It’s been said many times that these vehicles were amongst a group that brought the downfall of the British commercial vehicle industry. Well how well did they perform , was the small engine turbocharged and multigears scenario a reliable one . Would say a F88 240 be a more reliable and cost effective option to an ERF with a 240 Gardner or 250 ■■■■■■■ .The F86 was a light 6.7 litre motor with an 8 speed box , obviously performance wouldn’t be the criteria for buying one of these but productivity and reliability would so how long before a major overhaul on either of these Swedes . I inow the 240 F88 was more reliable than the later 290 .
it wasnt just the engine aspect to compare,but the build quality and every other aspect of the complete truck and in that case the volvo and scania were 100 times greater in all aspects.
the gardner 180 was best suited to being stuck into a small trawler.
nothing wrong with the engines,the problem was building a truck in britain with the sub standard build quality of your average unionised lazy bone idle british factory worker compared to scandanavia which was light years ahead.
dieseldog999:
it wasnt just the engine aspect to compare,but the build quality and every other aspect of the complete truck and in that case the volvo and scania were 100 times greater in all aspects.
the gardner 180 was best suited to being stuck into a small trawler.
nothing wrong with the engines,the problem was building a truck in britain with the sub standard build quality of your average unionised lazy bone idle british factory worker compared to scandanavia which was light years ahead.
To be fair i meant the whole package i probably worded it wrong . The cabs were in a different league but i heard the brakes weren’t the best . I understand what you’re saying i think you may get some stick about the lazy workers ( not from me though ) but we sat back and watched them improve over the years at a rate we could never compete with. What i’m trying to say is were they ever troublesome . Don’t forget they were designed to run at much higher weights the F86 for instance had a design weight of 36 tons . Not sure but wasn’t Sweden running at 48 tons at the time or am i imagining that?
The bit I remember about them were the sprung seats, working cab heaters and being able to talk in them. The Volvo brakes were not huge drums or linings, and they didn’t stop as quick as they went, The F86 wasn’t a sleeper cab, it was a cab you could sleep in. An 8 speed synchro box was never going to beat a 9 speed Fuller.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
F86 among other things; all round vision ;power assisted steering; only one step to cab floor; a radio you could listen to ; good progress on the road with an engine with slightly more bhp than a 180 Gardner.An all round better working environment.
My first encounter with an F88 was an 1971 vintage about two years old when I had a go in it, after my normal steed a GUY Big J 180 gardener it was quite surreal, it had the 16 speed box and I think the 230 engine but it was magic to drive, it was a bit like learning a musical instrument and thank god for that green light on the overdrive to let you know where you were.
Later in life I owned both models two F88’s with 240’s 16 speed but when the boxes went wrong what a nightmare but we did have a man who was mustard at overhauling them, also I bought an F86 on the spur of the moment, I was in Hartshorn in Birmingham where I had taken an F12 to have a Granning lift axle fitted when the weight went up to 38 tons and in the corner of there yard sat this F86 and I enquired about it and it was a trade in and only plated at 28ton at the time as the former owner was a company called Goodson lighting, anyway a barter ensued and I bought it for £750 and drove her home uprated her to 32 ton and that was my shunter and short haul motor which was my 4th addition to my fleet. Unfortunately I was the pilot and I called it a naturalist motor as I always said you could watch a rabbit mating at the bottom of a hill and by the time you got to the top the doe had had her litter but having said that I earned £1200 with it in the first week I had her so not too shabby a purchase in the end.
Later in life and things progressed with the FH which we had the first batch of four in 1993 and must have bought well over 100 of this model alone and then onto Scania’s in the present day but I can look back with fond memories of the early Volvo’s and seen them progress to what they are today. Only one other point and that is back in the old days you could nearly always do a get you home fix unlike today when a computer is needed but that’s what they call progress, Buzzer.
