This photo shows Heyland Hippo or is it a Beaver? with a Swedish BeGe-sleeper who was based in Stockholm and ran for ASG (AB Swedish freight centers). They see high out when they have two steps to Volvo and Scania-Vabis one. Swedish truck looked like this with 90 cm high flaps around. Sure, do you think that the cab fits really well?
The nosbil eller torpedo or bonnet big Leylands are SUPER Beaver (4x2 ) or SUPER Hippo (6x2 and 6x4) these two in Sweden are Super Beaver with Rydds bogie add ons , also sold in Sweden were Comet 4x2 normal control or nosbil , trucks shown i foto have 201 HK (net) 0.680 (677 cu ins ) 11.1 liter diesel , so around 250 hk on the Swedish rating , and lots of low down torque , could pull away 50 ton without using the gas ,and wid a nice BE-GE cabin , maybe the worlds best heavy truck in the 1950`s ? ,one of the top three at the very least .
Lilladan:
The nosbil eller torpedo or bonnet big Leylands are SUPER Beaver (4x2 ) or SUPER Hippo (6x2 and 6x4) these two in Sweden are Super Beaver with Rydds bogie add ons , also sold in Sweden were Comet 4x2 normal control or nosbil , trucks shown i foto have 201 HK (net) 0.680 (677 cu ins ) 11.1 liter diesel , so around 250 hk on the Swedish rating , and lots of low down torque , could pull away 50 ton without using the gas ,and wid a nice BE-GE cabin , maybe the worlds best heavy truck in the 1950`s ? ,one of the top three at the very least .
Interesting, I notice the trucks appear to have one piece windscreens was this a Swedish modification ?
Cheers Dave
Lilladan:
The nosbil eller torpedo or bonnet big Leylands are SUPER Beaver (4x2 ) or SUPER Hippo (6x2 and 6x4) these two in Sweden are Super Beaver with Rydds bogie add ons , also sold in Sweden were Comet 4x2 normal control or nosbil , trucks shown i foto have 201 HK (net) 0.680 (677 cu ins ) 11.1 liter diesel , so around 250 hk on the Swedish rating , and lots of low down torque , could pull away 50 ton without using the gas ,and wid a nice BE-GE cabin , maybe the worlds best heavy truck in the 1950`s ? ,one of the top three at the very least .
The 200bhp O680 Leyland was marked down in GB for unreliability, compared to the earlier 160(?)bhp version. However, who can say if it was any worse than the other 200hp-or-thereabouts engines in the late 1950s? The only 1950s lorry I can think of, which might be better overall, is the Foden with the Gardner 8LW and Dutch-built cab, several of which were sold in the late '50s. World’s best 1950s lorry- surely a good subject for a thread on Trucknet, and those Swedish Leylands would surely be contenders.
Lilladan:
The nosbil eller torpedo or bonnet big Leylands are SUPER Beaver (4x2 ) or SUPER Hippo (6x2 and 6x4) these two in Sweden are Super Beaver with Rydds bogie add ons , also sold in Sweden were Comet 4x2 normal control or nosbil , trucks shown i foto have 201 HK (net) 0.680 (677 cu ins ) 11.1 liter diesel , so around 250 hk on the Swedish rating , and lots of low down torque , could pull away 50 ton without using the gas ,and wid a nice BE-GE cabin , maybe the worlds best heavy truck in the 1950`s ? ,one of the top three at the very least .
Interesting, I notice the trucks appear to have one piece windscreens was this a Swedish modification ?
Cheers Dave
The truck has Swedish BeGe cab and this brand has always had a full window, never two with a divider in the middle.
The Leyland O.680 was rated at 150bhp, introduced in 1954 and was a very good reliable engine.
The 680 PowerPlus was rated at 200bhp, introduced in 1961 was always a good performer but suffered reliability wise. Head gaskets and injector pipes in the main.
Leylands cab had a split screen but these two in Sweden have one of the many Swedish cabins available for any makes sold there , yes the first 0.680 was around 150 hk , but other settings were available , but all versions were much better in these super export models than UK versions as they ran cooler , look at the size of those radiators ! they were regarded by many heavy haulage men around the world as the best , but in the 1960s in Africa or Austrialia pulling very heavy loads (two trailers ect) they would seize up for no apparent reason , the quality was now in question , and in Africa Volvo gained with its Titan turbo as mr Pat Kennett was sent out there to find the problem for Leyland ,he concluded ...worn machinery ..not so fine dedicated workers or not so skilled ? .. of course Leyland had increased power on the power plus` versions largely by increasing RPM , the old non power plus 0.600 was only 125 hk @1800 RPM for 9.8 liters , but was a first class engine …Gardners cannot figure in this as they did no work at all …an empty truck was enough for them back then
Hey The P680 (here 220 or 226 HP called) we had it in the daf’s and if you could manage a year without to open it you were happy,if you went Always heavy over the Alps.
