They run quite a few mans out of west thurrock
GasGas:
I can’t comment on what goes on at Trucking now, because I no longer have anything to do with it.But when I was editor a couple of manufacturers did take exception to what was said in ‘Truck on Trial’: one of the trials was written by Tim Blakemore and the other by Bob Beech.
On each occasion I had to field a cross phone call from the manufacturer’s PR department, and advertising was cancelled for a while.
Interestingly, what they took exception to was criticism of after-sales service rather than the actual product: but we were reporting the operator/driver’s experience with a particular truck and a particular dealer.
But my publisher didn’t get upset when advertising was cancelled. To be honest, I ran the magazine on the basis that there were 7 manufacturers who were likely to advertise with us (Foden and ERF never did, and they went out of business anyway), so if you upset one or two there were still five or six to sell to. Manufacturers in any case only spent serious money when they launched a new product, which was about once every five years.
Over the years, we probably gave Scania more positive coverage than any other make (magazines sell better when there’s a Scania on the cover), but Scania didn’t advertise much with us because they thought they were preaching to the converted, so giving a particular maker positive coverage doesn’t mean getting included on an advertising schedule in return.
Excellent insight into magazine editorship, thank you! 
I find the drivers’ opinions to be very technical in many tests and sound like they’re heavily edited or been told what to say. None say “I prefer the other lorry/prefer my old lorry etc…”
I very rarely buy trucking but i found the truck on trial a bit of a joke the last few years. Say itwas for a v8 scania most of the article was the history of the v8 scania range and recaling the glory days of the 141.
Intrsting enough in the right context but if im reading about an R730vVolvo fh16 i dont want to read about how the 141 was king of the road in 1980
Muckaway:
I find the drivers’ opinions to be very technical in many tests and sound like they’re heavily edited or been told what to say. None say “I prefer the other lorry/prefer my old lorry etc…”
That’s because they are being interviewed and responding to questions. The interviews you read are heavily edited, because the writer ‘cuts to the chase’
You start with a broad question like: “which of these two do you prefer?”
Then you get an opinion, then you start asking what the reasons are for that opinion…and then you start to get the worthwhile answers like:
“Because Truck A has a retarder, which make me feel much safer coming down from the Blanc”
or
“I can’t live with truck A, the bunk kills my back”
I remember one (Irish) driver saying he didn’t like the bunk in his (first model) Actros because it was a “Boss’s bed” by which he meant it was so uncomfortable he got out of it as soon as he woke up in the morning.
Harry Monk:
GasGas:
I can’t comment on what goes on at Trucking now, because I no longer have anything to do with it.But when I was editor a couple of manufacturers did take exception to what was said in ‘Truck on Trial’: one of the trials was written by Tim Blakemore and the other by Bob Beech.
On each occasion I had to field a cross phone call from the manufacturer’s PR department, and advertising was cancelled for a while.
Interestingly, what they took exception to was criticism of after-sales service rather than the actual product: but we were reporting the operator/driver’s experience with a particular truck and a particular dealer.
But my publisher didn’t get upset when advertising was cancelled. To be honest, I ran the magazine on the basis that there were 7 manufacturers who were likely to advertise with us (Foden and ERF never did, and they went out of business anyway), so if you upset one or two there were still five or six to sell to. Manufacturers in any case only spent serious money when they launched a new product, which was about once every five years.
Over the years, we probably gave Scania more positive coverage than any other make (magazines sell better when there’s a Scania on the cover), but Scania didn’t advertise much with us because they thought they were preaching to the converted, so giving a particular maker positive coverage doesn’t mean getting included on an advertising schedule in return.
Excellent insight into magazine editorship, thank you!
Thanks mate.
In summary, I took the view that there were seven of them and in effect only 2 or 3 other magazines that they could take their advertising to. And to be fair to most of the manufacturers, they were prepared to take the rough with the smooth and accept that not every example of every truck that they made was perfect when it left the factory.
Armagedon:
The problem with our trade press is they are ‘gutless’ pandering as stated to the manufacturers because of advertising revenue but the alternative I have always considered was to have the manufacturers living in fear as to what might be revealed that they were obliged to pay for advertising anyway. And the financial advantage is that we, who don’t buy mags.
often would actually buy the mags. to see who is being hammered this week/month.
Our trade press in my opinion do fail our industry and sales are dire because of it.
Some good points, but poor truck mag sales have probably as much to do with the interweb’s success as much as anything.
Not all of the ‘trade press’ panders to the manufacturers’ concerns: when I was test driver/Dep Ed at Roadway we went ahead and published a test which utterly condemned the fuel economy of one of Europe’s ‘finest’ tractor units, while a certain other magazine published a glowing review of the same vehicle, with obviously massaged fuel figures to keep the manufacturer happy. Knowing the fella who does the tests there at Roadway now I’d still rather trust that mag’s opinion against most of 'em.
The other problem is that certain key figures on the truck testing press circuit haven’t done a day’s work at the sharp end of this business . . . not ONE day as a driver, yet they feel qualified to give their unqualified opinion on the vehicles that readers may indeed go and put their house on the line to purchase. Admittedly anyone who purchases a truck on the strength of a truck test alone needs their head examining, but as The Boss says, the industry is being let down as a result of commercial interests and a severe lack of real world experience.
~ Craig
Drift:
From what I see the PO has been renewing its fleet, every where I see new trucks being delivered on trade plates in convoy and I see a lot of new trucks in service.
Dont know how often they renew though.
From the looks of the car transporters I’ve been seeing they seem to be filling their boots with small fiat vans and I guess have ditched the Vauxhalls which seems an interesting decision. 
