Why did British Leyland fail?

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS OLD TIME LORRIES, COMPANIES AND DRIVERS (INTERACT
121

robert1952:

windrush:
Pat lived just at Ogston, Derbys, which is just few miles from me and didn’t make old age alas. He used to do the vintage commercial commentary at our local steam rally. I remember him saying that he couldn’t master the Foden 12 speed box, he had one on test for a couple of days and never managed a decent gearchange!

Pete.

He mastered it in the end though! He wrote a learned article in T&D in '87 comparing all the old-school gearboxes and wrote at some length about the 12-speed Foden. Cheers!

Roberrt

Ah good, the one he said that he struggled with was in one of Ryder’s S40 cabbed artics. “Totally illogical” were his comments. Anyway, gone off topic so had best behave myself, shut up and return to BL’s downfall!! :wink:

Pete.

122

Good thread this, great input not least that of Tomdhu, any relation to Tamdhu the malt
This video is about quality control at the BL car factories or more like the lack of it.
This youtube.com/watch?v=VTCfJKNE2hg being the reason for a post on here, which I have previously put on the Oxford thread, a spoof video with some well known actors, 24 minutes+, delivering the same cars to dealers, it was not unusual to find the badging didn’t correspond to the make/model of the car sometimes, being a bit of a magpie, I made it my “duty” :laughing: to lift/tilt seat cushions and carpets, accumulating nuts, washers etc by the pocketful and sometimes the odd spanner.
Oily

123

oiltreader:
This video is about quality control at the BL car factories or more like the lack of it.
This youtube.com/watch?v=VTCfJKNE2hg

Getting the priorities right by the standards of the day was that page 3 bird really a 38.Wendy looked better to me.Just as well the programme presenter wasn’t checking the measurements on the bits of the cars. :smiling_imp: :laughing:

124

Thanks again Tomdhu for your posts to this thread , do you have any info on the concept cab that AEC were using on the V8 which resembled a Peterbilt , and also the AV506 turbo which never went into production ?

125

oiltreader:
Good thread this, great input not least that of Tomdhu, any relation to Tamdhu the malt

Oily

Same area, same Clan, same name, same family but distance cousins, regrettably. I had to work for a living , starting as an apprentice.

126

ramone:
Thanks again Tomdhu for your posts to this thread , do you have any info on the concept cab that AEC were using on the V8 which resembled a Peterbilt , and also the AV506 turbo which never went into production ?

Afraid not. AEC were given quite a degree of independence in terms of development after the merger in 1962 with the exception of using the Ergo cab. The US style cab-over I think would have been a marvelous idea allowing a larger radiator and better cooling. It could also have been used by Scammell and saved them for paying Motor Panels for the Crusader cab. Same later on with Guy.

Mind you AEC, it has been found since, persisted with development of at least one project in secret after 1962. The first time I saw that cab was on the Internet. Poor cooling under the Ergo was a setback for both AEC & Leyland and probably was the thing that clouded Dr Fogg’s thinking. He thought the way out of gasket problems (caused by the Ergo overheating issue ) was a smaller engine (500) without head gaskets!

At least Dr Fogg got it (partially) right on the overhead cam issue as virtually all today’s top truck engines have overhead cams. What he didn’t anticipate was the move towards wet liners, four valves per cylinder and enhanced piston crown cooling required for really advanced turbocharging.

As to the AV506, I guess AEC engine development had a credibility issue following suspension of the V8 and that combined withe need to rationalise production across the group, meant that the Leyland 411 and 412 came along instead. That said, it was listed as an option in the Marshall in 1976.

127

Well If I may say my little bit, I Ran a lot of Leyland Motors, They were no trouble at all, If I had some problems with them, It was very easily put right, I think the major problem was the money grabbing ■■■■■■■■ they were employed be Leyland , Red Ken ■■■■■■ Leyland inside out, Im a very proud retired Haulage Man, Regards Larry.

128

The 500 wasn’t the first overhead cam Leyland diesel, that distinction goes back to their very first ‘oil’ engine from around 1932/3, which was bored out to become the much respected E102 “8.6” of a year or so later. This engine was I’m told, still being returned to the factory for overhaul in the middle to late 1950s, long after the 680 was in mainstream production.

129

Evening all,

Just to be boring, and perhaps give one or two of you something to meuse about over the festive season…problems, and how to solve them.

Enter into the French market…(and please think about this in relation to the 500 serie Leyland), Berliet with their sensational, (because this is 1970), V825, 12760cc V8,125x130mm 4 valve per cylinder, direct injection performance 2500 rpm gives@300 hp, (sae), under the sensational KB 2400 cab designed in house by the team led by Louis Lepoix, (destined for a 27 year life cycle).

But sadly like the “little” V800 I mentioned earlier, the realisation with operators is sadly far below what the client expected…High fuel and oil consumption, poor starting, smoking under load, piston failure…oh dear, as soon as they were on the road…they were back in the workshop!