But at that time they were more which were weak, look at Volvo’s 495 240HP or 230/255 as measured from country to country.
In a specification for the “Swedish” Leyland it stands:
Engine: 6 cylinder, direct injection diesel,
cyl-Vol. 11.100 cc, 154 bhp at 2000 r / m
torque 62.2 kgm at 1100 r / m, dry lining
Driveline: 5-speed synchronized, auxiliary gear box,
original rear axle: two driving axles with screw drive
Brakes: air brakes on six wheels, the total braking surface of 5.910 cm2
Suspension: bulb blasted semi-elliptic springs
General Characteristics:
Length: about 7341 mm Width: 2320 mm Distance between axles: 4,020 + 1,400 mm Total weight: 21,600 kg Weight: about 8.500 kg Tire size: 10.00 x 20. 12 stocks imposed load (incl. bed): about 13.100 kg Turning radius: 10.5 m
The above information is Leyland’s own which have been translated into Swedish
13,100 kg is more than both Volvo and Scania-Vabis could bear. Weight is with bed. With bodywork falls the otherwise total load. Recall that my father’s Titan 1954 could load 11,750 kg so it’s 1350 benefit for Leyland favour. The Titan had 18,000 gross vehicle weight. The photo shows an elderly Leyland with an older GN cab (Gösta Nyström). Is there anyone who can appreciate the year with the help of the picture? I think it should be ca 1953.
Its hard to say the exact year of the early Super Hippo in the photo , much later they got more modern front wings with headlamps built in , here is my model I built of one of the left hand control early versions that worked in England ,it had a double roof because it was built for some hot country , like a Volvo it would take any weight and the chassis would not break , many of these Leylands had two gear levers and 11 forward gears but constant mesh not syncromesh , also 5, 6 or 7 speed available all non syncro , a real drivers truck
Hi All
This is/was my old Super Hippo Australian model originally fitted with a left hand Turbo 680power plus which really was a piece of junk but when Leyland replaced that engine with a conventional model with a Turbo from memory around 270hp 13speed Fuller Leyland reduction hub rear axles it was quite a good truck at the time late 70s early 80s ,the radiator was only 795square inches and although efficient in europe struggled in the summer months here with more than one trailer .
Sorry the photo is poor quality its the only one I have of the old girl and apologies if I.m pinching the thread just thought it shows the difference.
Cheers Dave
Dig , the .0680 was non turbo , the 0.690 was the turbo version and it needed better cooling than ever , interesting that you had fuller gear cabinets , as did 1980s 90s Scania down under ,when the Scania gears blew up pulling 120 ton , Leyland had super beavers in its own UK fleet and new engine designs were tested in them unknown to public , even the 500
Lilladan:
Dig , the .0680 was non turbo , the 0.690 was the turbo version and it needed better cooling than ever , interesting that you had fuller gear cabinets , as did 1980s 90s Scania down under ,when the Scania gears blew up pulling 120 ton , Leyland had super beavers in its own UK fleet and new engine designs were tested in them unknown to public , even the 500
Thanks for that your quite correct the turbo models were the 690 I will put that memory lapse down to old age lol Leyland did try to increase the cooling here but they increased the capacity of the system by adding 2 extra rows of tubes which helped a bit but I had some success with a larger fan cowl and fitted a fan off an 8V71 Detroit 2 stroke engine, it was noisy but certainly moved more air through the radiator and kept it cooler.
We also fitted home made oil coolers on the engines which helped too.
We operated 4 of these trucks the first one was a 50s model with a 600 engine then a left hand turbo 690 which self destructed and had a conventional fitted under warranty followed by a Rolls Eagle mk3 set at 305hp went well at night with 3 trailers but had to be driven carefully when the sun came up.
The last one is the one in the photo.
