Tubbysboy:
Yes mate it was me. Sorry for repeating meself!!!
No problem at all 
. Same point, different context. Did the “pump settings drift” issue affect the sales of ERFs in Spain? Was it still bad on the electronically-controlled versions?
My first truck after passing my test was a 1988 Foden 4350 with the 14 lt ■■■■■■■ . It had the fuller 12 speed box ( 8+overdrive ) double drive bogie & eminox stack up the back . That old lass would pull a house down , which is just as well cos we did groupage work into Ireland & loaded bulk sawdust back home so it was a case of fill it to the roof which resulted in some rather " profitable " loads . The spec of the truck was the boss mans preference as they were in his words " robust" and after seeing the state of the Irish roads , it was a good choice !!! Driving through those country lanes & villages with the window down just to hear that Hummin ■■■■■■■ is a memory that will stay with me forever [emoji106][emoji4]
[/quote]
Also handy when on a bit of rouge… So I’ve been told, I myself was never involved in such behaviour.
[/quote]
Dread the thought Danny, i would never of accused you of such devious tactics !!!
By the way, how is the treatment for your ‘colour blindness’ going ■■?
Steve…
3stepsaheaduk:
Just out of interest what where the speed limits before limiters or how fastnwould they actually go up to legal or illegaland when did limiters come and spoil the fun,■■
sounds like you missed out on the glory days 3steps…my Daf used to cruise along all night at 75 mph in the mid-'80’s…and i still had a fair few artics come sailing by me 
I found the high flow rate of the ■■■■■■■ PT fuel system was a double edged sword when the mercury fell below the cloud point of diesel. Fine if the engine was running, or had been very recently and the fuel line between tank and filter was not too exposed; the return flow warmed the tank contents and kept the engine running or made restarting easier. But if the engine and had been shut down for an appreciable period then it was the high flow rate that clogged the filter. Getting a ■■■■■■■ to keep running in these conditions was difficult, especially given the required cranking time on probably already weakened batteries, that still so even after filling the filter with warmer fuel. Taking only one filter to a disabled vehicle was unlikely to meet with success.
M&C steve:
I’m surprised to read no mention of a characteristic feature of these engines, that is the high rate of warm recycled fuel returned to the running tank.Many drivers found that to be a most welcome thing in the harsh winter conditions often experienced, especially in eastern Europe, Turkey, Russia etc…
Steve.
And the cold air blasted past the engine by the fan still froze the filter which benefitted from a wooly hat or bit of foam rubber cable tied around it ,thinking about it the fuel warmer wires had probably broken !
[zb]
anorak:Tubbysboy:
Yes mate it was me. Sorry for repeating meself!!!No problem at all
I think it was more frustration at waiting for parts for ERF when they went wrong, transportes pastor who at the time ran about 8 ERFs where also the dealer, service and parts. Can’t say about the electrical controlled ones tbh. I think the 525s were electric?
One of the drivers still has one running about. Think it’s a 410.
As others have said, the 14 litre was under stressed, heavy, over engineered, thirsty, and totally reliable, plus the brilliant Jake Brake…The “replacement” L10 however was…errrrr…overstressed, under engineered, and unreliable… In compararison … 
Fergie47:
As others have said, the 14 litre was under stressed, heavy, over engineered, thirsty, and totally reliable, plus the brilliant Jake Brake…The “replacement” L10 however was…errrrr…overstressed, under engineered, and unreliable… In compararison …
Going off topic slightly, when I collected our first new Foden (A175 AHL) with the L10 fitted it so happened that a ■■■■■■■ fitter was at the quarry sorting a fuel problem with a 14 litre as I mentioned earlier in this thread. Our TM proudly asked the fitter what he thought of the L10, his reply was to ask where our furthest quarry was and send the thing there as they were rubbish! So it ended up at Gore quarry near Kington and it did have several engine issues, oddly enough it later returned to our quarry where the storeman eventually purchased it and ran it for several years as an od! I had a couple of six wheeler Fodens with L10’s and they were ok reliability wise but there was no low-down pulling power with them, I was up and down the gearbox all the time, plus they leaked oil almost like a Gardner!
Pete.
Fergie47:
As others have said, the 14 litre was under stressed, heavy, over engineered, thirsty, and totally reliable, plus the brilliant Jake Brake…The “replacement” L10 however was…errrrr…overstressed, under engineered, and unreliable… In compararison …
An absolute classic example of that simple engineering choice in which the former ( usually ) wins out every time. 
What is the situation with ■■■■■■■ now , do they still produce road going engines or is it just plant and generators
windrush:
Fergie47:
As others have said, the 14 litre was under stressed, heavy, over engineered, thirsty, and totally reliable, plus the brilliant Jake Brake…The “replacement” L10 however was…errrrr…overstressed, under engineered, and unreliable… In compararison …Going off topic slightly, when I collected our first new Foden (A175 AHL) with the L10 fitted it so happened that a ■■■■■■■ fitter was at the quarry sorting a fuel problem with a 14 litre as I mentioned earlier in this thread. Our TM proudly asked the fitter what he thought of the L10, his reply was to ask where our furthest quarry was and send the thing there as they were rubbish! So it ended up at Gore quarry near Kington and it did have several engine issues, oddly enough it later returned to our quarry where the storeman eventually purchased it and ran it for several years as an od! I had a couple of six wheeler Fodens with L10’s and they were ok reliability wise but there was no low-down pulling power with them, I was up and down the gearbox all the time, plus they leaked oil almost like a Gardner!
Pete.