The 86 did suffer from blown head gaskets but at that time just about every other engine did too, one of the General Haulage company’s I worked for as a Fitter had one F86 but didn’t buy any more, they were more driver friendly but whether they did the job any better than the British makes is doubtful. I think we have to get away from the myth that these foreign makes never broke down or had problems I done as much work on the different German, Swede and Dutch motors over the years as I did on British makes, as for driving experience they might have had good cabs but the best bed I ever slept in was my Sed Aki 401, when I began driving the F10 was around and I thought that was great but I also drove a Transcon around the same time and this was just as good from a drivers point of view, I drove a lot worse later and one of these was a Volvo from new which was an exceptionally poor machine. Franky.
Franky funny you mention head gaskets, on the 240 F88’s they suffered from head gasket problems quite a lot and many a time we had to remove them clean and sometimes have them regrooved but they were all single heads and it was my job to thoroughly clean them to get any carbon off, those were the days Buzzer.
One of the reasons i started this thread was the small engine big turbo scenario , did the engines last , because Volvo Cars have started to go down the same route again , well since 2015 anyway and they use a 2.0 litre 4 cylinder pushing out 235 bhp , i’ve just bought a XC90 and its a big heavy car i am thinking are the engines up to it. Mine seems to cope well but for how long
ramone:
One of the reasons i started this thread was the small engine big turbo scenario , did the engines last , because Volvo Cars have started to go down the same route again , well since 2015 anyway and they use a 2.0 litre 4 cylinder pushing out 235 bhp , i’ve just bought a XC90 and its a big heavy car i am thinking are the engines up to it. Mine seems to cope well but for how long
It’s clear that the only way to get the equivalent amount of power from a smaller capacity engine is by creating higher cylinder pressures and all the implications of that regarding components and head to block fastening/sealing.While more leverage at the crank effectively means free power in that regard.The manufacturer obviously won’t be picking up the bill for that in most cases because the trouble will usually start after the warranty has expired.With the win win that the small engine lots of boost formula means more profit than making a larger engine.On that note the best Volvo car was the 164.I doubt if the XC90 will still be on the road in 50 years time let alone still be worth around £7,500 in real terms by then.
Carryfast:
ramone:
One of the reasons i started this thread was the small engine big turbo scenario , did the engines last , because Volvo Cars have started to go down the same route again , well since 2015 anyway and they use a 2.0 litre 4 cylinder pushing out 235 bhp , i’ve just bought a XC90 and its a big heavy car i am thinking are the engines up to it. Mine seems to cope well but for how longIt’s clear that the only way to get the equivalent amount of power from a smaller capacity engine is by creating higher cylinder pressures and all the implications of that regarding components and head to block fastening/sealing.While more leverage at the crank effectively means free power in that regard.The manufacturer obviously won’t be picking up the bill for that in most cases because the trouble will usually start after the warranty has expired.With the win win that the small engine lots of boost formula means more profit than making a larger engine.On that note the best Volvo car was the 164.I doubt if the XC90 will still be on the road in 50 years time let alone still be worth around £7,500 in real terms by then.
Funny you should mention the 164 , my dad had one and the fuel injection system gave problems but they did make another 3 litre until recently but they have now dropped all but the 4 cylinder units . Apparently some young boffins at Volvo created a system they have patented and it produces excessive power from small engines , I think its more to do with using twin turbos , but like Ive said it goes well for a 2 litre and quite frugal too
ramone:
Funny you should mention the 164 they did make another 3 litre until recently but they have now dropped all but the 4 cylinder units . Apparently some young boffins at Volvo created a system they have patented and it produces excessive power from small engines , I think its more to do with using twin turbos , but like Ive said it goes well for a 2 litre and quite frugal too
Yep loads of boost = massive cylinder pressures at the end of the day nothing new there.Lots of inevitable aggro when it’s out of warranty with depreciation levels to match.
Which leaves the question if the the F86 was supposedly good for 36t gross operation why did Volvo offer the F12 in the UK market for 38t max operation instead of just increasing the boost levels of the F10 or even F7 motor to create sufficient power output for the extra few tonnes. 
