AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Do you get what you deserve at 16 tons?

7th March 1981, Page 67
7th March 1981
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 67, 7th March 1981 — Do you get what you deserve at 16 tons?
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Graham Montgomerie: How do you relate the vehicle you are marketing to the needs of the operator? I'm thinking in terms of specifying a six-cylinder engine and six-speed gearbox as opposed to a four-cylinder engine and a four-speed gearbox. Chris Christiansen: At 16 tons there are several applications. They cover local authorities; inter-city haulage; urban distribution. At LV we look at the duty cycle, that is the hours run and the distribution pattern in terms of load handling. We relate these to the demand from operators. It's a combination of market and operational research.

Peter Caldercourt: That's also what we do at Bedford. The historic development of the vehicle — particularly in the 71/2-16 tons range — has been one of gradual evolution where the operator's needs have been clearly identified. Specification variations to tailor the vehicle have evolved from options such as two-speed axles, and the need for power and multiplication up at the front of the vehicle. Operator needs in this market sector can be categorised and that makes life easier for the vehicle manufacturer.

Geoff Harvey: The customer c tates his needs. The range ha be adapted to suit the wid spectrum of the operati needs. On a tipper applicat we would go on a fairly bc spec., whereas for something motorway use we would go fc higher powered engine, mL speed box and two-speed axli

At 16 tons the market has h about between 14 to 16 per c of the total market, proba worth 10/12,000 units per yea John Speeks: Mercedes-B (UK) came into the 16-ton rr ket in 1976 with a clearly defii policy. it was that we would for a premium type unit wlgave all the benefits we wc normally associate with heavier end of the market. 1 produced a vehicle which gi reliability and flexibility. though the market was dowi 1980, by about 19 per cent, have seen a steady growth.

We feel that we have ; neered the premium vehicle this particular operation. TIare tipper versions and if haulage versions — reasonE powered we think — which gi us good spread for to motorways and trunk roads. GM: That leads me into the r part of the question. How do justify the cost of a prem chassis in this weight cateE as opposed to the "cheap cheerful" version?

JS: The 16-tanner is workhorse of the market wl historically was built down • price. Things have changed 1976 we were certainly at expensive end, but not today Chris Christiansen: That's t and while there is a fringe n ket at the top end of the 16. market which is growing, so thing like 70 per cent of the b ness is in the mid-power, r price band. But there's growl the top, say over 200 bi horsepower, where high duri ity, high reliability and high comfort demands are akin to maximum weight ar operators' demands, but clear that by far the bulk of market is not buying a very specification, up-market vehi JS: There are two distinct

rs in this 16-ton area. The two ,ecifications are markedly difrent. The premium vehicle fers more power for rugged assis 'components. Then you me down to the development )m the medium class which

been evolved from the need stretch from the old 121/2-ton oss, 71/2-ton payload vehicle. IS is stretched up to offer an onomic package for the ierator who is doing very relaely low mileage on urban Aribution work. The man who es in for the premium vehicle on long-distance, heavy-duty cle and big annual mileages. ter Walker: I think there's a nd within the industry for mfort and driver appeal. It's coincidence that the .innium vehicles have both ver appeal and a higher speciation, with more horsepower. I: I don't like the word remium" but it was brought so I'll use it, and I certainly n't like "cheap and cheerful" cause manufacturers offer iicles for a job they do. It alys comes back to what the erator requires. The customer mts something that is isonably priced, is going to do job and carry the payload, effectively. And that's why I ek the volume of the market I remain around the middlewer range, middle-price iicle.

yid Wilcox: Several large fleet N-ators running big fleets re a mixture of makes and y are saying that, in their ?ryday work, accessories like Tors and rear lamps need rear replacement. They can't isibly keep a stock of such ns to cover all makes. Is there scope for more standardisabetween manufacturers? : Well, rationalisation is the ry we have been preaching I working on for the last six Irs. Engine, chassis frame,

• , service items, daily service

rear lights particularly ne to mind. The Leyland ige will have extensive onalisation from ten tons all way up to 38 and 44 tons. A of the problems are on low t items. Rationalisation is imtent, but the extent to which t could be pushed industrye is another matter.

This is a part of the total cost Iperation, and that is what the ,raters are concerned with, necessarily that they want lmon spares amongst all the

various makes of vehicles on the market. They want low-cost spares, they want commonality as far as possible. But commonality can only apply to certain spares. Just as each individual manufacturer has developed his own cab style he likes to develop other things.

