andrew.s:
Lilladan:
but i agree with you Carryfast very dark forces were behind mister Chirchill , then after WW2 that he wanted he said looks like we slaugter the wrong pig!
are you suggesting that churchill wanted WW2?
While it would be unfair to say that Churchill wanted WW2 it would be fair to say that any good that his leadership did in WW2 was outweighed by his enthusiasm for not only needlessly taking us into WW1 but also entering it on the wrong side when he did.WW2 of course being a direct result of the circumstances in Germany caused by the damage which the aftermath of WW1 did to it’s economy and government systems and the resulting distortion of it’s public perceptions of reality and moral decency.
Firstly the question was why did the British truck manufacturing industry lose out against the euro and scandinavian competition.There’s no way that you can answer that question in detail without factoring in the long term damage caused to the UK economy by our involvement in WW1 and WW2 which directly resulted from the aftermath.
As for the cause of WW1 it was Russian militarism and the Russian government which kicked off the circumstances which led to a small localised issue in the Balkans between Austria and Serbia turning into WW1. With more than a bit of help from the two militaristic powers of France and Britain.I’m guessing that you didn’t see the facts presented in 37 days related to the Kaiser’s stop and reversal of the original German advance into Lux/Belgium when he ‘thought’ that he had a guarantee that both us and France would stay out of the argument between Austria and Serbia.Which Russian belligerence turned into aggression against Germany which France supported.Under those circumstances there was no way that Britain could/should have made a credible case to join the war on the side of France which Churchill and the government actually did.Whereas neutrality of both France and Britain or Britain joining the war on the side of Germany would,by implication,obviously have guaranteed Belgium’s neutrality.Being that in either case there would have been no need for a German attack on France to defend itself from attack from the West by France in support of Russia.Which was the ( justifiable ) reason for the German advance through Belgium.In addition to stopping WW1 before it had begun on the Eastern front between Russia and Germany being that more/most of Germany’s forces wouldn’t have been needed on the Western front.
The so called defence of Belgium’s neutrality was just a pre text for the UK government’s support of France and Russia having been blackmailed by the Tsar’s threat of Russian action against British interests in Asia if we didn’t join Russia’s aggression against Germany.
Unfortunately and inconveniently the facts don’t fit your typically British education system spun version of history.Which the King and his wife at the time obviously seemed to have realised when it was all too late. 
[/quote]
Spot on again carryfast ,
When i went to Bougey Nantwich , i thought ERF were top trucks ,but not my cup of coffee , too much noise ect , but when i looked in the defect book it was a surprise , again to find trouble with Gardners ect (sorry not ■■■■■■■■■ , i thought Gardners were too slow but good engines , then we had one at Grimsby England worn out at two years ! a 240 straight eight (255 horse) , it is not possible to thrash it at 1800 rpm max , so it was strange 
but even the bombproof V8 Merc went wrong later
I doubt if the reasons for the battle being lost are anything to do with whether or not the trucks were good enough or the back-up strong enough. Britain lost almost its entire engineering / manufacturing / export base and to assess why this happened we have to look at the much wider picture. This is why it is entirely relevant that most contributors to this thread are examining political and historical events, trends and changes in their search for answers. Robert
is this trucknet or university challenge, to much thinking can kill you, 
the simple fact is we didn’t keep up and change, just like now 
we are our own worst enemies,british built used to mean the best but not any more im sad to say,can anyone on here tell me they would sooner have a british truck over a swede back in the 70s and 80s, you drove what you were given 
I worked for onward for a long time, I started on a daf believe it or not back in 1972, I think onward/ackworth were the only firm that had them, but they went eventually then along came the scammell trunkers–Leyland beavers–crusaders–buffalos–then erf came along and were quite good but we were all jealous of the Volvos/scanias 
,now all we make in this country is sweets, and well what else don’t no, does anybody know ?
Sometimes the grass looks greener on the other side of the fence. Everyone kept saying that the Scandinavian trucks were better but I preferred driving ERFs to Volvos and Scanias, but felt I that ought to be preferring what it was fashionable to prefer. Foreign badges were fast becoming designer items in the '70s and '80s: your Mercs and Volvos were the Guccis and Nikes of the day. I’m not saying this was the only reason, but the fashion-consciousness of the transport sector had a little to do with it! Robert
Quite amazing Carryfast!
You must be in a very special position to have access to all these ‘facts’ to which eminent historians who have spent lifetimes of research on the subject don’t have.
Your ridiculous version of the reasons for the outbreak of the first world war is so risible as to be not worth countering.
I only studied the matter at degree level so am in no position to pontificate.
The basic problem is that your highly personal version of events should be given any credence.
This subject has been discussed and hijacked many times on here , but the simple facts are that we didnt move forward with progression .In 74 Volvo had the F88 290 and Scania the 110, we had the ergo in many guises the A series ERF , Fodens S80 ,GUY , Seddon and the Crusader with the motor panels cab and the good old Atki. Sure ,they were good money earners in their day but things were changing.Most of the afforementioned models were up for renewal or to be discontinued and the simple fact is their replacements weren`t good enough. The Marathon ,the B series and the Seddon Atkinson were big improvements over the previous models but fell short of the Swedes ,it was an almost half hearted response with obvious results 
Jazzandy:
Quite amazing Carryfast!
