Star down under.:
Now awaits you saying that the 903 was better than the N14 just to spite me.
For crying out loud Carryfast, why would I want to spite you? Don’t judge me by your standard.
As an owner/operator it is my opinion that the 14L ■■■■■■■ was unbeatable, whilst conceding that I was not disappointed by by the Cat 3406. These opinions have been formed from real world experience. I have no experience with any Gardner.
The only advantage 8V92 had over the 903 was initial cost, in every other respect the big ■■■■■■■ was superior; or does your experience contradict that?
Just for the record I was actually paid to evaluate the merits of kit like the 903 v 8v92 from the point of view of both manufacturer and customer.
Back in your fantasy world again, mixing your ambitions up with your abilities.
What employer in their right mind would task a failed apprentice to conduct such research?
At best you would have been a junior member of a team, there to make the tea.
[/quote]
I look forward to the thread now descending into an argument about whether the best tea is PG Tips or Typhoo
Star down under.:
Back in your fantasy world again, mixing your ambitions up with your abilities.
What employer in their right mind would task a failed apprentice to conduct such research?
At best you would have been a junior member of a team, there to make the tea.
Road testing is done by ‘drivers’.
A teamaker generally doesn’t get a class 2 licence paid for by the firm specifically to do that job.
The other senior ‘drivers’ who I worked with had no formal engineering qualifications or training at all to my knowledge.
But we all knew how a truck is put together and works.
So with your superior knowledge tell us in exactly what way was the 903 supposedly better than an 8v92.
While even if by some miracle you could dream anything up in that regard what has that got to do with ■■■■■■■ UK.
The same ■■■■■■■ UK that said let’s wait until around 1985 to fit a bleedin intercooler to the big cam.
Star down under.:
Now awaits you saying that the 903 was better than the N14 just to spite me.
For crying out loud Carryfast, why would I want to spite you? Don’t judge me by your standard.
As an owner/operator it is my opinion that the 14L ■■■■■■■ was unbeatable, whilst conceding that I was not disappointed by by the Cat 3406. These opinions have been formed from real world experience. I have no experience with any Gardner.
The only advantage 8V92 had over the 903 was initial cost, in every other respect the big ■■■■■■■ was superior; or does your experience contradict that?
Just for the record I was actually paid to evaluate the merits of kit like the 903 v 8v92 from the point of view of both manufacturer and customer.
Back in your fantasy world again, mixing your ambitions up with your abilities.
What employer in their right mind would task a failed apprentice to conduct such research?
At best you would have been a junior member of a team, there to make the tea.
I look forward to the thread now descending into an argument about whether the best tea is PG Tips or Typhoo
[/quote]
Yorkshire Tea for me
To be honest…since Robert1952 judged I wrongly used HIS picture…it takes DAYS for me to respond and input…so I am about
to leave TNUK definitely …as all reactions are puzzled and make no sense anymore, thanks TNUK for this policy, take care
I D a new sensible thread that does appear on TN from time to time.
For the next 2 or 3 days trawl through press releases and technical journals etc.
Then launch himself off the key board and proceed to spout his BS on said thread
Keep the BS flowing until most of the usually well informed TN Members are so P— off that they abandon the thread
But the Leatherhead sage keeps going until he has bored the bollox off even only those hardy souls that do make a stand and attempt to make a futile argument against all the BS The Leatherhead One continues to post !
To sum up “CF” is like an annoying terrier he always has to have the last “yap” so you may as well try p---- into the wind on Shap fell
Result “CF” has destroyed another thread on TN !
Down to insecurity from having failed at everything, then reverting to cast himself as a Boys Own hero.
Star down under.:
Now awaits you saying that the 903 was better than the N14 just to spite me.
For crying out loud Carryfast, why would I want to spite you? Don’t judge me by your standard.
As an owner/operator it is my opinion that the 14L ■■■■■■■ was unbeatable, whilst conceding that I was not disappointed by by the Cat 3406. These opinions have been formed from real world experience. I have no experience with any Gardner.
The only advantage 8V92 had over the 903 was initial cost, in every other respect the big ■■■■■■■ was superior; or does your experience contradict that?
