Perhaps I have the subject of Seddon’s wrong but looking at the make closely it was up there with ERF/Foden /etc but I suspect it was a very well built and designed motor let down in some parts of the country by poor dealers who perhaps didn’t do the motors justice , I would welcome others opinion’s on the subject .
They were at the cheaper end of the heavy market but none the less were a decent motor and popular with many companies especially between the 50’s to 70’s, the marque seemed to receive unfavourable comments after the Atkinson takeover and the introduction of the 400 series mainly, the 200 models having better reviews. The designers particularly during the 50’s seemed to have a free hand and many different cab types appeared as well as differing models in the range. They did quite well for a make that only appeared as a competitor in the commercial transport market, alongside older established makers, just before the Second World War. Franky.
Frankydobo:
They were at the cheaper end of the heavy market but none the less were a decent motor and popular with many companies especially between the 50’s to 70’s, the marque seemed to receive unfavourable comments after the Atkinson takeover and the introduction of the 400 series mainly, the 200 models having better reviews. The designers particularly during the 50’s seemed to have a free hand and many different cab types appeared as well as differing models in the range. They did quite well for a make that only appeared as a competitor in the commercial transport market, alongside older established makers, just before the Second World War. Franky.
Many thanks for your comments Frankydobo , on reflection they managed to their credit they sold in fairly large numbers to BRS / Feightliner etc etc so they must have done something right for a long time , I had experience running and driving 13/4 model and for sometime a tractor unit 32/4 fitted with a R/Royce 220 and found they them to be good basic motor which gave very little trouble .
Yes Franky, I reckon that pre Motor Panels days Seddon had as many different cab options as Fodens! The two I rode in from the fifties that Dad drove were very well finished internally, plenty of nice varnished woodwork. My last firm (but before my time there) ran a Seddon 13-4 tipper from new and really rated it, however they switched to ERF and then later on Foden when they upgraded to six wheelers.
Pete.
In it’s coach built cab vehicle ranges Seddon had some good medium weight and heavyweight lorries and the ranges offered a wide choice of engines and components. In fact it can be argued that Seddon did offer too many options and they drastically rationalised their range in the mid-1960s with the introduction of the Motor Panels cab. They had a loyal customer base and personal experience of a family business that ran Seddons found them to be good with excellent back up from the factory, although being at Bolton we were near to Oldham. They were cheaper than competing lorries with similar, or even identical drivelines. A Seddon 14/4/400 with Leyland O.400 Power Plus engine cost £2,350, which was about £300 cheaper than an equivalent Leyland Super Comet, doesn’t sound much, but in 1963 that was a reasonable amount of money and it paid for its 22’ ally and wood flat body. IIRC the 30/4/690 with AEC engine was about £400 cheaper than an AEC Mk.V Mandator with the same engine and gearbox. Seddon apparently worked on much smaller profit margins than others and maybe explains their perceived “cheapness” label, one of the charges that Atkinson levelled against them in the hostile takeover battle.
revman:
012
CET 734 is a very early Seddon, possibly 1939. Mr Dunbar should be able to tell us when it was registered.
This was a Dyson Trailers publicity picture taken in July 1959.
That’s an interesting photo, the trailer looks long for 1959 when the permitted C&U Regs length was usually 24’ to 25’. It’s a heavyweight SD4 tractor unit.
gingerfold:
In it’s coach built cab vehicle ranges Seddon had some good medium weight and heavyweight lorries and the ranges offered a wide choice of engines and components. In fact it can be argued that Seddon did offer too many options and they drastically rationalised their range in the mid-1960s with the introduction of the Motor Panels cab. They had a loyal customer base and personal experience of a family business that ran Seddons found them to be good with excellent back up from the factory, although being at Bolton we were near to Oldham. They were cheaper than competing lorries with similar, or even identical drivelines. A Seddon 14/4/400 with Leyland O.400 Power Plus engine cost £2,350, which was about £300 cheaper than an equivalent Leyland Super Comet, doesn’t sound much, but in 1963 that was a reasonable amount of money and it paid for its 22’ ally and wood flat body. IIRC the 30/4/690 with AEC engine was about £400 cheaper than an AEC Mk.V Mandator with the same engine and gearbox. Seddon apparently worked on much smaller profit margins than others and maybe explains their perceived “cheapness” label, one of the charges that Atkinson levelled against them in the hostile takeover battle.
