Hello all, becoming an executive, in for lunch! (old age has its benifits)! In a later life I ran some Roadtrains, all on an own account contract, average about 120000kms pa, 36 months All were Leyland, Spicer Pence per km they ran to budget, but we did build in a buffer cost to cover extra preventative maintenance and the lower anticipated residual value, compared to “premium” makes. Leyland were unwilling to underwrite a dealer buy back, so we took it on the chin. Gingerfold, do you know what axle went into the French market Roadtrain? for the life of me I cannot remember. Giraud Freres,(not the Giraud Group) the green white and red ones, ran them, and loved them, but they did do UK work. That prototype AEC looks the business, and underlines my sadness that Willeme and AEC did not become closer, the synergy in engineering design was obviously there. Just think AEC would have benifited from the Willeme TB Range of 6x4 6x6 8x4 and 8x8 150 to 300 ton heavies, (not forgetting the 1000 tonner for China)!! That would have given Watford something to think about. Cheerio bye bye , (all pray for rain please)!!
sorry if somones already said this but,as i lost the will to live after reading the first to pages, yes continental lorries were/are better if they wernt why did foden, erf, leyland etc all dissapear.i tell ya why cus they were crap , foden only got any good when the were a daf cf with a foden badge the only decent erfs were the ec with 14litre ■■■■■■■ and ecx with the 525 ■■■■■■■ and you only bought them cuz of the driveline
Saviem:
Hello all, becoming an executive, in for lunch! (old age has its benifits)! In a later life I ran some Roadtrains, all on an own account contract, average about 120000kms pa, 36 months All were Leyland, Spicer Pence per km they ran to budget, but we did build in a buffer cost to cover extra preventative maintenance and the lower anticipated residual value, compared to “premium” makes. Leyland were unwilling to underwrite a dealer buy back, so we took it on the chin. Gingerfold, do you know what axle went into the French market Roadtrain? for the life of me I cannot remember. Giraud Freres,(not the Giraud Group) the green white and red ones, ran them, and loved them, but they did do UK work. That prototype AEC looks the business, and underlines my sadness that Willeme and AEC did not become closer, the synergy in engineering design was obviously there. Just think AEC would have benifited from the Willeme TB Range of 6x4 6x6 8x4 and 8x8 150 to 300 ton heavies, (not forgetting the 1000 tonner for China)!! That would have given Watford something to think about. Cheerio bye bye , (all pray for rain please)!!
Might the axle you were thinking about be a “Soma” (spelling!) Cheers Dennis.
Bewick:
Saviem:
Hello all, becoming an executive, in for lunch! (old age has its benifits)! In a later life I ran some Roadtrains, all on an own account contract, average about 120000kms pa, 36 months All were Leyland, Spicer Pence per km they ran to budget, but we did build in a buffer cost to cover extra preventative maintenance and the lower anticipated residual value, compared to “premium” makes. Leyland were unwilling to underwrite a dealer buy back, so we took it on the chin. Gingerfold, do you know what axle went into the French market Roadtrain? for the life of me I cannot remember. Giraud Freres,(not the Giraud Group) the green white and red ones, ran them, and loved them, but they did do UK work. That prototype AEC looks the business, and underlines my sadness that Willeme and AEC did not become closer, the synergy in engineering design was obviously there. Just think AEC would have benifited from the Willeme TB Range of 6x4 6x6 8x4 and 8x8 150 to 300 ton heavies, (not forgetting the 1000 tonner for China)!! That would have given Watford something to think about. Cheerio bye bye , (all pray for rain please)!!Might the axle you were thinking about be a “Soma” (spelling!) Cheers Dennis.
This thread is going to be a bit quiet with Carryfast going to Le Mans in his Detroit powered Jag.Well I say " the very best of luck to the French " 
.
Cheers Dave.
Carryfast:
The issue of the export market for used trucks is a different one but the buying criteria of the average buyer,in the type of markets where those are sold,probably is’nt much different to that of a new start owner driver here looking for a good used wagon for long distance subbing.That criterea is keep it simple,big enough engine with enough power to cover plenty of miles in the course of a working day,and for the thing not to have worked too hard during it’s lifetime and to,hopefully,give it a good chance of having plenty more miles left in it when hauling as much payload as possible,with a comfortable enough cab to live with.
This is probably the wrong place for this, but it was mentioned several times that Carryfast begrudges railway wagons taking his work and stopping him getting a proper long distance job in the 60’ 70’s and 80’s. It was that reason that I thought this transport statistics report may be of interest.
