Bewick:
Can I ask you one question “CF” why is the total consensus of opinion on this site that you have always, and will no doubt continue to do,insist on spouting an utter load of Bollox on any subject and thread you decide to infect ! Cheers Bewick.
More like too many inconvenient questions for you to answer. As to what changed and when between Gardners being the best thing around,to suddenly Scania had actually got it right with its turbocharged motors since around at least 1970.The Big J’s production run obviously falling across that dividing line and which would probably,arguably,in large part,explain the rarity of the NA 8 cylinder Gardner option and Guy then eventually putting a similar,arguably even better,premium engine spec,in what were otherwise still cheap and nasty Brit guvnor’s wagons,more than Guy having run out of its supposed ration of the things.
Please refer to my previous post for a repeat reply to this garbage ! Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
Can I ask you one question “CF” why is the total consensus of opinion on this site that you have always, and will no doubt continue to do,insist on spouting an utter load of Bollox on any subject and thread you decide to infect ! Cheers Bewick.
More like too many inconvenient questions for you to answer. As to what changed and when between Gardners being the best thing around,to suddenly Scania had actually got it right with its turbocharged motors since around at least 1970.The Big J’s production run obviously falling across that dividing line and which would probably,arguably,in large part,explain the rarity of the NA 8 cylinder Gardner option and Guy then eventually putting a similar,arguably even better,premium engine spec,in what were otherwise still cheap and nasty Brit guvnor’s wagons,more than Guy having run out of its supposed ration of the things.
Please refer to my previous post for a repeat reply to this garbage ! Cheers Bewick.
Dennis for mankind’s sake and for humanity’s sanity please do not reply to anymore of the Leatherhead mans posts
Bewick:
Can I ask you one question “CF” why is the total consensus of opinion on this site that you have always, and will no doubt continue to do,insist on spouting an utter load of Bollox on any subject and thread you decide to infect ! Cheers Bewick.
More like too many inconvenient questions for you to answer. As to what changed and when between Gardners being the best thing around,to suddenly Scania had actually got it right with its turbocharged motors since around at least 1970.The Big J’s production run obviously falling across that dividing line and which would probably,arguably,in large part,explain the rarity of the NA 8 cylinder Gardner option and Guy then eventually putting a similar,arguably even better,premium engine spec,in what were otherwise still cheap and nasty Brit guvnor’s wagons,more than Guy having run out of its supposed ration of the things.
Please refer to my previous post for a repeat reply to this garbage ! Cheers Bewick.
Dennis for mankind’s sake and for humanity’s sanity please do not reply to anymore of the Leatherhead mans posts
Now then Gaz that’s the best piece of advice I’ve had all day which I believe I should take ! “The cheque’s in the post Mate” Cheers Dennis.
Bewick:
Can I ask you one question “CF” why is the total consensus of opinion on this site that you have always, and will no doubt continue to do,insist on spouting an utter load of Bollox on any subject and thread you decide to infect ! Cheers Bewick.
More like too many inconvenient questions for you to answer. As to what changed and when between Gardners being the best thing around,to suddenly Scania had actually got it right with its turbocharged motors since around at least 1970.The Big J’s production run obviously falling across that dividing line and which would probably,arguably,in large part,explain the rarity of the NA 8 cylinder Gardner option and Guy then eventually putting a similar,arguably even better,premium engine spec,in what were otherwise still cheap and nasty Brit guvnor’s wagons,more than Guy having run out of its supposed ration of the things.
Please refer to my previous post for a repeat reply to this garbage ! Cheers Bewick.
Dennis for mankind’s sake and for humanity’s sanity please do not reply to anymore of the Leatherhead mans posts
Well if I may say so, C/F Is no match against Dennis or anyone else on this thread including my good self, Anyone who would refer to a Gardner engine as a boat anchor says it all in my book, , I wonder what the good old Lewis would have thought, Regards Larry.
Well said, Larry! But you have to admit that, somewhere in the export files, there will appear items referred to as, “Motor Vehicle Engines, Hardly Used, 8 Cylinder” with the shipper named as “Old Barn in th’Ills Engine Replacements” and the receiver referred to as Mr Hoo Flung Dung, managing director of Hong Kong Junk Anchors, Ltd.