Just for the record I was actually paid to evaluate the merits of kit like the 903 v 8v92 from the point of view of both manufacturer and customer.
Back in your fantasy world again, mixing your ambitions up with your abilities.
What employer in their right mind would task a failed apprentice to conduct such research?
At best you would have been a junior member of a team, there to make the tea.
I look forward to the thread now descending into an argument about whether the best tea is PG Tips or Typhoo
[/quote]
I think the TEA will be more on par for me a ex driver, however there seems to be a lot of men on here who do understand the intrici’s of a diesel engine and i enjoy the rivalry of knowledge or supposed knowledge on these posts i think some may have worked in drawing offices.
Now if you want to know about the ■■■■■■■■ KV12. KV 16.that i do know a bit about the sequence
of build.
I must just say the many many lorries i had the privilege to drive for many companies over 34 years, the very last piece of information i wanted to know and was never given was what the engine was and what HP etc ,.the company wanted a driver not a consultant, as they said crack on.
i know DAF was a 28.00,then 3300 then a ATI, then 36.00 ETC ,similar to all makes you drove what you were given no matter as a DRIVER i was never consulted ever about anything ,just did as you were told no matter what engine they had.
You would hear drivers saying i like this, i wouldn’t drive that, etc utter rubbish .
Me being Dutch and at the end of the day European…I don’t mind DAF as by then they used the 500bhp for their own business
and I doubt if many 500bhp were sold in their 2800, 3300 and even 95 series…I remember that a medium-sized fleet asked and
not begged at the DAF-factory to buy a bunch of 10 tractors (in 1980-1985) with ■■■■■■■ under the cab and they were send away
with a false check to have some transportation for them…■■■■■■■ was not a thorough companion for DAF but a sudden help to
come out of the gap till they had something more powerfull themselves and then the bankruptcy came in…predicted? No way!!
Government-money was involved (>8.000FTE involved) so you know everything
peggydeckboy:
I think the TEA will be more on par for me a ex driver, however there seems to be a lot of men on here who do understand the intrici’s of a diesel engine and i enjoy the rivalry of knowledge or supposed knowledge on these posts i think some may have worked in drawing offices.
Now if you want to know about the ■■■■■■■■ KV12. KV 16.that i do know a bit about the sequence
of build.
I must just say the many many lorries i had the privilege to drive for many companies over 34 years, the very last piece of information i wanted to know and was never given was what the engine was and what HP etc ,.the company wanted a driver not a consultant, as they said crack on.
i know DAF was a 28.00,then 3300 then a ATI, then 36.00 ETC ,similar to all makes you drove what you were given no matter as a DRIVER i was never consulted ever about anything ,just did as you were told no matter what engine they had.
You would hear drivers saying i like this, i wouldn’t drive that, etc utter rubbish .
It obviously helps all concerned if the ‘driver’ and the operator and the sales rep and the manufacturers understand that 5 mpg at 32t gross isn’t representative of the potential efficiency of the ■■■■■■■ big cam and bonus points for knowing why it’s not.
IE gear the thing properly, learn to drive it properly and intercool it.
Not to mention price it right by maximising economies of scale.
Instead of which loads of wasted investment in ■■■■■■■ UK, losing almost half of it’s market share, because its potential customers were buying and getting obsolete Gardners when they weren’t buying the foreign competition.
That sort of sums it up and the predictable result on the UK truck manufacturing industry.
Nobody has mentioned the very popular ■■■■■■■ C Series and the L10, Fodens fitted both and we ran both types in six wheelers and they were reliable enough. Ford used the L10 in their Cargo and they were liked by local hauliers, I’m not sure which suitable alternative engines would be available from other UK makers?
windrush:
Nobody has mentioned the very popular ■■■■■■■ C Series and the L10, Fodens fitted both and we ran both types in six wheelers and they were reliable enough. Ford used the L10 in their Cargo and they were liked by local hauliers, I’m not sure which suitable alternative engines would be available from other UK makers?
Pete.
Don’t forget the various models of faultless 11 litres
windrush:
Nobody has mentioned the very popular ■■■■■■■ C Series and the L10, Fodens fitted both and we ran both types in six wheelers and they were reliable enough. Ford used the L10 in their Cargo and they were liked by local hauliers, I’m not sure which suitable alternative engines would be available from other UK makers?