You must be in a very special position to have access to all these ‘facts’ to which eminent historians who have spent lifetimes of research on the subject don’t have.
Your ridiculous version of the reasons for the outbreak of the first world war is so risible as to be not worth countering.
I only studied the matter at degree level so am in no position to pontificate.
The basic problem is that your highly personal version of events should be given any credence.
The ‘facts’ of our involvement in WW1 are unarguably a small localised ‘argument’ between Serbia and Austria,of very similar type to the one between us and Ireland at the time,being turned into a massive war between us and Germany caused by British and French support of Russian aggression against Austria and Germany in support of Serb nationalism.A war which unarguably cost Britain huge numbers in terms of casualties and cash in addition to leading to the events which started WW2 which cost us yet more lives and even more cash.I’m guessing that your degree level education was based on the typically British educational system version of those events.Which is the same one that says that the collapse of Britain’s industrial base was mostly the workers fault not Churchill’s in kicking off a pointless world war between us and Germany the results of which then inevitably led to a second one soon after.
IE the collapse of Britain’s industrial power house was mostly the result of being starved of cash to invest in production equipment and tooling,product development,wages to pay the workers,and money in the system for customers to buy it’s products.I’d also guess that your university education conveniently didn’t actually provide a total figure of the net loss in terms of cash caused to the UK’s economy by WW1 and WW2.
ramone:
This subject has been discussed and hijacked many times on here , but the simple facts are that we didnt move forward with progression .In 74 Volvo had the F88 290 and Scania the 110, we had the ergo in many guises the A series ERF , Fodens S80 ,GUY , Seddon and the Crusader with the motor panels cab and the good old Atki. Sure ,they were good money earners in their day but things were changing.Most of the afforementioned models were up for renewal or to be discontinued and the simple fact is their replacements weren`t good enough. The Marathon ,the B series and the Seddon Atkinson were big improvements over the previous models but fell short of the Swedes ,it was an almost half hearted response with obvious results
Exactly and most of the reason for that can be put down to lack of development and production budgets because unlike Sweden we didn’t remain neutral during WW1 and WW2.
Carryfast:
ramone:
This subject has been discussed and hijacked many times on here , but the simple facts are that we didnt move forward with progression .In 74 Volvo had the F88 290 and Scania the 110, we had the ergo in many guises the A series ERF , Fodens S80 ,GUY , Seddon and the Crusader with the motor panels cab and the good old Atki. Sure ,they were good money earners in their day but things were changing.Most of the afforementioned models were up for renewal or to be discontinued and the simple fact is their replacements weren`t good enough. The Marathon ,the B series and the Seddon Atkinson were big improvements over the previous models but fell short of the Swedes ,it was an almost half hearted response with obvious results
Exactly and most of the reason for that can be put down to lack of development and production budgets because unlike Sweden we didn’t remain neutral during WW1 and WW2.
Yes and thats why we are swamped with Swiss made lorries now :wink: ...... i think its more in the line of people not wanting to invest in our commercial vehicle industry
ramone:
Carryfast:
ramone:
This subject has been discussed and hijacked many times on here , but the simple facts are that we didnt move forward with progression .In 74 Volvo had the F88 290 and Scania the 110, we had the ergo in many guises the A series ERF , Fodens S80 ,GUY , Seddon and the Crusader with the motor panels cab and the good old Atki. Sure ,they were good money earners in their day but things were changing.Most of the afforementioned models were up for renewal or to be discontinued and the simple fact is their replacements weren`t good enough. The Marathon ,the B series and the Seddon Atkinson were big improvements over the previous models but fell short of the Swedes ,it was an almost half hearted response with obvious results
Exactly and most of the reason for that can be put down to lack of development and production budgets because unlike Sweden we didn’t remain neutral during WW1 and WW2.
Yes and thats why we are swamped with Swiss made lorries now :wink: ...... i think its more in the line of people not wanting to invest in our commercial vehicle industry
As I’ve said that was because most European investment was being diverted into German industry for strategic reasons with the UK’s being deliberately sacrificed as part of that.
Unlike us the collapse of the Swiss truck manufacturing industry was all about them voluntarily selling out,what to them was just an unimportant sector of the economy,to the might of the German post war economic stitch up.Whereas in our case it was one of trying to save what was a large and important sector of our economy by doing the best we could with very little cash and then stupidly exposing our domestic market to the combination of the might of that same post war German industrial stitch up of Europe and the Swedish invasion.In addition to forgetting about our old colonial export markets as part of that European project.
However comparing the Swiss automotive/truck manufacturing industry with the Swedish one is like comparing apples with oranges.IE the Swedish one being a major sector of an industrialised economy which unarguably benefited from Swedish neutrality during WW1 and WW2.While the Swiss one was just a small specialist industrial sideline in a mostly agricultural and banking based economy.The only connection being that like Sweden’s it’s economy also unarguably benefited from it’s neutrality during those wars.
