OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
Page 67
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 commercial motors, Letters should be on one side of the paper only and tyPewritten preferekce. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views
The Better Buses for London—Large or Small ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR. . [2632] Sir,—The formation of the London Public Omnibus Company is somewhat of a Gilbertian situation, inasmuch as those responsible for its inception were, until it came into being, such avowed opponents of anything in the nature of a "combine." Accordingly, it is not altogether surprising to .find • certain amusing statements in the article headed "London's Latest Six-wheeled Buses" in your current issue. Not so very long ago Mr. Bennett stated in your columns that he saw the salvation of the London traffic problem in the fast single-decker bus, carrying, if I remember rightly, 36 passengers. Certain correspondents, among them the present writer, drew attention to some rather obvious fallacies in his arguments and our contentions were apparently accepted, as no reply was forthcoming from any further champions of the small bus. Now, however, comes a complete change of front and we read that Mr. Bennett came to the conclusion three years ago that the traffic problem would be largely solved by the use of large six-wheelers. It is observed that he only recently disclosed this opinion—possibly after it had been advanced by those who contradicted his 36-seater theories and a six-wheeler had been put into service by a certain rival of his.—Yours faithfully, D. GRAHAM DAVIS.
Some Causes of Brake Failure.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR. • [2633] Sir,—It was with considerable interest that I read the article by "Eligineer Designer" and the letters of H. Whitby and Frank Smith on this very important subject, and I am a little surprised that the matter of brake failures has not attracted more .correspondence.
Although the three correspondents mentioned above have fairly covered the ground, •I beg leave to add a few causes of brake failure which have come under ray notice at different times, as I think it is well that all possible causes of failure sliould be known, so that they could be guarded against.
1. One of the commonest causes of failure is, probably, the escape of Oil or grease from the rear axle. 'This may be. due to neglect of the oil-retaining arrangements at the ends of the axle tubes, or it may be due to over-filling of the differential case with oil. In some instances it can be caused by over-filling the gearbox, and the oil escaping at the rear bearing and passing down the torque tube to the rear axle. In one make I have traced this to the over-filling of the engine, and the oil finding its way through the gearbox, down the torque tube and eventually, escaping to the brakes.
2. The use of cheap and inferior materials for brake 'facings has been responsible for certain failures. No risks should be taken in this matter, and only the best and well-tried materials should be used.
3. In some cases a brake drum has either -been too thin to start with or it may have been skimmed-up to remove scores too many times, until it has become so thin that when the brake was applied it would be found to become oval in the direction in which the shoes press, thus reducing the braking effect. Drums measured with trammels while the brakes are on, and then with them off, will sometimes show an amount of distortion that is surprising. The skimming-up of drums has, in some cases, been known to be repeated so often that the drum has broken away from its web, which resulted in complete brake failure.
4. Where metal facings are used for brake shoes care should be exercised when renewing such facings, as some metals are useless for this purpose. In a well-known instance iron shoes were replaced by castings made of bronze, which crumbled away when heat was generated 'while running down a long hill, with the result that 14 people were killed and many others injured for life.—Yours faithfully, OBSERVER. . London.
Fluid for the Lockheed Hydraulic Brake .Gear.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2634] Sir,—We noticed in the issue of The Commercial Motor for September 13th a description of the Metropolitan Asylums Board special ambulance chassis, and in describing the Lockheed hydraulicbrake equipment you mention that alcohol, . and not oil, is employed in the system; "as oil has been found to cause the rubber connections to perish very rapidly."
As the sole European factory representatives and manufacturers of the Lockheed braking system in England, • we would like to correct the information given. In the first place, we have never at any time recommended the use of oil, as it is well known that oils will attack rubber parts, and therefore our instruction to users of the Lockheed braking system are to use the brake fluid made up to a special patented specification. This fluid consists of a mixture of neutralized castor oil and denatured alcohol, treated with chemical agents to prevent the action of the fluid on the metal and rubber parts of the system. This guaranteed fluid is supplied by us to the trade, and is the fluid which should be used in all Lockheed hydraulic-braking systems. The use of any substitute is likely to lead to trouble.
If, as stated in your description, oil had previously been-used, this was contrary to our recommendations, and, moreover, would certainly, cause trouble.
There is no difficulty whatsoever in the users of the Lockheed braking system obtaining the special fluid, as it is obtainable through the trade or direct from us at 3, Berners Street, London, W.1.—Yours faithfully, AUTOMOTIVE PRODUCTS CO. London.
Merchandise Marks Act.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[2635] Sir,—My letter on this subject, dated September 5th, 1927, has resulted in a very interesting correspondence both through the Press and post. There seems to be a general consensus of opinion that Section 1 of the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926, is really very narrow in its scope, and is only intended to Prevent the affixing of British trade marks or trade names to foreign-made goods without the consent of the owner of the trade mark or name.
It appears, therefore, still to be possible for a British trader to import his goods up to 100 per cent. and to affix his own British trade mark or trade name tc such goods, without any indication that the goods are of foreign origin.
If the correspondence has done nothing else it has probably drawn the attention of the public to the .desirability, if they want British-made goods, of being careful to inquire as to the origin of the goods at the lime of purchase, even although, from all appearances, they might assume that the goods were of British manufacture.—Yours faithfully, JOHN Pucm, Managing Director.
Coventry. For Rudge-Whitworth, Ltd.