Besides, it gives us a laugh and winds young Dennis up!
Retired Old ■■■■:
Well said, Larry! But you have to admit that, somewhere in the export files, there will appear items referred to as, “Motor Vehicle Engines, Hardly Used, 8 Cylinder” with the shipper named as “Old Barn in th’Ills Engine Replacements” and the receiver referred to as Mr Hoo Flung Dung, managing director of Hong Kong Junk Anchors, Ltd.
Besides, it gives us a laugh and winds young Dennis up!
The Gardner fan boys seem to lose their sense of humour when anyone dares to question their obviously misplaced allegiance to what was unarguably a legendary piece of kit in terms of its efficiency by the standards of the 1950’s or earlier.But which was definitely a boat anchor at the point in time in question during the 1970’s.
Or the evasion of simple questions like was it that changed in the Scania 110 being off the radar during the early 1970’s.But the 111 suddenly then being seen as the logical solution ?.Which leaves the obvious question why shouldn’t that same logic then also be expected to apply in the case of anyone choosing between 6 cylinder turbo Rolls/■■■■■■■■■■ opposed to 8 cylinder Gardner,in the Big J.Also bearing in mind that Bewick seemed happy enough to selectively switch allegiance between ■■■■■■■ v Gardner as stated at least even in the choice between NA ■■■■■■■ Atki v 8 LXB Big J regardless of any supposed Gardner rationing and supply issues.All that is fact not bollox.
While it’s my bet that,contrary to the idea that Guy was supposedly starved of 8 cylinder Gardners.The more likely scenario is that Gardner actually set Guy a minimum order figure rather than a maximum one and the vehicles listed in the Commercial Motor Museum’s records are predictably all that found customers.Which would logically account for the obvious large discrepancy between that figure and the engine museum’s figure.
The mission for VALKYRIE is can he find any evidence that all the engines listed actually found their way into factory order Big J chassis and can he find a comparison of turbo 6 cylinder Rolls/■■■■■■■ Big J numbers v confirmed production 8 LXB chassis orders.
I tend to agree with CF here, by the mid to late 70s the Gardner engines were past their prime and in the 80s they were totally outclassed. My own experience of Gardner ‘power’ was with a 6LXC 400 SA with DB 6spd and 2spd axle, it was painful, noisy, slow and it drank oil like it was going out of fashion.
At the time I was hauling British Gypsum and delivering around the south coast, from Margate to Bognor Regis, I did one load a day, with a short run like a Margate or Folkestone i got back early enough to get one on wheels for the next day, I was also roping and sheeting the loads.
I got a newer lorry, another 400 but this had a 290 ■■■■■■■ and a tri axle curtainsider behind it, a sleeper cab too, it was like a holiday compared to the older lorry, I got twice as much done and my wages went up significantly as a result, which tells me the guvnor was earning a lot more too as he was as tight as two coats of paint and wouldn’t part with cash unless he had to.
This was the late 80s, to me it justifies CFs description, by then they were boat anchors.
newmercman:
I tend to agree with CF here, by the mid to late 70s the Gardner engines were past their prime and in the 80s they were totally outclassed. My own experience of Gardner ‘power’ was with a 6LXC 400 SA with DB 6spd and 2spd axle, it was painful, noisy, slow and it drank oil like it was going out of fashion.
At the time I was hauling British Gypsum and delivering around the south coast, from Margate to Bognor Regis, I did one load a day, with a short run like a Margate or Folkestone i got back early enough to get one on wheels for the next day, I was also roping and sheeting the loads.
I got a newer lorry, another 400 but this had a 290 ■■■■■■■ and a tri axle curtainsider behind it, a sleeper cab too, it was like a holiday compared to the older lorry, I got twice as much done and my wages went up significantly as a result, which tells me the guvnor was earning a lot more too as he was as tight as two coats of paint and wouldn’t part with cash unless he had to.
This was the late 80s, to me it justifies CFs description, by then they were boat anchors.