Still there WAS a market…construction, delivery, milk-industry (purple cow’s) in the era 1960-1980 when even German
marques offered Swiss-dimension…width 2.30m…trilex-wheels and …
ERF-Continental:
Still there WAS a market…construction, delivery, milk-industry (purple cow’s) in the era 1960-1980 when even German
marques offered Swiss-dimension…width 2.30m…trilex-wheels and …
The fact is it was a market which no one really ‘needed’ and which would have cost more than it was worth to be involved with in most cases.Just as Saurer’s management and investors decided.While the Germans were able to offset the costs of that involvement easily within their surplus investment budget in order to take over the Swiss market just because they could not because they actually needed to.IE a different situation from that of a truck industry being starved of cash fighting for it’s survival in it’s main large domestic market and losing let alone wasting money it didn’t have on large scale development to satisfy a small irrelevant specialist export one.
Spot on again carryfast , Sweden has less people than London ,low domestic demand = export or die ! plus dont believe the taught history look at REAL history , has even today Britain recovered from its WW1 ans WW2 debt ! only paid the Americans of around 2008 ? was it ? dont believe school BS
24hr servicing, leasing, overnight parts back up.
Volvo and Scania swept the board, with DAF hot on their heels, and IMO this was a big part of it.
I never liked foreign lorries that much aprt from DAF (which felt British to me with their old fashioned proper gearboxes), my sole criteria in a lorry was its drivetrain, not in the least bothered by its badge or its fancy frills, and well specified British built lorries with the correct ■■■■■■■ Eaton/Fuller Rockwell combination could get through some serious work quickly in the good days before limiters, and economically too.
Only in rare cases did you find a foreign lorry engine with a large swept volume, such as the odd Fiat or a very rare V8 Swede, and from a performance/driveability point of view you can’t replace CC’s, and IMO thats still the case.
The problem was, almost all British lorry service centres shut down overnight and at lunch time Saturday, and just when 24hr operations and the rise of the big logistics and parcel operators operators was taking off the foreigners provided just what was needed at the right moment.
Another thing, dumbing down of the job started even in the 70s and 80s, most foreign lorries (DAF’s excepted) could be driven easily by someone who passed their test yesterday, where it needed a lorry driver to drive most British stuff and DAFs.
British makers failed to respond adequately to the foreign attack by beating them at their own game, genuine patriotism became a joke, my late boss of the era whom i still have the utmost respect for (and his son who continued when he passed) always had the Union Flag stuck to the bonnet of his car, wouldn’t have a foreign vehicle in the yard, but there just weren’t enough of them around to keep our industry afloat.
Juddian:
24hr servicing, leasing, overnight parts back up.
Volvo and Scania swept the board, with DAF hot on their heels, and IMO this was a big part of it.
I never liked foreign lorries that much aprt from DAF (which felt British to me with their old fashioned proper gearboxes), my sole criteria in a lorry was its drivetrain, not in the least bothered by its badge or its fancy frills, and well specified British built lorries with the correct ■■■■■■■ Eaton/Fuller Rockwell combination could get through some serious work quickly in the good days before limiters, and economically too.
Only in rare cases did you find a foreign lorry engine with a large swept volume, such as the odd Fiat or a very rare V8 Swede, and from a performance/driveability point of view you can’t replace CC’s, and IMO thats still the case.
The problem was, almost all British lorry service centres shut down overnight and at lunch time Saturday, and just when 24hr operations and the rise of the big logistics and parcel operators operators was taking off the foreigners provided just what was needed at the right moment.
Another thing, dumbing down of the job started even in the 70s and 80s, most foreign lorries (DAF’s excepted) could be driven easily by someone who passed their test yesterday, where it needed a lorry driver to drive most British stuff and DAFs.
British makers failed to respond adequately to the foreign attack by beating them at their own game, genuine patriotism became a joke, my late boss of the era whom i still have the utmost respect for (and his son who continued when he passed) always had the Union Flag stuck to the bonnet of his car, wouldn’t have a foreign vehicle in the yard, but there just weren’t enough of them around to keep our industry afloat.
Firstly the DAF 2800/3600 range with a 13 speed fuller was the truck that the T45 would/should have been but the DAF was just a reflection of the development budget that was obviously ploughed into it which Leyland didn’t have which is why Leyland effectively handed the initiative to DAF to get on with it.
Having said that there were plenty of great last of the line British wagons with their typical British/American engine and driveline combination and competitive acceptable cab designs which made it into production against all the odds considering the cash and investment crisis which the UK manufacturers were facing and which deserved to succeed.
The reasons for that lack of success being contributed to in large part by the domestic customer base’s lack of foresight and backward thinking in wanting to hang on to the old designs of day cabs and Gardner engines at the time when the domestic truck manufacturers were trying to move forward and lack of loyalty to the domestic truck manufacturing industry when those customers ‘eventually’ decided to join the late 20 th century instead of being stuck in the mid mindset of mid 20 th century buying criterea.You can then add to that in small part the issue of ‘drivers’ who preferred to drive a less powerful Volvo or Merc with a zb slow,heavy,shifting synchro box than something like an ERF or Foden with a big power ■■■■■■■ and a 13 speed fuller.