Why did British Leyland fail?

I worked at Leyland from 1968 to 2004 (no! it wasn’t my fault it went down!)
When I started, Leyland was leading the way with the Ergonomic cab, I believe the first “flat fronted” HGV on the market, with decent proven engines, with the 400 series for the smaller trucks, and the 600/680 series for the heavy trucks, this was also fitted in various guises to buses & coaches, and also the Diesel Multiply Units (DMU’s) running around the railways, the engines were used in all sorts of different applications, generators, pumps etc.
Just about the time that I started there as a young lad, the government of the time “persuaded” the Leyland management to take on the ailing British car industry, in the form of Morris-Austin, Triumph and the other various bits that finished up with the BL badge on.
Leyland then for 10 years pumped all the profit that the Truck & Bus side were making into the car part of the industry, with very little progress being made on anything new in the heavy side, just the odd facelift to the present models.
Suddenly, the Leyland management found that the good products of 10 years ago, had now been left behind by the new trucks coming from Europe, along with the new 40 odd ton weight limit that was coming in. They had to do something quickly, so they came up with the Marathon for the heavier weight limit, with a codged up AEC engine pushed to it’s limits, (later you could have RR or ■■■■■■■■ and a new type of engine for the 24 - 32 ton market, ie. the “Fixed head 500” which turned out to be a disaster and finally broke Leyland!
The 500 engine gave good power, but due not enough time in R&D it had been rushed out into production. A new factory was built on the spurrier site just to manufacture & build the 500 engine.
Once in production. problems started to arise with the engine block cracking between the valves, as there were no cylinder heads, this meant that it was a cab off, engine out and complete engine strip down to fit a new block (approx 40 man hours turn around) This engine was also fitted to the National bus, so you can imagine the problems/ numbers there were. In fact Ribble motors sorted the problem by modifying things so the “old” 680 flat engine could be fitted instead.
The damage to the Leyland name was done, a once proud name was now the laughing stock of all the TV comedians mainly because of all the crap cars that were being produced with the Leyland name on them, and the “British disease” when the workforce in the car industry went on strike at the drop of a hat. Unfortunately, the British public tarred the Leyland Truck & Bus part with the same brush as the car plants. (Whilst I was there, there were only 2 proper strikes in the T&B side, one in around 1969 for 5 weeks, and one in the early 70’s for 2 weeks.
Transport managers had lost faith in the Leyland product, the public laughed at the Leyland name, the management buried their heads in their wallets, and in 1994 (or thereabouts) Leyland went into receivership.
There were a number of potential buyers for the Truck & Bus parts, but once again, the government of the day (as they had a large share in Leyland) decided who would have what. Volvo got the bus plant (& never did make it pay!) with DAF getting the trucks (we were making the roadtrain and the various types of it, plus the roadrunner, both good trucks of their day)
DAF stopped Leyland making roadtrains, as they didn’t want competition with their product in the same weight range. DAF then proceeded to milk Leyland of all that was any good, including their world-wide distributors, putting restrictions on everything.
I’ve never seen management “jollies” before of the scale that DAF bosses did. they even had a executive jet on hire twice or three times a week for trips between Leyland & Eindhoven.
When Leyland-DAF then went bust, the Dutch government bailed out the DAF part of the company, but the British government of the time wouldn’t do the same for the English part (what was left of it!)
Paccar bought the Leyland Trucks Assembly hall, along with the rights to the Leyland name, although DAF still have a % say in the business. (Paccar was one of the strong original bidders in 1994, but the government said No, it had to go to DAF!)
That left the Albion factories in Scotland and the crankshaft manufacturing & fabrication plant in Leyland. American Axles took these on as a package because they actually wanted to be able to bring American axles into Europe through England, without incurring import tax. By shipping completed axles to Scotland, having the wheel nuts screwed onto the wheel bolts, it then became an axle from Britain, thus avoiding any taxes.
They actually didn’t know much about the crankshaft manufacturing, but soon learnt that it was a money-maker, producing crankshafts for all the DAF engines, a Perkins marine engine, and the Rover 75 car engine, all produced on modern up-to-date machinery.
There was also the fabrication plant that produced lots of components for Leyland trucks & Volvo bus, but American axles or “Albion-Automotive” didn’t really want this side of the business, finally closing it down in 2005.
Due to the lack of business now for crankshafts (they’ve obviously not got replacement work to replace the Rover & Perkins stuff) that side is closing in the next few DAYS.
Volvo buses are now made on Poland.