Interesting comments, Pete. I drove a few classic early ‘high torque at low revs’ motors including the Scania V8 in the 142. As an admirer (and one-time user) of the 14-litre engine in its various forms, I wonder at what point in history did that engine finally match the Scania V8 for high torque at low revs. It must have been some time after the old small-cam ■■■■■■■ engines, perhaps when the NTE 320 came on the scene… ? Robert
ramone:
What is the situation with ■■■■■■■ now , do they still produce road going engines or is it just plant and generators
They still supply engines to DAF for the LF series and to IVECO for their Eurocargo range
ramone:
What is the situation with ■■■■■■■ now , do they still produce road going engines or is it just plant and generators
It’s the ISX range now which apparently some seem to say is ok while others say its a bit of a lemon.With the historic fight in the loose engine market still going on between Detroit and ■■■■■■■■
robert1952:
Interesting comments, Pete. I drove a few classic early ‘high torque at low revs’ motors including the Scania V8 in the 142. As an admirer (and one-time user) of the 14-litre engine in its various forms, I wonder at what point in history did that engine finally match the Scania V8 for high torque at low revs. It must have been some time after the old small-cam ■■■■■■■ engines, perhaps when the NTE 320 came on the scene… ? Robert
It seems to be the big cam range which was the main step.With figures around suggesting that the E/Formula 350-450 were making the highest power for the least engine speed with torque peaks of between 1,200 + to 1,400+ respectively all at 1,300 rpm.
Carryfast:
robert1952:
Interesting comments, Pete. I drove a few classic early ‘high torque at low revs’ motors including the Scania V8 in the 142. As an admirer (and one-time user) of the 14-litre engine in its various forms, I wonder at what point in history did that engine finally match the Scania V8 for high torque at low revs. It must have been some time after the old small-cam ■■■■■■■ engines, perhaps when the NTE 320 came on the scene… ? RobertIt seems to be the big cam range which was the main step.With figures around suggesting that the E/Formula 350-450 were making the highest power for the least engine speed with torque peaks of between 1,200 + to 1,400+ respectively all at 1,300 rpm.
Thank you CF. That would locate the match time approximately at the point the big-cam 350 came on the scene, then. Robert
The 335 ■■■■■■■ 14 lt. engine turbo charged to 380 bhp was in service in the U K in the mid 60s as it was fitted into the Scammell contractor Pickfords first ones were registered on a “E” plate but I am certain that Wynns had some on a"D" plate and possibly some were in their Pacifics as I seem to recall that Wynns had some input into the contractor as they were the first vehicles they bought from Scammell. The first general haulage lorry which I knew to have a 335 ■■■■■■■ engine was a R.K.Crisp Guy Big J on a “K” plate
cheers Johnnie
sammyopisite:
The 335 ■■■■■■■ 14 lt. engine turbo charged to 380 bhp was in service in the U K in the mid 60s as it was fitted into the Scammell contractor Pickfords first ones were registered on a “E” plate but I am certain that Wynns had some on a"D" plate and possibly some were in their Pacifics as I seem to recall that Wynns had some input into the contractor as they were the first vehicles they bought from Scammell. The first general haulage lorry which I knew to have a 335 ■■■■■■■ engine was a R.K.Crisp Guy Big J on a “K” platecheers Johnnie
Yes, and they were also fitted to LHD Seddon-Atkinson 400s, LHD ERF MGC and NGC ‘Europeans’, certain rare Ford Transcontinentals, and certain rare Leyland Marathons. However, these were all small-cam NTC / NTK ■■■■■■■ motors but they were all turbo-charged as far as I know. Interesting that you quote 380 bhp for one of these in the Scammell Contractor: even 335 bhp was big power in those days. Robert
robert1952:
sammyopisite:
The 335 ■■■■■■■ 14 lt. engine turbo charged to 380 bhp was in service in the U K in the mid 60s as it was fitted into the Scammell contractor Pickfords first ones were registered on a “E” plate but I am certain that Wynns had some on a"D" plate and possibly some were in their Pacifics as I seem to recall that Wynns had some input into the contractor as they were the first vehicles they bought from Scammell. The first general haulage lorry which I knew to have a 335 ■■■■■■■ engine was a R.K.Crisp Guy Big J on a “K” platecheers Johnnie
Yes, and they were also fitted to LHD Seddon-Atkinson 400s, LHD ERF MGC and NGC ‘Europeans’, certain rare Ford Transcontinentals, and certain rare Leyland Marathons. However, these were all small-cam NTC / NTK ■■■■■■■ motors but they were all turbo-charged as far as I know. Interesting that you quote 380 bhp for one of these in the Scammell Contractor: even 335 bhp was big power in those days. Robert
Robert they were rated at 240 tons gross train weight and could handle 300 tons they were semi automatic gear box self changing gears Coventry and capable of around 45 mph solo tractor but they were quite ■■■■■■■■■■ after a Super constructor but that only had a 250 Albion engine and 125 GTW
I had an Atkinson viewline with a 14lt. ■■■■■■■ in naturally aspirated 250 bhp and that was an excellent wagon , when the M62 first opened I had to watch out for Ford D series and TK Bedfords running at 24/28 tons as they would be under my feet running at 60 tons 
I am almost certain that the 335 was the first turbo charged ■■■■■■■ engine but as I was only a thick driver don’t take that as a fact
cheers Johnnie
robert1952:
Interesting comments, Pete. I drove a few classic early ‘high torque at low revs’ motors including the Scania V8 in the 142. As an admirer (and one-time user) of the 14-litre engine in its various forms, I wonder at what point in history did that engine finally match the Scania V8 for high torque at low revs. It must have been some time after the old small-cam ■■■■■■■ engines, perhaps when the NTE 320 came on the scene… ? Robert
According to the published figures, the Swedes were always a step ahead, IIRC. The NTC355 might have had a few more lbft than the 140, but neither of those variants were ‘high torque at low revs’ motors.