[zb]
anorak:bma.finland:
as i remember them,one still on the yardcheers benkku
That’s a late 1968 F88. I know this because Tiptop495’s guide above tells me.
Hey Anorak,You have learned you lessons very fast and efficient, so you has been qualified with distinction 
.
Found this on a GB site.
(Power output 318 hp DIN (290 bhp BS AU 141) with an 8 or 16 speed gearbox.) ■■?
Found on a site, look at the nice fueltank.
Bye Eric,
Thanks for the gold star. 
I guess those numbers are for the 88-290? 318bhp sounds high, given that DIN net is usually just a bit more than BS141Au. Apart from the 1.4% difference between metric and imperial hp, they are usually(!) comparable. There was a roadtest in Truck magazine, which mentioned that the 290 had a thermostatic fan (or something like that. My memory is poor). Mr. Kennett said that the lorry would have more than 300bhp when this device was not in use. Maybe the DIN test was done without intermittently-used accessories, but the BS one insisted that they were engaged? In the 1980s, there were two different DIN standards in use: 80 and 88. One was “more gross” than the other. I cannot remember which one was which, but the “grosser” of the two became ISO1585, which became the world standard. Maybe the DIN figure you mention is to the higher of the two.
There must be a book somewhere, which describes the different tests. Otherwise, how would development engineers working on dynamometers know what to do? The internet is practically useless for finding out such things- the simple facts are mixed up with 101 shades of BS.
I hope the driver of the green F88 survived, whatever the owner of the yellow trailer might think! The cab has done a good job of staying cab-shaped, given that the chassis appears to have buckled or snapped.
[zb]
anorak:
Thanks for the gold star.I guess those numbers are for the 88-290? 318bhp sounds high, given that DIN net is usually just a bit more than BS141Au. Apart from the 1.4% difference between metric and imperial hp, they are usually(!) comparable. There was a roadtest in Truck magazine, which mentioned that the 290 had a thermostatic fan (or something like that. My memory is poor). Mr. Kennett said that the lorry would have more than 300bhp when this device was not in use. Maybe the DIN test was done without intermittently-used accessories, but the BS one insisted that they were engaged? In the 1980s, there were two different DIN standards in use: 80 and 88. One was “more gross” than the other. I cannot remember which one was which, but the “grosser” of the two became ISO1585, which became the world standard. Maybe the DIN figure you mention is to the higher of the two.
There must be a book somewhere, which describes the different tests. Otherwise, how would development engineers working on dynamometers know what to do? The internet is practically useless for finding out such things- the simple facts are mixed up with 101 shades of BS.
I hope the driver of the green F88 survived, whatever the owner of the yellow trailer might think! The cab has done a good job of staying cab-shaped, given that the chassis appears to have buckled or snapped.
Hey Anorak, it must be possible to find out on the net,but think it will be very difficult.
In the time there was a horsepower race as never before and nowadays.
In that time every horse was useful.
And paper is willing,look at the Germans they presented always at just the enforced power.
192,232,256,304 and 320 and said it is in DIN,but what was the truth ■■?
And how was it measured,with the lowest oilpressure and so on ■■
The best you saw was on the hills and at the fuel pump.
All the Germans with 256hp had no power and a bit high on fuel.
The 304/320’s some had the power other no more as an other with 280 or so,but all were very very heavy on fuel.
Not to believe,but you could burn with ease a barrel more fuel on a big day’s work against a Scania.
The same with OM/UNIC’s (306 DIN - 340 SAE) big V8 but this gave at least still power.
Bye Eric,
Must have been fairly new when that happened- an enlargement of the photo shows zero evidence of tin worm!
hey, nothing to do with the 88’s but the best easyshift ever, and forget these of today and tomorrow.
And a torque curve sheet of the '70’s.
bye Eric,
The smashed up green one is an 89, it is Scandinavian too, not British.
[
](Photo Storage) Just thought these photo,s may be of interest.I have all the hand books and original receipts for this truck that was a 1973 F88 bought by J H Martin haulage from edmonton north london.Me and my 2 cousins worked there in the early 70,s loading fruit for uk and europe.If anyone wants me to scan the handbook let me know.
