As per F88vs 111 but more about the time of my youth, Pictures would be nice.
Also when these replaced those(above), were there the same grumblings as now that they had lost there way, not as good as they used to be etc?.
Hiya ,
I remember that drivers who got the first F10s after a 290 F88 used to complain they didn’t pull as well & if i remember rightly they had the downrated 278bhp TD100B engine .The wall to wall plush tan carpet/trim was OTT for the time .
.jpg[/IMG]010/TCY260S](http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy83/hywel2010/Steel012!%5B%5D(http://i780.photobucket.com/albums/yy83/hywel2010/Steel012.jpg).jpg%5B/IMG%5D010/TCY260S){kind=link}
Stupot:
This is one of the first F10s and a F88 - 290bhp behind it. ( a bit close )
The F10 was better than the F88 all round – less power - less revs - more mpg.
The F10s had much better brakes, although the brake linings and drums were same on both.
Regards – Hywel – 
retired. 
Strange one is this… because its a matter of which you prefer, both have mostly been at the top of the tree for 40yrs. The scannys have always had the slight edge on BHP eg ; F88-240, to Scania 110-260, - F89-330, to Scania 140-350, F88-290 & F10-278, to Scania 111-305. Then Volvo revamped the 89s 330 in the F12 to scanias 141-380 . Then the 2nd F-series F10s-299, to the Scania 112-340(333bhp). Both top of there game in their own right especially if you got given one of which ever after one of our british Gems. One thing always puzzled me through the years was did the swedish companys have an understanding on sloping windscreens ? The balance always chaged from 88s & 89s sloping screens, 110,111,140 & 141 flat screen. F10,12 & 16 flat screen, 112,142,113,143 sloping screens. Then back with the FH Series sloping screens and the scania R series 114 124 144 & 164s Flat screens. Hmmmmm …!
The 112 would make you a bit more money but the F10 was much nicer to cover long distances in. I think later 112’s had parabolic springs but the earlier one had multileafs which meant you felt every bit of gravel. I once hit a level crossing in france and something shot off the bunk and hit and cracked the windscreen.
I had both an F10 & a R112M The Scania was the better lorry in my opinion it pulled better the gearbox was smoother (even with the silly dog leg1st & 6th) the driving position was better as well, however the Volvo had better in cab storage & the handy outside locker for your wet kit tool box etc & much smoother ride, the scanias had a very hard ride when empty.
Given the choice I would have the Scania though.
I fully agree that the F10 was a more comfortable wagon, you could poor a cup of tea into a mug on the move in a Volvo, but wouldnt fancy doing it in a 112. The Scania always seemed a bit stronger wagon, and pulled slightly better, I ran several Scanias but I have always considered myself a Vovo man, and out of choice I would drive a Volvo every time. The one wagon I always wanted to buy though was a 141, tried to do a deal on a local one more than once, but never got it.
Still a smart looking lorry… the F10
Likewise with the 112…
Scania’s just edge it for me , although the Volvo’s a comfortable truck, there’s something about scanias having a ‘quality’ solid feel about them and an excellent driving position, don’t think many drivers would have complained about getting either of them though
Yes I agree that the Scania was a tougher lorry, but still vote for the Volvo
An interesting one this, an F10 was very good at its job, but I reckon the R112 has a slight edge over it, a P112 is more comparable to an FL10, in which case the FL is the better lorry by far.
Both were excellent trucks,but for me at least it has to be the F10 by a long shot…I remember looking at the F10/F12 when they first arrived in 1977/1978 and comparing them to a Guy Gardner 180 and a Mandator which were still popular trucks at that time and thinking to myself what on earth is this?..it was like a space ship! Air conditioned cab…wall to wall carpeting…independently sprung cab…quiet comfy cab…headlamp washer wiper system…turbo intercooled engine…16 speed’box…a cab heater that would actually work…a dash panel where every switch/dial lit up at night…a comfortable sprung driver’s seat…a nice warm bunk you could sleep in…exterior wet locker/tool box…a radio that actually worked and you could hear it as well…etc… To me the driving position of the F series was unsurpassed,even 'till this day…Volvo just got it right and I still reckon it is nicer than the FH that eventually replaced them. The F10 just glided over humps and bumps and gave a beautiful ride whereas the Scania 111 was a lot rougher by comparison. The Scania 112 didn’t come around for three or four years later and was a vast improvement over the 111 but wasn’t a patch on the comfort or finish of the F10,especially when driven on poorer road sufaces,they were much rougher. The 112,however had a cracker of an engine that pulled like a train which was very frugal in all working conditions and the bigger cab was nice and roomy and well laid out. If you got a Dutchman to fettle the boost pressure mechanism of the injector pump on your Volvo F10,bring up the breaking pressures on the injectors and advance the timing a few degrees,there was no 112 could catch it in a month of Sundays. The F10 engine would really come alive when it was tuned by someone who knew what they were doing and it made them really easy on fuel as well.
To me the Volvo F10/F12 were the ones that put Volvo in the top running trucks. As good as the F88/F89s were,these were better. The F10 flat cab became the F10 high roof which in turn became the square lamp model. With every model they improved the pedigree. The last of the F10s with semi wrap around dash,half leather seats,cruise control were fantastic trucks
Hi - Riverstick,
That was a good story of the old F10s - you took the words out of my mouth.
— Hywel –
I agree with all you have said Riverstick, the only thing being that the 10 litre was a bit highly streched. In 12 litre form the F series was a fantastic truck. I personally covered many hundreds of thousands of km’s around europe very happily in mine.
It might just be me, but I always found that the 299 highline was a cracking lorry, went like the wind , but found that the later 320 bhp f10 was a little slugish, could have been down to the gearbox, always liked that 16 speeder on the earlier Volvos, had a cog for every occasion. Also the later model had to run with a speed restricter, you could always carry a good speed with the 299, although not as fast as the prvious F88 (and they call it progress !!)
Funny that in some of the older threads on here people seem of the opinion that the old 385bhp f12 motor was a belter, possibly better than the later models.