 series powered TM could only have been the result of conspiracy not ■■■■ up.Let alone factoring in all the other sabotage and sell out of the UK automotive industry.
[zb]
anorak:
After a period of relative calm, you have struck another rich vein of silliness.
If you want to believe that Michael Edwardes wasn’t just a puppet of the establishment in all this that’s your choice.
He was recruited because the previous company he managed was doing well. The work he did at British Leyland is unanimously lauded for taking the firm in the right direction. Thanks for the choice- I’ll go with the theory that the Establishment did not have an agenda to damage the businesses in which they probably owned shares.
What’s your opinion on the idea that Hitler is still alive, kept in a private hospital near Weybridge, for the purposes of using his visionary ideas to assist the British banks in their mission to destroy everything nice?
Very interesting little piece! It cannot be emphasised enough the extent to which Fuller gearbox installation varied among manufacturers, and the consequent extent to which performance and driving experience varied. MAN, ERF and Ford could do it, so why couldn’t Seddon-Atkinson, DAF and Leyland do it? This discrepency continued after the Eaton-Fullers and into the period of the Eaton Twin-splitter: the difference between an Iveco installation and a SA one was so wide as lead a driver to believe they were entirely different gearboxes! Robert
0
Indeed Robert, i wasn’t that impressed by the ETS until i drove an F90 MAN so fitted for a number of years, with the MAN’s free revving engine and the rapidity with which revs dropped when you lifted off throttle, i suggest it was the best ETS installation of all.
Plus where i worked at the time the in house workshops kept the gearbox/clutch brakes adjusted regularly and working well, so when needed you could have lightning quick shifts by hitting the button at the bottom of the full press of the clutch pedal.
Which allegedly would enable an F90 tractor solo to out accelerate a fiends Cortina Savage if the button was used.
Very interesting little piece! It cannot be emphasised enough the extent to which Fuller gearbox installation varied among manufacturers, and the consequent extent to which performance and driving experience varied. MAN, ERF and Ford could do it, so why couldn’t Seddon-Atkinson, DAF and Leyland do it? This discrepency continued after the Eaton-Fullers and into the period of the Eaton Twin-splitter: the difference between an Iveco installation and a SA one was so wide as lead a driver to believe they were entirely different gearboxes! Robert
0
Indeed Robert, i wasn’t that impressed by the ETS until i drove an F90 MAN so fitted for a number of years, with the MAN’s free revving engine and the rapidity with which revs dropped when you lifted off throttle, i suggest it was the best ETS installation of all.
Plus where i worked at the time the in house workshops kept the gearbox/clutch brakes adjusted regularly and working well, so when needed you could have lightning quick shifts by hitting the button at the bottom of the full press of the clutch pedal.
Which allegedly would enable an F90 tractor solo to out accelerate a fiends Cortina Savage if the button was used.
I agree with that, Juddian: I too drove F90s with ETS and they were superb! Robert
Carryfast:
Failure to standardise on the Fuller 13 speed box.
That wasn’t a failure: it was common sense. Firstly, because the choice between 9-sp and 13-sp was a wise option that customers deserved; secondly because making customers have a 'box they don’t want can lead to the kind of disaster that befell Mercedes when they standardardised on the EPS and half their UK customers went out and bought Scanias instead. Robert
Slightly off the subject i always thought the ERF “E” Series had the best installation of the ETS
Also I never used the clutch other for than starting and stopping or in heavy traffic
Carryfast:
If you want to believe that Michael Edwardes wasn’t just a puppet of the establishment in all this that’s your choice.
He was recruited because the previous company he managed was doing well. The work he did at British Leyland is unanimously lauded for taking the firm in the right direction. Thanks for the choice- I’ll go with the theory that the Establishment did not have an agenda to damage the businesses in which they probably owned shares.
It seems strange in that case why his first act in the job wouldn’t have been to have stopped the ugly retrograde SD1 programme in its tracks in favour of a Rover V8 engined development of the superior Triumph 2.5 saloon.Instead of which his claim to fame is the Mini Metro and turning Triumph into a maker of small fwd poverty spec Jap based heaps to add to the crap BMC Brit ones we already had.In addition to retarded junk like the Marathon 2 to compete with imports like the F12 in the truck division.
As for the establishment’s so called economic interests in UK industry.They weren’t exactly going to say that from now on all UK investments will be going go into European industry because the intention is the gradual run down of UK industry in the interests of making the German economy the dominant European one.IE the pretence of supporting uk industry while actually deliberately putting it out of the frame ‘was’ the ‘agenda’.
Carryfast:
Failure to standardise on the Fuller 13 speed box.
