newmercman:
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first, they may have had a few creature comforts, but they weren’t better, they were just available and they were cheap, the salesmen were hungry, so they listened to the customers, rather than telling them what they could have…if they waited, they got their foot in the door and that was thatWhen do you reckon this was, Newmercman? In what year did they overtake, so to speak?
newmercman:
I reckon that the Continental Manufacturers survived at the cost of the British Manufacturers is down to two things, bad decisions and a bad attitude by the management, they thought they could dictate to the customers and given that the customer had little choice they thought they had us over a barrel, you’ll get what we want to give you and you’ll get it when we want to give it to you, then Volvo, Scania, Merc, Magirus, FIAT and Daf popped up with immediate delivery and the rest is historyThe union problems at the Leyland plants put a serious dent in the reputation of the products they made, Scammell and AEC were premium products, Guy made a decent workhorse, Leyland had a few decent motors in their stable too, but all were starved of funds by the car division, so they got left behind, but don’t forget that they set the standards that the foreigners had to beat, even in the last days of Leyland they made some decent motors, the Constructor 6 and 8 wheelers were good and the Roadrunner was one of the best 7.5t vehicles on the market
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first
Oh and Bedford didn’t even enter the equation, they were worse than Leyland for their attitude, look at their last lorry, the TL range, what a joke, it was a facelifted TK and was 20yrs behind the competition, any other manufacturer could’ve made a success of the TM range, but they decided to stick a two stroke bus engine in it, did they not have a market research team?
But how far was a 180 Gardner powered day cab Atki behind that 1965 Kenworth and Bedford probably did have a good market research team who came up with the (correct) conclusion that the Brit operators would never accept 400 hp engines, like the yanks already had in use,for at least another 12 years or more. 
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first, they may have had a few creature comforts, but they weren’t better, they were just available and they were cheap, the salesmen were hungry, so they listened to the customers, rather than telling them what they could have…if they waited, they got their foot in the door and that was thatWhen do you reckon this was, Newmercman? In what year did they overtake, so to speak?
They never did overtake it was just that the Brits decided to turn around and go home and leave it all to the competition because the competition were running under their home rules while ours were lumbered with our home rules.
Evening all, well I am fresh in from the driving seat of my John Deere, 14 hours , long time for an old boy, ( and I would just like 10 minutes quiet talk to the designer of John Deeres seats, reminds me of the"comfort" of an S21 and that is a Micky Mouse Foden C.F.). I really want to go for a shower, tea, and a nice cool glass of Bolinger! But no, dear old C.F. is still up a Gum Tree, and shouting like a lovelorn Pheasant!! Tricentrol, quite a tidy chassis converter, (amongst a veritable ocean of others, non of whom were bad), W hy did you not last the course with them, dear friend, particularly as they invested in training you to conduct “Big Boys Toys”■■ Did not one of the excellent engineers from Dodge take over there,… Bob…? Probably had to weed a few no hoppers out, the penalty of management you know!! To the point, many conversions of “higher powered” tractor units to rigid drawbar spec were carried out, this was not innovation, just following a trend. Drawbar equals more deck, cube out before weigh out. Yes like Greyhounds without the trailer attached, but very “meagre” in terms of payload potential in rigid form. You know I can still remember standing in Trevor Morris"s Cambrian Railway Yard in Oswestry, when his son Phillip made a speedy entrance in a then very state of the art Drawbar 2600 DAF, (do you not agree one of the best looking lorries ever). Trevor dryly commented, the man who has made me money will be here in 15minutes! Bang on cue, at 15 minutes drew in a Mk 1 Atkinson 150 Gardner 40ft outfit!! There"s my money said Trevor!! and dear CF, over 40 years later I have to see his point! Kr79 has made valid points that you should consider well.Likewise Sammyoposite, good analysis and relevance. Newmercman, bang on, the Harley, Honda point is a very good analagy, (and dear friends Newmercman obviously has more up to date knowledge of the Colonial and US scene than any of us). And finally, (less I become accused of War and Peace ambitions in my writings again) Sammyoposite, my love of Atkinsons led me to own and run, both in the UK and Europe, for many years a Viewline ex RTITB, ROLLS,ZF Kirkstall, reg WAN183G. on a pleasurable basis, Boy she was a great drive, pokey, manouverable, comfy,and when she went to France the Frenchmen loved her looks and sound!! I am sure you would have loved her. C.F, KW"s, having done a fair few miles in K100s, Aerodynes, Coffins, and shorts, on any great mountain, when you stop for your ice cold Peroni, at the stopping place of the sole Italian TM (whose disturbed driver is trying to understand where all his fuel has gone), and the pilots of the French Unic designed V8 Fiats, you would really need to rest , that low geared "Cornbinder"steering would have done for your arms, and your nerves, there would have been no “blowing doors off”. More like avoiding the drop!! I am done, want my tea, CF, have you started your homework yet? Last thing, Bedford TM 3800, DD, Italian market, I suggest you get a copy Bisonte De La Strada, Vol3 Iditione 40, gives the real facts of operator acceptance, problems, and support! May give you food for thought! Bon Nuit, (Bilston Dialect again sorry)!
