OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 29
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the use of conimercial motors. Letters should be on one side of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for
views expressed is accepted. ,
Pneumatic Tyres and Running Costs.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1825] Sir,—With the true instinctof the nostrum monger your correspondents—The United States Rubber Co., Ltd.—in page 60, of your issue of March 1st, declare that 15,000 miles is a conservative estimate of the average mileage of "our Nobby cord truck tyres."
" That infernal 'Sketch ' " has evidently put a spoke in the Giants' wheel in demonstrating by the table set forth on page 890 of your issue of liebruary 15th, that the running costs of a eliar-k-banes vehicle showed that Giant pneuiriatie tyres are over 50 per cent. in excess of the solid-tyred vehicle. Your correspon.dents also complain that "The Skotch' has made no allowance for saving in fuel and lubrication, nor for diminution of depreciation. The erstwhile Sphinx-like silence of the Giant is broken, and he literally squeals his old slogan of petrol economy, lubrication economy, and' diminution of depreciation at the sting of "The Skotch's " truths. Sir I absolutely deny their claims.
I aim that their statements are untrue and calculated to mislead commercial vehicle users, and lead them into a sea of trouble which will ultimately prove their undoing. The Giants know it ,• and they know that I know it, and it will bel a pleasurable disappointment to me and many. others if, inSteact of once again wrapping themselves in the toga of silence, they come forward as true Giants should, and show us in a practiOal and conclusive manner that their claims are real and 'honest.
The Giants have never satisfactorilyproved anything, and notwithstanding the fact that the challenge of Palladium Au.tocars, Ltd., gave them a splendid crpportunity of not only proving, but acclaiming in the most convincing manner, their merits, they chose not to accept it.
It is quite evident that they prefer paper heroics, cleverly and subtly elaborated by their publicity department, to a test on the broad road with its infinite variety of Conditions. The less the Giants meddle with "tables," the better for their peace of mind. It will be within, your recollection, Sir, that their luminary—Mr. F. A. Sessions—brought outhm famous impact table to scotch the Palladium double cantilever serpent. This was eventually discovered to he a " faked " plagiarism from an Ameriam report, and the expose resulted in the effectual snuffing of that gentleman, who, in the words of the story, "was never heard of again." It is a tribute to American publicity methods, and a singular refleetiort an the business acumen and the horse sense of commerical vehicle users, that they can be persuaded to face the enormous initial -outlay entailed by the Giant pneumatic outfit, together with the annual .recurring maintenance charges, and the multiplied risks and troubles, without undoubted proof that the elaims made are good and genuine.
It seems to me, in the light of my experience with the double cantilever vehicle' that the user will be far hotter and more profitably employed in inducing manufacturers to alter their designs and make the springs do their proper function without either the risk or the expense which the pneumatic alternative entails.
Some day the light will spread—but, thelessons may be bitter.—Yours faithfully, j. Ross MAeM.A.nox, Managing Director, PALLADIUM AUTOCARS. LTD.
The Third Brake and the Sprag.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1826] Sir,—Whether I have been fortunate or whether it is the general. experience I do not know,
but I have not, of late years, met with a single vehicle the side brakes at which would not hold it anywhere—if in order. We may ask a lot of the manufacturers, but I really think that to demand a third brake is to ask too much.
It will be a long time yet before the human element can be ruled out of the control of things mechanical, and, until this time comes, there will be ever the cry for yet one more brake. The man to whom two brakes are insufficient would invariably be found with his third or fourth, or fifth brake rusted up, worn out, or incomplete in some way.
As for sprags—well the idea of a ratchet arrangement on the rear wheels looks very good to me, but I am an awful pessimist in these matters. I have been
engaged in the repair and maintenance of all types I.0.-engined machines for many years now, and my
observation of types of men has taught me that the driver who can use these additions just when the necessity arises is the man to whom the necessity never does arise.
Talbots, and, no doubt, others, fit, or used to fit, a ratchet on the foot brake drum. Now, many •scores.
of Talbots have passed through my bands, but never yet did I find one—bar the nearly new ones—with the sprag in working order. I have seen a few with the pawl bent to uselessness, showing that attempts to use it had been made tee Iate.
To fit the sprag en the road wheels merely removes its dependency upon the transmission; it will still meet with the inevitable doom of neglect. No, sir, the third brake and the sprag are not the way out for the nervous. The only way (and that has its drawbacks), is for the public to ask for a little
extra taxation—by the way of a -change—and to insist upon having a system of skilled inspectors_always
upon the road with power to stop anything from a motor bicycle to a six-tanner, and with the ability to take the driver's seat, and to test the brakes. I have an idea I could get, a rare bag of indifferents, bads, and actually criminal on any main road any day in . the week. At any rate it ought not to be impracticable to institute some sort of brake inspection on motor chars-a-bancs in their garages. It would be a safeguard to the publicl—Yours faithfully,
Sheffield. J. a GRETTON.
Steamer v. Petrol Wagon'.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[18271 Sir,—In a recent issue of The. Commercial Motor, you published a letter written by " Steampet " under the above beading.
It seems to me that this letter is hardly one which • should be considered when your contributor compares a: 4 ton petrol wagon, which has a legal speed of 12 miles per hour, a 6 ton steam wagon, which has a legal speed of only eight miles per hour. Surely the 4 ton petrol should arrive at its journey's end much sooner when it is allowed so much greater speed? Cannot your contributor consider the matter ern the basis of a 5 ton or 6 ton petrol vehicle with a 6 ton steamer/ That would be a much, fairer comparison.
—Yours faithfully, W. ROGERS. Virenabley