In fairness to RM, with trucks, it would make no sense to buy anything but Daf or Iveco in the 7.5t rigid sector.
Does anyone else snigger when they see,
Truck of the year.
On a tragic pile of plastic.
The other problem is that certain key figures on the truck testing press circuit haven’t done a day’s work at the sharp end of this business . . . not ONE day as a driver, yet they feel qualified to give their unqualified opinion on the vehicles that readers may indeed go and put their house on the line to purchase. Admittedly anyone who purchases a truck on the strength of a truck test alone needs their head examining, but as The Boss says, the industry is being let down as a result of commercial interests and a severe lack of real world experience.
Some good points there Craig- there is a huge difference in evaluating a truck on a press drive to getting a demonstrator and putting it to work in your fleet
Press days tend to use highly “fettled” trucks, often set up optimaly for the test route that is well known to the manufacturers in advance, and you tend to have the manufacturers main demo driver sitting alongside you to ensure you drive the way they want you too- even if that goes against everything you know is the reality in the working world.
Many ( but not all) test reporters as Craig said are journalists first and foremost, many with a vehicle engineering background rather than commercial driving, they have excellent technical knowledge and many years experience of road testing vehicles, but very little of actually using the vehicle weeks on end in a real work environment-(There are a few very good ex-drivers who do road tests too tho) However the point is that these are technical tests mostly- not driver impressions, the tests are aimed at those that hold the ■■■■■ strings - not the end user (The driver).
I have been involved in a few road tests over the years- one particular light commercial got a pretty scathing report from me, and although the sub editor toned it down a bit, years later I still don’t get test drives invites from that particular company any more
Another article written by someone else was particulary harsh on a certain truck model that lead to complaints to the management at the time of it not being fairly balanced, and while the article was not withdrawn- a more sympathetic one from the same writer appeared a couple issues later.
For the magazines editors (way above my lowly pay grade) I would guess they constantly have to walk a fine line between journalist integrity and biting the hand that sometimes feeds the magazines ( large advertising budgets for the titles).
AS I have said many times… Its not what you say- its how you say it, and sometimes the reader should “read between the lines”
The ***** climbed windy hill at a steady pace -
doesn’t sound that bad- almost complimentary
But between the lines - if it was great uphill then
The ****** romped up windy hill not missing a beat
It went over the weighbridge with a reasonable load about average for the class of vehicle
sounds OK after all its close to most- Manufacturers happy because you haven’t pointed out that its a bit heavy restricting payload
It went over the weighbridge with almost a tonne extra payload than the average for its class
is a lot better and the message that the manufacturer would want to get out- everyones happy
Cabs fine for the occasional one or two nights out a week- which of course is this models niche market
its small and cramped with little storage- manufacturers happy cos you pointed out you can night out in it, and by innuendo are recommending that for more regular nights out you get one of their, a lot more expensive, superXXLHiroof variants and not said you wouldn’t let your dog sleep in it over night
oatcake1967:
Does anyone else snigger when they see,Truck of the year.
On a tragic pile of plastic.
It would appear everyone gets a turn at winning. A bit like the boat race but less pointless.
A cycnic might say, it’s a competition where magazine publishers from all over Europe decide which manufacturer has the biggest promotional budget to back their latest truck!
I remember one year when Volvo launched the first FM and Mercedes launched the Atego…the Atego was judged to be truck of the year, in a decision that baffled many because the FM was a far better truck.
GasGas:
A cycnic might say, it’s a competition where magazine publishers from all over Europe decide which manufacturer has the biggest promotional budget to back their latest truck!I remember one year when Volvo launched the first FM and Mercedes launched the Atego…the Atego was judged to be truck of the year, in a decision that baffled many because the FM was a far better truck.
It is also judged from jury members from all over Europe, and what might not be a major model in the UK might be market leader in other countries. Also a cynic may suggest that some judges maybe swayed by their local manufacturer and vote on national grounds/allegiences (“a la Eurovision song contest”)- not an issue that the UK judge will have to worry about
GasGas mentioned the recent Volvo videos. I personally think they were a stroke of genius, while making serious point, one about the strength of the tipper and the other two about how precise the new steering is, something which you couldn’t get across in a printed ad. Its good to see a truck maker finally get how powerful the internet and a viral video can be. I saw it shared so many times on Facebook by people with no links to the industry and a friend who works quite high up in a bank was telling me people in his office were even talking about it. Will it sell trucks? Who knows. Is it more successful than a printed ad in a mag? Undoubtedly. Last time I looked one of them had over 40 million views. After all, Stobart have done pretty well by appealing to the public.
If you want to sell a widget that is only used by a few technicians then a small advert in a specialist magazine is the most cost effective way to go - Volvo this year seem to have grabbed the proverbial bull by the horns and marketed their brand to all,
Including the general public- Scania have for a long long time been the perception of the ultimate truck,(rightly or wrongly) and rested on their laurels for a number of years and looking in at this Volvo seem to be making a push to change the public perception of trucks - away from Scania and into Volvo being the accepted idea of a truck
It is a brilliant high profile campaign- that is getting a lot of attention- and as yet I don’t see a response from Scania
My thoughts are either Scania start to really engage via the new mediums - or Volvo are going to capture the next generation as far as marketing goes there s a whole new generation coming through that is bought up on the internet and they will be swayed by those that connect with them in the new fangled ways- Scania really needs to understand if they want to remain king of the hill they have to adapt and change to the new world… and as yet there is no real sign they can or will