Saviem:
Tricentrol, quite a tidy chassis converter, (amongst a veritable ocean of others, non of whom were bad), W hy did you not last the course with them, dear friend, particularly as they invested in training you to conduct “Big Boys Toys”■■ Did not one of the excellent engineers from Dodge take over there have you started your homework yet? Last thing, Bedford TM 3800, DD, Italian market, I suggest you get a copy Bisonte De La Strada, Vol3 Iditione 40, gives the real facts of operator acceptance, problems, and support! May give you food for thought! Bon Nuit, (Bilston Dialect again sorry)!
Where the zb did I ever say that I ever worked for them. 
and don’t remember saying anything about any 3800 Italian TM’s either 
.The only connection that I ever had with Tricentrol was working for one of their ‘customers’ hence the fire truck connection 
and the reason I did’nt ‘last the course’ in ‘that’ job was all to do with the type of factory closures and redundancy common here at the time. 
But if you know anything about Reynolds Boughton products you’ll know that the Griffin chassis was in a different league to anything that Tricentrol did and if you know what company was the customer for that bit of kit you’ll know then who I was actually working for. 
However what I did learn during the 5 years that I worked there was that Detroit powered trucks,wether commercial or emergency service vehicles,had a (well deserved) reputation in most,if not all,of the markets that they were used in that was second to none.That’s assuming that they were specced accordingly with careful regard to the job they were required to do.
However the fact that a small 7 Litre,naturally aspirated motor,could even work for long and survive in an environment of hauling 32 t gross around the country,as specced by the Brit customers at the time, says everything. However if there’s evidence that the 3800 was also used (8V71 ?) in the Italian environment and conditions we can obviously add to that list yet another feat over and above the call of duty .
newmercman:
Saviem, there’s no point trying to convince dear old Carryfast the error of his ways by using factsYou make a good point with the rigid comparison, there was an earlier thread here about groundbreaking lorries, I nominated the Merc 1617 and 814 (LN2) as such, they changed the rigid market forever, before they arrived the rigid lorry was very much the poor relation to its articulated brothers
Oh and Carryfast’s journey over Monte Bianco would have taken a different route to anyone else, he would be in a two stroke DD powered airship, he wouldn’t need to worry about mpg as he would supply all the hot air
Your other point about rigids and their importance was the driver licensing laws and local licensing offices. The driving test wasn’t introduced until 10th May1967. Even after that due to the excise duty and licensing act, operators were trying to keep the tare weights down.
If we could body a TK Bedford or Fiat 159 and keep it under 3 tons they were far more valuable than one that was even one cwt over, we had our own tricks as to how to get the weights down and as long as the initial weight certificate came under the magic figure, we were making money
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first, they may have had a few creature comforts, but they weren’t better, they were just available and they were cheap, the salesmen were hungry, so they listened to the customers, rather than telling them what they could have…if they waited, they got their foot in the door and that was thatWhen do you reckon this was, Newmercman? In what year did they overtake, so to speak?
Put a Mandator/Big J/Borderer/LV up against an F86, a Scania 80 or a pre LP Merc and the Brits were well in front in terms of mpg and reliability, comfort wise the foreigners were streets ahead. By the mid 70s the continentals had developed their ranges and the Brits were still offering the same stuff from the previous decade, that’s when they lost the battle forever, there was too big a hill to climb for the British Manufacturers, so although the first shots were fired in the very late 60s, the war wasn’t won until the mid 70s, when crap like the S80 Foden, Sed Ak 400 and the dreadful TM were put up against the foreign opposition.