If any dates are a little out, then sorry! I wasn’t making notes at the time.

bowser:
you cant buy british if nothing british is built … you cant blame operators for that …

french buy french because they have that choice , surely.

Thats the point im making,if bl had kept up with the forieners yrs ago and operators had a decent choice maybe things would have been different,but having said that the brits in general,the ,public i mean have never bought british even when they had the chance [not for many yrs anyway].
regards dave.

One problem was quality. dad bought a new Leyland Clydesdale 4 wheeler tipper in 1978. It broke down on its first day out and carried on like that for the 18 months dad owned it. more off the road than on. He finally had enough of it and had a new fiat 159 tipper instead of it, that was one of the best trucks he had. He kept it for 10 years until the iveco ford partnership. After that it got difficult to get parts for it

dafdave:

del949:

I agree,you only have to look back to the launch of the roadtrain,said at the time to be yrs ahead of its time and no sleeper cab.

regards dave.

If the sleeper cab was available when the T45 was launched, it was available soon after.

I drove a brand new Roadtrain for about three years in the late 80s (I previously had a Daf 2500 sleeper) and it was comfortable, modern, mostly reliable and far more sought after on the fleet than the Dafs.

You could also get some kip behind the seats (when waiting to be unloaded) in a standard day cab, unlike most of the other day cabs available.

I liked the Roadtrain, but I think the rot had already set in with the management and the Daf buyout/merger.

TIPIT:
Not wanting to distract from Ramone’s origional question … I can understand B.L. getting into trouble because of the diversity of companies it owned.
But what would you say finished Bedford off ? they looked to have had a strong hold on the light end of the market and M.O.D.
Back to BL again … you would imagine once their money was all in one pot, they would have been able to put the best of it’s ideas together and come up with the right products.
Wasn’t there something printed in Commercial Motor or Motor Transport in the mid 60’s, that sometime in the future they could see there being only 4 or 5 manufactures on the market.
The way the big transport companies have taken over the smaller ones it’s starting to look like the days of varied liveries are numbered now as well, all white or green … Bring back BEWICK’s !!! :wink: :laughing:

Well I did try!!! not very hard,but I did try!! How could I have kept a “straight face” in 1976 and said,right lads,I’ve decided to re-equip with this fine Bl product—the Buffalo!! I’d have been better off using the real thing to pull Ox carts!! at least they would have got to London and back without needing a vet!!!

I dont think anyone can argue with the real biffo as he worked at Leyland and obviously knows his stuff but such a large organisation must have been a nightmare to manage.Why on earth did they merge the cars with the commercials,why didnt the government sell off the profit making sections earlier especially if the various truck companies were making profit .Biffo mentioned the AEC engine working to the limits but didnt DAF use the smaller 680 block and still do at higher power outputs than the 760 or its turbo charged TL12 and "flexitorque versions .Was the TL12 unreliable and thirsty or was it too expensive to build .I dont know if anyone saw the Clarkson documentry on BL but he was chatting to ex salesmen,a manager and union rep and they were laughing about the poor build quality in the car plants,cars arriving at dealers with the wrong door cards in or parts completely missing,the lost days through strike action i think it was run like most state owned buisnesses and local councils,from top to bottom no one cares cos its not there money

Bewick:

TIPIT:
Not wanting to distract from Ramone’s origional question … I can understand B.L. getting into trouble because of the diversity of companies it owned.
But what would you say finished Bedford off ? they looked to have had a strong hold on the light end of the market and M.O.D.
Back to BL again … you would imagine once their money was all in one pot, they would have been able to put the best of it’s ideas together and come up with the right products.
Wasn’t there something printed in Commercial Motor or Motor Transport in the mid 60’s, that sometime in the future they could see there being only 4 or 5 manufactures on the market.
The way the big transport companies have taken over the smaller ones it’s starting to look like the days of varied liveries are numbered now as well, all white or green … Bring back BEWICK’s !!! :wink: :laughing:

Well I did try!!! not very hard,but I did try!! How could I have kept a “straight face” in 1976 and said,right lads,I’ve decided to re-equip with this fine Bl product—the Buffalo!! I’d have been better off using the real thing to pull Ox carts!! at least they would have got to London and back without needing a vet!!!

You could have bought it Dennis and put your moniker on the thing,showed a bit of patriotic support for an ailing British company.
Cheers Dave.

ramone:
I dont think anyone can argue with the real biffo as he worked at Leyland and obviously knows his stuff but such a large organisation must have been a nightmare to manage.Why on earth did they merge the cars with the commercials,why didnt the government sell off the profit making sections earlier especially if the various truck companies were making profit .Biffo mentioned the AEC engine working to the limits but didnt DAF use the smaller 680 block and still do at higher power outputs than the 760 or its turbo charged TL12 and "flexitorque versions .Was the TL12 unreliable and thirsty or was it too expensive to build .I dont know if anyone saw the Clarkson documentry on BL but he was chatting to ex salesmen,a manager and union rep and they were laughing about the poor build quality in the car plants,cars arriving at dealers with the wrong door cards in or parts completely missing,the lost days through strike action i think it was run like most state owned buisnesses and local councils,from top to bottom no one cares cos its not there money

Hi ramone,
Was’nt the V8 AEC engine the forerunner of the same engine used by Scania.
Cheers Dave.

Dave the Renegade:

Bewick:

TIPIT:
Not wanting to distract from Ramone’s origional question … I can understand B.L. getting into trouble because of the diversity of companies it owned.
But what would you say finished Bedford off ? they looked to have had a strong hold on the light end of the market and M.O.D.
Back to BL again … you would imagine once their money was all in one pot, they would have been able to put the best of it’s ideas together and come up with the right products.
Wasn’t there something printed in Commercial Motor or Motor Transport in the mid 60’s, that sometime in the future they could see there being only 4 or 5 manufactures on the market.
The way the big transport companies have taken over the smaller ones it’s starting to look like the days of varied liveries are numbered now as well, all white or green … Bring back BEWICK’s !!! :wink: :laughing:

Well I did try!!! not very hard,but I did try!! How could I have kept a “straight face” in 1976 and said,right lads,I’ve decided to re-equip with this fine Bl product—the Buffalo!! I’d have been better off using the real thing to pull Ox carts!! at least they would have got to London and back without needing a vet!!!

You could have bought it Dennis and put your moniker on the thing,showed a bit of patriotic support for an ailing British company.
Cheers Dave.

There is a tale to this shot! The driver(for that day) the late Roy “Bull” Davies had stopped in the yard entrance as soon as he had got in from Aintree with a load of drums and gone into the traffic office to ask if he was going to be driving that “god awfull motor” (or words to that effect) to-morrow,if so he would go “on the sick”!!! Honest! Dennis.