Looked great on Berliets stand at the 1970 Paris Show…less so smoking and sullen by the side of the route, over a spreading patch of oil…What to do?

Redesign the whole engine…(imagine the cost)…and in July 72, after approx. 700 units had been sold, STOP PRODUCTION…at mega cost, but it saved the company reputation

Why?

Because in November 1972, (following a major re engineering operation started in 1971), the revised V8 08. 35 . 30, (135x130mm), is launched, smooth reliable economic, first turbo charged, then intercooled, it went from 320 hp, up to 420 in the 90s, when it was dropped in favour of the 6 cylinder 12 litre, because of its higher,performance , and better economy potential.

Operators were compensated by advantageous part exchange, plus over riding discounts on the “new” model…but many had left Berliet behind, for Unic, Saviem, MAN, and Mercedes…but many stayed, and remembered how well they had been looked after!

Perhaps Leyland should have been more generous, more proactive in the field, because the basic products that they offered were quite good, some outstanding, and well able to compete with the competition.

Was it just typical British Manufacturers arrogance , born of lack of understanding of the market that they were selling into? And this engine was only selling into two basic prime market sectors, yet its poor reputation was cataclysmic in impact upon the whole range of lorries. Or was it the unweildly and burocratic relationship between the After Sales Departments, …(Warranty, Parts, Field Service), where safeguarding their own budget took prime consideration over the total effect upon the company…A major, and terminal failure of Senior Management to" grasp the nettle", and realise just how serious the problem was for the corporate body!

But had anyone senior have grasped that nettle, would the consequence have been similar to that of Berliet? Where the cost of surgery simply destroyed the balance sheet…and if so, would it have hastened the end of Leyland?

Lots of Railway Sidings for ones minds to explore on that one!

Happy Christmas to all!

Cheerio for now.

130

To be fair at least a longer stroke 125/135x130 V8 design probably had more potential in it in terms of not being a total loss than either AEC’s over square 130 or 135x114 V8 or the way too small overall capacity of the 500 in addition to all the extra quirks of the fixed head idea.Realistically Leyland’s only hope was for sufficient funding to allow the type of clean sheet design needed at that point and a change in design mindset which foreseeably produced those two no hope lemons and which crippled the 760 at the drawing board stage.

The funding side probably being a non starter from at least the point where BMC was absorbed into Leyland.Instead of cutting it loose from Jaguar and letting it sink. :bulb: :frowning:

131

cav551:
The 500 wasn’t the first overhead cam Leyland diesel, that distinction goes back to their very first ‘oil’ engine from around 1932/3, which was bored out to become the much respected E102 “8.6” of a year or so later. This engine was I’m told, still being returned to the factory for overhaul in the middle to late 1950s, long after the 680 was in mainstream production.

I’m sure that their are overhauling instructions and illustrations for that engine in my 1940’s Motor Repair and Overhauling books Cav.

Pete.

132

^^^
E 102

flickr.com/photos/jp4712/84 … otostream/

flickr.com/photos/jp4712/84 … otostream/

133

cav551:
^^^
E 102

flickr.com/photos/jp4712/84 … otostream/

flickr.com/photos/jp4712/84 … otostream/

Saw my first E102 in this H.D. Beaver circa 1976. It was rated at 7 ton solo or 15 gross.

We borrowed it from a local guy we and put on display at a local show after a quick bit of paint. I’m trying to trace it now.

Any idea of what it might be worth?

134

The 600 and 680 had a bit of a reputation for being a bit of a swine to get the manifolds and injector pipes on and off. That is until you’ve tried it on an E102 - now they really take the biscuit.

135

Saviem:
Perhaps Leyland should have been more generous, more proactive in the field, because the basic products that they offered were quite good, some outstanding, and well able to compete with the competition.

You are right. Their response was too little and far too late. They should have discontinued the V8 much earlier. They did buy back quite a few Mandator V8s but not enough to mend the fences with the truckers.

Saviem:
Was it just typical British Manufacturers arrogance, born of lack of understanding of the market that they were selling into? And this engine was only selling into two basic prime market sectors, yet its poor reputation was cataclysmic in impact upon the whole range of lorries. Or was it the unwieldy and beurocratic relationship between the After Sales Departments, …(Warranty, Parts, Field Service), where safeguarding their own budget took prime consideration over the total effect upon the company…A major, and terminal failure of Senior Management to" grasp the nettle", and realise just how serious the problem was for the corporate body!

At the very top of the engineering hierarchy was Dr Albert Fogg. He had Stokes’ ear, because he was the visionary chosen by Stokes to chart Leyland’s long term engineering design strategy. But he was an academic – totally remote from the “oily” side of the real trucking market. His appointment effectively sidelined Ron Ellis (the MD of Leyland Trucks) in terms of engineering, by removing engineering from his portfolio. Ellis still had responsibility for after-sales service and support. Therefore he was left holding the hot potato. That aside, the Board had collective responsibility for developing a strategy that protected the company’s reputation. They fouled up. They didn’t do enough, quickly enough.

