Trev_H:
The normal control Mercedes I saw in the 50’s around Cheshire and Manchester (no M6 then, apart from the Preston by pass ) were on foreign plates, artic tankers IIRC but what I did remember was the little porthole window in the sleeper section, was there anything British at that time that had anything like a sleeper ?
Yes. As far as I can make out, all the British makes which exported lorries had a sleeper option, whether it was a modified “standard” cab or a foreign-built coachbuilt one. The British stuff seemed to be competitive with anything in the world, until about 1955. During the next five years, the Continentals changed up a gear, while the GB lot, en masse, engaged Aberdeen overdrive…or so it seems.
It was the uk government’s post war economic policies and the uk bankers together with (a lot) of help from the domestic uk customers’ demands compared to those of the customers in the colonial markets that did it.
Leyland Hippo etc v Krupp Titan would have been the relevant comparison but,of course UK buyers weren’t looking for,nor probably could they have afforded to buy or run,sleeper cabbed Hippos etc (or Titans) while there was no way that the Germans would ever have bought a Leyland regardless of how good the Leyland was.Then the colonials discovered US trucks and the rest is history.
Jazzandy:
I’m pretty sure that Lenham Storage were running imported Mwrcs in the late 50’s.
I wonder what persuaded them to buy foreign? In those days, I am guessing that the British mechanicals were at least as good as the Continentals and, unless they had a burning desire for a (arguably) more comfortable cab, the only other explanation is that they were using them to go across the Channel. Any ideas?
There is some information on '50s bonneted Mercs here: baumaschinenbilder.de/forum/ … r=0&page=3
Here’s another market which was enthusiastic about British wagons in the fifties (and later). It seems that Leyland just let these customers go, for no sound commercial reason that I can conceive. camionesclasicos.com/FORO/vi … fc5ef0c725
[zb]
anorak:
Here’s another market which was enthusiastic about British wagons in the fifties (and later). It seems that Leyland just let these customers go, for no sound commercial reason that I can conceive. camionesclasicos.com/FORO/vi … fc5ef0c725
‘If’ the theory,that AEC was wiped out,to allow Leyland to get an advantage,is correct,then they wouldn’t have also wanted to take themelves out doing it.
As for the export market issues it was the lack of the possibility of large scale sales of those same type of trucks in the domestic market that did it.Which is the difference between how the US truck manufacturing industry took over the colonial export markets and how we lost all of ours.A viable production operation requires the type of economies of scale that can only be obtained by product rationalisation in which you’re not lumbered with having to produce massively different products,using totally different componentry,for your relatively fewer sales,in your export markets,compared to your relatively much larger sales in your domestic market.
That type of operation can only work by letting either the domestic market or the export markets go.No surprise that in the volume UK commercial vehicle manufacturers case they had no option other than taking the latter option.Whereas my employers had the luxury of being able to take the former one.
Kr79 I don t remember there being alaw against sleeping in cabs in fact a lot of us used to do it, dont forget that non sleeper Scania i had 3 years sleeping across the engine, the unions opposed their members sleeping in sleeper cabs what next, iremember coming back from G lasgow when i was working for Springfield driving a Seddon 13 4 in the 60s 18 ton of mixed copper scrap and pig iron coming up the back side of Shap no M6 in those days the thing was on its knees no wonder Manufacturers GTW 18 ton, first gear i was so knackered i could nt even make the Jungle and kipped in the cab at the top. That was in the days before Ministry plating but I got a severe bollocking off the Management for overloading,happy days Crow.
kr79:
Concerning sleeper cabs in the uk was there a law against sleeping in the truck or was that just kipping across the seats in a day cab.
One of our driver’s asked that question at a RHA meeting when tachograph’s were coming into general use, he was told that Britain wasn’t large enough to require a night out! I THINK that the rule was never introduced, maybe an Urban Myth perhaps?
I thought the unions’ “ban” on sleeper cabs only came in in the 1970s. Whenever it was, they were common elsewhere in the '50s, but completely absent fron British haulage, where it was the norm for drivers to find accomodation. Presumably, hotels, guesthouses and the like existed in Europe at the time, but the Continentals preferred the tin box, (as did the US). The British custom was peculiar to Britain, or so it seems. Why?
[zb]
anorak:
I thought the unions’ “ban” on sleeper cabs only came in in the 1970s. Whenever it was, they were common elsewhere in the '50s, but completely absent fron British haulage, where it was the norm for drivers to find accomodation. Presumably, hotels, guesthouses and the like existed in Europe at the time, but the Continentals preferred the tin box, (as did the US). The British custom was peculiar to Britain, or so it seems. Why?
