5Valve:
… Having said that, once Perkins took over, the 6LXDT was substantially redesigned and became the LG1200, becoming a much more compact and light design more suited to future needs…
I did not realise that Perkins had had any input into the design of the Gardner engines; I always thought it was a rebadging exercise. What improvements were made?
The biggest improvement was when they stopped production !
Anorak, Once Perkins took over they were involved, to some extent, in updating the 6LXDT into the LG1200. Most of the work was done at Gardner but some testing was carried out at Peterborough. Although Perkins owned the company they charged us for the use of their ‘Facilities’ and staff, hence they had a small but meaningful input into the LG1200 project. (The bean counters can’t resist sticking their oar in, can they!) I still have a copy of the preliminary workshop manual and parts book for the LG1200 which had been refined into a compact package eminently suitable for my market sector. (Bus and Coach). I spent a large amount of time abroad in the mid 70’s late 80’s for Gardner
mainly on bus, marine and some loco business. The real problem with what you can term the ‘loose engine business’ is that the world automotive ( esp. truck) business was consolidating down into a handful of manufacturers who invariably also produced their own engine ranges. Where we stood a chance was in the bus/coach/marine sectors where customers had a more open choice of specifying what engine they required. The cost of meeting legislation was becoming far more onerous and costly so you then need to have more sales to even stand still. The reason we have no indigenous manufacturers of any consequence, in the UK, is that they were not large enough to meet head on with the likes of Mercedes Benz.
Stokes at Leyland might just have been able to make the company a world player if he had got his act together in the 60’s before MB and Volvo etc. got up to speed. On my travels in the 70’s I could see where Leyland really had been a worldwide operation from the late 40’s through the 50’s only to drop the ball in the 60’s. Hence where we are today. (Apologies for the sermon).
5Valve:
Anorak, Once Perkins took over they were involved, to some extent, in updating the 6LXDT into the LG1200. Most of the work was done at Gardner but some testing was carried out at Peterborough. Although Perkins owned the company they charged us for the use of their ‘Facilities’ and staff, hence they had a small but meaningful input into the LG1200 project. (The bean counters can’t resist sticking their oar in, can they!) I still have a copy of the preliminary workshop manual and parts book for the LG1200 which had been refined into a compact package eminently suitable for my market sector. (Bus and Coach). I spent a large amount of time abroad in the mid 70’s late 80’s for Gardner
mainly on bus, marine and some loco business. The real problem with what you can term the ‘loose engine business’ is that the world automotive ( esp. truck) business was consolidating down into a handful of manufacturers who invariably also produced their own engine ranges. Where we stood a chance was in the bus/coach/marine sectors where customers had a more open choice of specifying what engine they required. The cost of meeting legislation was becoming far more onerous and costly so you then need to have more sales to even stand still. The reason we have no indigenous manufacturers of any consequence, in the UK, is that they were not large enough to meet head on with the likes of Mercedes Benz.
Stokes at Leyland might just have been able to make the company a world player if he had got his act together in the 60’s before MB and Volvo etc. got up to speed. On my travels in the 70’s I could see where Leyland really had been a worldwide operation from the late 40’s through the 50’s only to drop the ball in the 60’s. Hence where we are today. (Apologies for the sermon).
A very interesting post, 5valve, please keep posting! Robert