5Valve:
Thanks Anorak, for posting the info regarding the ■■■■■■■ book. It brings back many memories of my time spent with them putting fires out with the Val/Vales, Vim’s and occasionally NH’s and NT’s in the UK, in the mid -late 60’s.
For those of you on the truck side of the business, the original automotive engine Shotts supplied was the NHE 180 which
went up to a max of 220hp later in it’s life, the US designation was 742 cu. in. The NH250 range was 855cu.in, this was also available in turbo’d form up to 380hp, i.e. NT380, but, this was invairiably for construction use with only occasional automotive use at 335 and 380 for the likes of Scammell for heavy load work. The Super 250 engine used by Ford was 927 cu.in., as always they wanted to be different from the pack, as they had been when wanting detail changes to the V8 Vale engine, for the D1000 range, to differentiate themselves from the Dodge K series.
I probably wouldn’t have liked a fleet of V8 ■■■■■■■■■■■ the only one I ran gave faultless service and the 180/205 and 220 sixes also gave reliable service too.The ■■■■■■■ were always a bit thirstier than the Gardners which was a major consideration,even in those far off “halcyon” days of being a haulier !! Cheers Bewick.
Hi Bewick, so, it was you that had the good one. We always wondered who owned it!!!
That reminds me of one of our regular technical meetings , held at the Darlington Plant. We were having problems with water pump bearing failures, the tech service manager stood up and said that they now had a ‘fix’ and we could all pick up 10 modified water pumps from the stores, for free issue to customers/dealers as we saw fit. “Great”, was our response, “How can anyone tell it’s a modified pump?” Tech service -" Easy, it’s got a large dot of red paint on the impeller" Six speechless service personnel (an unknown phenomenon as you will probably attest to), one of our number then said to him, “As you are the one with the BSc, would you like to go out of the door, compose yourself and return with a better place to put the red dot”. Not all companies are perfect all the time!
We also had a lot of fun over the years, with the yank’s, teaching new arrivals how to correctly spell and pronounce “Aluminium” rather than Aluminum. Happy Days.
Evening all, I still rated ■■■■■■■■ and more importantly its “people”, higher than most. 5valve, who was the rep who lived at Woodseaves Staffordshire, a real trier, what he did not know, or have experience of, he made up for by trying! Blooming good bloke!
What everyone forgets in looking backwards, it was the people on the ground who made the difference, often in the face of the quality, (or lack of), and gave the product credibility. That is why, when you look at SMMT statistics on vehicle registrations, in some areas a particular make, not a national market leader, would have greater sales than the market leaders. Purely down to the people involved, and the support for the product.
Its B… raining again, so I doubt if we can beat the mud, and raise a few spuds tommorow,…if you want to invest, forget gold…hide a few tons of spuds!! I shall away, and drown my sorrows with a large Bollinger, Cheerio for now.
Ah Saviem, Bonjour Matelot, that was Kelvin Fowler who lived in Staffs. I was the young , good looking, unmarried one, who got shunted all over the place, filling in on the gaps when we had no cover. I joined at the back end of '66 and there were about six of us based in the field covering the whole spectrum of Engines, from the NHC4 tiddlers, up to the V12 635’s which were just starting to appear in 100 ton dump trucks, for open cast site use.
The one thing that we did, that seemed to completely disarm most customers, was to be straight with them as to the cause of any failure. Certainly the usual manufacturers response to a problem, at that time, was to say they had never come across it before. The whole point about engine problems is that you have to determine the root cause of the problem and then effect a cure. Making assumptions usually means you end up having a second failure with an even more irate customer on your back. This is not to say that a great deal of " lead swinging" used to go on by some customers, but, they invariably got short shrift, but couched in the most acceptable terms!
( Saviem, by the way, I will revert to the other blog soon, now everything has quietened down!)
Hi 5valve, reading that book (link above), it seems that all of the sub-14 litre ■■■■■■■ V engines of the early 1960s were a disaster. Were the problems eventually sorted out? Was the 903 a better-engineered effort? Also, why did they bother to design and build the 903, when they had a perfectly good 855 cu in engine in the range?