CC: I think one has to be a bit careful as well; you could be in danger of inflicting on operators a vehicle which is an amalgam of all the worst case conditions. There could be a danger in pursuing the rationalisation arguments to the nth degree. It could introduce a cost and weight penalty to the vehicle.

PC: When you cut down the options available to the operator you cut down his choice and that's why our friends at Bedford keep the TM and TK going together. The customer wants the choice of both vehicles just as he wants the choice of the many engine options as he gets with Dodge.

GH: The question was why don't we all fit the same accessory to make it easier for the operator to get replacement parts. That's the individual manufacturer's problem, to ensure that he backs his product wholeheartedly with parts availability and a good dealer network.

JS: For a long time we have followed commonality in parts. We follow the unit construction principle all the way through. Our new generation cabs are more or less identical. Someone touched on the question of costs. Life-cycle costs, we think, are the most important thing; operators are becoming more sophisticated in this area. I agree that it is up to us to accept that the backup is absolutely paramount in our business. I don't think it's our job to dictate to operators what they should have. Our job is to respond to their demands.

Steve Gray: Availability of spare parts is the prime complaint from most vehicle operators. It seems to me a lot of manufacturers charge high prices for spare parts because that keeps the initial cost of the vehicle down. How do the manufacturers feel about Multipart where LV sells other manufacturers' parts, or parts suitable for other manufacturers vehicles?

GH: I think most manufacturers compare their captive parts prices with other manufacturers. We certainly do. Captive parts are applicable to vehicle volume; and because they are unique the volume is lower, hence they are higher priced than a part that goes right across the whole industry. I don't believe manufacturers really load it on captive parts at all.

SG: Some do, and by as much as 15 to 20 per cent in some cases.

CC: How can you say that manufacturers are overcharging for any aspect of their business when you look at their general level of profitability? There are very few people making profits Out of the business.

PW: It's not how much a part costs, but how often you use it that's important. If a part appears to be more expensive from an importer, and it very often is, there are very good reasons for that. If you use only half as many of them are you paying as much per mile?

SG: If you want to buy a diff for a vehicle, why then must you buy a whole axle instead of a diff? PW: When you get to expensive items such as diffs, engines and gearboxes you have got very different life-cycles.

CC: I think we all do the same sort of comparative analysis relating to the cost of our spares to see that we are competitive with the rest of the business, including the people supplying from factors. We establish what we think are fair prices for our parts. We also take into account the differences in utilisation rates. There was an inference in your question that imported vehicles may be more reliable.

PC: I don't believe any manufacturer would put a product on the market which had an inferior or non-acceptable life-cycle. Certainly, the Bedford philosophy is one of providing low-cost parts. We monitor parts prices against the competition and the non-OE manufacturing input into the parts business. Every manufacturer has to provide excellent back-up in terms of availability. SG: But what about Multipart? CC: That simply is a service to operators. There are relatively few operators who operate exclusively one make of vehicle. Most run mixed fleets of vehicles, and we make no bones about our objectives. LV wants to recover market leadership in this country. Which means quite clearly that people will need to change the make of vehicle that they have been used to running for us to achieve our objectives. SG: The importers have standardised on such things as chassis widths which make body building much easier. Why don't British manufacturers get together? What about rationalisation of chassis widths and heights, and so on? This would simplify body specification.

PC: Commercial vehicle development is an evolutionary process. You don't suddenly change overnight. We have been developing to meet European standards for the last ten years. GH: There are no problems in putting bodies on British vehicles.

SG: Well, it comes back from operators that it takes an awful lot longer to get a British vehicle bodied than it does for an imported one. Is it the bodybuilding industry that's at fault?

PC: I think the European body builders and the vehicle manufacturers, because of the limited scope of their ranges in the UK have a very tight relationship. The UK bodybuilding industry has grown up from a cottage industry. Now you are getting some rationalisation, some standardisation with kit parts and that sort of thing. I don't see standardisation overnight.

PW: Leyland, for example, is now rationalising its product range, but they would like to have made the profits to have sorted that out earlier. I take the point about the cottage nature of a vehicle bodybuilding indus, it's fairly sophisticated aar but it's taken a long, long le to grow up.

LV had a multiplicity of !hides, but we will have tionalised a fairly modest age of frames with T45 for a ry wide range of vehicles. It all riles down to cost at the end of a. day; the chassis price is iced 15 per cent of the total iole life cost. So we have to ace emphasis on the front end St as well as on the residual lue and the reliability costs.

