You’re my hero mate [emoji41] [emoji41]
I drove these for a short while on Euro work (before they put me on Moroccan work with artics). IIRC these DAFs had underfloor engines (I’m sure someone will shout if I’m wrong). The downside was that it had to have a bus gearshift called ‘Easyshift’ which was a little stubby switch with an H-pattern and was truly horrible to use! Robert
[zb]
anorak:
I wonder why they went out of favour?
Probably (I’m guessing) production costs. If most of the market was happy to buy tippers with “normal” configuration, where’s the incentive to reinvent the tipper?
newmercman:
You’re my hero mate [emoji41] [emoji41]
Accolades! At long, long last. 
200 views and no mention of sentinel.
Punchy Dan:
200 views and no mention of sentinel.
I hadn’t even thought of steam engines…
robert1952:
I drove these for a short while on Euro work (before they put me on Moroccan work with artics). IIRC these DAFs had underfloor engines (I’m sure someone will shout if I’m wrong). The downside was that it had to have a bus gearshift called ‘Easyshift’ which was a little stubby switch with an H-pattern and was truly horrible to use! Robert
I had a look around the internet, and could find no pictures of these with underfloor engines. They all had tanks or other chassis paraphernalia on one side or the other. I also had a look at the DAF FCV concept, and the text says the engine was mounted “well forward in the chassis”. Oddly enough, there is mention of Easyshift in connection with that concept vehicle. I reckon it was on those short-cab high-cube wagons because there was no room for an ordinary mechanical linkage.
ParkRoyal2100:
Punchy Dan:
200 views and no mention of sentinel.I hadn’t even thought of steam engines…
Diesels too.
[zb]
anorak:robert1952:
I drove these for a short while on Euro work (before they put me on Moroccan work with artics). IIRC these DAFs had underfloor engines (I’m sure someone will shout if I’m wrong). The downside was that it had to have a bus gearshift called ‘Easyshift’ which was a little stubby switch with an H-pattern and was truly horrible to use! RobertI had a look around the internet, and could find no pictures of these with underfloor engines. They all had tanks or other chassis paraphernalia on one side or the other. I also had a look at the DAF FCV concept, and the text says the engine was mounted “well forward in the chassis”. Oddly enough, there is mention of Easyshift in connection with that concept vehicle. I reckon it was on those short-cab high-cube wagons because there was no room for an ordinary mechanical linkage.
Yes, all that rings bells with me now Anorak and I can remember the fitter explaining to me why ordinary mechanical linkage was impossible - no room, as you say. Cheers, Robert
tyneside:
Somewhere in the late 70’s early 80’s chassis with the gearbox set back from the engine. IIRC There was a conventional bell housing on the engine and then a short prop shaft to the gearbox.Tyneside
This was the same setup as the Big FIAT’s back in the '70’s, made clutch changes easy when down the m/e.
Punchy Dan:
ParkRoyal2100:
Punchy Dan:
200 views and no mention of sentinel.I hadn’t even thought of steam engines…
Diesels too.
I was being sarky. But enlighten me…
There was a Foden timber tractor built in the '30’s that had I think a Gardner 5LW mounted on top of the chassis, sideways behind the cab, apparently because of the ultra short wheelbase it was for weight distribution.
newmercman:
There was also a 4 wheeler ERF that had a 180 Gardner set well back in the chassis. The M series IIRC, looked like a B series.
Shamrock Express (Curries) operated one on the Manchester to N.I route around 1979/80, I think there is a picture of it on this forum somewhere.
bestbooties:
There was a Foden timber tractor built in the '30’s that had I think a Gardner 5LW mounted on top of the chassis, sideways behind the cab, apparently because of the ultra short wheelbase it was for weight distribution.
This is what I was talking about.
Found this pic on a Foden site.
I had a Seddon Atkinson 400 that had a strange engine configuration, it had a 6LXC Gardner that appeared perfectly normal, but it acted as though it wasn’t connected to the drive axle in any way at the approach to a hill [emoji23] [emoji23]
Newmercman-
Ref.The 400 Seddon Atkinson Gardner,that’s the best description I’ve heard.I drove one for John Watney Distillery,albeit it was a 300,but loaded with Ethanol,coming out of the Dartford Tunnel North side escorted, was quite embarrassing to say the least.Happy New year to all the Trucknet folks.Regards,900x20.
Scottish & Newcastle brewery built a prototype front wheel drive rigid dray based around a Bedford TL chassis and named it the ‘Bruce’, after Alan Bruce their Fleet Engineer who started the project. This link (should) illustrate things better;
As strange configurations go, this is up there with the strangest.
I believe Bedford did one too.
GCR2ERF:
Scottish & Newcastle brewery built a prototype front wheel drive rigid dray based around a Bedford TL chassis and named it the ‘Bruce’, after Alan Bruce their Fleet Engineer who started the project. This link (should) illustrate things better;
Fascinating article, thanks for posting it. It never occurred to me to even think of a front-wheel-drive wagon but it certainly fits the bill.
PRACTICALITY
A couple of quick circuits around Edinburgh’s Ingoldstone Show Ground circuit proved the practicality of the front-wheeldrive arrangement.
It handled well, but did allow a fair amount of drive/steer reaction at the steering wheel.
I bet it bl**dy well did. I mean, I know Ford and all the rest have more-or-less got modern FWD cars with 250bhp to handle with little or no torque-steer, but that’s been a bugbear for decades. I can only imagine how a 1980s TL with a back-to-front ■■■■■■■■ Eaton driveline would have handled 