The continentals did bring a new concept to the industry, with lorries like the F88 and 110, they proved that a high (for the time) horsepower engine with a large cab could be an efficient machine, had the clowns in charge at the British Manufacturers realised this a little earlier, maybe we’d have had a product to compete and the yards would be full of homebuilt lorries and instead of ‘Logistics Companies’ delivering packaged food froma warehouse to RDCs, we’d still have proper Transport Firms delivering lumps of metal to factories that actually made stuff
newmercman:
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first, they may have had a few creature comforts, but they weren’t better, they were just available and they were cheap, the salesmen were hungry, so they listened to the customers, rather than telling them what they could have…if they waited, they got their foot in the door and that was thatWhen do you reckon this was, Newmercman? In what year did they overtake, so to speak?
Put a Mandator/Big J/Borderer/LV up against an F86, a Scania 80 or a pre LP Merc and the Brits were well in front in terms of mpg and reliability, comfort wise the foreigners were streets ahead. By the mid 70s the continentals had developed their ranges and the Brits were still offering the same stuff from the previous decade, that’s when they lost the battle forever, there was too big a hill to climb for the British Manufacturers, so although the first shots were fired in the very late 60s, the war wasn’t won until the mid 70s, when crap like the S80 Foden, Sed Ak 400 and the dreadful TM were put up against the foreign opposition.
The continentals did bring a new concept to the industry, with lorries like the F88 and 110, they proved that a high (for the time) horsepower engine with a large cab could be an efficient machine, had the clowns in charge at the British Manufacturers realised this a little earlier, maybe we’d have had a product to compete and the yards would be full of homebuilt lorries and instead of ‘Logistics Companies’ delivering packaged food froma warehouse to RDCs, we’d still have proper Transport Firms delivering lumps of metal to factories that actually made stuff
High,for the time,horsepower engine,large cab.The F88,which had none of those ingredients,versus TM which (could have) had them all if the ■■■■■■ Brit customers at the time would have bought the thing when it was put on the market which they obviously would’nt/did’nt and it’s the F10/12,DAF 2800 etc etc which then finished the job after Bedford (and Leyland before that by effectively handing a decent power unit to DAF instead of getting DAF to hand them a decent cab for the T45 instead ) decided to throw in the towel because they were already beaten by then by the buying policies of their customers when it mattered.
The F88 was a 60s child, the TM was mid 70s, the F88 was on its 2nd generation by then, the T45 range was an 80s release, the T45 especially, validates my earlier remarks, you could have any engine you wanted, as long as it was a TL12 it was supposed to go up against the F10, 111, 2800 and the rest, yet there wasn’t a sleeper cab available Even Foden, Sed Ak and ERF had worked out by then that they needed a sleeper cab
Newmercman wrote:
“Put a Mandator/Big J/Borderer/LV up against an F86, a Scania 80 or a pre LP Merc and the Brits were well in front in terms of mpg and reliability, comfort wise the foreigners were streets ahead.” (How do you do the nice neat quotes in the yellow boxes, without copying an entire post and clogging up the discussion? I must be thick because it comes out wrong every time).
Now we’re getting to the crux of it! Reliability, fuel consumption- parameters near the top of anyone’s list. Going back further in time, how would, say a Power Plus Leyland (Ergo, 1963) or Mandator (1964 Ergo model; was the AV760 available at this time, or would their top model have had a smaller engine?) or any of the 150LX-engined motors compare with:
Scania Vabis LB76 (introduced in 1963 with 220 BHP, according to the books).
DAF 2600 (first built in 1962 with their version of the P680. Don’t know whether the engine was DAF’s own build or Leyland supplied them finished and complete. Maybe somone can answer this).
Volvo F88 (launched in 1964 as the L4951, until they got scared it would never catch on unless it had a snappier name!)
Mercedes LPS1620 square cab (1963) or LPS1624 (1964).
I know none of the above foreigners were sold in Britain at the time, so the comparison would be hypothetical in the context of the home market. However, the UK manufacturers did manage to register some export sales in the period, so does anyone know how well our best efforts stacked up against the Continentals on their home turf? Same criteria as above- fuel, performance, reliability etc. I believe this would be a good answer to the question in the heading of the thread, if anyone can dredge up any information.