VI: Have you any thoughts on inimum power requirements the 71/2 to 16-ton category, in rticular for box body operain and, on a more specific bawhat are your company polias towards turbocharging for a urban delivery vehicle?

Our 16-tonner is rated a 4kW and is turbocharged. We ,lieve the turbocharging is parularly well balanced. It's an ine six developed from an enle produced in 1970 and is iry reliable. It gives us bhp/ton at the moment and a went for flexibility of operain. We feel the vehicle is aally suited for local delivery id long haul.

V: We too are looking at bhp/ton and we offer the best both worlds. One is turboarged on the Magirus and the 3t is direct injection, non-turicharged. I'm not giving away iy secrets when I say we feel, EEC legislation moves over e next few years and particu-ly with the needs for emission ntrol, that turbocharging will the rule throughout the range vehicles. We are even thinking

turbocharging vehicles at ound 50-60 horsepower and rtainly we will see vehicles at /2 tons being turbocharged.

I think 10bhp per ton from /2 up to 16 tons is about the gm. Although, in common rth other manufacturers, we io offer higher output engines r those who want additional )wer. As we get more and ore into EEC noise legislation, id the need for more fuel-effiant and emission free engines en turbocharging has a great tu re.

HI: We fit any of the three units rt it's the operator's decision hich one we fit. Many probms come about because of ixing component parts of chographs. The problems can ? laid at the door of the tacho.aph manufacturers.

3: I've got some thoughts on )ur after-sales service — if at's the right thing to call it. artain manufacturers have )ne all out to make their dealerships a separate entity and mixed cars and commercials, whereas importers have come in with cv's only and in a much better position.

CC: About six or seven years back you could get a Leyland Vehicles product at something approaching 150 to 180 different locations. Over the past three years we have been implementing our franchise strategy which is to have around 80 full-line cvonly distributorships in large geographical areas with service dealers beneath them.

JS: MB believes absolutely in the professionalism of the cv franchise. Where we have dual passenger car and franchises, it is absolutely essential that the cv side is run by professionals. We are totally committed to aftersales service. We have invested enormous resources to develop the dealer network to cope with the vehicle park.

PW: I find myself in a bit of a quandary on this question. Having spent 11 years at Ford I know that cars and ev's do go together. Of the whole of the Ford cv network, 150 have car franchises as well, but they are separately run companies with separate management and separate skills.

On the other hand, it's no coincidence that there is not a single Fiat car dealer who holds the cv franchise, that is deliberate. But a professionally run Fiat car dealership who knows cvs would be considered. Professionally run dealerships can sell anything.

PC: The dealers are the cornerstones of the Bedford marketing and philosophy principles. All 226 of our dealers in the UK and Eire are professional cv people. In some cases the premises are dualled with passenger car operations or with van operations.

OH: We have a few dual franchises but our policy is to be exclusive. The location for a cv dealer is a different requirement than for cars and you have certainly got to have separate management.

SG: Are your dealers carrying stocks to satisfy customer demand? Many of the customers say they aren't.

JS: Mercedes-Benz have a Trans Europa service, which is a mobile workshop. We have centrally based and regionally based parts representatives, and these people are not just directed towards the support of the dealer network, they are directed towards the support of our customers.

SG: How often do you hear complaints that parts are never on the shelf? We are told by you that there is an 88 per cent to 92 per cent first picking, but when an operator's machine is lying at the side of the road he never seems to need the parts you've got on first picking.

CC: We have something like 150,000 vehicles in use in the UK, of a mixed pedigree, and there will betimes when a part is not in stock, usually for older vehicles. But every manufacturer, Leyland included, has a total commitment to parts and service support.

We have our central parts operation at Chorley connected by a computer terminal to many of our distributors. We have our own company-owned depots backing up our distributor network —five of these around the country.

We launched Co-Driver 15 months ago to make it quite clear to operators the back-up services we have, and it's an extensive range of baCk-up services. Since then, the number of complaints has reduced significantly.

Co-Driver is an all-embracing system. It covers 24-hour road breakdown and recovery. It includes a facility for analysing vehicle expenses. Operators can pay bills by credit card: it tells an operator or distributor how to use the VOR service; it lists the distributors' service points. It's a cradle-to-grave concept of operator support.

PC: All back-up services try to give the same assistance for the customer. When we get down to analysing complaints about parts not being available, we often find the operator has not placed an order for the part. We provide, within 24 hours, 99 per cent of the 93,000 parts which we keep in stock at our Toddington warehouse, but we can't provide those parts if we haven't received an order.