Cheers Dave
Interesting DIG , the Roller had wet cylinder liners that gave problems in UK at 32 ton after only 130 000 KM ( 80 000 miles) , how did yours do ? you have a nice kabin on the Leyland , most in England had Leylands own short hut
Lilladan:
Interesting DIG , the Roller had wet cylinder liners that gave problems in UK at 32 ton after only 130 000 KM ( 80 000 miles) , how did yours do ? you have a nice kabin on the Leyland , most in England had Leylands own short hut
Lilladan our Rolls didn’t have any Liner issues while with us but it did drop a valve,the memory has failed me again as to wether an inlet or exhaust but I do know the stem was Sodium filled and there was concern that we shouldn’t handle any engine parts until it had been thoroughly flushed with water, Rolls refused to accept warranty on the failure as Leyland Aus had fitted the engine with the standard Super Hippo radiator and they Rolls had insisted on a minimum of 1200 square inches frontal area. We weren’t happy so Leyland accepted the responsibility on repairs and some downtime but we traded out of the truck at the end of that cattle season and went to the Crusader chassis fitted with Detroit 8V71 engines.These gave good service in a tough environment.
I cheated with the sleeper cab it was off an S model Kenworth which I aquired quite cheaply and fitted to give myself a few creature comforts.lol.
Cheers Dave
Dig do you remember what diff ratio you had in that photo?
I think they would be 48mph diffs judging by the larger hubs, but it’s a bit hard to tell from the angle.
Leyland with the 690 tag■■? Just confused the issue as AEC had already taken that one.
You were onto the correct configuration with the bonneted truck.
A lot of the ERGO’s problems can be traced back to their dreadful cooling system, disintegrating plastic fan, inadequate overflow tank and so on.
Never had these problems with the 680 in LAD or bonneted cabs as the fan was belt driven.
690s were trialled locally in twin row cane harvesters and had no cooling problems due to their massive radiators. A very cheap 250+hp stationary engine in the day.
cargo:
Dig do you remember what diff ratio you had in that photo?
I think they would be 48mph diffs judging by the larger hubs, but it’s a bit hard to tell from the angle.
Leyland with the 690 tag■■? Just confused the issue as AEC had already taken that one.
You were onto the correct configuration with the bonneted truck.
A lot of the ERGO’s problems can be traced back to their dreadful cooling system, disintegrating plastic fan, inadequate overflow tank and so on.
Never had these problems with the 680 in LAD or bonneted cabs as the fan was belt driven.
690s were trialled locally in twin row cane harvesters and had no cooling problems due to their massive radiators. A very cheap 250+hp stationary engine in the day.
Cargo, 53mph at 2100 rpm, being old school I was content at 1900 which was around your 48 figure. I worked at Leyland Aus when I first arrived here and we actually modified the ERGO cabs to take a water pump mounted fan and a modified radiator to suit which greatly improved the cooling and popularity of the model but not enough for Leylands to change the european assembly line.
I may stand corrected but wasn’t the AEC engine a 960?
Cheers D
Pretty sure it was 690 for the Mammoth Major and such. I had a AV505 Monarch and that was enough AEC experience for me.
AEC (Leyland) turbo’d the 690 and then later they brought out the 760 and turbo’d it. Think it was called the LT12?
Interested to hear of the local modifications to the crankshaft driven fan. I’d given it away by then but we went through a fair few plastic fans and radiators (which copped the shrapnel) until Leyland offered a glass reinforced nylon job which did last.
Fan would always let go as you were pulling up a big hill and had no choice but to keep on going, engine really got cooked.
the AEC was the non turbo AV 691 11.3 liter , but also was a derated version 11.3 liter 2AV690 for the Dumptruk the Leyland 0.690 turbo was 11.1 liter , yes the roller had sodium cooled hollow valves and could be refaced as normal but only disposed of at end of life in a large water tank because of the danger of sodium escape to air , so dropping a valve( like the Scania`s did )could be dangerous on a Rolls Royce , at 30 to 48 ton in Denmark the Ergo beaver was known for (in English miles ) fan mountings , clutches , at 80 000 miles head gaskets , at 120 000 - 150 000 miles pistons and liners , clutches , temp gauge carpilary tube , oil seals rear axel and gearbox , gearbox failure , so about the same as a Mercedes - Benz of the day ! but the Leyland was much cheaper to buy and the spares very much cheaper and the Leylands back axel tough ,and the Leyland had brakes !
In a specification for the “Swedish” Leyland it stands:
Hi All