■■■■■■■ V8 7.7 Litre engine which was fitted to Ford and Dodge in the late 60’s, early 70’s were problematic.
Cheers Dave.
Dan Punchard:
Any thoughts on the worst ■■■■■■■ engine ? I vote for the 365 .
Not sure what they were OFFICALLY called ( 
) but the V6’s in the Foden’s had a pretty bad reputation, even worse than the V8’s, though I had no personal experience of either. I knew a few lads who worked on them though and they had issues with them. I only drove (for a living) the 250 L10 for five years and very occasionally the bosses 8 litre C series, they were OK in a six wheeler for what they were but needed the revs keeping up which, being an ex Gardner and Rolls driver for years, I hadn’t been used to doing!
Pete.
Saviem:
Evening all,Some interesting posts to ponder…
Carryfast a thought provoking post, what if Britain had erected strong import tariffs, would it have protected our industry? Other countries in Europe did so, yet Britain allowed unfettered access to our own markets…and in the case of our own industry, when imported product simply could not, (in its delivered form), meet C&U regulations, which were totally out of step with those in place in our neighbouring western European countries. But our domestic manufacturers HAD TO,…(.a handicap in designing vehicles for other European markets), and to compound the blow there was no enforcement against the “illegal”, (and it was), imported product!
Just think that scenario through…It does not reflect well on our politicians, or those who could have lobbied, the industry, and the Trade Unions, does it!!!
The US truck market of `79, saw 200,000 chassis produced. ■■■■■■■ were fitted in 46% of them.
The market crashed in ``83, at 100,000 units, yet ■■■■■■■ held 60% of that market.
Merril Lynch , that sage of the investment marketers, urged investors to acquire ■■■■■■■ stock in 1984!
ERF Continental is right, ■■■■■■■ strength was totally on the market that they were in, the manufacture and supply of engines for various applications and that was their strength.
But just to go back to the 475, and although it was seen as suitable for the heavy haul operation, its prime focus was to prevail in the Canadian provincial market with its high, but strictly enforced weight limit 0f circ 62 tonnes. The 475 having a weight advantage over the KT range of circ 1000 lbs.
The 14 litre in its 335 form was a preferred option to many of the French heavy haulage operators that I dealt with, primarily as an engine swop from Detroit in the case of the PRP-Willeme multi axle range, and even kept some of the aged, (but superb), "Shark Nose 610s going even 20 years after they hit the road, and very much so in the case of the Berliet “big hitter” the TBO, the 335 was an almost universal swop motor!
Cheerio for now.
The issue of letting go of protectionism in favour of a ‘free’ trade environment was arguably one of the largest factors if not the largest factor in the collapse of Britain’s post war economic recovery.The question then being what changed and why from that correct policy of the 1950’s to the obvious opening of the flood gates which took place later.In this case I’d guess at the time that would translate as the arguments between those like Peter Shore,with a nationalist orientated type economic policy,as opposed to people like Wilson and Heath.
As for the domestic unions.Unfortunately most probably couldn’t and still can’t differentiate a policy which works in the national interest,from nazism.Thereby seeing jobs for foreign workers as a good thing from the point of view of their blinkered Socialist left v right view of the world.
It’s a reasonable bet that the continuation of the idea of the typically ■■■■■■■ engined with Fuller transmission,domestically produced truck,would have survived,at least throughout the life of the 14 Litre/N series,had we maintained that protected non EEC/EU member status of the 1950’s-early 70’s.With the win win situation that the ability to set quotas and tarrifs,especially if/when used in retaliatory way,would probably have even helped rather than hinder European exports of same.Certainly in the case of EU ‘type approval’ for example being used as a way of putting such products out of the frame.
As for the small cam 335 v the 475 it seems that ■■■■■■■ arguably made a massive leap in technology between the production time of the two types.With the 475 being a game changer in the day in terms of its combination of top end power and low down torque output expectations for a 6 cylinder engine effectively being able to do everything that the whole E320-400 range could but better.In addition to being effectively Scania or even Merc V8 proof. 
In which case it seems difficult to understand any case for not using it even in the main stream 38t gross weight class.The next and obviously final leap being the N14 with it’s 500 + hp and 1,800 lb/ft potential.Not bad for a design which had its roots in the 1950’s possibly before.
ERF-Continental:
A strong advice to ZB Anorak, don’t spoil or spill your hard-earned money on betting for NTC475’s but buy the books before you judge wrong!
Explain, please.
I’m guessing the books give sales figures for the 475 and that there’s been quite a few used in marine, plant and static operations your side of the pond.
newmercman:
I’m guessing the books give sales figures for the 475 and that there’s been quite a few used in marine, plant and static operations your side of the pond.
You may well be right. There might have even been the odd one sold into the specialist vehicle market in Europe- firms like MOL, Ginaf, even dear old Foden.
