Good point, with the uncertainty surrounding the Atkinson and Seddon merger, maybe the idea of supplying the BL group wasn’t a bad idea. I think any reluctance would have came from the BL side too, I know Gardner had very strong principles, but that was on the engineering side, I doubt the sales team could give a toss who bought their wares.
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
harry_gill:
ERF-NGC-European:
Lawrence Dunbar:
ERF-NGC-European:
Well done Valkyrie - I rather thought you’d come up with the goods in the end, having made such a good start on your research a couple of years ago! Nice to see that they all had 9-sp Fullers, just for pudding! Robert0
Well please excuse me for asking, Is this a painting or a real photograph,■■?Regards Larry.
It is an image of what the painter saw with his own eyes - a kind of evidence in itself. His paintings were meticulous in detail and if says 240 on the grille you can bet that that is exactly what he saw!
And I agree with NMM’s observations about Dennis’s wry humour, by the way! Robert
Hiya,
I’ve seen a Big J in BRS guise at I think Wolverhampton depot it was
purporting to be an 8XLB complete with 240 Percy badge but alas it
was a 180 Percy and what a heap of crap they were when there was
the far superior Roller and ■■■■■■■ engined jobbies available, got
to admit I drove the J’s on and off throughout their production run
and never came across or heard mentioned a J with the 8XLB, And
as yet other than known mock-up’s no photographic evidence of the
beast ever being made at Fallings Park so strange when the vehicles
are not too far in the past and there was such a lot produced.
thanks harry, long retired.
Now then “H” you very defo are an un-reconstructed retro bate ( Like Larry and me 
) and if you are not careful the PC “thought” Police will be down on you like a ton of the “proverbial” smelly stuff 
for having the temerity ( cheek ) to continue with your very well founded and valued opinion on this matter You have been warned Look after yourself, Regards Dennis. PS Well what else can you expect from a Slinger !
Bewick:
harry_gill:
Hiya,
I’ve seen a Big J in BRS guise at I think Wolverhampton depot it was
purporting to be an 8XLB complete with 240 Percy badge but alas it
was a 180 Percy and what a heap of crap they were when there was
the far superior Roller and ■■■■■■■ engined jobbies available, got
to admit I drove the J’s on and off throughout their production run
and never came across or heard mentioned a J with the 8XLB, And
as yet other than known mock-up’s no photographic evidence of the
beast ever being made at Fallings Park so strange when the vehicles
are not too far in the past and there was such a lot produced.
thanks harry, long retired.Now then “H” you very defo are an un-reconstructed retro bate ( Like Larry and me
Bearing in mind the discrepancy between the Vehicle museum v the Gardner engine museum numbers maybe the ( very ) small outside chance that they were all retro fitted not built as 8 LXB from new. 
Which leaves the inconvenient Commercial Motor report of it being officially introduced as an option on new orders.
Meanwhile any answer to the question of your buying choice between ■■■■■■■ Atki v 8LXB Big J ?.Because that might go a long way in answering the question as to why the 240 BigJ was so rare.IE its potential buyers didn’t know the option existed and/or they thought the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls option was the better choice anyway.
Hiya,
Dennis, might even get ordered to “sling my hook” in the p""s off
context but bovvered nah’, having a week in Blackpool from the
19th so I’ll get some good Lancashire air in my lungs might just
need to "fitten up"in case I’ve got a fight on my hands, bit of sea
air should do my Good Lady a power of good she’s had an awful
year with the “C” thingy and all the therapy’s involved and the
going abroad is out of the question now with the exhorbitant
cost of travel insurance me being ancient and my Missus still
being observed the insurance is three to four times the cost of
the holiday, and I wouldn’t pay it on principal, robbing gits.
thanks harry, long retired
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.
It would probably be fair to say that until trucks like the SA 400 with turbo ■■■■■■■ etc engines became common they were all ‘guvnors’ wagons’ with gutless motors and a shed for a cab to whatever degree.While,as Harry says,I’d guess that a Big J with a Rolls or ■■■■■■■ in it would be a relatively more premium motor than a 180 Gardner powered Atki for example and a match for the 240 Gardner powered ones at least.With the win win of a lower price and 6 cylinder simplicity.
On that note we know that Bewick seemed happy to use the BigJ but for some reason the 8LXB option was obviously off his radar.While also speccing ■■■■■■■ motors instead of 8 LXB in the Atki.