If you are honest Dennis would you say the ERFs and Atkis were any better than the AECs , Marathons or Buffallos ,Comfort wise the Marathon would probably be best of that group, but the build quality is the thing they struggled with and lack of investment in updating them,The ERFs and Atkis had more engine / gearbox / axle options so maybe its just down to what suited each individual operation ,yeah the 500 fixed head was a disaster but none of them came close to the Volvo/Scanias of the day

Bewick:

TIPIT:
Not wanting to distract from Ramone’s origional question … I can understand B.L. getting into trouble because of the diversity of companies it owned.
But what would you say finished Bedford off ? they looked to have had a strong hold on the light end of the market and M.O.D.
Back to BL again … you would imagine once their money was all in one pot, they would have been able to put the best of it’s ideas together and come up with the right products.
Wasn’t there something printed in Commercial Motor or Motor Transport in the mid 60’s, that sometime in the future they could see there being only 4 or 5 manufactures on the market.
The way the big transport companies have taken over the smaller ones it’s starting to look like the days of varied liveries are numbered now as well, all white or green … Bring back BEWICK’s !!! :wink: :laughing:

Well I did try!!! not very hard,but I did try!! How could I have kept a “straight face” in 1976 and said,right lads,I’ve decided to re-equip with this fine Bl product—the Buffalo!! I’d have been better off using the real thing to pull Ox carts!! at least they would have got to London and back without needing a vet!!!

Dennis still build refuse vehicles and other specialist vehicles,such as fire engines.

No they don’t, the Fire Appliance side went a few years ago and I’m sure they have finished altogether now, John Dennis Coachbuilders (A Grandson of one of the original Dennis Bros) is the only Dennis name attached to any sort of vehicle and they only make bodies. Everybody is struggling even the Scandinavians everybody and his dog seems to worship. Getting back to the original post, British Leyland had no right to survival than any other independant British make, in fact its a wonder they didn’t go down long before they did, there were problems long before the intervention of Volvo and Scania which wasn’t the sole reason why the British commercial vehicle industry lost the world market. They were though one of the many last straws that broke the back. It was all down to incompetance, arrogance and a work force that had discovered blackmail did work. The never had it so good years are responsible for many of the problems we even find ourselves in today because we have failed to learn from past mistakes. The whole of British society changed after WWII even though at first Britain thought it could carry on as before, so its not really a question of why did British Leyland fail but of why did Britain fail and I suppose we all have to take some blame. Franky.

The Atkis and the ERFs were miles better than a poxy Buffalo,and they held their value in the secondhand market as well.You couldn’t give Leylands away once they were seconhand.their value(if they had ever had any) plummeted!!!Sed/Atks unfortunately headed the same way as the Leylands.Dennis.

No its no relation whatsoever,ive read that before but theres no truth in it.I read in the AEC Gazette that when the V8 was causing problems it was someone from Scania who was singing the praises of the AV760 and telling them to invest in what was a sound design

Dave the Renegade:

ramone:
I dont think anyone can argue with the real biffo as he worked at Leyland and obviously knows his stuff but such a large organisation must have been a nightmare to manage.Why on earth did they merge the cars with the commercials,why didnt the government sell off the profit making sections earlier especially if the various truck companies were making profit .Biffo mentioned the AEC engine working to the limits but didnt DAF use the smaller 680 block and still do at higher power outputs than the 760 or its turbo charged TL12 and "flexitorque versions .Was the TL12 unreliable and thirsty or was it too expensive to build .I dont know if anyone saw the Clarkson documentry on BL but he was chatting to ex salesmen,a manager and union rep and they were laughing about the poor build quality in the car plants,cars arriving at dealers with the wrong door cards in or parts completely missing,the lost days through strike action i think it was run like most state owned buisnesses and local councils,from top to bottom no one cares cos its not there money

Hi ramone,
Was’nt the V8 AEC engine the forerunner of the same engine used by Scania.
Cheers Dave.

Was you opinion the same for the AECs and Marathons (which were basically AECs)?

Bewick:
The Atkis and the ERFs were miles better than a poxy Buffalo,and they held their value in the secondhand market as well.You couldn’t give Leylands away once they were seconhand.their value(if they had ever had any) plummeted!!!Sed/Atks unfortunately headed the same way as the Leylands.Dennis.

ramone:
Was you opinion the same for the AECs and Marathons (which were basically AECs)?