Scanning handbook would be great boyzee, bring back memories for me & many others 1981 was when I swapped mine for one of them new fangled F7`s Details get a bit foggy after 32yrs 
Some good food for thought in the previous few posts. These explain some of the power standards, but with almost zero actual detail of the test conditions and no figures to compare the various standards used in Europe:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horsepower
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directive_80/1269/EEC
The latter article more or less says that DIN70020, EEC80 (I called this DIN80 in previous post. I was confused at the time ) and ISO1585 are all comparable, which is not the case- ISO gives bigger numbers.
Regarding the F12 spec sheets, I thought it had the same engine as an F89? 330bhp DIN (and also 330 to SAE, if you believe Volvo). The second sheet says 350pk to DIN70020, so who am I to argue? Did Belgium have F12s with “tweaked” fuel pumps, possibly to meet the Italian 8bhp/tonne rule, or something?
Boyzee- what a wonderful collection of memorabilia. That graph of test results on the F88 looks a bit dodgy. It seems that they ran the engine at peak power in two different gears, loading the dyno to “govern” it at that speed. The two measured points on the graph are so close together, that the extrapolated “tail” back to the theoretical zero-speed could not be drawn accurately. I assume that they checked that one of the gears was not direct! Tyre losses and oil-churning losses are not directly proportional to speed, so the assumption that it is a straight line graph is wrong, I think.
Hey Anorak and all other, TD120… A= F89 B=F89 Italy C=first F12 ('77-'79) D= first F12 Italy.
For Italy all must have 352 or more in DIN but who know■■?
MB showed a 352hp S1932 OM403 V10 with longer stroke,but with the same engine and typ
numbers, strange not■■?
Bye Eric,
[[[
[/
URL]]http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/802abc75-4a76-4067-842f-4b65085090d5_zps6de6e0a8.jpg[/IMG]](http://s249.photobucket.com/user/Boyzee_photo/media/e4d194b2-49c6-4df7-bfad-113b6d3104a7_zpsc2c7b7df.jpg.html)[[
]http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/img298_zps687483f2.jpg[/img]](Photo Storage)](Photo Storage)
Hey boyzee, Very nice of you, here they give the HP’s in SMMT DIN SAE .
The end of the tunnel is coming■■?
Bye Eric,
tiptop495:
Hey boyzee, Very nice of you, here they give the HP’s in SMMT DIN SAE .
The end of the tunnel is coming■■?Bye Eric,
No chance! It does not give the numbers of the test standards, so we cannot work out what sort of test it was. The SMMT figure could be net or gross. The 250bhp figure does not correspond to the dyno results (dodgy though I think they are) in Boyzee’s previous post, which showed 235bhp net to BS141Au. I guess that the DIN figure is gross, because it is only 10bhp less than the SAE figure.
Assuming that those dyno figures are “fudged” to give the actual rated net output, I guess that the TD100A engine in the F88 gave the following outputs:
235 imperial bhp to BS141Au net.
240 metric bhp to DIN70020 net.
250 bhp to some UK gross standard.
260bhp to some DIN gross standard.
270 bhp to SAE gross.
I have some more engine spec,s that are in the handbook if you want me to post these.I cannot scan them tonite but will put them up in the week if you want them.
I had this 1971 F88 for a number of years untill 1976 when I got a brand new 290.
boyzee:
I have some more engine spec,s that are in the handbook if you want me to post these.I cannot scan them tonite but will put them up in the week if you want them.
Yes please!
Your 88 looks like a smart, well-travelled wagon. I get the impression that the 1960s and early '70s was the “golden” period for European haulage.
Was their a difference in interior trim in the early chrome grill models with the uk & other markets? In the brochure i’ve seen it shows red fabric seats but i’m sure ‘ours’ had grey vinyl - like the 1st 86’s
f 88 290 for sale classic commercial any info looks very good :
![http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/802abc75-4a76-4067-842f-4b65085090d5_zps6de6e0a8.jpg[/IMG]](http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/802abc75-4a76-4067-842f-4b65085090d5_zps6de6e0a8.jpg%5B/IMG%5D){kind=link}
![http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/img298_zps687483f2.jpg[/img]](http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg233/Boyzee_photo/img298_zps687483f2.jpg%5B/img%5D){kind=link}
