newmercman:
The Italians loved the TM, they were fond of the Transcon too, there was a Bedford dealer on the Tangenziale in Milan, down on the south east side IIRC, a firm I reloaded from in Padova had a wagon and drag TM with the big DD in it, you could hear it coming for miles and boy what a noise, if a Scania V8 were a singer it would be Micheal Buble, whereas the V8 DD is Frank Sinatra
Hereâs a TM I saw last week in Calgary AB
0
Thatâs a good description newmercman. The drawbar versions were built by Tricentrol Chassis Developments which was a division of Bedford and itâs those that were also used for the fire trucks that I was involved with.Given the choice between the V8 Scania (or the V8 Fiat motor) or that big TM you know which one Iâd have wanted.
But the Canadian one in that pic looks like a typical ex military one so just a boring small Bedford engine probably.
This brings back some memories turn up the phones or the speakers.
As far as I know Tricentrol were never part of General Motors, they were an independent company that had their fingers in many pies.
It depends on the definition of part.In the sense of GM approved and warranted developments of the TM to meet Bedford special orders,from memory I think that was all within their remit.
newmercman:
The Italians loved the TM, they were fond of the Transcon too, there was a Bedford dealer on the Tangenziale in Milan, down on the south east side IIRC, a firm I reloaded from in Padova had a wagon and drag TM with the big DD in it, you could hear it coming for miles and boy what a noise, if a Scania V8 were a singer it would be Micheal Buble, whereas the V8 DD is Frank Sinatra
Hereâs a TM I saw last week in Calgary AB
0
Thatâs a good description newmercman. The drawbar versions were built by Tricentrol Chassis Developments which was a division of Bedford and itâs those that were also used for the fire trucks that I was involved with.Given the choice between the V8 Scania (or the V8 Fiat motor) or that big TM you know which one Iâd have wanted.
But the Canadian one in that pic looks like a typical ex military one so just a boring small Bedford engine probably.
This brings back some memories turn up the phones or the speakers.
As far as I know Tricentrol were never part of General Motors, they were an independent company that had their fingers in many pies.
It depends on the definition of part.In the sense of GM approved and warranted developments of the TM to meet Bedford special orders,from memory I think that was all within their remit.
Yes I agree that they did the work that Bedford didnât seem to want and thatâs probably one of the reasons why Bedford lost business to their competitors.
Tricentrol Chassis Developments were one of the few divisions that survived, but sadly ceased trading last year I recall.
Fincham:
As far as I know Tricentrol were never part of General Motors, they were an independent company that had their fingers in many pies.
It depends on the definition of part.In the sense of GM approved and warranted developments of the TM to meet Bedford special orders,from memory I think that was all within their remit.
Yes I agree that they did the work that Bedford didnât seem to want and thatâs probably one of the reasons why Bedford lost business to their competitors.
Tricentrol Chassis Developments were one of the few divisions that survived, but sadly ceased trading last year I recall.
Thanks for that update I didnât realise they stayed around for so long.Regardless of the set up from experience I can only say that what they did in the case of modifying and upgrading the TM was a credit to both them and Bedford.As Iâve said elsewhere it was their efforts that originally made the 8v92 4400 version not Bedford.
Fincham:
As far as I know Tricentrol were never part of General Motors, they were an independent company that had their fingers in many pies.
It depends on the definition of part.In the sense of GM approved and warranted developments of the TM to meet Bedford special orders,from memory I think that was all within their remit.
Yes I agree that they did the work that Bedford didnât seem to want and thatâs probably one of the reasons why Bedford lost business to their competitors.
Tricentrol Chassis Developments were one of the few divisions that survived, but sadly ceased trading last year I recall.
Thanks for that update I didnât realise they stayed around for so long.Regardless of the set up from experience I can only say that what they did in the case of modifying and upgrading the TM was a credit to both them and Bedford.As Iâve said elsewhere it was their efforts that originally made the 8v92 4400 version not Bedford.
I have checked and it was 23/12/2010 that they went into liquidation, time flies these days.
My interest in Tricentrol is that I own a vehicle that they modified and nearly forty years on it is still working well.