Pete.
I know it is not relevant to the truck industry but also a host of ■■■■■■■ applications for Ag and construction.
Lawrence Dunbar:
Well give me a good old Gardner engine , OK They didnt keep up with modern progress when Turbos came into fashion, But the 150 Gardner doing 10 plus MPG, In the 50/60/70s Made a lot of hauliers like myself a good living, And for CF in his wisdom saying the were only good as boat anchors was an insult to The Lewis Gardner family in my oppinion , was totaly out of order.
This is a shot of the smallest unit we ran at BTS 150LX /DB6:600/Kirkstall BDR and it more or less was a spare unit but was regularly called into front line service at busy times and I clearly recall one afternoon we had to call in a part timer we employed occasionally to run down to Tubby’s at Crick and back on a change over.
So I filled it up and coupled it up to a trailer loaded with 20 ton of Libbys Orange “C”. So it was running at it’s plated weight of 32 ton gvw down and it’s load back was 20/21 ton of woodpulp for the Paper Mill at Beetham. Well I filled it up next morning with 39 gal chocker the same as I had filled it up the day before. So it had covered just over 350 miles and turned in 9 mpg on the round trip running at 32 ton gvw. There was only the 180LXB’s that could manage to turn in that sort of performance and I can say that MK1 ran like a little sewing machine you could hardly hear it on tick over smooth as silk it was ! Cheers Dennis.
windrush:
Nobody has mentioned the very popular ■■■■■■■ C Series and the L10, Fodens fitted both and we ran both types in six wheelers and they were reliable enough. Ford used the L10 in their Cargo and they were liked by local hauliers, I’m not sure which suitable alternative engines would be available from other UK makers?
Pete.
The early L10s that Stirlands operated after bad experiences with the Gardner LXC leaked more oil than the Gardners!!!
Also the L10 suffered premature head gaskets problems and leaking side plate gaskets
Stirlands returned to Gardners with the LXCT range which proved to be very reliable
After Gardners were no longer an option the Rolls/PerkinsTX engine became the mainstay engine of choice
The ■■■■■■■ M11 was a massive improvement over the L10 Stirlands ran more than a dozen of them in ERFs
Once TDG became more involved in vehicle purchasing their buying policy was LeylandDAF/ DAF ERF and Volvo
Stirlands had a Volvo FH12 380 on a long term demo to compere with a ERF EC11 380 on fuel consumption trials
The Volvo chucked a con rod through the block it had done around 300k
Lawrence Dunbar:
Well give me a good old Gardner engine , OK They didnt keep up with modern progress when Turbos came into fashion, But the 150 Gardner doing 10 plus MPG, In the 50/60/70s Made a lot of hauliers like myself a good living, And for CF in his wisdom saying the were only good as boat anchors was an insult to The Lewis Gardner family in my oppinion , was totaly out of order.
0
This is a shot of the smallest unit we ran at BTS 150LX /DB6:600/Kirkstall BDR and it more or less was a spare unit but was regularly called into front line service at busy times and I clearly recall one afternoon we had to call in a part timer we employed occasionally to run down to Tubby’s at Crick and back on a change over.
So I filled it up and coupled it up to a trailer loaded with 20 ton of Libbys Orange “C”. So it was running at it’s plated weight of 32 ton gvw down and it’s load back was 20/21 ton of woodpulp for the Paper Mill at Beetham. Well I filled it up next morning with 39 gal chocker the same as I had filled it up the day before. So it had covered just over 350 miles and turned in 9 mpg on the round trip running at 32 ton gvw. There was only the 180LXB’s that could manage to turn in that sort of performance and I can say that MK1 ran like a little sewing machine you could hardly hear it on tick over smooth as silk it was ! Cheers Dennis.
I totally lost the plot there Bewick.You’re describing 35 mph ‘average’ across a 10 hour driving shift let alone 9.
The first and last time that I ever drove a Gardner engined unit was an emergency when the DAF 2800 wasn’t finished in time from a service.From memory I think it was an 180 ERF B series that had been relegated to yard shunter before it’s sale and deserved meeting with a gas axe bearing in mind it was only around 5 years old.
