i,ll think about 10 of the tm series,cheers benkku
newmercman:
One thing that seems to be missing from all your “obvious” statements Geoffrey is the absolutely undeniable fact that the two stroke diesel engine was an oddball, yes the American market may have used it numbers, but they have a rather peculiar mindset, as well as cheap fuel, also trucking was highly regulated then and rates were set by the ICC to ensure that the carriers made a fortune, regardless of how inefficient their equipment was. Many companies in the USA would have spare engines ready to drop in when the old ones wore out and this was definitely the case.You have to take into account that noise look at Harley Davidson as an example, they outsell the far superior Japanese bikes by a huge margin and they’re awful things, but they make a lot of noise and they’re shiny, us Brits with our stiff upper lips would never go for such things.
The TM was never going to be a success with a two stroke of any kind under the cab, you can come up with all the figures you want that make the DD engines better on paper than the competition,
Firstly ironically for your arguments the Japs didn’t take on let alone conquer the motorcycling world using 4 stroke engines.They used the very real on paper ‘and’ real world advantages,related to specific outputs,contained in the two stroke idea to do it.But what they didn’t do was wreck their own plans by putting a moped engine in a 750. 
Meanwhile we might have been able to beat the Japs at their own game in that regard ‘if’ we’d have followed on with the ideas contained in the water cooled Scott Flying Squirrel.
youtube.com/watch?v=zxFBPkEabPA
While it was only the fact that Jet engine technology had caught up with piston,in ultimate two stroke form,which stopped the Rolls Royce Crecy aero engine project.Not the idea that 4 stroke was supposedly ‘superior’.Which probably also explains why Napier also didn’t choose 4 stroke for its Deltic Diesel Locomotive engines.
None of which seems to fit the idea of closed minded Brits.Who couldn’t recognise the advantages of 92T v 14 litre ■■■■■■■■■■■ alone the difference,between 71N compared to 92T and the ability of the latter to at least act as a superior stop gap over the ■■■■■■■ Big Cam until the 60 series arrived.Assuming that is Bedford had chosen to use it in a big standardised way.As for Detroit durabilty as I’ve said there never would have been a 92 series let alone 60 series if Detroits weren’t at least as competitive in that regard with ■■■■■■■ in the day.
So ■■■■■■■ went bust and had to be rescued by Penske as well then did they?
Also, anyone with half a brain would realize that I’m referring to present day motorcycles, the yanks still buy Harleys and they are so inferior to the Japanese bikes that the distance between the two is immeasurable.
They would still buy two stroke Detroit Diesels if they made them too, they like noise and shiny things.
I read back through this thread, why I do not know, but you’re surpassing your previous efforts on other threads with the if, buts and maybes on this one, seriously I have never read such a load of old ■■■■■■■■ in my life.
Oh and the 60 series was designed by ■■■■■■■■ they didn’t need it as their N14 was almost as good, so they sold the rights to John Deere, who didn’t need such complicated engineering either, so they passed it on to Penske owned Detroit Diesels.
The 71 and 92 range had sent DD to the brink of bankruptcy. The reason, they were cack, end of story.
HTH.
Carryfast:
Firstly ironically for your arguments the Japs didn’t take on let alone conquer the motorcycling world using 4 stroke engines.They used the very real on paper ‘and’ real world advantages,related to specific outputs,contained in the two stroke idea to do it…
Except they did… they might have dominated racing with 2 strokes, but it was the small and mid sized 4 strokes that took the motorcycling world…
Best selling bike of all time… Honda step-thru (C50/70/90) by a country mile…
Was the standard of engineering and reliability that won the Japs the motorcycle industry, and for road machines, 4 strokes always dominated, courtesy of Honda’s world class 4 strokes.
newmercman:
Oh and the 60 series was designed by ■■■■■■■■ they didn’t need it as their N14 was almost as good, so they sold the rights to John Deere, who didn’t need such complicated engineering either, so they passed it on to Penske owned Detroit Diesels.The 71 and 92 range had sent DD to the brink of bankruptcy. The reason, they were cack, end of story.
HTH.
Although if we count the inlines it would have taken well over 30 years of 71 and 92 production for GM to realise it was costing money not making it for them.While having at least allowed enough cash during that period to throw £50,000,000 + Bedford’s way. 
While the idea of ■■■■■■■ staying with its good old fashioned,less complicated,pushrod engineering and sending the Deere design Detroit’s way doesn’t look good for any argument in favour of modern Jap bikes v a simpler to maintain old Harley motor. 
The fact is the closure/sell out of GM’s heavy truck operations seemed to follow a time line which suggests it was more the investment lost in the TM operation,than the 71 or 92 being lemons ( by the standards of their day ).Those ‘standards’ ( emissions regs ) being much more friendly to the idea of two strokes wether heavy truck diesels or Jap bike engines.The difference in this case being that the Japs didn’t throw their cash reserves away on trying to help the Brits at Norton/Triumph who ( by the Bedford analogy would have spent a lot of the cash on buying in loose Harley engines ) thereby stopping the Japs from the switch to ultimately less output efficient but marginally cleaner 4 strokes later on.Which probably explains why the Astro was taken out with the TM just as the move to the 60 series was about to pay off for GM.
Although in the absence of a new two stroke with a better stroke measurement and some large advances in turbocharging technology to follow on from the 92 I,personally,would prefer the simplicity of the ■■■■■■■ N14 v 60 series.Which might explain Detroit’s decision to leave most of its loose engine operations to Penske. 