Hi Anorak,
There were two, what you might say were compact, vee engine families, the Val/Vale smaller units and the larger Vim/Vine’s. I think the idea was to offer a very tight package, i.e. a ‘box’ of very small proportions that got away from the in line engine package size which could be inhibiting in some applications. The smaller V6/V8’s had engine speeds of 3000 rpm + and ,if I remember were ‘oversquare’, a whole new ball game to UK truck customers to get used to, more used to a maximum of 2000 rpm mainly in- line engines with good mid range torque outputs.
The larger, and slower revving, V6 Vim engines used by Guy and Daimler were built under licence by Krupp in Germany. The Guy’s were in the main very well behaved, in the Big ‘J’ chassis, but, the same engine in the Daimler Roadliner single decker gave, from what I can remember, many problems. The V903 was a later development of the range and was more substantial and reliable than it’s predecessors.
I do recall being told that a petrol version of the smaller Vee engines were made for use in the States, may have been V8 only. Looking back after all this time I now realize why we all used to do 45,000 + miles a year putting fires out!!
5Valve:
Hi Bewick, so, it was you that had the good one. We always wondered who owned it!!!
That reminds me of one of our regular technical meetings , held at the Darlington Plant. We were having problems with water pump bearing failures, the tech service manager stood up and said that they now had a ‘fix’ and we could all pick up 10 modified water pumps from the stores, for free issue to customers/dealers as we saw fit. “Great”, was our response, “How can anyone tell it’s a modified pump?” Tech service -" Easy, it’s got a large dot of red paint on the impeller" Six speechless service personnel (an unknown phenomenon as you will probably attest to), one of our number then said to him, “As you are the one with the BSc, would you like to go out of the door, compose yourself and return with a better place to put the red dot”. Not all companies are perfect all the time!
We also had a lot of fun over the years, with the yank’s, teaching new arrivals how to correctly spell and pronounce “Aluminium” rather than Aluminum. Happy Days.
Hi boys
5Valve water pump bearings must be the most common brake down for ■■■■■■■■ They have been a problem for years. I’ve lost count of how many I’ve fitted especially in plant Komatsu 210s and D39,61,65s In fact I’m fitting one tomorrow to a small 4 cylinder in a 9ton Terex dumper. If I get a marker pen and put a red mark on the impeller do you think it will last longer
5Valve:
Hi Bewick, so, it was you that had the good one. We always wondered who owned it!!!
That reminds me of one of our regular technical meetings , held at the Darlington Plant. We were having problems with water pump bearing failures, the tech service manager stood up and said that they now had a ‘fix’ and we could all pick up 10 modified water pumps from the stores, for free issue to customers/dealers as we saw fit. “Great”, was our response, “How can anyone tell it’s a modified pump?” Tech service -" Easy, it’s got a large dot of red paint on the impeller" Six speechless service personnel (an unknown phenomenon as you will probably attest to), one of our number then said to him, “As you are the one with the BSc, would you like to go out of the door, compose yourself and return with a better place to put the red dot”. Not all companies are perfect all the time!
We also had a lot of fun over the years, with the yank’s, teaching new arrivals how to correctly spell and pronounce “Aluminium” rather than Aluminum. Happy Days.
Hiya “5 Valve”,this is an early 1970 shot of our entire fleet at the time,taken at about mid-day on a Saturday just after we’d finished loading in the local Paper mill.The D1000,which I drove,would be about 2 years old at the time.We changed the engine oil on the ■■■■■■■ and the two Perkins V8’s in the Mastiffs every 2 weeks,filter every other change,plus I had the ■■■■■■■ injectors torqued regularly as well ! But honestly,that D1000 never missed a beat all the time I ran it,it was a Great motor ! Cheers Bewick.