Thats a very interesting article on Seddon you have posted gingerfold , I am interested to note that AEC engined units were available on the open market and assumed they were a special build for nationalised companies .
moomooland:
0Here’s the picture with the detail added Franky.
Click on the picture to enlarge it.
Notice the diesel gauge on the side of the tank!
David
5thwheel:
moomooland:
0Here’s the picture with the detail added Franky.
Click on the picture to enlarge it.Notice the diesel gauge on the side of the tank!
David
Best place for the guage in my opinion, they were very accurate I found compared to the electronic ones in the cab. Fodens still had them well into the 80’s, I used to fill them to just around the 3/4 mark to try and keep the tare weight down. 
Pete.
shugg:
gingerfold:
In it’s coach built cab vehicle ranges Seddon had some good medium weight and heavyweight lorries and the ranges offered a wide choice of engines and components. In fact it can be argued that Seddon did offer too many options and they drastically rationalised their range in the mid-1960s with the introduction of the Motor Panels cab. They had a loyal customer base and personal experience of a family business that ran Seddons found them to be good with excellent back up from the factory, although being at Bolton we were near to Oldham. They were cheaper than competing lorries with similar, or even identical drivelines. A Seddon 14/4/400 with Leyland O.400 Power Plus engine cost £2,350, which was about £300 cheaper than an equivalent Leyland Super Comet, doesn’t sound much, but in 1963 that was a reasonable amount of money and it paid for its 22’ ally and wood flat body. IIRC the 30/4/690 with AEC engine was about £400 cheaper than an AEC Mk.V Mandator with the same engine and gearbox. Seddon apparently worked on much smaller profit margins than others and maybe explains their perceived “cheapness” label, one of the charges that Atkinson levelled against them in the hostile takeover battle.Thats a very interesting article on Seddon you have posted gingerfold , I am interested to note that AEC engined units were available on the open market and assumed they were a special build for nationalised companies .
Yes, both AEC and Leyland supplied engines into the “loose engine market” as it was called, both in the UK and overseas. At various times and in differing quantities AEC supplied engines to Albion, Atkinson, Dennis, Dodge, ERF, Guy, Rowe Hillmaster, and Seddon. I don’t know of any Leyland powered Atkinsons or ERFs, but they supplied the others in the above list plus Bedford, Foden, and Scammell. No doubt I’ve missed one or two others.
Gingerfold wrote: That’s an interesting photo, the trailer looks long for 1959 when the permitted C&U Regs length was usually 24’ to 25’. It’s a heavyweight SD4 tractor unit.
I had the same opinion Graham it certainly does look a long trailer, however looking up C&U Regs for Max Vehicle Lengths it seems there was no actual max length for a semi trailer only a max artic length of 35ft 0ins in 1955 until 1964 when the overall length became 42ft 7ins (13m) with still no permitted trailer length. A semi trailer has no max length until 1983 at 12.2m with a maximum artic overall length of 15.5m. I would have thought the picture of the SD4 was before 1964 but possibly it was taken another 5 or 6 years later and met the 64 Regs although this seems unlikely. Bit of a poser. Franky.
I’ve found a photo of an SD4 with test trailer which is identical to the previous picture and indeed the text with it says it would have been a special types before the length limits change in 1962. My list of C&U Regs has no changes for 1962 so not sure how that stands unless its a mistake and should be 1964. It does seem to be another Dyson trailer possibly even the one that went to GKN in the other pic. What was needed for ‘Special Types’ identification in those days? Franky.
It looks to me very much like the vehicle is set up for brake testing, chalk gun attached to the front bumper with the trigger wiring going back into the cab and plenty of skid marks on the tarmac.