Hiya has anyone got photos of the yokoarma F1 tyre lorries a friend of mine has one under restoration its a V8 with a sleeper cab on a A reg
plateâŚits the usual cab rot the problem the cab is off and the engine out restorationâŚany photos would be welcome. cheers
John
3300John:
Hiya has anyone got photos of the yokoarma F1 tyre lorries a friend of mine has one under restoration its a V8 with a sleeper cab on a A reg
plateâŚits the usual cab rot the problem the cab is off and the engine out restorationâŚany photos would be welcome. cheers
John
I recall that when I kicked remoulds into touch for the trailers I started buying Yokohama and Toyo 1100X22:5 tyres and I went on to run some Toyoâs on the units and they did fine,wasnât too keen on running Yokos on the units but they did OK on the tandem axle trailers.I used mainly Bridgestone and Mich on the tri axles and on the units.Cheers Dennis.
Retired Old â â â â :
I used to get invitations to Bandagâs Christmas lunch!
In the early to mid 70âs I used to send all my worn Mich casings to Bandag for re-capping with their Mich type tread,I never liked the look of the their other two treads,the very flat one and that drive axle zig zag one !! Cheers Dennis.
I remember one of their products was called the Bandag Bullet. One of my mates had so many blow-outs with them that he changed his CB handle to âBullet Testerâ. That was in my period of attempting to be a Road Transport Tycoon, whereby my main contractor insisted that I bought all my supplies from his company, at his price!
Hi! There was acctualy 3 TM sold in Sweden in the early 80is. One of them was a longhauler and was most used on the jugoslavian route but did trips to northafrica,Turkey,and the rest of the old east block.Also did a couple of trips to Egypt
Two of the three truck are still alive and are waiting to get restored and the last one is owned by one who has one of the other two.
Cant say that the Swedish driver liked them mutch,they had trouble With fuelinjection. And one time,one of them whent from Bulgaria to Sweden With only half power⌠And one change engien dou to that problem. But forign truck manufakturs has always had truble to make it here,we like our Volvos and ScaniasâŚ
Dirty Dan:
Hi! There was acctualy 3 TM sold in Sweden in the early 80is. One of them was a longhauler and was most used on the jugoslavian route but did trips to northafrica,Turkey,and the rest of the old east block.Also did a couple of trips to Egypt
Two of the three truck are still alive and are waiting to get restored and the last one is owned by one who has one of the other two.
Cant say that the Swedish driver liked them mutch,they had trouble With fuelinjection. And one time,one of them whent from Bulgaria to Sweden With only half power⌠And one change engien dou to that problem. But forign truck manufakturs has always had truble to make it here,we like our Volvos and ScaniasâŚ
Reg Danne
The injection system on Detroits always took a lot of setting up to get perfect even sometimes on brand new engines.Ironically we found that British know how in that regard was often better than American at least in the case of the wizards at Talbot Diesels at Iver.Any that werenât running at their best were soon returned usually putting out more power than expected when theyâd finished with them.There were also injector upgrades to up outputs which again needed a recalibration/setting of the system.
Talbot Diesels used to do a lot of work on DD stuff from Europe, I used to take stuff in there that came from GM in Belgium and take stuff out of there for GM in Belgium. It was all crated so I donât know what it was specifically.
Firstly the E290 was specced for the 3800 not the 4400 and that is confirmed even by CM archives as just being in the process of being introduced at the time in question which admittedly is slightly earlier than I remember that option being put into TMâs in practice.
However the 4400 was a totally different beast with a totally different power requirement.While there is a difference between confirmation of hearsay in the CM archive as opposed to 1 st hand definite memory of Bedfordâs approved outsourced special order facilities which were obviously not on CMâs radar in the day and which were the first manifestation of the 4400.Not the later official UK market launch which was based on the former and as in all cases with the TM with Detroit power being offered first and foremost.Which in this case translated as the turbocharged 92 series spec not the obsolete non turbo 71 series of previous official UK spec series,as opposed to special order/export versions.
Therefore the history of the TM âspecialsâ,as opposed to âofficialâ options,will have to remain as hearsay based on good first hand memory at least until or unless we can find someone who can confirm probably Tricentrolâs involvement in the introduction of the type of trucks shown in the above Scandinavian article,at the time line stated,in question.
