Earlier in this thread someone (i think Dennis) mentioned quite correctly that Leyland and AEC were manufacturers and the likes of ERF and Atkinson amongst others were assemblers ,obviously Leyland got it badly wrong and dragged AEC with them and the rest of the group but were there any foreign assemblers at the time ,looking whats left in europe now i cant think of 1 ,the Americans still have them but the trend in europe is manufacturing ,obviously building your vehicles from scratch with in house components has got to be better than buying in ,even Leyland became an assembler to a certain extent near the end using ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Royce engines and Fuller /Spicer boxes anyone got any thoughts on this?
ramone:
Earlier in this thread someone (i think Dennis) mentioned quite correctly that Leyland and AEC were manufacturers and the likes of ERF and Atkinson amongst others were assemblers ,obviously Leyland got it badly wrong and dragged AEC with them and the rest of the group but were there any foreign assemblers at the time ,looking whats left in europe now i cant think of 1 ,the Americans still have them but the trend in europe is manufacturing ,obviously building your vehicles from scratch with in house components has got to be better than buying in ,even Leyland became an assembler to a certain extent near the end using ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Royce engines and Fuller /Spicer boxes anyone got any thoughts on this?
It’s called “vertical intergration” “ramone” Scania,Volvo and Renault and Mercedes could be described as this.About the only component (for some reason) that was bought in by these firms was ZF power steering units although Mercs did use the ZF gearbox until they launched their own.I’m not too sure about Le Frog as I am straying onto “Saviem” territory and I never was,until latter years,involved with French motors!Cheers Dennis.
Bewick:
ramone:
Earlier in this thread someone (i think Dennis) mentioned quite correctly that Leyland and AEC were manufacturers and the likes of ERF and Atkinson amongst others were assemblers ,obviously Leyland got it badly wrong and dragged AEC with them and the rest of the group but were there any foreign assemblers at the time ,looking whats left in europe now i cant think of 1 ,the Americans still have them but the trend in europe is manufacturing ,obviously building your vehicles from scratch with in house components has got to be better than buying in ,even Leyland became an assembler to a certain extent near the end using ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Royce engines and Fuller /Spicer boxes anyone got any thoughts on this?It’s called “vertical intergration” “ramone” Scania,Volvo and Renault and Mercedes could be described as this.About the only component (for some reason) that was bought in by these firms was ZF power steering units although Mercs did use the ZF gearbox until they launched their own.I’m not too sure about Le Frog as I am straying onto “Saviem” territory and I never was,until latter years,involved with French motors!Cheers Dennis.
The Renaults had their own 18 speed “knockover” box ,the only good thing i have to say about them was that the Major cab in my opinion was a decent cab ,much better than its replacement the Premium
The major cab. Was that the old berliet cab.
kr79:
The major cab. Was that the old berliet cab.
Yeah,and an old design but imho very comfortable roomy and quiet
Unfortunately, any time I think of British Leyland nowadays reminds me of the famous sink plughole 
It is embarrasing
ramone:
Earlier in this thread someone (i think Dennis) mentioned quite correctly that Leyland and AEC were manufacturers and the likes of ERF and Atkinson amongst others were assemblers ,obviously Leyland got it badly wrong and dragged AEC with them and the rest of the group but were there any foreign assemblers at the time ,looking whats left in europe now i cant think of 1 ,the Americans still have them but the trend in europe is manufacturing ,obviously building your vehicles from scratch with in house components has got to be better than buying in ,even Leyland became an assembler to a certain extent near the end using ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Royce engines and Fuller /Spicer boxes anyone got any thoughts on this?
sisu (finland) have beeing (leyland,rr,■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ engines,fuller zf box) own chassies axels (and cab to 97,then renault) from -11 a mecedes under brand ,driveline and cab m-b in a finish frame, they make a few hundred motors in year. 
same strugeling for last 30 years, seems like the same like BL in small scale 
hej bma
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately, any time I think of British Leyland nowadays reminds me of the famous sink plughole
Ha ha Wheel Nut, i never noticed that before , the only problem with it is that it only has a L in the middle bearing in mind how many good companies they took down with them having said that the logo would have to be big to get all those companies initials on it . 
ramone:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately, any time I think of British Leyland nowadays reminds me of the famous sink plugholeHa ha Wheel Nut, i never noticed that before , the only problem with it is that it only has a
Lin the middle bearing in mind how many good companies they took down with them having said that the logo would have to be big to get all those companies initials on it .
It was supposed to have been drawn by a junior draughtsman after a pub lunch and his thoughts about the merged company. One of the top brass liked the design without realising what he had commissioned.
True story or Not. I like the idea!
Wheel Nut:
ramone:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately, any time I think of British Leyland nowadays reminds me of the famous sink plugholeHa ha Wheel Nut, i never noticed that before , the only problem with it is that it only has a
Lin the middle bearing in mind how many good companies they took down with them having said that the logo would have to be big to get all those companies initials on it .It was supposed to have been drawn by a junior draughtsman after a pub lunch and his thoughts about the merged company. One of the top brass liked the design without realising what he had commissioned.