My request for an explanation was more to do with the above member’s habit of using an information-sharing forum to boast that he has books which contain information, while declining to share it. To craft an analogy, it is like buying a ball and eleven football kits, then taking them to the field, but not letting anyone else play with them. There may be a more concise way of describing that; possibly even a single word would encapsulate it. Suggestions please.
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
I’m guessing the books give sales figures for the 475 and that there’s been quite a few used in marine, plant and static operations your side of the pond.You may well be right. There might have even been the odd one sold into the specialist vehicle market in Europe- firms like MOL, Ginaf, even dear old Foden.
The obvious question then being the choice between 475 powered ERF/SA 401 v anything available in the form of Euro or Scandinavian imports especially at the big power higher premium end of the market.IE an unarguably superior domestic product but it still got mostly over looked in favour of less able imports. 
Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
I’m guessing the books give sales figures for the 475 and that there’s been quite a few used in marine, plant and static operations your side of the pond.You may well be right. There might have even been the odd one sold into the specialist vehicle market in Europe- firms like MOL, Ginaf, even dear old Foden.
The obvious question then being the choice between 475 powered ERF/SA 401 v anything available in the form of Euro or Scandinavian imports especially at the big power higher premium end of the market.IE an unarguably superior domestic product but it still got mostly over looked in favour of less able imports.
I blame the bosses of British Haulage companies- all of them, en masse. If they had organised a national picket of the vehicle manufacturers, they could have forced the factories to churn out 475bhp vehicles ad infinitum. Seize the means of production- it’s the only way.
For the genuine “connaisseurs” the NTC475 (Twin Turbo) was in fact NOT intended for the automotive market at
that time due to SEVERE coolant-troubles, hence that in British Columbia, Alaska and Canada some ‘ended’ but to
be confident NO WAY in serious haulage-business! In quite some applications an after-cooler was recommended
in terms of a radiator behind your cab…in case of normal control a necessity. Well, let’s skip the emotional part
on applications and lack of relevant knowledge. Perhaps Ron Hawkins might release some experiences with this
engine in generator-applications during his time with GCC and ■■■■■■■■
ERF-Continental:
For the genuine “connaisseurs” the NTC475 (Twin Turbo) was in fact NOT intended for the automotive market at
that time due to SEVERE coolant-troubles, hence that in British Columbia, Alaska and Canada some ‘ended’ but to
be confident NO WAY in serious haulage-business! In quite some applications an after-cooler was recommended
in terms of a radiator behind your cab…in case of normal control a necessity. Well, let’s skip the emotional part
on applications and lack of relevant knowledge. Perhaps Ron Hawkins might release some experiences with this
engine in generator-applications during his time with GCC and ■■■■■■■■
I’m guessing they either ran up against some limititations concerning insufficient coolant flow capability within the block/head castings in that case which was obviously cured in the case of the N14’s even higher output.Or just the simple fix of outran the water pumping and/or radiator flow rates and capacity of the lower output versions ?.
Whatever the issues the N14 suggests that the basic design of the 14 litre was no where near it’s outright limits in the case of the 475.While it seems clear from the CM article that it certainly was available for general automotive use. 
[zb]
anorak:
The obvious question then being the choice between 475 powered ERF/SA 401 v anything available in the form of Euro or Scandinavian imports especially at the big power higher premium end of the market.IE an unarguably superior domestic product but it still got mostly over looked in favour of less able imports.
I blame the bosses of British Haulage companies- all of them, en masse. If they had organised a national picket of the vehicle manufacturers, they could have forced the factories to churn out 475bhp vehicles ad infinitum. Seize the means of production- it’s the only way.
[/quote]
To be fair it was more a question of where was the advantage in going for anything more than the ■■■■■■■ E320 option or one of the big V8 options instead of looking at the 475.No real need for a revolution. 
Although a decent government more orientated towards a protectionist economic policy instead of free markets might obviously have helped. 
[zb]
anorak:Carryfast:
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
I’m guessing the books give sales figures for the 475 and that there’s been quite a few used in marine, plant and static operations your side of the pond.You may well be right. There might have even been the odd one sold into the specialist vehicle market in Europe- firms like MOL, Ginaf, even dear old Foden.
The obvious question then being the choice between 475 powered ERF/SA 401 v anything available in the form of Euro or Scandinavian imports especially at the big power higher premium end of the market.IE an unarguably superior domestic product but it still got mostly over looked in favour of less able imports.
I blame the bosses of British Haulage companies- all of them, en masse. If they had organised a national picket of the vehicle manufacturers, they could have forced the factories to churn out 475bhp vehicles ad infinitum. Seize the means of production- it’s the only way.
Bloody fools the lot of em, far too interested in making money!
We’re not in Russia or former Eastern-countries…hence the free choice on what is or will be available
on the market, with OEM or assembled components…there was no (to my humble opinion) real gap as the
KT450 was available as well. It probably was more a matter of showing (off) what ■■■■■■■ could deliver
and at the end of the day the market/operator decides …by 1975 (or close around) ■■■■■■■ was not that
eager anymore to “HAVE” the automotive market, leaving the OEM to their own R&D and struggling.