My old Man had an F Reg tractor and it gave no problems either, could pull well and went like stink, he quite liked it as the heater was spot on, something the motors he had before that didn’t really have! They were quite comfortable to drive and as an almost constant passenger then, I liked the interior. I recall something being done to the engine later when someone else had the vehicle but it must have done a bit of graft by then.
I loved the sound of the V8, much better sound than the Dodge’s, they were just ■■■■ LOUD! I’d come across the engines a few years earlier when Ellis had about three new D1000 units, we had trouble with water in the fuel until it was discovered the returning hot fuel made for a very hot tank and when filled with cold diesel from the pump on return to the yard this caused condensation so water in the fuel.
These engines did have a reputation even then for problems with pistons picking up and bearings failing but how much this was actual fact or rumour is hard to say, it was few years later before I worked on ■■■■■■■ again, all in-lines though, good engines but you couldn’t beat the sound of those V’s. Franky.
i was told at ■■■■■■■ worsley plant that the e290 actually produced 278 bhp at the wheels . i think a lot depended who set the injectors up , when worsley had fitted new injectors and set them up the pulling power was incredible .
5Valve:
Hi Anorak,
There were two, what you might say were compact, vee engine families, the Val/Vale smaller units and the larger Vim/Vine’s. I think the idea was to offer a very tight package, i.e. a ‘box’ of very small proportions that got away from the in line engine package size which could be inhibiting in some applications. The smaller V6/V8’s had engine speeds of 3000 rpm + and ,if I remember were ‘oversquare’, a whole new ball game to UK truck customers to get used to, more used to a maximum of 2000 rpm mainly in- line engines with good mid range torque outputs.
The larger, and slower revving, V6 Vim engines used by Guy and Daimler were built under licence by Krupp in Germany. The Guy’s were in the main very well behaved, in the Big ‘J’ chassis, but, the same engine in the Daimler Roadliner single decker gave, from what I can remember, many problems. The V903 was a later development of the range and was more substantial and reliable than it’s predecessors.
I do recall being told that a petrol version of the smaller Vee engines were made for use in the States, may have been V8 only. Looking back after all this time I now realize why we all used to do 45,000 + miles a year putting fires out!!
Hi 5valve, the book confirms your argument that ■■■■■■■ were trying (desperately) to build a compact engine, to compete with the petrol engines used in middleweight vehicles in the US, in the early 1960s. To achieve this, the V’s were undersquare, high-revving things. The result cost ■■■■■■■ all their profits and more, for a period in the mid-‘60s. The fad seems to have spread to GB- AEC being the most prominent example. AEC fans can take heart from the fact that a much larger engine manufacturer made the same mistake. The book cites the unreliability of the VIM/VINE as instrumental in the demise of Krupp.
Did Ford not offer the Perkins V8 as an alternative, in the D-series? This was an undersquare design (1:1.06).
Does anyone know of any oversquare lorry engines which were generally accepted as successful?
The V6 engine used in the early tilt cab Dodges were just noisy bags of ■■■■ and wern’t they the engine that Guy’s were going to use when the Big J was launched,that idea came to an abrupt end IIRC.Personally I thought the ■■■■■■■ V8 was a better engine than the Perkins V8,but here again the two Perkins we ran gave us good service so it is just a personal choice.The ■■■■■■■ sounded much “crisper” than the Perkins which was probably as a result of the different injection systems.Cheers Bewick.
Frankydobo:
My old Man had an F Reg tractor and it gave no problems either, could pull well and went like stink, he quite liked it as the heater was spot on, something the motors he had before that didn’t really have! They were quite comfortable to drive and as an almost constant passenger then, I liked the interior. I recall something being done to the engine later when someone else had the vehicle but it must have done a bit of graft by then.
I loved the sound of the V8, much better sound than the Dodge’s, they were just ■■■■ LOUD! I’d come across the engines a few years earlier when Ellis had about three new D1000 units, we had trouble with water in the fuel until it was discovered the returning hot fuel made for a very hot tank and when filled with cold diesel from the pump on return to the yard this caused condensation so water in the fuel.
