I know we’re talking of trucks of yesteryear but the ■■■■■■■ N14 really is ancient now and without a complete internal redesign couldnt cut it with a modern engine.
The later celect plus engines suffered with injector problems and oil leaks and ones rated above 500hp had cylinder head issues and piston/ring problems at around the 750k mark. No engine is bullet proof and this one certainly did have its own set of problems…
The N14 is said to have the longest in service lifespan of any diesel engine ever made. Not only that but they can easily match or better current engines for mpg.
Although I’m positive that my D13 with all the emission junk removed, including the VGT, would better the ■■■■■■■ in all areas.
I’m not a complete luddite, I think EDC is the best thing to happen to diesel engines since the turbocharger, but the rest of it, you can poke it, far too much to go wrong and far too expensive to replace.
If I could get the EGR, DPF, SCR, VGT and the rest of that crap bypassed on my trucks I would do it in a heartbeat, it would improve reliability, longevity and mpg, the top three in my list of things I want from a lorry.
I do think modern stuff has made the job a bit mundane. I loved my E12 with a 375 Rolls and Eaton twin split, was a bit disappointed with its replacement, an EC11 Olympic with a horrid 16 speed Eaton box . Then we went on to Volvo and Renault. However, best had to be a Seddon Strato with a 410 ■■■■■■■■ twin split and no limiter![SMILING FACE WITH OPEN MOUTH AND TIGHTLY-CLOSED EYES]
Sent from my SM-T365 using Tapatalk
OVLOV JAY:
switchlogic:
This common expensive and difficult to repair opinion didn’t really bear out in reality. Back in the day if you had an intermittent fault you’d have to hope it happened while at the workshop, and it never did, but with modern stuff you plug in the computer and it’ll tell you what happened exactly when and how to rectify. The only expensive aspect of maintaining new trucks is the £10k+ to buy a diagnostics computer. We also forget that trucks now are much much more reliableYes and no. My current 2 year old fh has been woefully unreliable. It’s lost about 8 days service to defects over the past 2 years, and that’s without the regular servicing and 4 call outs to the side of the road where action service have got me back up to speed. Although older trucks needed a rebuild every 3 or so years, these are more reliable in that respect. But a Friday afternoon motor is much more of a problem now. And the fault diagnostics are still the same now. If it’s not showing the fault when you are in the workshop, they won’t touch it, as they don’t want to do the warrenty work. As soon as they’re out of warrenty they will do every last little problem, then stick you a massive bill.
Rebuild every 3 yrs ? Not with a ■■■■■■■ you don’t .
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .
Punchy Dan:
OVLOV JAY:
switchlogic:
This common expensive and difficult to repair opinion didn’t really bear out in reality. Back in the day if you had an intermittent fault you’d have to hope it happened while at the workshop, and it never did, but with modern stuff you plug in the computer and it’ll tell you what happened exactly when and how to rectify. The only expensive aspect of maintaining new trucks is the £10k+ to buy a diagnostics computer. We also forget that trucks now are much much more reliableYes and no. My current 2 year old fh has been woefully unreliable. It’s lost about 8 days service to defects over the past 2 years, and that’s without the regular servicing and 4 call outs to the side of the road where action service have got me back up to speed. Although older trucks needed a rebuild every 3 or so years, these are more reliable in that respect. But a Friday afternoon motor is much more of a problem now. And the fault diagnostics are still the same now. If it’s not showing the fault when you are in the workshop, they won’t touch it, as they don’t want to do the warrenty work. As soon as they’re out of warrenty they will do every last little problem, then stick you a massive bill.
Rebuild every 3 yrs ? Not with a ■■■■■■■ you don’t .
Having not been of the era, I only go by what older drivers I know say from their experience doing continental in the early 80’s. Hard work back then compared to now I guess
Punchy Dan:
OVLOV JAY:
switchlogic:
This common expensive and difficult to repair opinion didn’t really bear out in reality. Back in the day if you had an intermittent fault you’d have to hope it happened while at the workshop, and it never did, but with modern stuff you plug in the computer and it’ll tell you what happened exactly when and how to rectify. The only expensive aspect of maintaining new trucks is the £10k+ to buy a diagnostics computer. We also forget that trucks now are much much more reliableYes and no. My current 2 year old fh has been woefully unreliable. It’s lost about 8 days service to defects over the past 2 years, and that’s without the regular servicing and 4 call outs to the side of the road where action service have got me back up to speed. Although older trucks needed a rebuild every 3 or so years, these are more reliable in that respect. But a Friday afternoon motor is much more of a problem now. And the fault diagnostics are still the same now. If it’s not showing the fault when you are in the workshop, they won’t touch it, as they don’t want to do the warrenty work. As soon as they’re out of warrenty they will do every last little problem, then stick you a massive bill.
Rebuild every 3 yrs ? Not with a ■■■■■■■ you don’t .
Quite right, you bloody didn’t, where i worked last in the 80’s with ■■■■■■■ they were sold on at roughly 7 years and apart from routine but good servicing that was it.
The foreign motors might have had the driver kudos, and crucially the dealers were clever and adapted faster to a changing world with better parts and service back up 24/7, but the engines didn’t thrive on bloody hard graft like a ■■■■■■■■ can’t speak for the L10 mind, luckily always had the proper ones.
Punchy Dan:
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .
Not to the Swedes they didnt, Volvo and Scania have always had their own in house engine design from day one. The good thing about these is that they have their own gearboxes and drive axles to match the engine, the likes of ERF, Sudden Accident, Foden ect all had various makes of engine /gearbox and axles fitted ie ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Gardner- Eaton/Fuller- Rockwell and ratios would always be compromised to the characteristics of the particular engine fitted.As for ■■■■■■■ L10/EC11/EC14 its old tech now and wouldnt lend itself to modern injection/emmisions equipt.
switchlogic:
This common expensive and difficult to repair opinion didn’t really bear out in reality. Back in the day if you had an intermittent fault you’d have to hope it happened while at the workshop, and it never did, but with modern stuff you plug in the computer and it’ll tell you what happened exactly when and how to rectify. The only expensive aspect of maintaining new trucks is the £10k+ to buy a diagnostics computer. We also forget that trucks now are much much more reliable
In reality the computer only points you in a direction, seen loads of problems that it would not tell you, it’s another tool that’s all, a broken wire or faulty sensor and it’s giving you a generic fault code, trucks have got more reliable in some areas but are going backwards in others!
AndrewG:
Punchy Dan:
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .Not to the Swedes they didnt, Volvo and Scania have always had their own in house engine design from day one. The good thing about these is that they have their own gearboxes and drive axles to match the engine, the likes of ERF, Sudden Accident, Foden ect all had various makes of engine /gearbox and axles fitted ie ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Gardner- Eaton/Fuller- Rockwell and ratios would always be compromised to the characteristics of the particular engine fitted.As for ■■■■■■■ L10/EC11/EC14 its old tech now and wouldnt lend itself to modern injection/emmisions equipt.
Think you are wrong,
scania.com/group/en/scania- … t-venture/. heres one example ,it reminds of lorries where it’s joe blogs transport working in partnership with Tarmac , ■■■■■■■ being Tarmac . 
( scania being joe blogs )
Not long after passing my test I spent the best part of 12 months driving a P reg Foden with a crash box. To say that it was basic is an understatement. But you know what, that truck made me a much better driver. I still to this day double up on the clutch on the downshift. I’ve no need to but I do because it’s still the most efficent way to change gear. (Or is that all in my head). Do I miss that truck? Absolutely not. I love new trucks. The comforts and ease of use. They’re not perfect but they’re light years ahead of that old Foden of mine.
Tony.
Punchy Dan:
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .
I was a ■■■■■■■ basher in the 70`s the bigger the hammer the better. -
rebuild every 3 years nah 2 more like, long live the 8---- ---- or the V8 
-
8LXBV8BRIAN:
Punchy Dan:
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .I was a ■■■■■■■ basher in the 70`s the bigger the hammer the better.
rebuild every 3 years nah 2 more like, long live the 8---- ---- or the V8
Your in cloud cuckoo land ,we got an 11 litre ■■■■■■■ in every day use on long distance that’s done 1.6 million miles not ks and never been touched ,it’s getting a bit ready the timing gears are badly worn but it keeps going well .
AndrewG:
Punchy Dan:
The ■■■■■■■ bashers on here should remember that ■■■■■■■ sold thier technology to a lot of the manufactures of engines in use today .Not to the Swedes they didnt, Volvo and Scania have always had their own in house engine design from day one. The good thing about these is that they have their own gearboxes and drive axles to match the engine, the likes of ERF, Sudden Accident, Foden ect all had various makes of engine /gearbox and axles fitted ie ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Gardner- Eaton/Fuller- Rockwell and ratios would always be compromised to the characteristics of the particular engine fitted.As for ■■■■■■■ L10/EC11/EC14 its old tech now and wouldnt lend itself to modern injection/emmisions equipt.
Think they showed the swedes a thing or two, fuel systems and engine brakes!
Have a read man!!!
■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■
truckingtopics.co.uk/dafmx-11euro6.html here’s another with the help of ■■■■■■■ .
truckinginfo.com/article/sto … iesel.aspx Even Cat can’t resist .
myholsetturbo.com/holsethistory.html
Just have a look who fits ■■■■■■■ turbos!
robroy:
AndrewG:
robroy:
ended up buying a [zb] Ford Cargo
…bizzarely flavour of the month in transport in 1988
And just how the ferkle did this piece of [zb] ever get ‘Truck of the year’ in 88■■?
Drove a 2817 once sadly, and how anyone signed that off as any good ill never know, 170hp perkins V8 wouldnt pull the skin off a rice pudding…The L10 290 ■■■■■■■ was worlds apart to the Perkins ‘piece of [zb]’ you mention
, in terms of performance and mpg, however a lot suffered with water problems when they first came out.
Not a patch on the ■■■■■■■ 290E, but they did not come with that option.
They were more of an operator’s truck than a driver’s truck.
Stobarts were a big fan of them at that time, but as I said their drivers were not.
The problem more than anything was the top hose design, and that, coupled with the reducer on the header tank proved problematic and made it over pressured. I believe they alleviated it by putting a bigger thermostat housing on and thus larger top hose, but the whole design (top hose wise) is too twisty and bendy and makes for poor cooling properties at full weight.
The original radiator was also too thin as I recall and was improved. Even so, the top hose design on the later improved models was still poor and unless replaced at sensible intervals would blow on the 90 degree bend part. Mine has blown one already just driving around solo, but it probably was 15+ years old…
As you sensibly say, there were an Operators truck designed in brutal times of economic change, that like it or not, saved a few companies from going to the wall. The problem comes when they are compared to Volvo and Scania et Al of the time. Great 7.5, but a comparatively poor tractor (but excellent 6 wheel tipper)
switchlogic:
Taking of power though it’s interesting how the average power went up and up, 280 320 360 380 400 420 480 etc but for at least 10 years now 440 - 480 has remained the average. Will the average go up again or is the 480 the perfect compromise between power and fuel? I’m talking average as in most lorries on the road.
I guess at the end of 38t era 360/380 was the average fleet motor, 44t started off about 420/430 then has crept up a bit 450/460 probably now. 500+ still something a bit better than the norm in the way 400 and upwards was in the 90’s.