Economy and reliability came in second to availability, if the waiting list was 18months plus and you needed a new lorry as you expanded your business, where were you going to get one? An import, where would you go the next time you needed a lorry? To the dealer who gave you what you wanted, when you needed it, relationships were built and many firms switched between marques as franchises changed, it all boils down to customer service in the end
[zb]
anorak:newmercman:
The original question was, were the Continentals better? My answer is no, not at first, they may have had a few creature comforts, but they weren’t better, they were just available and they were cheap, the salesmen were hungry, so they listened to the customers, rather than telling them what they could have…if they waited, they got their foot in the door and that was thatWhen do you reckon this was, Newmercman? In what year did they overtake, so to speak?
I’d say the late 70s early 80s was when the continentals really left the uk makers behind the f7/10/12 the scania 2 series the daf 2800 and later 3300 the merc sk even though it could be gutless in some specs were just a different world in driver comfort. We had the sed ak and I can honestly say a sed ak 3-11 is the worst vehicle I have ever driven the erf b c and e series and the foden s10/haulmaster and later 4000 were going in the right direction but the fibreglass cabs were never a patch on scania and Volvo.
As nmm says the t45 range could have been the one the little roadrunner was a great 7.5 tonner and lived on as a daf for years the constructor was as good a tipper as anything else from it’s era the roadtrain cab especially the interstate was good for it’s era but it needed to be a sleeper cab from launch and if it had been offered with the fully re developed aec v8 or a ■■■■■■■ as the later ones were and a fuller or twinsplitter and a decent axle from launch things might be different.
newmercman:
The F88 was a 60s child, the TM was mid 70s, the F88 was on its 2nd generation by then, the T45 range was an 80s release, the T45 especially, validates my earlier remarks, you could have any engine you wanted, as long as it was a TL12
The F88 was a 60’s child that,if it was British,would have been blamed for being an old design left in production too long before development of something better (F10/12 ).The fact is the F88 and the TM were both in production at the same time whatever the excuses made for the F88 being ‘second generation’.The fact is compared to (what could have been ‘if’ the ■■■■■■ British customers would have bought the thing) an 8V92 powered TM 3800 it was second rate not second generation 
.
But as usual it’s typical Brit product bashing double standards without regard to telling it like it really was.The same applies to the T45.It was just a second rate wagon built for,what the experience of Leyland’s (and Bedford’s) sales departments had found through experience,were second rate customers who’s thinking was at least 10 years behind where it should have been.
The fact that trucks like the DAF 2800 range,which had been in production since the mid 1970’s only really took off in the Brit market during the 1980’s and that the F88 could still find buyers during the late 1970’s says everything about Leyland’s decision to just try to pander to the F88 fans with the T45 and let DAF sell the better 2800 in it’s home market until the Brits came to their senses.
By which time it was all way too late for Bedford and Leyland etc which those company’s managements probably already knew was what was going to happen in which case throwing money away on development of trucks which no one was likely to buy,at the time they would been brought into production (as Bedford did),would have just left an even bigger financial headache when the time came to shut up shop.
So you agree with the rest of us then Carryfast? Is that what you’re trying to say?
newmercman:
So you agree with the rest of us then Carryfast? Is that what you’re trying to say?
I feel an if, and some buts coming!
My favourite dealer had 3 marques in the years I dealt with them. They are still in business and still popular with operators.
I don’t remember them selling many TM, but they certainly flooded the market with TK and KM, both units and rigids.
They then took on the UK DAF Franchise and had many years of success and many happy operators who still buy the new models off them. They are now very well established as a Renault dealer.
In those days, the “guvnors” were the bloke who wrote the cheque, washed the lorry and kept them running and loaded both ways. He didn’t have time for trucks that didn’t suit him, he didn’t have a shed full of spare parts for or needed a load of specialist tools to work on them. The drivers drove what they were given and it worked well for me. If I wanted to drive a different type of lorry, you changed companies, not their buying policy 
newmercman:
So you agree with the rest of us then Carryfast? Is that what you’re trying to say?
Agree about as much as a top fuel drag race car builder would agree with someone who says that the thing would go better if it had a zb twin cam Lotus Cortina motor,or even that BMW trurbocharged F1 engine,put in it instead of a big blown pushrod Hemi.
Wheel Nut:
newmercman:
So you agree with the rest of us then Carryfast? Is that what you’re trying to say?I feel an if, and some buts coming!
