[zb]
anorak:
Go back another 20 years, and the top specification would have been 350-odd bhp, 900lbft and a flat-roof cab. The 1995 DAF (and its contemporaries) therefore gave about 40% more power, 60% more torque and the extra space afforded by the ice-cream van top. Fast forward to 2015 and we have 750bhp and 2600lbft, so the power and torque have increased by about the same percentages, in the same time. The cabs are no bigger nowadays, and engine makers, when they deign to give such information, will boast minimum sfc figures of around 195g/kWh, so fuel efficiency has remained the same over the past 30 years.
Most people would say that the 1995 DAF, with its 500bhp, would be well on top of hauling a 2015 44 tonner, so there has been no real progress in the past 20 years, apart from the fact that modern trucks are full of electronic garbage.
[zb]
anorak:
Go back another 20 years, and the top specification would have been 350-odd bhp, 900lbft and a flat-roof cab. The 1995 DAF (and its contemporaries) therefore gave about 40% more power, 60% more torque and the extra space afforded by the ice-cream van top. Fast forward to 2015 and we have 750bhp and 2600lbft, so the power and torque have increased by about the same percentages, in the same time. The cabs are no bigger nowadays, and engine makers, when they deign to give such information, will boast minimum sfc figures of around 195g/kWh, so fuel efficiency has remained the same over the past 30 years.
Most people would say that the 1995 DAF, with its 500bhp, would be well on top of hauling a 2015 44 tonner, so there has been no real progress in the past 20 years, apart from the fact that modern trucks are full of electronic garbage.
Robert
To be fair it is the average torque output that makes it go and makes the fuel figures not the peak figure.By that standard the ■■■■■■■ would have needed to hold it’s peak figure from 1,050-1,400 rpm to compare like with like with today’s standards.
On that basis I’d probably put up with all the emissions zb in my 44 tonner just so long as I can delete the limiter and have a fuller in it.
[zb]
anorak:
Go back another 20 years, and the top specification would have been 350-odd bhp, 900lbft and a flat-roof cab. The 1995 DAF (and its contemporaries) therefore gave about 40% more power, 60% more torque and the extra space afforded by the ice-cream van top. Fast forward to 2015 and we have 750bhp and 2600lbft, so the power and torque have increased by about the same percentages, in the same time. The cabs are no bigger nowadays, and engine makers, when they deign to give such information, will boast minimum sfc figures of around 195g/kWh, so fuel efficiency has remained the same over the past 30 years.
Most people would say that the 1995 DAF, with its 500bhp, would be well on top of hauling a 2015 44 tonner, so there has been no real progress in the past 20 years, apart from the fact that modern trucks are full of electronic garbage.
Robert
To be fair it is the average torque output that makes it go and makes the fuel figures not the peak figure.By that standard the ■■■■■■■ would have needed to hold it’s peak figure from 1,050-1,400 rpm to compare like with like with today’s standards.
On that basis I’d probably put up with all the emissions zb in my 44 tonner just so long as I can delete the limiter and have a fuller in it.
I remember an owner-operator being uncertain as to what his new vehicle should be. He was considering Scania, whom he had a decent deal with last time, Volvo, whom he had a unit from in the past and Daf, whom he had decent results with on a couple of occasions.
Daf won the day for him, on the basis of that ■■■■■■■ engine. He was over the moon with it and kept it for six years instead of his usual four.
If you go to Biglorryblog (you can short-cut to it from this forum at the top of the page), and then click on the picture of a D-series unit, you can find the details of the forthcoming celebration of 50 years of ■■■■■■■ production at Darlington on the 11th July 2015. They’re looking for people with Darlington-built ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ vehicles to take part - the earlier the better, apparently! Robert
Here you go… ■■■■■■■ ISX rated about 580bhp… 18speed Road Ranger box on the back of that ( Paccar built ) speed limiter set to about 109 kph ( a bit hairy on gravel roads but we try ) if my calculations are right it does about 1.34 km’s to the lt running at 57 tons…Fairly reliable but they do brake down sometimes…
Hi just joined so the new boy on the block. I ran a small fleet on the Isle of Man doing coal & grain haulage to and from the docks. We used to say “Coast to Coast”!!. My best memories were of a B/C series ERF 8 wheeler with the N250 ■■■■■■■■ 9 speed Range change and bulk ali body. I was told when I bought it not to exceed 1500 rpm and stay closer to 1000rpm. Only 250 horses but, Lord, they could pull for ever the gearbox was well used and once you had got going you really didn’t need the clutch, get the revs right, lift off and slide her into the next gear. Changed it for a Leyland Constructor 8 with 10 litre ■■■■■■■ and splitter box with the same bulk body swopped over. The fuel consumption was almost identical with the 14litre just a degree better but you were a lot busier on the stick. Of course I drove the 14 litre if you gave it to a rev merchant the figures would be different. We did it all with 250Bhp, can you even buy anything this power now!!