That wasn’t a failure: it was common sense. Firstly, because the choice between 9-sp and 13-sp was a wise option that customers deserved; secondly because making customers have a 'box they don’t want can lead to the kind of disaster that befell Mercedes when they standardardised on the EPS and half their UK customers went out and bought Scanias instead. Robert
Why would customers have ‘deserved’ an option which could only have given them worse fuel consumption figures.While how can the 13 speed fuller v 9 speed possibly be compared to the diabolical EPS fiasco anyway.IE the 13 speed fuller had all the same advantages of the 9 speed regarding shift quality etc while providing more closer ratios to keep the engine closer to its torque peak.
gazsa401:
Slightly off the subject i always thought the ERF “E” Series had the best installation of the ETS
Also I never used the clutch other for than starting and stopping or in heavy traffic
Absolutely! I reckon the ETS installation in the E-series was much better than in the EC-series that followed. Robert
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.
Some part of the answer to that would depend on when you asked the question. I’m a bit younger than most on here, but if I’d had my HGV1 ticket in 1980 I’d have said Volvo, because the F10/12 looked (and with a 16sp box, went like) the business to me. What early-20s bloke wouldn’t have been seduced by those looks and that cab, compared to what looked like an Ergo on stilts?
These days I might waver a bit, but I still think that F10/12 cab (especially in Mk2 form, preferably with an F16 badge) looks good 30+ years later, but I’m going off-topic here (again). Give me a 2800 and we’ll call it quits…
I asked Graham a few weeks back about a book he`d written on the Marathon which he never published . He posted it on here which I was grateful for as I respect his work and I have a collection of his other fine books . So enter the resident clown rambling on about utter nonsense and there goes another interesting thread .
ramone:
I asked Graham a few weeks back about a book he`d written on the Marathon which he never published . He posted it on here which I was grateful for as I respect his work and I have a collection of his other fine books . So enter the resident clown rambling on about utter nonsense and there goes another interesting thread .
What you actually mean is that you only want confirmation of your silly fan boy views and won’t tolerate anything which doesn’t fit that agenda.
On that note I doubt if whatever he wrote could ever defend Leyland putting up such a retarded piece of junk against competition like the F12.While if I’ve read it right he seems to be more in agreement with my idea of that situation being deliberate and not ■■■■ up.Than your idea that the heap supposedly nearly saved Leyland from oblivion as opposed to sending it on its way.
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.
Some part of the answer to that would depend on when you asked the question. I’m a bit younger than most on here, but if I’d had my HGV1 ticket in 1980 I’d have said Volvo, because the F10/12 looked (and with a 16sp box, went like) the business to me. What early-20s bloke wouldn’t have been seduced by those looks and that cab, compared to what looked like an Ergo on stilts?
These days I might waver a bit, but I still think that F10/12 cab (especially in Mk2 form, preferably with an F16 badge) looks good 30+ years later, but I’m going off-topic here (again). Give me a 2800 and we’ll call it quits…
I had my ticket in 1980 and I preferred the Bedford TM to the Volvo and the DAF 2800.Also don’t see any reason why that also wouldn’t have applied in the case of a well specced SA 400.
ramone:
I asked Graham a few weeks back about a book he`d written on the Marathon which he never published . He posted it on here which I was grateful for as I respect his work and I have a collection of his other fine books . So enter the resident clown rambling on about utter nonsense and there goes another interesting thread .
What you actually mean is that you only want confirmation of your silly fan boy views and won’t tolerate anything which doesn’t fit that agenda.
On that note I doubt if whatever he wrote could ever defend Leyland putting up such a retarded piece of junk against competition like the F12.While if I’ve read it right he seems to be more in agreement with my idea of that situation being deliberate and not ■■■■ up.Than your idea that the heap supposedly nearly saved Leyland from oblivion as opposed to sending it on its way.
There you go again the Marathon was introduced in 72the F12 late77 , but your stupid replies just keep coming ,what part of there was no money available don’t you understand .The Marathon was developed on a shoestring by some well respected engineers. All you want to do is crib and complain about how the engine was no good how the cab was no good in your opinion . Why didnt they offer a high power ■■■■■■■ , because they had a decent in house engine that was well on top of the job when introduced definitely at 32 tons and performed better than the offerings from ■■■■■■■ at the time. You mention taking customers choices away by insisting everyone uses the 13 speed Fuller in place of the 9 speed ■■■■?? .Every thread you enter becomes a childish this v that . Conspiracies from Governments conspiracies from journalists if it isn't big power its junk if it hasn't got loads of gears its crap ,Ive said it before and Ill say it again I don't think youve ever driven a lorry otherwise you wouldn`t spout so much crap.
[/quote
would enable an F90 tractor solo to out accelerate a fiends Cortina Savage if the button was used.
