1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156 
HEAVY RIGID
Page 27
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Winner:
MAN 12.185
Others: Scania P94 260 Volvo RE220 lveco Ford Cargo Fi, or some reason (and we can't quite work out why) we're seldom overrun by offers of heavy rigids for roadtest. Maybe the cost of bodying a big truck as a fleet or press demonstrator makes it sufficiently unattractive to manufacturers when considering the likely sales payback. Yet, despite the fact that we only tested four heavy rigids in 2002—comprising three 4x2s and a 6x2—they neatly reflected the growing market 'niches' that exist above 7.5 tonnes.
While the number of 18-tonners registered in 2002 fell by 7.3% to 7,188, sales in the 10-12-tonne sector were up by between 5-6%. No one is sure if we're finally seeing the effect of recent driver licence changes—but there's no doubting the strong arguments for not speccing a fully-blown 18-tonner. The 12-tonne MAN 121851RC (aka the LE180C) and 13.5-tonne !yew Ford 130E18/P Cargo Tector are good examples of the benefits of staying below 15 tonnes. With a 7,160kg net payload, the MAN 12-tonner more than doubles the capacity of the equivalent 7.5-tormer, while occupying similar space on the road.
Likewise, the Cargo's 8,100kg load is not to be sniffed at. More importantly, there are bottom-line benefits on VED too. At £200 a year, the MAN and Cargo save you £450 against a heavier and less fuelefficient 18-tormer. So if you don't need that magic 10 tonnes, why pay for it Of the two, the MAN was notably better on fuel but the Cargo was infinitely more driveable, thanks to Its Allison 2000 Series five-speed auto, something of a rarity on test rigids.
We also reckoned that although the Cargo Teeter auto (loaned to us by drinks giant AC Barr) had far fewer miles on the clock than we'd normally expect, we were sufficiently impressed to conclude its "fuel economy should not be a deterrent to two-pedal operation". The likely reduction in replacement clutch costs, particularly for a truck on urban multi-drop work, also gave the auto Cargo good engineering appeal.
However, with a price tag of around £6,700 extra, you'd need to do your sums carefully before committing. Both the MAN and Cargo cabins are coming to the end of their lives ("mature" and "in the twilight of its life-cycle" was how we described them respectively) so they're `gaffer' rather than 'driver' trucks. However, the MAN's sleeper cab option helped to give it a more spacious feel.
Volvo's 18-tonne FLE 220 Is hardly a newcomer, yet around our Welsh middleweight route its latest 220hp Euro-3 5.4-litre six-pot delivered a solid performance which beat the more modern Mercedes Atego 1823. While drivers might not exactly be clamouring to climb into the FLE 220's cabin, its trim level is surprisingly good and so was its overall driveability, thanks to its good brakes, willing engine and fluid handling. Intact, the Volvo proved that many a good tune is played on an old fiddle.
With sales of three-axle rigids up 6.1% in 2002, Scanla was wise to offer us its P94 6x2 for test. However, most of the 4,306 six-wheelers registered last year undoubtedly ended up with a tipper or mixer body rather than a Southfields curtainsider like ours. Yet the P94 has many attractive attributes, like a 16.5-tonne payload, close to 9.9mpg economy and potentially better "urban compatibility' than a full-size artic.
What's more it offered strong driver appeal with its quiet, high-spec sleeper cab and its Opticruise auto-box, although the latter is not without its faults—having rather ponderous changes lower down in the gears. However, a trip through traffic-clogged Hereford won us over.
The P94's 260hp nine-litre lump did the job for us; there wasn't much in reserve at 26 tonnes and we reckoned 300hp would be a better bet.
And so to the verdict for our heavy (and widely different) rigid quartet. On outright productivity alone (calculated by multiplying average fuel by average speed by body/payload allowance) the outcome is (not surprisingly) true to form, with the Scania finishing On top.
But the P94's extra payload doesn't come cheap. As tested, its price was £16.000 more than the F1E220's; £23,000 more than the Cargo; and a whopping £28,000 more than the MAN. You'd need great freight volumes and decent rates to justify that kind of increase.
When it comes to driver appeal both autos clearly have it, while in engineering terms the MAN and Volvo are equally solid, no-nonsense machines well reworked for Euro-3.
However, in a group where direct comparisons are pretty impossible we've gone for the MAN not only because of its good fuel economy (15.5mpg) and straight-forward spec but also, and perhaps more importantly, if the market Is trading UP from 7.5 tonnes but moving DOWN from 18.0, then the 12:185L11C looks to be the right kind of truck to get operators into a growing niche at the right time. And as they say:" Timing is everything." That's why we've voted the MAN 12-tonner top of the heap.