Opinions from Others.
Page 18
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Bi-fuel Experience Wanted.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1621] Sir,--We have been considering the question of fitting on 'one or more of our lorries a spemal type of carburetter and vaporizer for hi-fuel consumption, the additional fuel being a, proprietary one now costing a little over is. id. per gallon. Can any of your feaders give us their experience of the use of such a carburetter or of the use of spirit of lower quality than Taxibus or Crown for 2i--ton lorry work on country roads I—Yours faithfully, Cheshire.
Non-skid Experiences Wanted..
The Editor; THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1622] Sir,—I think it would interest many users be side myself if those drivers or others who successfully overcame the snow-bound country roads during the past winter could be induced to give their views before the diffieulties are quite forgotten. Surely experiments have been made with various kinds of purchased and home-made chain non-skids, but if we all have to conduct our own tests, the period generally being so short, it would probably be a considerable number of years before the . majority hit upon a satisfactory article. I am' referring particularly to twin-rubber-tired rear wheels.—Yours H. NEWLA.ND. Bournemouth.
The Petrol Difficulty.
The Editor, THE "COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1623] Sir,—We have just learned from one of our customers in Scotland that the various petrol companies are now refusing to open any new accounts with users of commercial or other vehicles. This means practically the stoppage of the selling trade, as trade buyers of petrol are restricted in their supplies and have necessarily to look after their old customers. We venture to think that this matter is serious enough to receive special attention from our trade societies, and that efforts should be made to remove this stumbling-block, which may easily become more destructive of the motor trade, whether manufacturing or selling, than even the new taxation. —Yours. faithfully, BRAMCO, LTD.. W M. knarEanv.
[The new Committee on Petrol Distribution will it &hoped, take into consideration the hardships involved in individual cases by the petrol companies' action indicated above.—ED.] Should Steam Be Brought Into Line?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1624] Sir,—We have read your current editorial re above with considerable interest, and we might say surprise, for if you are, as you state a champion of the steam motor wagon cause, why keep drawing attention to same, as per editorials in: the last three or four issues about taxation? Surely, "you might let well alone and say now't." We leave it to the users and manufacturers of this class of vehicle as to what they think of your attitude in this matter for continued reference to same, as we consider it has the reverse effect to' what yen claim.' Leave it to "One Hears " : " Steam escapes— enough said for the present," and you, in our opinion, will be well advised to do the same, not forgetting steam wagons are British made throughout, —Yours
faithfully, " YORKSIIIRE."
We gladly give publicity to this letter which is from the general manager of a steam-wagon works of long standing. But surely the fast that definite attempts have been made and will increasingly be made to bring the steamer into line proportionately in this matter calls for some better ventilation than one of laissez faire. Our correspondent does not suppose, we trust, that the authorities will forget steam wagons and tractors so long as we do not mention them. If we are to secure exemption for them we must an jointly make the best possible case we can in that direction and that can only be done by discussion and ventilation. Silence is no argument and in ay Seedily be taken as a token of acquieseenee.-En.)
..e54
American Spares.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL Monja. [1625]Sir,—In common with a number of other purchasers and would-be buyers of American lorries, I am perturbed at the possibilities of, in the near future. my not being able to obtain the necessary spareepartS for the machines thus acquired. In the principal cases, I believe it is a fact that spare parts are available at the moment 'in this country, but is there not always a possibility of the Government, which owns so many American lorries, commandeering any stocks of that-kind, with the--result that there would be a very meagre chance of adequate supplies again being brought across from America. I think this spare-part question is a very serious ape for owners of imported lorries. We must perforce look well ahead., It would be a matter of considerable comfort to many of us to know that there is really no actual cause for anxiety in this direction.—
Yours faithfully, " ANXIOUS ALFRED." Putney.
[We shall be happy to publish any re-assurance from those concerned with the import of American lorries, which they may care to address to
us for this purpose.-Em]
The Law a Heavy Motorcars.
7'he Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1626] Sir,—With reference to the article appearing in your issue of the 20th ult., viz., part 3 of "The Law of Heavy Motorcars," there is a point upon which I should be much obliged if you could give me some information.
Apparently the article in question confines itself to steam vehicles but, generally speaking, the section of the law dealing with axleweights is the same as for petrol vehicles. Your Contributor, in dealing with axleweights, states that the weight of any axle must not exceed the registered .axleweight. This expreseion is, of course, quite correct legally, but, from a user's point of view, the following question presents itself :
The manufacturer sells a two-ton lorry, weighing complete, say, 3 tons 6 cwt. When the two-ton load. is put on the lorry the total weight should be 5 tons. 5 cwt., and, for example, the loaded axleweights, may be : front axle, 2 tons, and back axle, 3 tons
5 cwt. The law as regards axleweights for vehicles travelling at a speed of 12 m.p.h. is that any axle must not exceed 6 tons. If. however, the weights painted on are as per my example, it wc old seem that if the back axleweight of the vehicle in question be over 3 tons 5 cwt., the user is liable to prosecution (assuming, of course, that the weights painted tan the vehicle are the registered weights). It has been advanced that the greatest axleweight allowable, viz., 6 tons, should be painted on the vehicle, and then there would be no question raised by the police if the user wants to put on an extra half-ton or so. This, however, would seem unfair, as, if the user is a novice, he might assume that the 6 tons in question is the weight permissibl to be carried on the actual lorry. You will no doubt observe that my main point is to find out whether, in the event of an actual axleweight exceeding the registered axleweight—but not exceeding 6 tons—the user is liable to prosecution, or whether he can be forced to alter his registered weights. I enclose my card and am—Yours faithfully, "COVENTRY."
[The article in question deals with heavy motorcars generally and not with steam wagons as distinct from petrol-propelled machines. The expression "the axle-weight of any axle shall not exceed the registered axleweight " is the phrasing used in par. 1, Art. V, of the 1904 Heavy Motor Car Order, so that it is without argument" correct legally." The owner mast make up his mind as to what maximum load he willcarry,when be presents the machine for registration. If he be sufficiently generous in his estimate he can cover the ease suggested above. He is certainly liable to prosecution if he carry more than be has registered even if such weights do not approach the maximum permitted under the Act. It is not for the authorities to urge increase of the original declaration. The onus in the first place is on the owner. We would also add that ignorance of the law i9 no exeuse.-En.1