These engines did have a reputation even then for problems with pistons picking up and bearings failing but how much this was actual fact or rumour is hard to say, it was few years later before I worked on ■■■■■■■ again, all in-lines though, good engines but you couldn’t beat the sound of those V’s. Franky.
Franky did one of elliss ■■■■■■■ Vs not shear its flywheel bolts with the flywheel parting company with said motor?
Franky did one of elliss ■■■■■■■ Vs not shear its flywheel bolts with the flywheel parting company with said motor?
I know that happened with a motor when the governer overan, Taffy the driver rammed it into gear and let the clutch out to stall it but the clutch and flywheel disintergrated, not sure if it was a Ford though! Also a tale of Baconeck who had dropped a trailer with a Ford and forgot to uncouple the Susies, as he pulled away they stretched beyond their limit snapped and shot into the rear window hitting him on the head and knocking him out. The unit carried on into the office wall and kept running in gear churning up the ground with the rear wheels, never did find out if that was true or not as it was told to me by Billy Luntley a well known ‘joker’ who, some on here, know well, good story all the same! Franky.
There’s a complicated tale about the Ford, Chrysler, Perkins engines, I can’t remember the exact way it went, I’d have to read through the info again but its something about using engines built under license and although the Chrysler had its own badge on, it was a ■■■■■■■ Vale, something along those lines, I’ll check it out tomorrow.
Franky.
I didn’t have anything to do with the ■■■■■■■ V8’s but I do know that our local Ford dealer had a few flywheel’s come adrift on the D 1000’s. I worked on the Perkins V8 and relinered a few under warranty for oil burning problems, Tarmac had Foden 6 wheeler’s with the V6 ■■■■■■■ fitted and I dont think they were that impressed as they seemed short lived!
The last two Foden six wheeler’s that I drove had ■■■■■■■ L10’s in them, they seemed an ideal engine for that type of vehicle but you needed to keep them revving to get any power from them plus they both leaked oil like a Gardner! I had been used to Rolls engines for eleven years and they could pull at low rpm so the ■■■■■■■ took a little getting used to but apart from a water pump on both engines and a turbo on one they were pretty reliable engine’s.
5Valve:
Hi Anorak,
There were two, what you might say were compact, vee engine families, the Val/Vale smaller units and the larger Vim/Vine’s. I think the idea was to offer a very tight package, i.e. a ‘box’ of very small proportions that got away from the in line engine package size which could be inhibiting in some applications. The smaller V6/V8’s had engine speeds of 3000 rpm + and ,if I remember were ‘oversquare’, a whole new ball game to UK truck customers to get used to, more used to a maximum of 2000 rpm mainly in- line engines with good mid range torque outputs.
The larger, and slower revving, V6 Vim engines used by Guy and Daimler were built under licence by Krupp in Germany. The Guy’s were in the main very well behaved, in the Big ‘J’ chassis, but, the same engine in the Daimler Roadliner single decker gave, from what I can remember, many problems. The V903 was a later development of the range and was more substantial and reliable than it’s predecessors.
I do recall being told that a petrol version of the smaller Vee engines were made for use in the States, may have been V8 only. Looking back after all this time I now realize why we all used to do 45,000 + miles a year putting fires out!!
Hi 5valve, the book confirms your argument that ■■■■■■■ were trying (desperately) to build a compact engine, to compete with the petrol engines used in middleweight vehicles in the US, in the early 1960s. To achieve this, the V’s were undersquare, high-revving things. The result cost ■■■■■■■ all their profits and more, for a period in the mid-‘60s. The fad seems to have spread to GB- AEC being the most prominent example. AEC fans can take heart from the fact that a much larger engine manufacturer made the same mistake. The book cites the unreliability of the VIM/VINE as instrumental in the demise of Krupp.
Did Ford not offer the Perkins V8 as an alternative, in the D-series? This was an undersquare design (1:1.06).
Does anyone know of any oversquare lorry engines which were generally accepted as successful?
The 17.17 litre Fiat/IVECO V8 was oversquare, how successful would depend on who you are talking to.
Franky.