Carryfast, you have to remember that in the 70’s Gardner had all sorts of workforce disputes and there was a long waiting time for a Gardner powered chassis. That was why Rolls engines started arriving at Tilcon but as soon as Gardners became readily available again they were specified in the 1980 intake of Foden and Sed Ak 400’s. So hauliers wanting a vehicle quickly took what was available, and of course they often stayed with the Rolls or ■■■■■■■ option and put up with the lower payload and slightly higher fuel consumption as the chassis/cab was several hundred pounds cheaper and available off the shelf.
Pete.
harry_gill:
Hiya,
Dennis, might even get ordered to “sling my hook” in the p""s off
context but bovvered nah’, having a week in Blackpool from the
19th so I’ll get some good Lancashire air in my lungs might just
need to "fitten up"in case I’ve got a fight on my hands, bit of sea
air should do my Good Lady a power of good she’s had an awful
year with the “C” thingy and all the therapy’s involved and the
going abroad is out of the question now with the exhorbitant
cost of travel insurance me being ancient and my Missus still
being observed the insurance is three to four times the cost of
the holiday, and I wouldn’t pay it on principal, robbing gits.
thanks harry, long retired
Hiya “H” I’m pleased to hear that things “medicalwise” for you both are hopefully looking up and that you are looking forward to your week in Blackpool 
Well it will be an improvement of seeing the two of you’s on Tele rolling about “brahms and listz” on the Strip in Benidorm Anyway Mate I hope the weather will be good for you, seems the forecast for the weekend and next week is decent so fingers crossed. Don’t worry about leaving your keyboard “un-attended” for the week as if there is anything derogatory said I will leap to our joint defence !! 
Wishing you both a most enjoyable week Regards Dennis.
windrush:
Carryfast, you have to remember that in the 70’s Gardner had all sorts of workforce disputes and there was a long waiting time for a Gardner powered chassis. That was why Rolls engines started arriving at Tilcon but as soon as Gardners became readily available again they were specified in the 1980 intake of Foden and Sed Ak 400’s. So hauliers wanting a vehicle quickly took what was available, and of course they often stayed with the Rolls or ■■■■■■■ option and put up with the lower payload and slightly higher fuel consumption as the chassis/cab was several hundred pounds cheaper and available off the shelf.Pete.
What Carryfast knows about Gardner engines you could write on a pin head
It’s been explained many a time why hauliers still opted for the Gardner option but alas it’s still not sunk in yet
gazsa401:
windrush:
Carryfast, you have to remember that in the 70’s Gardner had all sorts of workforce disputes and there was a long waiting time for a Gardner powered chassis. That was why Rolls engines started arriving at Tilcon but as soon as Gardners became readily available again they were specified in the 1980 intake of Foden and Sed Ak 400’s. So hauliers wanting a vehicle quickly took what was available, and of course they often stayed with the Rolls or ■■■■■■■ option and put up with the lower payload and slightly higher fuel consumption as the chassis/cab was several hundred pounds cheaper and available off the shelf.Pete.
What Carryfast knows about Gardner engines you could write on a pin head
It’s been explained many a time why hauliers still opted for the Gardner option but alas it’s still not sunk in yet
Well said that man, Regards Larry.
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.
I seem to recall that the price differential between a ■■■■■■■ engine Chassis ( ERF and Atkinson) and an 8LXB engine one was circa £ 1200 and that was if you could get a “sniff” at an 8LXB engine Chassis 
I know £1200 dosen’t seem a lot nowadays but in the early 70’s it was a substantial sum ! And I can honestly say that any discussion of 8LXB engined chassis was centred on either ERF or Atkinson and to a lesser extent Foden ( pass the bucket ) and at no time did Guy Big J’s feature in any discussions I had with other major hauliers I was friendly with during those years. And speaking as a haulier and purchaser of many tractor units in that era the only Chassis I ever considered buying ( if I could get hold of them) was Sed/Atk and ERF and absolutely no way would I have considered an 8LXB engine Big J, even if at the time ( which I wasn’t!) I had been offered one. From memory there weren’t any Guy dealers anywhere near us as I believe they had been subsumed into the nationwide British Leyland dealer network with that stupid “colour” code for each marque. IIRC the last new BIG J I bought in1977 came from Cicely Commercials in Blackburn who were IIRC Atki dealers prior to becoming Mercedes dealers, from whom I did go on to buy a number of 1844’s units and some lighter Mercs from in the '90’s. IIRC the last new Big J I bought cost £9000 + vat and an F88 and 8LXB Sed/Atk cost me £15,000 + vat !!! Different horses for very different courses ! Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.I seem to recall that the price differential between a ■■■■■■■ engine Chassis ( ERF and Atkinson) and an 8LXB engine one was circa £ 1200 and that was if you could get a “sniff” at an 8LXB engine Chassis
Dennis as an operator when it came to vehicle purchases was it a multiple purchase or a single purchase?