You can see that in 1974 we carried a lot less for much shorter distances and that apart from 1989 the transport industry increased the amount it was carrying by road.
So between 1974 and 1997 the tonne kms increased year on year. The important dates for gross weight increases were in;
1964 - 32 ton
1968 - 32 ton [32500kg] (40’ trailers allowed)
1982 - 38000kg.
1997 - 44000kg (6 Axle Intermodal)
1999 - 40000kg (5 Axles)
2001 - 44000kg (Everything on 6 axles)
So despite his protestations that the railways get all the work, all the subsidies and are taking much of the profitable work away from road hauliers, it simply isn’t true. Coal and coke are carried by rail in huge quantities, but the road transport industry has increased steadily over the last 25 years and in 2008 the roads had carried 87% of the goods. The next biggest winner was fuel, oils and chemicals carried by inland waterways and mainly by pipeline.
I have posted this link before, but it is a great reminder of where we have come from, and in the words of a dragon, where we are now…
rchs.org.uk/trial/4-2%20Road%20haulage.pdf
It opens in a pdf reader
kr79:
Was a Detroit engine avaliable in the scammell crusader or am I imagining it
Hi kr79 as far as I can recall the crusader 4x2 only had rolls engines but the 6x4 were D/D V8s with the rolls as an alternative and I believe the M O D ones were nearly all rolls powered but only being an illiterate retired lorry driver I could be wrong again.
The first one I came across was the “Samson” as I was working at Pickfords Sheffield depot when it came and we did not know what was coming as the grapevine was telling us that it was an Atkinson 6x4 ballast box tractor which was allegedly stopped by B L as it was rumored that they would not supply any more Scammell Contractors if Pickfords took delivery of the big Atkinson and so the Samson came.
The chap who was having it ended up with a 4x2 Atkinson viewline ballast tractor and we heard there was a new Scammell coming but we did not hear anything about it until it was at the motor show which was unusual as something came out on the grapevine and we were all surprised at the choice of engine as everything was coming with ■■■■■■■ engines over 20 tons payload.
I left around 75 and went onto tankers for Sykes and they were a big user of crusaders running well over 100 and they were all 4x2 rolls engines and personally I thought they were a decent wagon and fairly reliable (well the ones I had were ) and I can only say from my own experiences.
cheers Johnnie
Dave the Renegade:
Bewick:
Saviem:
Hello all, becoming an executive, in for lunch! (old age has its benifits)! In a later life I ran some Roadtrains, all on an own account contract, average about 120000kms pa, 36 months All were Leyland, Spicer Pence per km they ran to budget, but we did build in a buffer cost to cover extra preventative maintenance and the lower anticipated residual value, compared to “premium” makes. Leyland were unwilling to underwrite a dealer buy back, so we took it on the chin. Gingerfold, do you know what axle went into the French market Roadtrain? for the life of me I cannot remember. Giraud Freres,(not the Giraud Group) the green white and red ones, ran them, and loved them, but they did do UK work. That prototype AEC looks the business, and underlines my sadness that Willeme and AEC did not become closer, the synergy in engineering design was obviously there. Just think AEC would have benifited from the Willeme TB Range of 6x4 6x6 8x4 and 8x8 150 to 300 ton heavies, (not forgetting the 1000 tonner for China)!! That would have given Watford something to think about. Cheerio bye bye , (all pray for rain please)!!Might the axle you were thinking about be a “Soma” (spelling!) Cheers Dennis.
This thread is going to be a bit quiet with Carryfast going to Le Mans in his Detroit powered Jag.Well I say " the very best of luck to the French "
Cheers Dave.
Don’t panic Dave having seen the lap times of the Astons I changed my mind because the zb French probably would’nt be able to stop themselves laughing when they hear another Brit moaning about the zb French regs that have made them fit a zb 2 Litre six cylinder motor in a car that should have a supercharged 6.0 Litre V12 in it and I suppose that Saviem will blame the Brits for that too. 
sammyopisite:
kr79:
Was a Detroit engine avaliable in the scammell crusader or am I imagining itHi kr79 as far as I can recall the crusader 4x2 only had rolls engines but the 6x4 were D/D V8s with the rolls as an alternative and I believe the M O D ones were nearly all rolls powered but only being an illiterate retired lorry driver I could be wrong again.