My favourite dealer had 3 marques in the years I dealt with them. They are still in business and still popular with operators.
I don’t remember them selling many TM, but they certainly flooded the market with TK and KM, both units and rigids.
They then took on the UK DAF Franchise and had many years of success and many happy operators who still buy the new models off them. They are now very well established as a Renault dealer.
In those days, the “guvnors” were the bloke who wrote the cheque, washed the lorry and kept them running and loaded both ways. He didn’t have time for trucks that didn’t suit him, he didn’t have a shed full of spare parts for or needed a load of specialist tools to work on them. The drivers drove what they were given and it worked well for me. If I wanted to drive a different type of lorry, you changed companies, not their buying policy
‘But’ any British manufacturer who’d spent a lot of time and trouble designing and producing a 400 hp unit (or drawbar prime mover) on the British market in the late 1970’s did’nt have the luxury,at the time,of being able to ‘change companies’ if they did’nt like the buying policies of their customers.It was a case of take the chance and hope they’ll see sense in time or not bother and just take a few bob off of DAF and flog a few T45’s instead before shutting up shop.Leyland chose the latter option Bedford chose the former and it was Scania,DAF,Volvo etc etc etc who eventually got the orders for some decent 350- 450 hp + units when the British customers eventually saw sense. 
Yes but the scania and volvos products evolved in to those products over time.
Bedford launched a product with a totally alien to European hauliers engine in to a Market they had never competed in.
It would be like lotus bringing out a people carrier.
kr79:
Yes but the scania and volvos products evolved in to those products over time.
Bedford launched a product with a totally alien to European hauliers engine in to a Market they had never competed in.
It would be like lotus bringing out a people carrier.
Or like a US operator in the 1970’s making the jump in thinking from using an old 1950/60’s tech wagon with acceptable outputs for that time to the 8V92 Detroit although cab comfort levels were already better than 1980’s European levels even in the 1960’s as that vid of what was available in 1965 shows.That rate of progression in US truck design versus British and even european truck design at that time,showed that the US customers were far more progressive in their thinking than their British and to a lesser extent european counterparts .
Luckily for the European manufacturers their customers were’nt as far behind the Americans as the British ones were.Which left the British manufacturers in the worst of all worlds of having to use designs which were effectively obsolete and/or underspecced in both cab comfort levels and power outputs in order to be able to sell their products on their home market while the Europeans and Scandinavians had a more forward thinking home marketplace in which to sell those newer designs until our market eventually caught up.
Which is why Volvo produced the F88 during the 1960’s and DAF were producing the 2800 in the mid 1970’s and regardless of the arguments about how many were actually sold,there obviously was sufficient demand in the Scandinavian market for an even more powerful V8 powered truck or Scania would’nt have bothered to design and build one at a time when the British buyers were still often happily using day cabbed 180-250 hp wagons to haul 32t gross loads around the country.
Carryfast:
kr79:
Yes but the scania and volvos products evolved in to those products over time.
Bedford launched a product with a totally alien to European hauliers engine in to a Market they had never competed in.
It would be like lotus bringing out a people carrier.Or like a US operator in the 1970’s making the jump in thinking from using an old 1950/60’s tech wagon with acceptable outputs for that time to the 8V92 Detroit although cab comfort levels were already better than 1980’s European levels even in the 1960’s as that vid of what was available in 1965 shows.That rate of progression in US truck design versus British and even european truck design at that time,showed that the US customers were far more progressive in their thinking than their British and to a lesser extent european counterparts
Luckily for the European manufacturers their customers were’nt as far behind the Americans as the British ones were.Which left the British manufacturers in the worst of all worlds of having to use designs which were effectively obsolete and/or underspecced in both cab comfort levels and power outputs in order to be able to sell their products on their home market while the Europeans and Scandinavians had a more forward thinking home marketplace in which to sell those newer designs until our market eventually caught up.
Which is why Volvo produced the F88 during the 1960’s and DAF were producing the 2800 in the mid 1970’s and regardless of the arguments about how many were actually sold,there obviously was sufficient demand in the Scandinavian market for an even more powerful V8 powered truck or Scania would’nt have bothered to design and build one at a time when the British buyers were still often happily using day cabbed 180-250 hp wagons to haul 32t gross loads around the country.
There`s a village missing its idiot somewhere