The front panel on that Israeli Marathon is different to the norm. I wonder why?
Earlier in this thread I posted TRUCK’s 1978 Euro-Test part 1. Here is part 2 (kindly scanned by DEANB). Robert
Londra Camp about 1987. It had been abandoned…
GS
was that you gs or that poor marathon 
The ■■■■■■■ 335 Marathon appears in the Eurotest table above, with worse results than the similarly-powered ERF. I wonder why it performed so badly, especially with Mr. Kennett’s affection for Leylands so evident in much of his writing? Has that Eurotest been posted anywhere? Dean?
[zb]
anorak:
The ■■■■■■■ 335 Marathon appears in the Eurotest table above, with worse results than the similarly-powered ERF. I wonder why it performed so badly, especially with Mr. Kennett’s affection for Leylands so evident in much of his writing? Has that Eurotest been posted anywhere? Dean?
The tests were posted and commented upon recently on the relatively new Marathons Nearly Truck thread 
Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
[zb]
anorak:
The ■■■■■■■ 335 Marathon appears in the Eurotest table above, with worse results than the similarly-powered ERF. I wonder why it performed so badly, especially with Mr. Kennett’s affection for Leylands so evident in much of his writing? Has that Eurotest been posted anywhere? Dean?
The 1978 test was posted and commented upon recently on the relatively new Marathons Nearly Truck thread The table at the end of the test is a summing up of all the previous Euro Tests so that 335-powered Marathon would have featured earlier on - I’ll investigate. Robert
EDIT:
OK, I’ve done a bit of homework and the the Cu335 Marathon doesn’t appear in the '75 test, or the '77 test (both of which I have), so it must appear in the '76 test which I haven’t seen since it was published. Has anyone got it? Robert
ERF-NGC-European:
ERF-NGC-European:
[zb]
anorak:
The ■■■■■■■ 335 Marathon appears in the Eurotest table above, with worse results than the similarly-powered ERF. I wonder why it performed so badly, especially with Mr. Kennett’s affection for Leylands so evident in much of his writing? Has that Eurotest been posted anywhere? Dean?The 1978 test was posted and commented upon recently on the relatively new Marathons Nearly Truck thread
EDIT:
OK, I’ve done a bit of homework and the the Cu335 Marathon doesn’t appear in the '75 test, or the '77 test (both of which I have), so it must appear in the '76 test which I haven’t seen since it was published. Has anyone got it? Robert
I dont recall ever seeing a test with a 335 Marathon Robert ? I have been going through Truck from the the first copy and i am sure there is no such test.
I will double check but i am wondering if they have got the details from a foreign magazine using a 335 Marathon ■■
I wonder if commercial motor did a test with the 335 Marathon ■■
DEANB:
I wonder if commercial motor did a test with the 335 Marathon ■■
The table says Leyland Marathon MTC3832. Does that code suggest a Cu 335? Also, we were told on the other Marathon thread that after the prototype 6x4 Marathon with the Cu 335 in it was trialled, there was no take up until much later, and the Leyland engines were pushed instead. Robert
The text of the Eurotest posted above mentions the Marathon 335 “…tested a couple of years ago…due to poor preparation and unsuitability for the task at hand…came last…”. God knows what that means, but the date of its test is narrowed-down somewhat.
Still hunting. In the meantime, I’ve found some comments made a while back by former Middle-East / LDD-writer, Lawrence Kiely, who had a 335-■■■■■■■ Marathon in '76. Here’s his rather interesting account:
The engine was a 14 litre 330 bhp ■■■■■■■ NTC which was powerful enough in those days but the let down was only a 9 speed gearbox, the Fuller RTO 9509.
Good tough boxes with, I believe, twin layshafts. M+C Steve would know more about these I’ve no doubt. However the Fuller 9513 which as its model number suggests was a 13 speed was far superior. Very common in the Ford Transcontinentals. You needed those extra cogs going up any mountain.
The biggest fault with the Marathon I had, SLB344R, was the cab suspension, or total lack of it. It was LHD so BL got that right although they did not have a lot of capital to produce a new truck when the UK was invaded by Scania 110/140s plus Volvo F88s and the pokier F89.
There was only one bed which when lifted up revealed a stainless steel sink with water tap, cooker, and small fridge. The passenger seat swivelled through 180 degrees so one could then cook away creating whatever gastronomic delight or disaster one cared for.
It was late 1976 during this My Mistake Marathon trip to Tehran that after slithering up Mount Tahir, in the Agri region some 800 kms east of Ankara, the weather deteriorated into a roaring snow storm. Just made the top so decided to pull over and cook. Round went the passenger seat, up went the bed, cooker on, frying pan hot, coffee cup in hand and some decent taped (CDs had not yet been invented) music roaring away.
Robert
stevejones:
was that you gs or that poor marathon
The bloke in the photo is a Swede nicknamed “Magnum” I took the photo.
I felt abandoned ! 
GS OVERLAND:
stevejones:
was that you gs or that poor marathon
I felt abandoned !
CF will be pleased to read that Lawrence Kiely (see 2 posts back ^^^) thought that the Marathon should have had a 13-sp box (not 9) and maybe on M/E work he was right. However, some time back John (‘Saviem’) posted that when Giraud of France bought LHD Marathons they switched from 13-sp to 9-sp because they used less fuel! Robert
Thanks Dean- a fascinating read, that. So, the Marathon’s bad gear linkage cost it 33 minutes, its modern-but-badly-engineered taper-leaf suspension actually caused damage to the contents of the cab and the brakes were ■■■■. Robert- would you be able to suggest an alternative vehicle, based on the same basic specification?
To be fair to Leyland, those faults are easily-rectified. Maybe slightly-later chassis were less rubbish.
ERF-NGC-European:
CF will be pleased to read that Lawrence Kiely (see 2 posts back ^^^) thought that the Marathon should have had a 13-sp box (not 9) and maybe on M/E work he was right. However, some time back John (‘Saviem’) posted that when Giraud of France bought LHD Marathons they switched from 13-sp to 9-sp because they used less fuel! Robert
Which leaves the question how did the 13 speed Transcon with the more powerful ■■■■■■■ manage to combine a higher overall speed with lower overall fuel fuel consumption.I’ll go with more torque and more gears to exploit it. 
Although don’t ask how the TL12 Marathon with a 9 speed seemed to beat just about everything from a V8 Scania to an F12. 
[zb]
anorak:
Thanks Dean- a fascinating read, that. So, the Marathon’s bad gear linkage cost it 33 minutes, its modern-but-badly-engineered taper-leaf suspension actually caused damage to the contents of the cab and the brakes were [zb]. Robert- would you be able to suggest an alternative vehicle, based on the same basic specification?To be fair to Leyland, those faults are easily-rectified. Maybe slightly-later chassis were less rubbish.[/quote
The idea with the taper leaf were supposedly self dampening,but I notice shock absorbers still fitted to the Leyland.