V6,V8,V10, (and the odd V12, Gentlemen, your experiences!

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS OLD TIME LORRIES, COMPANIES AND DRIVERS (INTERACT
1

Back in recent history, the 70s, and 80s, a number of manufacturers utilised V configurations in their engines. Many are long gone, made obsolete by European “pollution regulation”, their installed weight penalty, and of course fuel useage, (particularly on part throttle).

Gentlemen, what is your experience of, Fiat, Unic, Berliet/Renault, MAN, Magirus,Mercedes, AEC, Perkins, ■■■■■■■ Vale, (did anyone ever enjoy these contraptions)? Scania, and not forgetting the "Green Leaker, Detroit. But please, only in on highway lorries, not Fire Appliances, Buses, or Coaches!

For my own part I had great service from Mercedes V8s, in the 1628s, in the 80s and early 90s. Totally reliable, and on daily rental, coped with everything thrown at them! But I have no experience of the 1633, the 48, or later lorries.

I always rated Herr MANs V10, particularly seeing how it stood up to the abuse Italian operators meeted out to it! I have friends in Belgium who still claim that the Magirus Vs were the most profitable engines to run, and friends in Britain who would claim the opposite for Mr Perkins Vs!
So over to you all, there must be some great experiences out there, lets hear about them, good, bad, and funny! Cheerio for now.

2

Being only a driver and not an operator, my experience with V8’s is of of limited worth for your post.
But the Mercedes NG range seemed to be a reliable engine, albeit very underpowered by todays standards. I had driven quite a few various marks in the 1624 - 2225 range though, I do recall coming back from Manchester to Essex with a piston,con-rod and the head removed from the engine of said 1624 after a catastrophic failure. but how the oil and water was sealed off by the lads who came out to get me going again escape me now. but home it came on seven with the surplus bits in the passenger footwell!

The other V8 I did like was in a Iveco turbostar 190-38, it was a 380 BHP. That truck could fly, it also went extremely well uphill fully freighted too. I never recalled seeing many of them about in the UK and was told by a Belgian mechanic (during a minor breakdown on the way back from Italy) that they were a marine engine originally and only a few were fitted into trucks. How true this was is not known by myself.

3

I drove a merc 3025 8 wheel tipper e reg 1988 last of the non turbo mercs. Underpowered but reliable and a great tipper for when the going got tough. The later v6 3029 and 3234 were much better performers though.

4

I took my test in a V8 D1000, so I suppose that’s a good place to start. I always had a soft spot for those Perkins V8s, they sounded so meaty compared to a six pot, of course it was all an illusion, they were pretty gutless, but they sounded as though they were doing 100mph :laughing:

Next up were Mercedes’ of all shapes and sizes from the naturally aspirated 1626 or later 1625 which were not a lorry for those in a hurry. They were very reliable, quite good on fuel and that’s about all I can say really, the main thing I remember about them was how slow they were on a hill, I used to joke that I only drove them at night on sidelights so they couldn’t see the hills coming :cry: I also had a brief spell in two V10s, one a RHD 1632, the other a LHD 2032. They both had plenty of low down pull, made a very nice noise, but were unremarkable in every respect as I remember :wink:

After those, thankfully, came a 1633, what a difference those turbos made, those things were flying machines, only let down by the ponderous gearchange from the ZF Ecosplit gearbox. That was addressed by EPS, had an early D plate 2035 and I did more miles in the workshop van getting a lift back from Merc’s workshop than I did earning a living in that thing :unamused: However, the Powerliner 2 sorted the reliability issues out, I had a 1735 which never let me down, it was run hard too and with some very neglectful servicing, yet that thing was a beast of a lorry, it was definitely built on a Monday morning after the best weekend Wurth had ever seen, that little Merc would live with 142 Scanias over the mountains :sunglasses:

A brace of V8 Scania’s followed, two 142s and a 470 143, the 142s were fantastic lorries, well on top of the job, reliable and a pleasure to drive. The 470 was a disaster, it was built only to make the early EPS Mercs look reliable :unamused:

Then came one of the most underrated lorries ever made, a 190-48 TurboStar, that used to eat 143s for breakfast, I never put a spanner on that thing, it was a fantastic lorry, if you’ve never driven one, you missed out, believe me :sunglasses:

From that I moved into a brand spanking new Actros 2540, I liked it, it was on top of the job (containers) and was remarkably economonical, especially so after buying the fuel to charge over the Alps in that big FIAT :laughing:

A 144 Scania followed the Merc, I was running a log book with this lorry as I was carrying chopped up cattle under the OTMS scheme, somehow the speed limiter fuse became ‘loose’ and I spent my whole working day in the midddle lane :open_mouth: It also did the odd trip to Germany with hanging meat. It too was very good on fuel, considering the volume of work it did :wink:

Another big FIAT is next on the list, this time a 520 EuroStar, only one thing to say about this, WOW :exclamation:

I saved the best until last, my 143, one of the final models on a P plate and without doubt, this was the best lorry I’ve ever had, it never let me down apart from an alternator belt and an injector pipe, which both happened within a mile of a Scania dealer. It was a pleasure to drive and reasonably economical, like the 1735, it was one of those lorries were every manufacturing tolerance was in its favour and because of my experiences with it, I think that the Scania 143 is the best lorry ever made :wink:

5

I drove a 480 turbostar back in 1989 it was new at the time and that thing just kept pulling awesome motor

6

I was hoping for a 190.48 to appear in the yard…but it never did :slight_smile:
The 380 was good, but the 480 was a powerhouse, just didnt get the chance to get me hands on one!