The instruction was accompanied by much apologies from the guvnor and his agreement that there was no way that it would manage my regular double return run from Feltham-Kilworth-Feltham-Kilworth-Feltham in the driving time.
So only one run and one trailer load each way…
The thing could only manage 45-50 mph flat out and down to less than 30 mph on anything other than flat ground at we’ll under 32t.
So having to employ two drivers to do one nights work or only getting half a night’s work out of it obviously made any small saving in fuel costs moot.
The rest is history.At least for the commercially suicidal idea of staggering on with the NA Gardner instead of ■■■■■■■ and ERf etc getting on with the intercooled 320 + Big Cam when it might have made a difference.
Although agreed the 8LXB/C would have been a relative game changer v the 6 LXB.But both were obsolete by 1980.
windrush:
Nobody has mentioned the very popular ■■■■■■■ C Series and the L10, Fodens fitted both and we ran both types in six wheelers and they were reliable enough. Ford used the L10 in their Cargo and they were liked by local hauliers, I’m not sure which suitable alternative engines would be available from other UK makers?
Pete.
The early L10s that Stirlands operated after bad experiences with the Gardner LXC leaked more oil than the Gardners!!!
Also the L10 suffered premature head gaskets problems and leaking side plate gaskets
Stirlands returned to Gardners with the LXCT range which proved to be very reliable
After Gardners were no longer an option the Rolls/PerkinsTX engine became the mainstay engine of choice
The ■■■■■■■ M11 was a massive improvement over the L10 Stirlands ran more than a dozen of them in ERFs
Once TDG became more involved in vehicle purchasing their buying policy was LeylandDAF/ DAF ERF and Volvo
Stirlands had a Volvo FH12 380 on a long term demo to compere with a ERF EC11 380 on fuel consumption trials
The Volvo chucked a con rod through the block it had done around 300k
Yes the L10’s did sweat oil a lot! First one we had at our quarry was in a Foden eight legger (A175AHL) and the only one we had with a Spicer gearbox. I collected it brand new from Tilcon’s Reddish depot and coincidently we had a ■■■■■■■ fitter doing some warranty work on another Foden with a 14 litre engine working in our workshop. Our TM came to view the new truck and the fitter told him that the L10’s were very troublesome so it was shipped off to one of our Welsh quarries! It did have issues, but eventually returned to our quarry six years later when an OD purchased it and it gave no more trouble. When I drove for a local haulier the two L10’s I had were only running at 26 tonnes gross and apart from waterpumps failing and one turbo we had no problems with them.
The ‘little’ 8 litre C Series 265 in the gaffers truck was also ok, it did have a replacement engine fitted when it was about ten years old though.
The ‘little’ 8 litre C Series 265 in the gaffers truck was also ok, it did have a replacement engine fitted when it was about ten years old though.
Pete.
[/quote]
The C series - at least when fitted to the Dennis Javelin coach - was a great engine, very fuel efficient and if you needed any parts they were(and still are) readily available in the aftermarket. You could get 14mpg out of them.
Also the question (as ■■■■■■■ had a service- and research-center in Gross Gerau (near Frankfurt) to
have the CONTINENTAL-business shaped) besides politics, employment etc…what was more attractive
…to expand that business IN the UK or because many of the manufacturers were not keen on the Continent
to apply ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
NO Carryfast we are NOT in Phantasyland…so be crisp on your ideas and judgement
Good job i didn’t say anything about the Rockwell back axle instead of group 
First one we had at our quarry was in a Foden eight legger (A175AHL) and the only one we had with a Spicer gearbox. I collected it brand new from Tilcon’s Reddish depot and coincidently we had a ■■■■■■■ fitter doing some warranty work on another Foden with a 14 litre engine working in our workshop. Our TM came to view the new truck and the fitter told him that the L10’s were very troublesome so it was shipped off to one of our Welsh quarries! It did have issues, but eventually returned to our quarry six years later when an OD purchased it and it gave no more trouble. When I drove for a local haulier the two L10’s I had were only running at 26 tonnes gross and apart from waterpumps failing and one turbo we had no problems with them.