The first one I came across was the “Samson” as I was working at Pickfords Sheffield depot when it came and we did not know what was coming as the grapevine was telling us that it was an Atkinson 6x4 ballast box tractor which was allegedly stopped by B L as it was rumored that they would not supply any more Scammell Contractors if Pickfords took delivery of the big Atkinson and so the Samson came.
The chap who was having it ended up with a 4x2 Atkinson viewline ballast tractor and we heard there was a new Scammell coming but we did not hear anything about it until it was at the motor show which was unusual as something came out on the grapevine and we were all surprised at the choice of engine as everything was coming with ■■■■■■■ engines over 20 tons payload.
I left around 75 and went onto tankers for Sykes and they were a big user of crusaders running well over 100 and they were all 4x2 rolls engines and personally I thought they were a decent wagon and fairly reliable (well the ones I had were ) and I can only say from my own experiences.
cheers Johnnie
I always wonder why the Marathon project was pursued when the presumably the Crusader could’ve been developed further to provide a premium motor.
sammyopisite:
kr79:
Was a Detroit engine avaliable in the scammell crusader or am I imagining itHi kr79 as far as I can recall the crusader 4x2 only had rolls engines but the 6x4 were D/D V8s with the rolls as an alternative and I believe the M O D ones were nearly all rolls powered but only being an illiterate retired lorry driver I could be wrong again.
The first one I came across was the “Samson” as I was working at Pickfords Sheffield depot when it came and we did not know what was coming as the grapevine was telling us that it was an Atkinson 6x4 ballast box tractor which was allegedly stopped by B L as it was rumored that they would not supply any more Scammell Contractors if Pickfords took delivery of the big Atkinson and so the Samson came.
The chap who was having it ended up with a 4x2 Atkinson viewline ballast tractor and we heard there was a new Scammell coming but we did not hear anything about it until it was at the motor show which was unusual as something came out on the grapevine and we were all surprised at the choice of engine as everything was coming with ■■■■■■■ engines over 20 tons payload.
I left around 75 and went onto tankers for Sykes and they were a big user of crusaders running well over 100 and they were all 4x2 rolls engines and personally I thought they were a decent wagon and fairly reliable (well the ones I had were ) and I can only say from my own experiences.
cheers Johnnie
I think they put a V8 AEC in the Crusader for a very short time too ,but im not certain
kr79:
gingerfold:
Some development was on-going at AEC circa 1970
1
0It’s a good job you don’t drive today then as modern engines use the Gardner let it lug principle.
If you listen to people on this thread who know what they are talking about you can see a lot of the problem was the attitude of the British truck builders and Gardner with there attitude of this is the way we do things like it or lump it. We know they were capable of building trucks suitable for Australia with big power and cabs but didn’t offer us nothing new or in leylands case offer new stuff but expect customers to discover all the problems with it.
Looking at this aec prototype you can see they were going in the right direction but we ended up with the marathon a parts bin special which looked like olive from on the buses compared to scanias lb 110/140 designed by an English man which looked like Britt ekland if you get my drift.
We have gone on about the f88 etc but really the truck that cemented volvos reputation for quality in the uk was the humble little f86.
And if people on the thread knew what they are talking about they’d know that there’s no way that a 9 Litre engine can be driven in the same way as a 14 Litre one can even if you are one of the lot who run something almost to a standstill before dropping a gear.
youtube.com/watch?v=lfyIeO6z … re=related 4.00-425
youtube.com/watch?v=FVE8s5aXkQs
1969 Detroit power versus 1970’s Brit and the scammell is probably empty 
Page number 8 on this thread and still no one has realised that its futile trying to beat CF down in an argument. As you were chaps 
MrHappy:
Page number 8 on this thread and still no one has realised that its futile trying to beat CF down in an argument. As you were chaps
It’s only futile if you’re wrong. 
Carl:
sorry if somones already said this but,as i lost the will to live after reading the first to pages, yes continental lorries were/are better if they wernt why did foden, erf, leyland etc all dissapear.i tell ya why cus they were crap , foden only got any good when the were a daf cf with a foden badge the only decent erfs were the ec with 14litre ■■■■■■■ and ecx with the 525 ■■■■■■■ and you only bought them cuz of the driveline
Hi carl when the continental’s first arrived I would not say they were better but certainly more comfortable most of them were very poor on hilly terrain as there was very little motorway’s then and they were all fairly quick on the flat but inferior on the hills I would say the first one that pulled well was the Scania 110 though it did have a tendency to twist prop shafts, then the 240 Volvo but I am sure these were designed for 48 tons GTW in their native country.