7

I have driven a V6 and a V8 Mercedes and a V10 MAN which was a heavy haulage tractor rated at 150 tons this only had a 6 speed box and a torque converter but it was fine to drive and I only drove it a couple of times so its hard to say what it was like in heavy going but it did seem to have a lot of grunt. The several Mercs were the same bar one very fast on the flat but did not like hills but a 1934 I had at Exel in the 90s was not bad on the hills as I often ran with other lads and I would always pull away from them on the hills. The MAN V10 was in the mid 70s and it was either 320 or 330 but but would go up anything. I have also driven a heavy duty Iveco 420 Eurostar plated for 80 tons but I am not sure if it was the straight 6 or V 8 it was late 80s on a “F” 6x2 tag/lift axle but that would pull like a train.
cheers Johnnie

8

Evening all, you know nmm has got me thinking, that 1633, powered by he OM422A,14.62 litres, 128x142mm bore /stroke, twin (little turbos), 328bhp, (BSAU141a), 1034ib ft @1200rpm, quite a specification. Probably weakened in the chassis , (as Mark details), by the “lumpy” ZF Ecosplit change, but 1034lb ft torque at 1200rpm, should have overcome that!!!

Shared so many components with the 1625, and 1628, it must have been a “cheap” powerhouse to run. One of my Belgian pals said I made a big mistake in buying 1628s for rental. He claimed that his 1633s were cheaper to run, and better liked by their drivers…maybe, in hindsight, he was right!!

But what of the big Maggies?? I always had a soft spot for them, and Sammyopposite, I always “loved” MANs designs.

And twoninety88, contrary to what you may think, you are wrong, yours are just the most valued posts, and those that I hoped that we would get more of! To work with a vehicle and engine, …well that really is experience!

Im away to the Bollinger, bon chance mes amis, Cheerio for now.

9

trucks 045.JPG
trucks 045.JPG816×612 157 KB
a 190.48 for sum of u do drool over lol

10

Keeping to the commercial limit my experience was the V8 Merc,I’m sure it was a 1628,under long term hire from the Ryder fleet and then the last wagon I ever drove the turbo V6 2534 as a drawbar outfit.I think the old V8,without the limiter,which could therefore get a run at the hills,was better than than the 2534 with one which couldn’t.In addition to which the 1628 was more comfortable had more room I preferred the bigger steering wheel and most other things about it.In other words the 2534 was an absolute dog of a truck by comparison :imp: :laughing: .The turbocharged V8 would have been great especially if it could have been fitted with the old ZF constant mesh 12 speed splitter instead of the heavy,slow,to use synchro job. :wink:

11

This Mercedes 1626 V8 took me all over Europe, and brought me home again. Slow and under-powered but very reliable. It dropped a valve at Cluses in France but still plodded on in a haze of blue smoke. One of those rattling short exhaust joining pipes fell away one day; I replaced it with a hollowed-out Malonga Coffee tin and carried on. It was a rare spec rhd truck with the snorkel air intake, air sprung seat and factory-fitted all-around curtains; originally operated by Brent Savage on Middle-East work. A great starter in the mornings; slap-across gearchange and long range tanks. Ideal for long trips if you weren’t in a hurry.

fortrucknet.JPG

12

f88vol:
0 a 190.48 for sum of u do drool over lol

Drool for just a second I will, but the interiors were absolute rubbish :slight_smile: I’m sure lots of drivers accumulated rubbish on the journey down to Italy., y’know, food wrappers, ■■■ cartons, sweet wrappers. When they slung it out in a carrier bag once over the blanc or the frejus, teams of people were picking it up and recycling it for Iveco interior panels.

Anyway, back on topic, the ‘rattle pipes’ on the Mercs! I had forgotten them! they used to drive me bonkers until the boss got around to changing them. Why did mercs persist with them when other V8 engines seemed to have a better exhaust arrangement?

13

f88vol:
0 a 190.48 for sum of u do drool over lol

Our 480 was a 4 x 2 but we had 3, 6 x 2 rear lift 360s just like that and they were no slouches either,and yes the cab interiors fell apart ,i remember 1 driver wedging a hair brush in the window to stop it dropping