I think it was probably more a case of the typical Brit attitude towards long distance freight being expected to be moved by rail not road which was then reflected in cab design.The basic thought process seemed to be one of trucks were only expected to be worked over relatively short distances then back to base.
The demands and therefore design of trucks in the domestic market wasn’t keeping pace with the shift in freight traffic being moved by road over longer distances.In general that change seems to have taken place on the basis of trucks,which were previously used for short runs and return to base,suddenly then being used for ever longer freight movements with no regard to the actual difference in design required for running short distance operations compared to longer distance ones.
That change in design would obviously cost money.No surprise that the Brit guvnors took a long time in starting to think about spending the extra amounts required compared to their European,US,and Colonial counterparts.
To be fair though the British truck builders seemed to be offering the day cab as the standard offering well in to the 70s whereas the continental builders offered the sleeper as standard. I know when leyland introduced the roadtrain there was no sleeper at the launch and that was about 1980.
kr79:
To be fair though the British truck builders seemed to be offering the day cab as the standard offering well in to the 70s whereas the continental builders offered the sleeper as standard. I know when leyland introduced the roadtrain there was no sleeper at the launch and that was about 1980.
The product line up of any manufacturer is demand driven so what you see at the time is a reasonably accurate reflection of what the customers wanted.In this case the definition of ‘demand’ was the domestic market just as in the case of the European/Scandinavian/US products were a reflection of the demands in their respective domestic markets and the idea of standard fit sleeper cabs would have been driven by those domestic demands and the economies of scale issue in that having to fit a day cab for their export markets would have been more aggravation than it was worth.Just as the opposite was the case for the uk manufacturers during those years when the opposite applied here in relation to the customer demand situation.
Which is why German drivers were finding themselves driving something like the Titan or a sleeper cabbed Merc while the Brits were often lumbered with a small shed bolted on the front of a Gardner powered heap.Probably in many cases not much different in comfort or performance to the AEC Matadors that they’d been driving in the war to sort those same German drivers out just a few years previously.
kr79:
Also does anyone have any data on gvw and dimensions axle weights etc in mainland Europe as this has a bearing on what would be on offer.
The obvious Dutch type limits shown by the examples posted elswhere of the time certainly would have helped in moving demand in the domestic market forward faster.Wether the austerity and poverty ridden British economy of the time would have been able to make use of those types of limits is another matter.
That’s fair enough in the 50s and 60s but by the mid 70s it was obvious the sleeper cab was the way forward and the Brits were still trying to sell day cabs as standard fit erf and seddon Atkinson released new cabs in the mid70s with a day cab as standard.
There was obviously a demand for sleepers as there seems to be lots of evidence of various contraptions nailed on the back of cabs.
I suppouse the UKs rigid8 and trailer rather than artic dominance may have a bearing on things.
I think in many ways increased weights would have helped more back then than today as we still had lots of heavy industurys that needed steel coal and other stuff like that.
kr79:
That’s fair enough in the 50s and 60s but by the mid 70s it was obvious the sleeper cab was the way forward and the Brits were still trying to sell day cabs as standard fit erf and seddon Atkinson released new cabs in the mid70s with a day cab as standard.
There was obviously a demand for sleepers as there seems to be lots of evidence of various contraptions nailed on the back of cabs.
Maybe, in the 1950s, British drivers would have turned their noses up at the notion of kipping in the cab, rather than having a proper bed. Those that did rough it probably appreciated their night-out money as a bonus. For the operator, it seems to make more financial sense to buy a larger cab, than forking out for digs every night. The continued reliance on digs, through to the 1970s, seems to be a peculiarity unique to Britain.
kr79:
I suppouse the UKs rigid8 and trailer rather than artic dominance may have a bearing on things.
I think in many ways increased weights would have helped more back then than today as we still had lots of heavy industurys that needed steel coal and other stuff like that.
Rigids and trailers were common all over the Continent in the 1950s. Germany brought in very severe weight regulations in about 1955(?), to encourage rail transport, resulting in these multi-axle vehicles:
Prior to that, more than one trailer was possible. These rules were relaxed in about 1960(?). Apologies for approximate dates. Source of photo: baumaschinenbilder.de/forum/ … r=0&page=3
kr79:
I thought it was just and the Italians that liked the rigid and trailer.
The good old fashioned drawbar outfit was actually king right across europe at least up to the 1980’s,especially in Holland, Germany,Austria,Switzerland and Scandinavia and probably still is at least in Scandinavia based on the simple fact that they drive better with less cut in and gross train weights are better for keeping within axle weight limits as opposed to the artic configuration of gross combination weights.
I THINK that the rule was never introduced, maybe an Urban Myth perhaps?