Carryfast:
ramone:
Funny you should mention the 164 they did make another 3 litre until recently but they have now dropped all but the 4 cylinder units . Apparently some young boffins at Volvo created a system they have patented and it produces excessive power from small engines , I think its more to do with using twin turbos , but like Ive said it goes well for a 2 litre and quite frugal tooYep loads of boost = massive cylinder pressures at the end of the day nothing new there.Lots of inevitable aggro when it’s out of warranty with depreciation levels to match.
Which leaves the question if the the F86 was supposedly good for 36t gross operation why did Volvo offer the F12 in the UK market for 38t max operation instead of just increasing the boost levels of the F10 or even F7 motor to create sufficient power output for the extra few tonnes.
When the F10 was introduced wasn’t the 9.6 downrated to 278 bhp from the F88s 290 . That eng8ne had many outputs 320bhp being its last output i think
I read something about the 4 cylinder Volvo car engine and how some young trainees had stumbled across a new method but i can’t remember what but i’m sure a patent was slapped on it , but then again i may have read it wrong
ramone:
Carryfast:
ramone:
Funny you should mention the 164 they did make another 3 litre until recently but they have now dropped all but the 4 cylinder units . Apparently some young boffins at Volvo created a system they have patented and it produces excessive power from small engines , I think its more to do with using twin turbos , but like Ive said it goes well for a 2 litre and quite frugal tooYep loads of boost = massive cylinder pressures at the end of the day nothing new there.Lots of inevitable aggro when it’s out of warranty with depreciation levels to match.
Which leaves the question if the the F86 was supposedly good for 36t gross operation why did Volvo offer the F12 in the UK market for 38t max operation instead of just increasing the boost levels of the F10 or even F7 motor to create sufficient power output for the extra few tonnes.
When the F10 was introduced wasn’t the 9.6 downrated to 278 bhp from the F88s 290 . That eng8ne had many outputs 320bhp being its last output i think
Realistically it can only be numerous variations on a theme as to how to compress more air to be stuffed into the same relatively small capacity cylinder with the lose lose of also having to create even more pressure and load through the chain to compensate for the lack of leverage at the crank.
While by the logic of getting as much as possible from the least capacity possible there obviously would have been no business case for the F12 here outside of the STGO market sector in a 38t max regime.
While at face value the MX13 seems to be the best modern all round truck engine design and a good benchmark.
when i was at ferrymasters early - mid 70’s their fleet was predominately F86 , with a few scania 80/81 and the odd DAF 2200 thrown in . they were only kept for 3 years but they were pretty reliable as i recall and it wasn’t an easy job ■■■■■■■ 20 tonnes about in a tilt or 22 tonnes on a 30 foot flat bed . if i remember rightly some of the later 201 bhp F86’s had a few injector problems but nothing major. passenger seat was taken out and a bed was fitted with an F88 mattress , i thought it was a pretty good bed for the size of the cab.After i left FM 1 of the drivers changed his F86 for an F7 i got the conversion kit off him for my own F86 , now this one would have been about 6 years old when i got it, cab rot was the biggest issue (drivers seat went through the floor), i had a few overheating problems , range change cable snapped, rear spring centre bolt broke, gearbox rear oil seal went ,the heater wouldn’t blow cold air (handy in summer) engine never missed a beat though, and it was only geared for 52 mph which was irritating.
i liked her though.