By the way…there was a merger ongoing between ■■■■■■■ and White Motor Company (White, Autocar,
Diamond T, Sterling and other, that would give a boost to later Volvo buying) then, a bit later also between
■■■■■■■ and PACCAR (Kenworth, Peterbilt and later Foden, DAF) which would have given other players on
the cards-table nowadays!
Again, nowadays the automotive market is on keen procurement and outsourcing of components, some stick
to their in-house manufactured products with huge R&D-pressure. ■■■■■■■ left the UK/Continental market
of V-engines to Caterpillar and continental OEM’s, learning from their expensive Chrysler- and Krupp-lessons!
newmercman:
Bloody fools the lot of em, far too interested in making money!
That would obviously explain it.Why buy a 475 ■■■■■■■ powered SA when they could have a 1644 with an EPS instead.
ERF-Continental:
We’re not in Russia or former Eastern-countries…hence the free choice on what is or will be available
on the market,
The logical result being a race to the bottom,in which Communism in the form of totalitarian economies like China,wins out and/or the situation that Greece etc is in.IE massive debts resulting from unsustainable trade deficits. 
While it is possible to have the total antithesis of Communism in the form of Nationalism which is just as much against the idea of free markets.The difference is in the ‘reasons’ and how and where that policy is applied.As,hopefully,France will soon prove.While European ‘type approval’ was never exactly about ‘free trade’.
Just a guess Geoffrey, but I’m sure that not too many buyers were faced with the choice of regular powered ERF/SA/Foden or high powered Mercedes.
Maybe they should’ve offered the Signature 600 and blown those pesky foreigners with their pitiful mid 400hp engines back over the channel where they belong.
newmercman:
Just a guess Geoffrey, but I’m sure that not too many buyers were faced with the choice of regular powered ERF/SA/Foden or high powered Mercedes.Maybe they should’ve offered the Signature 600 and blown those pesky foreigners with their pitiful mid 400hp engines back over the channel where they belong.
Admittedly the average 290 buyer wasn’t going to buy a 320-400 +.However I’d doubt if Mercedes UK etc and CM went to all the trouble of providing and testing big power kit like V8’s if they thought that there wasn’t a reasonable potential market here that was going to buy it.
As for it taking a 600 in the day to sort the likes of Scania etc out why and even if it did that would obviously have been a KTA.
In which case Saviem’s comments provide most of the reasons as to why a 475 would arguably have been the right motor of choice in that regard.
As a former road tester I’ll tell you why CM went to the trouble of testing the big power lorries…
It is a lot of fun, simple as that.
Evening all,
Oh dear…do I detect a situation of “handbags at 40 paces”?..I do hope that I am wrong!
ERF Continental, Im afraid that you are to be corrected on two points, please allow me…
The 14 litre engine first emerged in 1955.
The NTC475 was conceived originally as a power unit for the growing market in Canadian provinces of Alberta, and British Columbia where the overall market for new vehicles had remained static for a considerable number of years, the gross weight of the combinations was strictly limited, therefore the payload potential was critical, and the requirement for considerable horsepower was paramount. The KT range was, although reliable, and well up on both torque and horsepower, (450,535,600, remember we are talking about early `80s), but it was quite obvious that with the engineering developments taking place in Europe, as well as North America, then the net installed weight of a power unit, and its horsepower potential would become more critical.
Remember at that time the European vertically integrated manufacturers, Mercedes, Fiat, and MAN, were all pushing forward with development of reasonable weight, high horsepower units, in the US Mack had slimmed the 16.8 litre V 8, and CAT were pushing the power envelope of their 6 cylinder offerings.
For ■■■■■■■■ the opportunity to evaluate a specification that pushed the limits further, in a road application , as offered by the specific area of the Canadian market was ideal. That the engine would find its way into other markets, (as per" my" K100), well those things just happen.
NMM has a good point, just how many NTC475s were built? ERF Continental, can you tell us? It certainly was not a common option. But as a “driveable” engine I can only say, (based on a fair amount of personal experience), that it was far more user friendly than the big banger KT serie.
Dan, to answer your question, really the very poorest, (and that is being polite), ■■■■■■■ Engines were the Vim, and Vale, 6, & 8 cylinder Vs. Dave is right, they were" Orrible", (but sounded great)! Bust Krupp, Nearly bust Guy, (but they were busy doing it for themselves)!, and very nearly got hold of Berliet…but they chose to build their own disasterous high revving 6 litre V engine!
Just seen NMM s last post…at last someone has told the truth…it really was…and universally everybody loved being “pedal to the metal”!!!
Makes one wonder, if one thinks about it…was the 14 litre a fluke■■?
Cheerio for now…no handbags Gentlemen!
newmercman:
As a former road tester I’ll tell you why CM went to the trouble of testing the big power lorries…It is a lot of fun, simple as that.
Also having done at least a bit of road testing when the country still had some work fun absolutely but it wasn’t cheap let alone free and had to be paid for in the form of sales.