GH: We are in a similar position. Manufacturers aim to give 100 per cent parts availability. I thinl we are at 95 per cent at the mo ment, but the dealer stocks part; to meet, what he feels, will br ideal demand. But there is thc problem of an operator going tc a dealer and being told that thr dealer doesn't have the part. TN operator goes off and shop; around all the dealers. That'; wrong — if he stopped at tha original dealer and asked for it tc be ordered on VOR, most manu facturers would have it to hirr within 24 hours.

SG: This has been a bone o contention for 20 years or more Why does the operator shot around? In all the customer eciu cation that you have done, with all these great consultancy ser vices you offer, you seem to Ix failing to educate the operato not to shop around.

PW: I think manufacturers lea instinct dislike blamin,c operators. That goes withou saying, but I do think operator; make it difficult for themselves Often the operator has his owr parts book, he refers to it anc gets the part number wrong. Hi orders the wrong part numbe and he gets the wrong part Then he blames us because hi can't read the parts book.

DW: One point operators rais( regularly is the importance of good local dealer. They ofter buy a particular type of vehicli because there is a good loca dealer. But are all dealers en titled to be called good?

PW: I think at times .operator: forget that just as they are ii business to make a profit, s( also is the dealer in business ti make a profit. If they are no paying their bills, they are jus not going to get the service the: expect.

Dealers will go broke this yea — quite a lot of them, for dil ferent reasons. Some of then are inefficient, we know that. Bu a lot of them will go to the wa because they are indebted an operators have caused that debt.

Taking extended credit puts dealers in a position where they can't hold the sort of stock that operators would like. Any dealer with a 100 per cent first-time pick off his own shelf would go broke tomorrow.

SG: Isn't this a case where the manufacturer can assist the dealer with a credit card, as LV's Co-Driver does?

JS: We help our dealer network in terms of parts supply. I go along with Peter 'Walker. We live in a world where everyone is under pressure. You can come up with all the sophisticated systems in the world and you can have the 100 per cent parts pick, but you'll still find difficulties and you'll still find people who can't be satisfied, for all sorts of reasons.

CC: The golden rule is "place an order," that is the most efficient way to get out of trouble. We are not in a communications ivory tower. We have a well-publicised number. We have people all over the country, as has everyone else.

We have regional offices, regional parts people, regional service engineers. The last thing , an operator should do is feel as though he's on his own when he has got a problem.

SG: How many of you are on a system where the operator has an impressive stock and how widely is it used?

CC: We run substantial systems — and the parts are located on the operators' premises. The second question was how widely is it used? I think mainly by large fleet operators. I wouldn't say it's used extensively. There are 145,000 fleets in the country and I would guess that no more than 1,000 of those iold an impressed stock of parts supplied and funded by the -nanufacturer.

3M: Are these operators that vou select?

7.C: It's mutual. In some cases .hey select themselves if they 3 re buying a lot of vehicles then t's a very sensible commercial Jolicy to let them have a stock of arts.

/W: So what criteria do you ap)Iy? If an operator comes along )nd he's only got three riachines, do you ask to see how us bankbook looks before you jive him this facility?

It's a question of trust. If you ire talking about a man who is .unning 50 or 60 vehicles then

there's obviously a strong element of trust which has been built up. If a man came in tomorrow who we didn't know and said "look, I'll buy three of your vehicles, if you give me a stock of parts", then we would have to look at him, PC: We would like to see how he ran his business, whether he could meet the standards which we lay down. It's not in the manufacturers' interest to have disgruntled customers. We are only in business because of our customers and I think the better the service we provide them, through whatever means we choose, whether it's through consignment stock or whether it be through faster response time through normal retail channels, the better for us all.

JS: The dealer has to be brought in.

GH: We see it as a dealer responsibility. Nobody wants to leave dead parts lying about. That costs money. It all comes back to making a profit and giving a service to the operator. Nobody can afford to do it right across the board. A three-vehicle fleet would be uneconomic.

GM: If you ask operators what variants on a standard vehicle they want, surely you'll end up with 57,000 variants on one theme. How far do you think you can go on getting operators' views before you launch a new vehicle?

JS: We have to listen to what operators want in general and then we have to respond. As you rightly said, we can't respond on an individual basis. Each operator has his own particular needs and criteria, and we would have thousands of variants on the same tool, But it is not our job to ram a product down anyone's throat. We are very heavily committed in development terms. We are not manufacturers, we are a marketing company in the UK but on the manufacturing side of Daimler-Benz, the product range is wide and can be adapted to almost any needs.