tony
tonyj105:
when i was at ferrymasters early - mid 70’s their fleet was predominately F86 , with a few scania 80/81 and the odd DAF 2200 thrown in . they were only kept for 3 years but they were pretty reliable as i recall and it wasn’t an easy job ■■■■■■■ 20 tonnes about in a tilt or 22 tonnes on a 30 foot flat bed . if i remember rightly some of the later 201 bhp F86’s had a few injector problems but nothing major. passenger seat was taken out and a bed was fitted with an F88 mattress , i thought it was a pretty good bed for the size of the cab.After i left FM 1 of the drivers changed his F86 for an F7 i got the conversion kit off him for my own F86 , now this one would have been about 6 years old when i got it, cab rot was the biggest issue (drivers seat went through the floor), i had a few overheating problems , range change cable snapped, rear spring centre bolt broke, gearbox rear oil seal went ,the heater wouldn’t blow cold air (handy in summer) engine never missed a beat though, and it was only geared for 52 mph which was irritating.i liked her though.
tony
My dad drove a L reg for the company he worked for and having come off a G reg Mandator it was quite different . It didn’t pull any better but the engine was nearly half the size of the Mandators. I always remember how he would put a brick on the accelerator and walk round the nearside and pull a piece of wire that was attached to the engine under the wheel arch and it started first time. They bought a second which was a M reg but this was ex Transflash and it had done more miles than the Space Shuttle and wasn’t as reliable. But i suppose in the day if you wanted to carry 22 tons in relative comfort there wasn’t much to touch them . The L reg was ex Gordon Tune a company i’ve never heard of but i’m guessing was Hull/ Grimsby area as the full registration was FFU 841 L
i forgot about the cold start on the near side, he didn’t know about the hand throttle then , saves on bricks . you want to see 25 F86’s start up on a cold morning in the winter , quite a (very blue foggy) sight
tony
tonyj105:
i forgot about the cold start on the near side, he didn’t know about the hand throttle then , saves on bricks . you want to see 25 F86’s start up on a cold morning in the winter , quite a (very blue foggy) sighttony
Ha ha 1 was enough , having said that when he had the Mandator he opened the bonnet in the cab and fiddled with something and fired that up with the bonnet up now that was noisey but it wasn’t too often because it was normally on the button a good starter
I first drove an 86 around 1978/79, whilst a funny little thing to look at it was quiet and comfortable with super light steering and a revelation to drive compared with my normal 180 Gardner engine A series ERF without power steering etc, sprightly performer on parcel work too.
Drove 88’s now and again, the 240 would go fast eventually but no guts to hold the speed, dreadful blind spots with tiny windows a high cab and no down mirrors.
F10’s were great on transporter work, low cab cut even lower you could put really big motors above the cab, reliability was brilliant.
My last FL was a 380 FL12 wag’n’drag transporter, best car transporter i ever drove, pulled really well and again completely reliable.
Early FM’s again never a moment’s trouble with them.
Newer models not so sure about.
I drove Scania 110’s regularly, 111 112 113 114, later 4 series and new gen, generally completely reliable, 112/113 not great pullers but kept going, new gen a very very good wagon.
There was nothing wrong with the British motors once they got their finger out and started taking the foreigners seriously, Sed Ack and ERF with (14 litre) ■■■■■■■■ Rockwell, Fuller combos would run forever and leave the normal Swedes standing in performance without a fuel penalty, but they needed good maintenance, which wasn’t an issue for operators with their own workshops…but that is where the Brit makers let themselves down, the foreign dealers were quick to 24 hour dealer service and all inc packages, the Brits couldn’t be arsed with that and paid the price.
The Brit’s gearboxes were always miles ahead of the foreign stuff because Scanny and Volvos were hobbled with synchro boxes which baulked and made them much harder to use all the time, where Brit (and MAN) constant mesh boxes took a bit of getting used to but once mastered were a joy requiring almost not effort providing gearchanges in milliseconds…we’ll skim over Fodens earlier 12 speeds with the air shift on the steering column at this point 
, fast shifts but didn’t take prisoners.
Volvo changed all that when they brought out Geartronic, which is basically still the same as what they use now, it was a winner on an L reg FL10 i drove back then.
Now very few makers even offer manual boxes for typical fleet stuff in the UK, and few operators would spec it if they could, cos only a a handful of the drivers could cope and autos prevent idiots from damaging the box clutch or drivetrain or even engine, sad innit.