True story or Not. I like the idea!
I thought the logo was designed to co-incide with the development of the Gas Turbine truck in the mid 1960s. The logo` was to depict the " spinner " part of the turbine.
I have also been told that the rude name for the logo was The spinning A***hole .
Cheers, cattle wagon man.
cattle wagon man:
Wheel Nut:
ramone:
Wheel Nut:
Unfortunately, any time I think of British Leyland nowadays reminds me of the famous sink plugholeHa ha Wheel Nut, i never noticed that before , the only problem with it is that it only has a
Lin the middle bearing in mind how many good companies they took down with them having said that the logo would have to be big to get all those companies initials on it .It was supposed to have been drawn by a junior draughtsman after a pub lunch and his thoughts about the merged company. One of the top brass liked the design without realising what he had commissioned.
True story or Not. I like the idea!
I think i prefer Wheel Nuts version which is probably nearer the truth quote “one of the top brass liked the design without realising what he had commissioned” … sounds familiar to me lol
I thought the logo was designed to co-incide with the development of the Gas Turbine truck in the mid 1960
s. Thelogo` was to depict the " spinner " part of the turbine.I have also been told that the rude name for the logo was
The spinning A***hole.Cheers, cattle wagon man.
British Leyland failed because of the Government and unions and a load of lazy (zbs) who thought they would have jobs for life!!.Just like it is here now in Canada!!!.
scaniaontheroad:
British Leyland failed because of the Government and unions and a load of lazy (zbs) who thought they would have jobs for life!!.Just like it is here now in Canada!!!.
You seem to have forgotten that Thatcher won the 1979 election and everything here since has all been about her tory utopia of the global free market economy with the resulting massive trade deficit and wages lagging behind prices and unions that are too weak to do anything about it and look where the economy is now.
Beats me how they failed, when they could build kit like this!
Carryfast:
scaniaontheroad:
British Leyland failed because of the Government and unions and a load of lazy (zbs) who thought they would have jobs for life!!.Just like it is here now in Canada!!!.You seem to have forgotten that Thatcher won the 1979 election and everything here since has all been about her tory utopia of the global free market economy with the resulting massive trade deficit and wages lagging behind prices and unions that are too weak to do anything about it and look where the economy is now.
You’re forgetting the fact that BL as a whole produced crap; The Marathon was only a new chassis with leftover AEC bits glued on top; The Constructor went ok but someone forvot about driver comfort…What was “Super” about the Super Mastiff or any of the Scottish baked bean cans? BL cars were so crap it’s amazing to see so many Marinas and Itals still around.
Leyland should’ve merged with Bedford; 2x ■■■■ poor manufacturers together.
Simple, while BL were turning out Mandators, Scania were turning out the 111, when they were turning out the Marathon Scania the 112. As a kid I wanted a 111, by the time I started in the mid 70’s Leyland were already a joke.
Muckaway:
BL cars were so crap it’s amazing to see so many Marinas and Itals still around.
I’ve got an (admittedly modified but nothing that wasn’t available at the time) old early 1980’s (1970’s design) Jag that says you’re wrong unless that is you know a way to make a BMW built at the same time (assuming you can find one that hasn’t rusted away) using it’s original zb Ford type steering set up and Mc Pherson strut front and semi trailing arm rear type suspension run at the same speed with the same handling and straight line stability.But don’t bother using an M5 of the time because it still wouldn’t be fast enough. 
However if you really prefer the BMW suspension set up there was always the much cheaper 1970’s Triumph 2.5 instead although Leyland did throw in rack and pinion steering as a no cost extra on that as standard.
ghosttrain:
Simple, while BL were turning out Mandators, Scania were turning out the 111, when they were turning out the Marathon Scania the 112. As a kid I wanted a 111, by the time I started in the mid 70’s Leyland were already a joke.
To be fair they could also turn out stuff like this given customers who had a clue what they wanted.You can bet if Scania could have turned out something better for less money that’s what the mod would have bought. 
Sorry don’t agree, they continued to turn out rubbish compared to Scania and Volvo which the most prosperous companies of the time used ( I did have a Mandator for a time and it was comparable to '60s types). Poor reliability and years behind the times. The MOD were stuck with what the government told them they could buy.
ghosttrain:
Sorry don’t agree, they continued to turn out rubbish compared to Scania and Volvo which the most prosperous companies of the time used ( I did have a Mandator for a time and it was comparable to '60s types). Poor reliability and years behind the times. The MOD were stuck with what the government told them they could buy.
Blimey so there was actually a Scania on the market which would have done a better job of hauling Challengers around than the Commander could for less money. 
Which Scania would that have been considering the actual comparison in spec that you’re going to need to even match it .
As for poor reliabilty and years behind the times you’re actually talking about a point in time when many/most British operators/customers preferred day cabbed Gardner powered heaps to anything which Leyland might otherwise have been able to put on the drawing board instead.So they left it to DAF to provide for the more far sighted euro market who,no surprise,then together with the Scandinavians amongst others cleaned up in the British market when the Brit customers eventually realised that the early 20 th century was over.