Yes Dennis, the garage I worked at in Reading was an old established Morris Commercial/BMC commercial distributor and then BL in their wisdom decided on different colour coding for their ranges and we suddenly became Leyland Redline dealers! 
OK, nothing much changed for a while and then out of the blue we had Guy forced upon us and we knew nothing about ■■■■■■■■ AEC or Gardner engines yet were supposed to service and repair the things. Luckily we only had a few AEC 505 engined Big J’s in our area (a couple of units of Standard Box and two four wheel rigids) so coped OK with them but Guy dealers always seemed very thin on the ground compared to the other makes in the BL range?
Pete.
gazsa401:
Bewick:
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.I seem to recall that the price differential between a ■■■■■■■ engine Chassis ( ERF and Atkinson) and an 8LXB engine one was circa £ 1200 and that was if you could get a “sniff” at an 8LXB engine Chassis
Dennis as an operator when it came to vehicle purchases was it a multiple purchase or a single purchase?
My vehicle purchases were usually dictated by the growth in our traffic flows from both existing and new customers although I regularly sold some of the fleet when the second hand market was good and took advantage of any decent deals to acquire good late second hand replacements to improve the fleet in general. What I didn’t do though was sell trailers out of the fleet very often apart from one or two odd balls that didn’t fit ! Well you can’t get it right all the time eh! Cheers Dennis.
Bewick:
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.I seem to recall that the price differential between a ■■■■■■■ engine Chassis ( ERF and Atkinson) and an 8LXB engine one was circa £ 1200 and that was if you could get a “sniff” at an 8LXB engine Chassis
Reading between the lines of that suggests that a big reason for the 8 LXB Big J’s rarity was most operators irrationally turning their backs on what was probably the best value option,assuming the 8 LXB was anyone’s ‘thing’.IE 8 LXB Big J for around £10,500 meaning a 30% saving on a comparable motor like an Atki ?.On that note it’s difficult to see what an 8 LXB engined Atki could do which an 8 LXB engined Big J couldn’t.Both obviously being similar horses for similar courses given the equivalent engine option.While the Big J could probably also save a fortune on the purchase cost.
Which leaves the question does that mean your choice of ■■■■■■■ Atki was just a second best one,from your point of view,just based on availability ?.While it’s ironic that any real fan of the Gardner would still have chosen the ■■■■■■■ Atki over the 240 Gardner engined Big J given the choice.Bearing in mind that you obviously did buy the Big J in its lesser spec. 
The fact of the matter is, clearly stated in the BL Truck Division policy and range rationalisation discussion document of the early 1970s, of which I still have a copy, was that BL realised it was fighting a losing battle in the premium tractor unit sector with all of its offerings from Leyland, AEC, Guy, and Scammell. All of its models of the period 1971 to 1974, at the time Gardner had the 8LXB, were stop-gaps until the Marathon was developed and introduced, and it became available from 1974. The Marathon itself was only an interim model (stated in the document) until a completely new range, code named T45, was developed, which of course was the Road Train. The rationale for offering engine options of ■■■■■■■ and Rolls Royce in versions of the Marathon was to retain the loyalty of Guy Big J customers, and also to tempt other potential customers who had a preference for those “loose” engines in Seddon Atkinson (as it became in 1970, although the first SA badged truck was still a few years away) ERF, and Foden models. That the Marathon had its flaws is well documented and has been widely discussed on here in the past. The BL document in my possession was a confidential internal management paper, most of its recommendations being ignored or only partially implemented at the time.
gingerfold:
The fact of the matter is, clearly stated in the BL Truck Division policy and range rationalisation discussion document of the early 1970s, of which I still have a copy, was that BL realised it was fighting a losing battle in the premium tractor unit sector with all of its offerings from Leyland, AEC, Guy, and Scammell. All of its models of the period 1971 to 1974, at the time Gardner had the 8LXB, were stop-gaps until the Marathon was developed and introduced, and it became available from 1974. The Marathon itself was only an interim model (stated in the document) until a completely new range, code named T45, was developed, which of course was the Road Train. The rationale for offering engine options of ■■■■■■■ and Rolls Royce in versions of the Marathon was to retain the loyalty of Guy Big J customers, and also to tempt other potential customers who had a preference for those “loose” engines in Seddon Atkinson (as it became in 1970, although the first SA badged truck was still a few years away) ERF, and Foden models. That the Marathon had its flaws is well documented and has been widely discussed on here in the past. The BL document in my possession was a confidential internal management paper, most of its recommendations being ignored or only partially implemented at the time.