BeardedBlunder:
Carryfast:
Firstly ironically for your arguments the Japs didn’t take on let alone conquer the motorcycling world using 4 stroke engines.They used the very real on paper ‘and’ real world advantages,related to specific outputs,contained in the two stroke idea to do it…Except they did… they might have dominated racing with 2 strokes, but it was the small and mid sized 4 strokes that took the motorcycling world…
I don’t think the Suzuki GT750 was a racer while it would be fair to say that the Jap invasion of the 1970’s involved a lot of two stroke technology at fast road level in that 750 sector especially when the Suzuki was combined with Kawasaki H2 sales etc.It mostly being that sector which wiped out Triumph and Norton.
I’m not going to be pulled into an off topic conversation re motorcycles, so this’ll probably be my last post in this thread.
As to what actually killed Norton & Triumph, it may have been the 2 strokes that young lads lusted after, but way more 4 strokes were actually sold, for road use, and it was the sales that killed them, not the bikes most couldn’t afford.
robert1952:
0An interesting set-up: British plates, day cab, LHD, roof-mounted air-con… Makes you wonder who commissioned it! Or was it a demo only job? Robert
Did a supermarket not order a few of this spec ? to send out as full loads to the continental shops they had M&S or Safeway ,drive them on to the ship then a new driver
at the other end. 
i can remember something like that at the time. 
-
Geoffrey the analogy between Japan and Harley is to prove that the US market will buy any old tripe as long as it’s shiny or makes a lot of noise. Success in that market is no indication of quality.
BeardedBlunder:
I’m not going to be pulled into an off topic conversation re motorcycles, so this’ll probably be my last post in this thread…
Please continue. Digression is an allowable luxury, and informed opinion is at a premium when the Loon is awake.
8LXBV8BRIAN:
robert1952:
0An interesting set-up: British plates, day cab, LHD, roof-mounted air-con… Makes you wonder who commissioned it! Or was it a demo only job? Robert
Did a supermarket not order a few of this spec ? to send out as full loads to the continental shops they had M&S or Safeway ,drive them on to the ship then a new driver
at the other end.
Good heavens, yes! I’d forgotten all about those. BOC Transhield had them (only a couple or so, I think) for their channel hopping service. But they had sleeper cabs IIRC. Robert
…
robert1952:
0
We saw already a similar W-registration (on the ERF NGC from Laiteries Préval) meaning
it was a registration for a manufacturer or trader, situated Nord pas de Calais, 59
[zb]
anorak:BeardedBlunder:
I’m not going to be pulled into an off topic conversation re motorcycles, so this’ll probably be my last post in this thread…Please continue. Digression is an allowable luxury, and informed opinion is at a premium when the Loon is awake.
and not “sedated” in his padded cell
Evening all, Now the demise of the United Kingdom Motorcycle Industry…There is a subject matter of equal strength, and labarynthine twists and turns, to develop quite an argumentative thread!
But its not for here!
One all pervading background to the demise of Bedford, and so far totally unmentioned, was the dire straits of GMs prime business, their motor car, (automobile), business. Even though the World Truck Program, had separated lorries from the main stream activities, GMs motor car business was in serious problems, and GM Senior Management were looking to “shed weight”.
One previous comment suggested that the new GM tractor unit/drawbar would have sold more acceptably had it been badged GM, or Astro, or whatever GM name was available.
Not so, in Europe, (and Globally), Bedford was a known, and respected name. NMMs picture of the French Demonstrator 340, shows how the Bedford name, had General Motors , (painted ) underneath the badge. This became standard practice in later years, (as did use of Marseilles Coder, trailers for Press tests). Ive a feeling that that unit was used for the Test carried out by Poids Lourdes Magazine…I will look if I have a copy.
Was it the 81UK Show, where Bedford showed a GM Brigadear, on their stand…didn’t sell many did they.
Cheerio for now.
Saviem:
One all pervading background to the demise of Bedford, and so far totally unmentioned, was the dire straits of GMs prime business, their motor car, (automobile), business. Even though the World Truck Program, had separated lorries from the main stream activities, GMs motor car business was in serious problems, and GM Senior Management were looking to “shed weight”.
On that note that translated in Europe as GM sadly falling back on its German Opel production operations v Vauxhall.Mostly because Opel’s rate of development was better.With as usual Vauxhall not seeming to have a clue about engine development or options and still relying on live rear axles long after Jaguar and Triumph had been using IRS for example.
While like most of the other US auto manufacturers it was the ridiculous level of emissions bs and failure to isolate the US and UK economies from the OPEC oil price issues that wrecked the good old American Chevy V8’s that had proved themselves more than capable of sorting out Ford at least.Although I,for one,preferred the ‘proper’ MOPAR type conventional rocker shaft and rockers idea than GM’s pedestals and pressed rockers.
Having said that GM were probably in no worse a situation in the day than most other car makers and probably actually ( a lot ) better off at least during the late 1970’s early-mid 80’s time in question.So where the conclusion of ‘dire straits’ has been drawn from is anyone’s guess.The figures and dates suggesting that if anything the TM fiasco had contributed to GM’s later profits down turn,at the time of closure,as opposed to being a result of it.
nytimes.com/1983/10/25/busin … arter.html
nytimes.com/1987/02/06/busin … -year.html
With Opel’s fortunes also going from strength to strength v those of Vauxhall’s at least.Not surprisingly with products like the Commodore/Monza/Senator v the Firenza/Victor.Although like Vauxhall/Bedford still being a liability compared to GM’s US car manufacturing operations.
For what it’s worth…a copy on the TM
ERF-Continental:
For what it’s worth…a copy on the TM
It was great to read a more open minded view concerning Detroit engines.Meanwhile to correct the mistake concerning 8 wheelers.As usual like most other engine and axle configurations yes they were available to special order from Tricentrol.
hankstruckpictures.com/pix/t … le0063.jpg
By the way what date was that article printed ?.