Which then leaves the obvious question of perceived UK market preferance/acceptance of the â â â â â â â powered options v Detroit having been based on an erroneous comparison with the obsolete non turbo 71 series powered TMâs as opposed to turbo 92 series.In which case the information which is out there suggests that there was actually very little if anything in it in respective fuel consumption figures had the UK market been as enlightened in its thinking as the export ones in that regard.
That erroneous thinking having arguably been the difference between the TMâs and therefore Bedfordâs survival or going under.
So what were the introduction dates of the various models (3250, 3800, 4200, 4400 etc.) and engines (8v71, E290, 6v92, 8v92) then? A few paragraphs of these basic facts would provide a foundation (or otherwise) for the opinions. The CM archive, I would suggest, is your only verifiable source, so get researching!
As I said all of Bedfordâs outsourced âexportâ specials seem to have been off of CMâs radar in the day.From memory the TM was only available at day 1 âofficiallyâ as I think 3200 and 3800 both with non turbo 71 series V6 and V8 respectively ?.That situation only changed when the âspecialsâ which Iâm referring to had been developed not by Bedford but as a guess Tricentrolâs involvement which basically meant upgrading to turbo 92 series fit to replace non turbo 71 series in both V6 and V8 form.The different numbers were âthenâ made to suit those upgrades âafterâ that not before.While âI thinkâ,but not sure,the numbering remained the same in the case of the 3800 ? which eventually ditched the 8v71 in favour of the turbo 6v92 on an âofficialâ,as opposed to special order,fit basis.When it seems clear that the whole thing should have been introduced from day 1 in turbo 92 series only form and Bedford contributed to its own demise by splitting and failing to force,the domestic market along the same lines as,the export market.Now where have we seen that issue before.
While from memory I can certainly remember the change/upgrade from 71 series to turbo 92 series availability and on our production list some time after 1975 but well before 1980 all being drawbar spec rigids with the involvement of Tricentrol.Which seems to be confirmed by the dates and specs provided in the article in question.With as Iâve said Tricentrolâs involvement with the TM sadly seeming to have been totally off CMâs radar bearing in mind that its upgrades were an as,if not more,important prt of the TMâs story as Bedfordâs involvement itself.
This show report proves that Bedford were still selling the original 1974 model TM4200, with 8v71 engine, at the end of 1978. They used that show to launch the E290 version of the TM3800. I guess the TM4400, with the turbo 92-series engine, came in '79 or '80.
Iâd guess the key question in this comparison is who instigated the upgrade from non turbo 71 series to turbo 92 series and exactly when.While model numbers seem to have been more orientated to design plated weights than just as importantly the power/torque outputs needed for same.On that note I can only go by my own memory which says that it wasnât Bedford who instigated that upgrade and it was done by 1977 as suggested in the article.
The really surprising thing being that having not only made the massive mistake of not going for turbo 92 series from the start they then stuck with the non turbo 71 series for so long at least on an official basis as opposed to outsourced special order.Which seems to have been a case of only give them the ârightâ spec if they actually specifically demand it.In which case weâll direct them to our approved outsourced upgrade operation which is in the process of developing the in house wagon it should have been from the start.
On that note with that business plan Bedford really did help to contribute to its own demise and Iâm suprised that its GM parent didnât foresee all that from day 1 and thereby forced the ârightâ engine choice decisions on Bedfordâs management and thereby also the market when they had the chance and before it was all too late.
The 4400 was introduced to meet the power to weight requirements of the Italian market, find out when that law was introduced and that will tell you when the 71s changed to 92s.
newmercman:
The 4400 was introduced to meet the power to weight requirements of the Italian market, find out when that law was introduced and that will tell you when the 71s changed to 92s.
I think that was 1976 or '77 but, as the 1978 show proves, Bedford were still fitting 71 series engines. We know that the 386/395/400 bhp 8v92 had arrived by 1980, but Bedfordâs advertising shows that that was not the only 92 series engine on offer by that time:
The drawbar versions were built by Tricentrol Chassis Developments which was a division of Bedford and itâs those that were also used for the fire trucks that I was involved with.Given the choice between the V8 Scania (or the V8 Fiat motor) or that big TM you know which one Iâd have wanted.