The 250 bhp ■■■■■■■ and the 280 bhp rolls would out pull them as well as the 240 Gardner but it did not take long for them to upgrade their engines to equal and then pass what we had to offer which most british manufacturers failed to realize and this lack of foresight was the beginning of the end of our lorry manufacturing industry.
The mid 70s saw the build quality and service back up deteriorate with a could not care less attitude of the our work force.
cheers Johnnie
Carryfast:
MrHappy:
Page number 8 on this thread and still no one has realised that its futile trying to beat CF down in an argument. As you were chapsIt’s only futile if you’re wrong.
Thats it,“carryfasts” new non de plume----------- “carryfast the futile” or in french at Le Man------- “carryfast le futile” Has a certain ring of truth about it don’t you think lads? Cheers Bewick.
sammyopisite:
Carl:
sorry if somones already said this but,as i lost the will to live after reading the first to pages, yes continental lorries were/are better if they wernt why did foden, erf, leyland etc all dissapear.i tell ya why cus they were crap , foden only got any good when the were a daf cf with a foden badge the only decent erfs were the ec with 14litre ■■■■■■■ and ecx with the 525 ■■■■■■■ and you only bought them cuz of the drivelineHi carl when the continental’s first arrived I would not say they were better but certainly more comfortable most of them were very poor on hilly terrain as there was very little motorway’s then and they were all fairly quick on the flat but inferior on the hills I would say the first one that pulled well was the Scania 110 though it did have a tendency to twist prop shafts, then the 240 Volvo but I am sure these were designed for 48 tons GTW in their native country.
The 250 bhp ■■■■■■■ and the 280 bhp rolls would out pull them as well as the 240 Gardner but it did not take long for them to upgrade their engines to equal and then pass what we had to offer which most british manufacturers failed to realize and this lack of foresight was the beginning of the end of our lorry manufacturing industry.
The mid 70s saw the build quality and service back up deteriorate with a could not care less attitude of the our work force.
cheers Johnnie
Hiya Johnnie,the reason the Scania sometimes twisted the prop shaft was a deliberate weak spot they created! A propshaft was easier to replace than stripping the diff down if a half shaft broke! I know,a bit of useless info but true all the same.Cheers dennis.
And if people on the thread knew what they are talking about they’d know that there’s no way that a 9 Litre engine can be driven in the same way as a 14 Litre one can even if you are one of the lot who run something almost to a standstill before dropping a gear.
I have been very lucky with the lorries i have driven , due to me not knowing what i`m talking about the manufacturers have very kindly fitted rev counters with nice green bands on them and i have been told to keep the needle in that section as thats where i would get the most efficent performance … not sure what that means as im very limited
Hiya Johnnie,the reason the Scania sometimes twisted the prop shaft was a deliberate weak spot they created! A propshaft was easier to replace than stripping the diff down if a half shaft broke! I know,a bit of useless info but true all the same.Cheers dennis.
[/quote]
Hi Dennis that makes sense to me anyway as I knew a firm who did low loader work with a 110 carried a spare prop shaft with them so the crew could change it themselves.
cheers Johnnie
P S you may want to book a holiday as I am coming over to your coast ( well just south of you to the tower ) in 3 weeks for the weekend for a family wedding. 
ramone I could have done with some needles of the pain killing type as when I first started you had a speedo that said you could do 0 to 35 in about .005 seconds a temp. gauge and a little arm that would pop up saying stop but when you saw it you couldn’t old Cliff who taught me had a piece of hardwood 2x2 which was excellent ( though painful ) for making sure you concentrated on what you were doing, as he only told you once. I will say that he taught me a lot and kept me doing things the correct way for the rest of my lorry driving career.
cheers Johnnie
Carryfast:
MrHappy:
Page number 8 on this thread and still no one has realised that its futile trying to beat CF down in an argument. As you were chapsIt’s only futile if you’re wrong.
I think you’ve just proved beyond reasonable doubt my point. No further questions Your Honour
sammyopisite:
ramone I could have done with some needles of the pain killing type as when I first started you had a speedo that said you could do 0 to 35 in about .005 seconds a temp. gauge and a little arm that would pop up saying stop but when you saw it you couldn’t
cheers Johnnie
ha ha my dad told me about those little pop up arms