Importantly, the engineering team at Leyland had recently been staffed, at senior level by engineers who came up from AEC and who were the original developers of the V8. They were intimately involved from the beginning and couldn’t be seen to be rubbishing their own project. ( (This contradicts what has been said elsewhere but I will elucidate in greater length on the AEC V8 thread before too long. Watch that space!) ). So, understandably, the top level engineers were in denial. Had they been from the “Leyland” side, who is to say they wouldn’t have rubbished the V8 engine earlier and so cut their losses? About 400 were produced

To compound the V8 problem was their choice of the pneumocyclic gearbox behind it in the Mandator. It suffered with the extra torque. Then there was the abuse caused to the engine by the way some drivers used the semi-auto box and the splitter. The v8 did much better with the constant mesh 6 speed.

One bad engine is bad enough but this coincided with the O.500 debacle and that was on a bigger scale. It affected both trucks and buses and in the latter sector Leyland Group had the market to itself. Disaster on a grand scale. Around 2000 were produced. For a greater insight, there is no better publication than Doug Jack’s “Beyond Reality”

To reinforce the top level procrastination was the fact that demand for trucks and buses was in far in excess of production capacity at that time. I recall then having to quote an overseas customer 23 months delivery on an order for 4 Super Hippos! It was a very frustrating time for us peons at the coal face.

It wasn’t arrogance or failure to understand the market. It was mismanagement at the Leyland Trucks level and mismanagement at the BLMC level. At the BLMC level it is a bit more understandable as they were totally overwhelmed by bigger problems at Austin Morris. (I still refuse to call them “Leyland Cars”)

They hadn’t had a major failure on this scale within the memories of those in charge. There had been problems e.g. with the cross-flow head on the O.400 engine but this was solved quickly. But under the new board structure, the ability to handle a major crisis just didn’t come into play.

Saviem:
But had anyone senior have grasped that nettle, would the consequence have been similar to that of Berliet? Where the cost of surgery simply destroyed the balance sheet…and if so, would it have hastened the end of Leyland? .

Had they grasped the nettle early on, I do sincerely think they could have made it. The O.680 and AV760 could have kept them going quite nicely for another 2 or 3 years. Having seen what other manufacturers were doing, that would have been enough time to overcome their earlier prejudice towards turbo-charging. That way they could have developed the TL12 much earlier. The TL12 was reliable, with good mileage and low warranty costs.
On that basis Chairman Michael Edwardes strategy of splitting off trucks would have kicked in earlier and Leyland would have been saved from the clutches of DAF. And I might have had a much better pension!

Isn’t hindsight marvelous!

Happy Christmas!

136

Bone idle workers I know I saw it with my own eyes, plus they would go on strike if someone ■■■■■■ out of turn

137

SHYTOT:
Bone idle workers I know I saw it with my own eyes, plus they would go on strike if someone ■■■■■■ out of turn

This is true only of the Cars side. The workers at Leyland were totally different. They were hardworking, skilled and committed. The Leyland factory is in the small town of Leyland and apart from Leyland & Birmingham Rubber Co. (of Durex fame) there was no other industry.

Virtually everyone worked at “T’ Motors” so everyone had equity, so to speak, in the company. The union stewards were pretty sensible and totally unlike Red Robbo and his communist cadre in the Midlands.

138

You never went to Bathgate or Scotstoune then well i did and they were bone idle they got what they deserved just like Dagenham Halewood & Basildon,
Theres another large motor manufacturing company in this country building plants abroad and when they are up and running UK plants will shut

139

Tomdhu:

SHYTOT:
Bone idle workers I know I saw it with my own eyes, plus they would go on strike if someone ■■■■■■ out of turn

This is true only of the Cars side. The workers at Leyland were totally different. They were hardworking, skilled and committed. The Leyland factory is in the small town of Leyland and apart from Leyland & Birmingham Rubber Co. (of Durex fame) there was no other industry.

Virtually everyone worked at “T’ Motors” so everyone had equity, so to speak, in the company. The union stewards were pretty sensible and totally unlike Red Robbo and his communist cadre in the Midlands.

It would be reasonable to say the same about Jaguar/Rover/Triumph in the overall scheme of things.Like us when they did strike it was generally a justified last resort case of trying to maintain wages in real terms against an environment of double figure price led inflation.With the general attitude being you pretend to pay us we pretend to work and if we can buy things and pay our mortgages for nothing then we’ll work for nothing. :bulb:

While the combined overall production numbers of cars like the XJ6/12,Rover P6 and Triumph 2000/2.5 as a return on actual investment suggest anything but a lazy poorly motivated workforce. :bulb:

140

SHYTOT:
building plants abroad and when they are up and running UK plants will shut

I think they made exactly the same excuse as yours about closing down the US Fordist system in favour of the Chinese Communist work ethic and economic system.The whole Anglo Saxon world has to be a greedy militant bunch of no hopers to justify your argument.Be careful what you wish for.