By which time the company had been owned by Hawker Siddley for some years who was anxious to dispose of Gardners, which they did by selling to Perkins, who also owned Rolls Royce Diesels, so neither owner had any interest, or desire, to develop existing Gardner designs (impossible given the age of the basic design), or replace them with completely new designs.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
newmercman:
I tend to agree with CF here, by the mid to late 70s the Gardner engines were past their prime and in the 80s they were totally outclassed. My own experience of Gardner ‘power’ was with a 6LXC 400 SA with DB 6spd and 2spd axle, it was painful, noisy, slow and it drank oil like it was going out of fashion.
At the time I was hauling British Gypsum and delivering around the south coast, from Margate to Bognor Regis, I did one load a day, with a short run like a Margate or Folkestone i got back early enough to get one on wheels for the next day, I was also roping and sheeting the loads.
I got a newer lorry, another 400 but this had a 290 ■■■■■■■ and a tri axle curtainsider behind it, a sleeper cab too, it was like a holiday compared to the older lorry, I got twice as much done and my wages went up significantly as a result, which tells me the guvnor was earning a lot more too as he was as tight as two coats of paint and wouldn’t part with cash unless he had to.
This was the late 80s, to me it justifies CFs description, by then they were boat anchors.
By which time the company had been owned by Hawker Siddley for some years who was anxious to dispose of Gardners, which they did by selling to Perkins, who also owned Rolls Royce Diesels, so neither owner had any interest, or desire, to develop existing Gardner designs (impossible given the age of the basic design), or replace them with completely new designs.
It would probably be fair to say that all the ‘issues’ of it being a lot of expensive engine for not much return in terms of output and general driveability applied just the same from the mid 1970’s and possibly before that if the example of Bewick’s liking for the Scania 111 is taken into account.Bearing in mind that,by that standard,it would have been products like the 110 which would have been the writing on the wall for Gardner well before even that point.In which case logically it was the turbo ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ option which Leyland Group/Guy rightly needed to concentrate its attention on in the fight back.
With the 8 LXB Big J possibly having just been a contractual mistake and a bridge too far in Guy’s engine purchase policy,without having an exit clause in place when it needed one,in its business relationship with Gardner in that regard. IE its rarity was possibly just evidence of it actually having been,what by then,was already known to be a mistake made by management in the Leyland Group range of products with no way out and with customer take up to match.Especially when we’ve got dyed in the wool Gardner people like Bewick not knowing anyone who used one,nor wanting one himself and eventually going for the Scania 111.The whole design ethos of the 8 LXB Big J being based on the choice between turbo 6 cylinder v NA 8 cylinder.At a time when the former had already clearly won out among the customer base being aimed for with predictable results in terms of production numbers.On that note it would be really interesting to find out the confirmed production numbers of turbo ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Big J’s v 8 LXB.
newmercman:
I tend to agree with CF here, by the mid to late 70s the Gardner engines were past their prime and in the 80s they were totally outclassed. My own experience of Gardner ‘power’ was with a 6LXC 400 SA with DB 6spd and 2spd axle, it was painful, noisy, slow and it drank oil like it was going out of fashion.
At the time I was hauling British Gypsum and delivering around the south coast, from Margate to Bognor Regis, I did one load a day, with a short run like a Margate or Folkestone i got back early enough to get one on wheels for the next day, I was also roping and sheeting the loads.
I got a newer lorry, another 400 but this had a 290 ■■■■■■■ and a tri axle curtainsider behind it, a sleeper cab too, it was like a holiday compared to the older lorry, I got twice as much done and my wages went up significantly as a result, which tells me the guvnor was earning a lot more too as he was as tight as two coats of paint and wouldn’t part with cash unless he had to.
This was the late 80s, to me it justifies CFs description, by then they were boat anchors.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Would you “Adam and Eve” it ! after 9 years of annoying the ■■■■ out of everyone on the TN site “CF” has managed to claim his first convert, while not exactly a “strike rate” to boast about he should, at least, be congratulated for dogged, mind numbing persistence ( shades of J. Corbyn here !) Oh! I’m fast loosing the ■■■■■■■ will to live so I’m now going into the wood to put my ■■■■■■■ head in a bucket ! Bewick.