The bit it seems to have got right,at least,was that ■■■■■■■ and Rolls were always going to be the way forward for Leyland Group.Also bearing in mind the vagaries in the buying policy of even the Gardner core customer base like Bewick who seem to have talked a premium on the Gardner choice but then contradicted that by obviously putting a preference on ■■■■■■■ Atki v 8 LXB Big J,for example,when it came to actually placing an order.On that basis that rationalisation plan seems to have been spot on in its engine premise at least,albeit even though the Marathon and T45 predictably didn’t meet the expectations of their target market.That arguably having nothing to do with the correct emphasis on ■■■■■■■ and Rolls engine provision while rightly ditching Gardner and eventually AEC.
As per usual “CF” you are spouting a load of verbal Bollox ! However, accepting that this thread has possibly reached an impasse I was thinking that this maybe an opportunity to “steer” in another direction ! There were, I believe, only five automotive users of the legendary 8LXB, i.e. Atkinson, ERF, Foden , Seddon and Guy ! So what would be the rational of the decision by both Seddon ( 32/4) and Guy Motors ( BL) to offer the 8LXB, and that was if they could secure deliveries of this engine in the face of the insatiable demands of Gardners three main customers Atki/ERF/ Foden. In the case of Seddon maybe they were able to “muscle” in as by the time the 8LXB was announced they had taken control of Atkinson (1970) although to all intents and purposes Atkinson still continued to operate separately until the Seddon/Atkinson was introduced in late 1975. It would be interesting to learn just how many 8LXB engines were delivered to each of the five vehicle producers during the period the engine was produced which may go some way to put matters into context viz-a-viz the 57 engines that were delivered to Guy Motors over the period covered between the 8LXB’s introduction and the demise of Guy Motors. Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
gazsa401:
Bewick:
acd1202:
I might also suggest that as an 8lxb would have carried a substantial capital cost premium over the ■■■■■■■ or Rolls alternative, operators would be more likely to specify this in a premium chassis, typically Atkinson or ERF, rather then a Big J. Which whilst a vehicle giving many operators excellent service, was always a cheaper alternative and a bit down market.I seem to recall that the price differential between a ■■■■■■■ engine Chassis ( ERF and Atkinson) and an 8LXB engine one was circa £ 1200 and that was if you could get a “sniff” at an 8LXB engine Chassis
Dennis as an operator when it came to vehicle purchases was it a multiple purchase or a single purchase?
My vehicle purchases were usually dictated by the growth in our traffic flows from both existing and new customers although I regularly sold some of the fleet when the second hand market was good and took advantage of any decent deals to acquire good late second hand replacements to improve the fleet in general. What I didn’t do though was sell trailers out of the fleet very often apart from one or two odd balls that didn’t fit ! Well you can’t get it right all the time eh! Cheers Dennis.
Thanks for the information Dennis when I started at Stirlands the fleet was about 120 tractor units and around 600 trailers and 100% Gardner powered with a mixture of 60% ERF and 40% Seddon Atkinson the last Gardner powered lorries Stirlands ordered was 6 “F” reg ERFs
Stirlands had a policy of having a least
5 new lorries a year being added to the fleet
The trunk motors were kept for around 5 years with astronomical mileage being put on the clock all trunk motors were double shifted some triple shifted 7 days a week
The lorries weren’t probably the drivers favourite but Stirlands payed well
With very good pay and conditions if not the best in the East Midlands
Hiya Gaz, If I recall W & J Riding were also more-or-less 100% Gardner users although they started to run ■■■■■■■ engine units later on probably as the reliability of the Gardner started to deteriorate, fortunately I and my long gone pal Malc Woodhouse Snr. had moved onto Scanias by then and I recall the both of us attending a function where we met Tom Riding and I clearly recall him saying " I can’t afford to buy Scanias like you two buggers" 
But to give the great Tom his due he remained faithful to British marques until his retirement in the mid 90’s ! He was and still remains a legend within the transport industry as dose my old Pal Malc Woodhouse Snr. Cheers Bewick.