Bewick:
The Atkis and the ERFs were miles better than a poxy Buffalo,and they held their value in the secondhand market as well.You couldn’t give Leylands away once they were seconhand.their value(if they had ever had any) plummeted!!!Sed/Atks unfortunately headed the same way as the Leylands.Dennis.

Yes --ditto—Dennis.

ah, The Clydesdale! I remember them, they had rubber chassis, well the long wheel based ones did. the rear propshaft was too long and it shook the drive-train to bits, often the bell housing would part company from the engine block. I spent many an hour drilling/ tapping & helicoiling the engine block to refit those bell housings, then fitting a different prop with a centre bearing.
I’m sure it was the Clydesdale that would also veer sharply one way or the other when braking hard, often not the same way as it had done the previous time!
I also remember one of our bosses taking one on test after the fitter on it just couldn’t get it to behave, he punched the brake pedal and finished up pivoting across the wall of a school playground. We had to fit flitch plates to the chassis rails to strengthen them up and give it more rigidity.

The TL12 engine was basically the AEC engine but has modifications to it , like each cylinder had a small oil pipe directed at the bottom of the piston to assist with lubrication and cooling.
ref DAF using the 680 block, I’ll stand corrected but my failing memory tells me it was MAN that bought the rights to the 600/680 engine and progressed it. like I say, I could be wrong and maybe it was DAF.

The Buffalo wasn’t that bad (apart from the crappy 500 engine) I was however way outdated, the ergonomic cab had been around for some considerable time by then.
The brakes etc were ok, they were a certainly a lot better than the Marathon!

I remember taking a marathon to the test centre with the 44 ton test trailer on (Leyland had an exemption at the time as the max weight was still 32 tons) I was going down a slight hill when a car decided that he was turning right, no indicators, just stopped in the middle of the road. With any “normal” truck there wouldn’t have been a problem, but this marathons braking system had been played with, I stood on the brake pedal but it wasn’t going to stop in time, finally throwing the dead man on to stop it just before I would have had the car as a bonnet motif. needless to say it failed miserably on the brakes at the test centre.

As for the car plants, we hated being tarred with the same brush, we hated them being called “Leylands”

Dieseldogsix:
I did read somewhere a few years back, that although Leyland trucks were profitable, the money was used to prop up the loss making car industry, leaving no cash for further development.

I’ve read this too.It was impossible for BL to make decent cars when all the staff regularly had one hand in the air :laughing:
Someone mentioned the Guy order books being full, weren’t Foden’s doing well when they were finished? Why exactly was Foden axed?

Just to redress the balance,we took delivery of 5 new Scania 400s with the opticruise box earlier this year and we have had them back numerous times for sticking in gear and they still havent solved the problem each time they say theres no fault when there obviously is,we had 1off the road most of last week with a poor attitude from the dealer ,it went back in today.Last week we took delivery of 4 new 450 Volvo FMs 1 went back yesterday for the night heater not working when i enquired about it today they didnt know that they had it in their garage ,then told me it would be ready tomorrow,after a rant we got it back at 2pm…maybe the BL attitude is spreading to Scandinavia!!!

You might have a point there, Ramone…We’ve had problems with Volvo (sorry, Renault Premium in disguise)

Muckaway:

Dieseldogsix:
I did read somewhere a few years back, that although Leyland trucks were profitable, the money was used to prop up the loss making car industry, leaving no cash for further development.

I’ve read this too.It was impossible for BL to make decent cars when all the staff regularly had one hand in the air :laughing:
Someone mentioned the Guy order books being full, weren’t Foden’s doing well when they were finished? Why exactly was Foden axed?

From what I re-call Fodens had reached their sell by date because lets face it by 1980 they were a total joke with the designs they were persisting with.bewick.