Gingerfold, I compare the Gardner engine to a boxer or footballer, in the beginning of their career nothing can stop them, KOs and goals for fun, but over time they lose their edge. This is the time to bow out gracefully, not humiliate themselves by trying to compete with the youngsters.
I’ll give a brief insight to my time at Stirlands I started there in 1981 the fleet was around a 120 strong and 100% Gardner powered with 60% being ERF and approximately 40% Seddon Atkinson with around half a dozen Atkinson Borderers with a mixture of 8LXBs 6LXBs and 6LXCS
The fleet engineer was a genius called Brian Ward a complete dyed in the wool Gardner man
I’ve posted on here before about the mileage the lorries Stirlands ran especially the trunk motors
There was nothing that could touch the Gardner for reliability at the time and as for fuel consumption which was the biggest annual cost not much came close
But no matter how heavy footed the driver was the fuel economy was pretty much the same
We regularly had different lorry manufacturers giving us demos for long term trials but if they didn’t hit the magic MPG Brian Ward wanted they were sent back
Some were sent back because of the excessive mileage reached in a short time
Anyway our first Turbocharged Gardner powered lorry was a 401 Seddon Atkinson XRR 252Y
That stayed in service for 13 years with one major engine overall in that 13 years
Brian Ward was a stickler for using top notch engine oil (with a close eye on consumption)
He worked very close with Gardner’s in getting the right specific oil
newmercman:
Gingerfold, I compare the Gardner engine to a boxer or footballer, in the beginning of their career nothing can stop them, KOs and goals for fun, but over time they lose their edge. This is the time to bow out gracefully, not humiliate themselves by trying to compete with the youngsters.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
Bewick:
Would you “Adam and Eve” it ! after 9 years of annoying the [zb] out of everyone on the TN site “CF” has managed to claim his first convert, while not exactly a “strike rate” to boast about he should, at least, be congratulated for dogged, mind numbing persistence ( shades of J. Corbyn here !) Oh! I’m fast loosing the [zb] will to live so I’m now going into the wood to put my [zb] head in a bucket ! Bewick.
To be fair we don’t seem to be talking about any direct comparison between 8 LXB engined Big J’s v big cam E290 ■■■■■■■ type efficiency at least.While there seems to be very little information available regarding turbocharged Big J versions it’s a reasonable bet that they would more likely have been early turbo RR Mk 111 or the small cam ■■■■■■■ ?.Which would probably at least swing the fuel consumption part of the equation back in the Gardner’s favour.So maybe the 8 LXB Big J was not such an odd ball at that specific point in time with production of the Big J reaching an end before the Gardner had completely reached its sell by date in that regard anyway ?.IE the Big J seems to be a case of,that unlike the Marathon for example,it falls into a specific market sub sector and production run timeline putting it more into what remained of the predominantly naturally aspirated engine market sector and era.
Which just seems to leave the question of the buying choice between any of the NA engined Brits v Scania 110 for example or Gardner 8 LXB v ■■■■■■■ ?.In which either the forward thinking contained in the turbocharged Scania or the more practical 6 cylinder simplicity of the ■■■■■■■ still seems the logical choice notwithstanding any,probably academic,fuel consumption advantages of the Gardner. As seems to be confirmed in your own choice of ■■■■■■■ Atki v 8 LXB Big J and then the move towards Scania.
Bewick:
This site requires removing from TNUK. Cheers Bewick.
I agree with you Dennis, But the ■■■■■■■ boat anchor ■■■■ has to be part of the deal, Ok so the old Gardners fell back , But in their heyday they were the best, Regards Larry.
I had a 320 Gardner and i was very impressed with it .It could puĺl like a train and never let me down .Wouldn"'t it be more señsible to compare a 290 ■■■■■■■ to a 320 Gardner or even a 320 ■■■■■■■ for that matter Obviously a 180 Gardner or a 240 wouĺdnt live with a 290 ■■■■■■■■
As seems to be confirmed in your own choice of ■■■■■■■ Atki v 8 LXB Big J and then the move towards Scania. 