SG: Isn't that where importers score over the UK producers? Isn't it because they are mainly marketing companies that they score? They can tailor a vehicle to a need. You have a wide range but if someone comes up and says "I want a Chinese six with four axles" can you do it? JS: We can, if there is a requirement.

PC: We are in a better position because we have a wider base from which to start. We have a manufacturing facility in situ, so we are able to adapt and modify to an operator's needs. Getting on for 50 per cent of the Bedford production goes out with special operator requirements on it. We also do it for certain low-volume equipment where there may be a long lead time from a supplier, but this is a question of planning.

I think this question of contact with the operator and how much do we involve him in the product evolution process is one that is on-going. The operator is primarily concerned with the dayto-day running of his business. He is only concerned with our business in as much as it affects him in the end.

But certainly, I think we all, as manufacturers, are involved with the operator in a two-way discussion in the development of the vehicle and also in the development of vehicles for specialised use.

GH: I object to the statement that home producers or manufacturers are not marketingorientated.

SG: I didn't say that. I said that because the importers were marketing, and do not have any manufacturing facilities, they were better placed. I didn't imply that you were not marketing men as well as manufacturing. GH: In fact we do a lot of marketing. We must do because as we said, we have got to sell a product which the customer needs. And the only way you can find out what the customer needs is by doing some pretty extensive marketing.

PW: If you go back to CM's 1980 Fleet Management Conference you'll find we talked about the European vehicle. The problem is that there are certain basic requirements whether it is operating in Austria, Sweden, Spain, Britain or elsewhere. So when you ask "do we talk l operators?" we have to talk operators.

You ask how we tailor tl basic vehicle to the indivi& needs or operators of peculiar different markets. We a looking at it fron different dire tions and if we need somethit which is too small for us to tail that vehicle to economical then we don't do it.

Just as IVECO in Italy has better opportunity to tailor vehicle because it has a mul bigger base to go from, it can ( it much more readily there, ju as Leyland can do it much me readily in this market plac You're talking about the scale the size of the operation whii each manufacturer meets each country as to how much I can market, how much he Ci tailor.

CC: It's very important for legi lation to be recognised, thoug because what an operator wan has to be in the framework legislation, and legislation se up an awful lot in the way design parameters for a vehicle.

You have relatively limited d sign options within the fram work of legislation.

Having said that, it depenc how fundamental the questic was, because we analyse deny tives and options. I think mo people can monitor the off-tak We monitor demand for variot options through these systems When you talk about fund mental changes in design, ha ing set up the framework legislation you then get your o tions within that, and we invol% operators at a very early stage what we call clinics. We ha N. operators and fleet enginee who go through marketing di! ics.

In vehicle designs clinics thE offer us opinions and we discu: it with them. We may thE change, modify or evolve the d. n but still within the framerk of legislation we adapt it to at the operator needs.

: We have been running clinfor nearly ten years now. The sequences of a manufacturer t involving the operator early ough in a new product delopment cycle can be disasus if he gets his sums wrong not involving them.

: So what we are saying then that is that it's really back to operator?

: How much is fuel consumpn a selling-point these days, mpared with either low first st or high first-cost? I think of erators, who, under accounnts' instructions, have got to ) well this year, while 1985 can ke care of itself.

All costs are important and Nays have been, but they are !coming increasingly so. I was lking to an operator not so ng ago who was running milins of miles a year. If he saved le mile per gallon for every hide over the year, he was ving something like £500,000 :r annum.

We are striving to develop ennes which will be more fective in terms of fuel use.

Fuel costs are of course vital. left relative importance de!lids on the operational cycles. the example quoted, in terms very high mileage, fuel costs !come crucial. But at a much ialler annual mileage they asme a less important role.

I can think of two customers in irope to whom we still sell pe)I-engined vehicles because at suits their operation. They II find it more economical in rms of petrol prices versus dieI and relative efficiency.

It's a question of horses for urses, and one can't say cate)rically that fuel costs are the ost important or even the cond most important cost facr. Their importance is related the type of operation volved.

i: Surely, fuel consumption ust be an important part of the )erator's consideration. We me out fairly well on CM's 16n test in March last year, but !spite that we must continue to Dk for improvements.

One mile a gallon worse fuel nsumption costs the operator out £1,200-£1,500 per vehicle nually. But we are going rough a period where ierators, because of pressure )m company secretaries and countants, are going for the ea pest first-cost vehicle.