Hi, Manxmac,
Welcome to the madhouse
One of our local hauliers had exactly the same spec as yours. I thought it was the dog’s, especially as most of the other vehicles on similar work were powered by 180s at 32 tons.
By the way, this is by way of making you feel at home…
Thanks for the welcome OF. Also the map of the TT course, I live away from the course close to the old wartime aerodrome at Andreas. I am retired now but used to farm 180 acres mixed arable/stock and haul coal and grain and also landfill as a regular 4 trips a day Douglas to Point of Ayre. All gone now the coal comes in in plastic bags instead of bulk, barley and wheat neither come or go by boat anymore and the landfill has been replaced by an incinerator. No small hauliers left and just replaced with about 3 big outfits that get all local work, needless to say it is expensive as no competition. 78 and enjoying fiddling with old David Brown tractors.!
robert1952:
On an entirely personal note, I do think that this attractive Cabtec Super-space cab still looks like a modern truck even today. Naturally, I believe that if they had stuck a Fuller or a Twin-splitter on the end of that ■■■■■■■ 500 I would probably have wanted to marry it! But even though some Belgian DAF 95s had Fullers, as did the Seddon-Atkinson Strato mark 1 with the same (ish) cab, apparently this wasn’t borne out in the Super-space version. Tip-top corroborates this on the 13-speed Fuller thread. I also seem to remember reading somewhere that when Mr Bennett created his famous one-off SA SuperCruiser, he had problems accommodating the Twin-splitter under the Super-space cab that he had fitted, and had to make alterations. Robert
Robert, all right you say, a perfect marriage, Daf with a ■■■■■■■ underneath, but not with a horrible ZF behind it.
That’s a combination for real drivers who can handle a Fuller and not for wallies or ■■■■.
[zb]
anorak:
engine makers, when they deign to give such information, will boast minimum sfc figures of around 195g/kWh, so fuel efficiency has remained the same over the past 30 years.
They have made them more efficient at part loads where most of the driving is done anyway, that’s why todays trucks are a little bit more fuel efficient, but not much.
[zb]
anorak:
engine makers, when they deign to give such information, will boast minimum sfc figures of around 195g/kWh, so fuel efficiency has remained the same over the past 30 years.
They have made them more efficient at part loads where most of the driving is done anyway, that’s why todays trucks are a little bit more fuel efficient, but not much.
Thanks- I did not know that. There is not much detailed technical information available on the internet, I find.
This thread is becoming neglected but there are legion informative and constructive post on other threads extolling the virtues of ■■■■■■■ engines posted by bloggers such as A-J ('ERF-continental). Much of that history deserves a place on this thread! Superb engines. Robert
As far as I know the NH-series was installed in ERF-chassis around 1967. By then it was
the 14litre NH-250, later the NHC-250 and in 1969 the 66Cu-series got the NHK-250, but
the 3MW from Lecoq in 6x4 version got the NHK-220, not being 14litre. The NH-series
has a thorough and long lasting pedigree as it was a derivation of the H-series.
I drove my old man’s transcontinental for a trip to Italy it had a 290 big cam in he had the 13 speed fullers replaced with a 9 speed . it went like ■■■■ of a shovel he had a guy called Owen ( oc diesels ) from goldbourn do a bit of magic
With it apparently he was the man for ■■■■■■■ around m/cr and surrounding areas he was always busy my old man did his own servicing and sent it to him for a check up every couple of months . that truck never let him or me down ■■■■■■■ at one time the best and easy to maintain shame that what they were in couldn’t be a bit better…
Hi Dennis, if my memory serves me correctly I think the first ERF to have ■■■■■■■ engine was a 8 wheel flat , New to Butts of Northampton and I think it would have been a 180 bhp job but still a 12.7 ltr .I have,nt spoke to you before but you may know my son Rickymac.I’ve been in transport all my life and just retired at 75 but I certainly remember your motors,
seems like me you,ve been round the block a few times and seems lot of changes
