Criticisms of
Page 42
Page 43
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Our Costs for Steamers
Answered
By "S.T.R."
IT is inevitable that a certain amount of criticism should follow the publication of such important data as are embodied in The-Commercial Motor Tables of Operating Costs. It is a measure of the utility of these Tables that they invariably call forth a considerable amount of comment, nearly all of it favourable, but some of it, nevertheless, embodying suggestions that the figures bear too heavily in one direction or another.
Disgruntled users complain that the figures are too favourable ; commercial-motor manufacturers, on the other hand, sometimes take the view that their vehicles are not shown in a sufficiently favourable light. Generally, a brief letter of explanation to each critic suffices to set matters right.
Sometimes, however, a point is raised which deserves publicity. That has happened this year, in the complaint of a steam-wagon manufacturer, that Table V, in which appear average operating costs of pneunia.tic-tyred steam vehicles, exaggerates those charges. In view of the keen rivalry between protagonists of steam and petrol vehicles, it is only fair to the former that publicity should be given to this point of view and a full answer be made on behalf of the Tables.
The Difference Explained.
In the accompanying table are given figures of mining costs from The Commercial Motor Tables, relating to 6-ton and 10-ton pneumatictyred steam wagons, along with data which, this manufacturer clain'is, more accurately represent the experience of steam-wagon users.
The difference is almost entirety one of point of view. It is not one of fact. In a letter accompanying these tabulated figures, it is suggested that the compiler of the Tables did not have before him actual costs of operating modern pneumatic-tyred steamers. In point of fact, the figures in the Tables are those of users, representing, as has so often been reiterated, averages of result's obtained under varied conditions of operation.
Taking the figures one by one, the first is fuel: the suggestion is made n16
that the price of 40s. per ton should be taken as basis, instead of 45s. That would not be fair, because 45s. is the price which the ordinary user must pay for best steam coal; just as, at the time when the Tables were revised, is. 3d. per gallon was the market price of petrol.
There is no more justification for selecting, as a basis for published data, terms which are open only to the favourably situated purchaser of coal, than for applying that principle in relation to the user of petrol. When the ordinary user was paying 1s. 3d. per gallon for his petrol, bulk buyers were purchasing at about 10d.
Next .comes the figure for mileage per cwt. My own personal investigation amongst users brought me to the conclusion that between 13 miles and 14 miles per cwt. was a fair figure to take for a 10-tonner, and between 14 miles and 15 miles for a 6-tonner. I met some users whose experience was approximately 11-12 miles per cwt., and there were others obtaining 15 miles or 16 miles for that quantity of coal.
I think the difference between my figures and those of this critic is explained by the fact that he. has taken as a basis the actual net consumption per mile over a fairly long run. Some support of this belief, on my part, is afforded by a reference to 500 miles per week in the notes accompanying his table.
Information of that kind is of little value in endeavouring to arrive at the cost of operating a motor vehicle. The only satisfactory data are those deduced from the consumption of fuel over a considerable period and of the actual total mileage of the vehicle during that period.
Fuel Cost Data.
That is important in the case of a petrol lorry, it is, unfortunately perhaps, even more important in the case of the steam wagon, which necessarily consumes fuel the whole . day long, whatever may be its mileage. It will be appreciated, therefore, that, whilst in the most favourable circumstances it might be possible to achieve the mileage per cwt. suggested by this critic, the figure would be halved in the case of a steam wagon engaged upon work which involved a comparatively small weekly mileage.
I put this forward as an explanation of my critic's figures and for his satisfaction. The answer to his criticism is already given in pointing out that the figures in The Commercial Motor Tables of Operating Costs are based upon user's experiences, which necessarily cover a wide variety of conditions, and, must be far short of the ideal.
Dealing with the question of tyres, whilst it is a fact that some users of pneumatic-tyred steam wagons have run tyres for 27,000 miles and even 30,000 miles, the average is under, rather than over 20,000. Is it the suggestion of this critic that the steam wagon is less hard on tyres than is the petrol lorry? Only that condition would justify any modification of the figures for tyres. I have solid grounds for answering the question myself—in the negative. There is left only the item of maintenance in dispute, and, as regards that item, point of view is a more important factor than in any other. So much depends upon the period over which maintenance is calculated, and that period is governed to some extent by the allowance for depreciation.
The critic's own figure for depreciation is £75 per annum on a vehicle costing £1,090, which assumes a life of 14i years. Ts it the view of this steam-wagon enthusiast that, during the whole of that period, the total cost of maintenance will not average more than £70 per annum? If that be his view, I can assure him that he is wrong.
One other matter must have mention. The critic is a manufacturer. It has been the custom in the quarter of a century during which The Commercial Motor Tables have been published, never to accept a manufacturer's figures for operating cost. This attitude does not, in any sense, imply that such figures would be in themselves untrustworthy, but it is the outcome of a belief that only data culled from actual users are satisfactory for the purpose.