On a simple one-year pay-back lculation this may not be the eapest vehicle when he takes :o account inferior fuel con sumption. Operators who are fighting for survival should still evaluate the cost of the vehicle with its fuel economy.

They would be well-advised to study fuel consumption advantages as well as the advantages of low-cost purchase.

SG: So where do we go from here? We are in a particularly conservative industry. I would like to know what the manufacturers think of the future of the 16-ton vehicle. Are we going to see a dramatic change over the next five years?

CC: I don't think the duty cycle for a 16-ton machine is going to change dramatically over the next five years. We could see some changes coming. in terms of propulsion. For instance, lpg could come in at 16 tons, and we are looking at electric vehicles. GM: I'm very surprised to learn that you think there's going to be a move towards lpg in the 16ton category.

CC: I don't think diesel is going to be replaced in the next five years. But I do know there are certain peripheral duty cycles where you will start to see the erosion of diesel in the longterm. I think we'll see the introduction of other propulsion sources in the next 15 years.

GM: But this means a new breed of engine because by the time you get to that weight category it's not a simple matter of converting an engine. It's not quite as simple to convert a diesel engine to lpg as it is a petrol engine. You are talking about an engine designed from scratch to run on lpg.

CC: That's right.

SG: This brings us back to a point we were talking about earlier, Is this something you are going to make the operator take or is it something he has been asking you for?

CC: All operators are concerned about rising fuel costs and noise comes into it as well, quite obviously lpg and electric propul sion are ways of solving or reducing the noise and cost penalties.

DW: What do manufacturers think the operator's demand in the 16-ton market is going to be in the next ten years?

PW: We are looking at approximately 10,000 vehicles a year but it is a most peculiar market. It's a market which could blossom over the next couple of years if the construction business blossoms, because it's also a tipper market. If you take those two together that's probably a quarter of the market.

In the longer term, we are talking about turbocharged engines going further down from 16 tons. And I think we could also be looking at 1 6-ton drawbars taking a greater share of the market.

JS: From Mercedes' point of view, I agree with everything that Peter 'Walker says except his drawbar premise. We think the drawbar will probably come along only in 40/44 tons category because we're going to need additional space to accommodate the axle weights.

We see the 16-ton market remaining fairly stable in the next five years. We think there will be no massive switch from the 16ton category. It might be down this year, but it will stay around 10/12/15,000 units.

GH: I think it's going to remain a fairly stable market, of 10/12,000 units. You could have some shift patterns within it. The tipper market has kept about its market share, in recent years. In municipalities we find there is a tendency to move from 15 tons into 16 tons but they are looking at greater use of their vehicles.

Fire engines are still a small but important part of the 16-ton market. I think there's going to be some growth with a number of additional applications.

PC: In terms of the shift in the market emphasis, there has been a gradual move towards polarisation, but not as marked as it has been in one or two other countries around the world. Yet the 16-ton area is certainly growing at the expense of the traditional medium-weight vehicle. The other big growth area of course is the 71/2-ton end of the market where you have the non-hgv class.

CC: The point about polarisation is well taken, we have a very significant market polarisation at 7.38 tons (7.5 tonnes) because of non-hgv licence requirement. There has always been a significant market polarisation at 16 tons.

Until recently we have always had a middle market between about 10 to 14 tons which was of course driven by the old three tons unladen hgv legislation.

So with the abolition of that, I think there'll be a progressive movement to the legislative modes which has always driven the dominant volume loads in the UK market.

I agree that we will always get this polarisation towards 7.5 tonnes at the one end at 16 tons at the other end. Within 16 tons I think the point raised by John 'Speeks is valid for part of the market.

We are going to get greater distinction between certain 16tanners because the tipper and the skip loader market has grown quite significantly at 16 tons in the last three to four years.

These demand a fairly basic form of specification — derived from vehicles that can have a high-premium specification — and I think the move towards higher power at about 180bhp level, synchromesh gearbox, possibly sleeper cabs, is going to polarise that 16-ton markel between a basic and maybe a premium spec.

I think there will be two basic 16-ton derivatives in the next two to three years. In terms of market size, it's always been a very stable market — about 12,500 just over a Year ago, 10,000 last year. I think it will recover by about 25 per cent and relatively quickly as the economy reflates.

Editor's note: That's how the manufacturers see the medium-weight market. They believe that they supply the vehicle the operator wants and provide the back-up service he demands and deserves.

They consider they are developing vehicles to meet environmental economic and market considerations.

But what are your views? What does the operator think?

Write and tell us — we'll pass on your comments.