OPINIONS and QUERIES Are Splitpins a Security or a Danger ?
Page 60
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3509] Sir,—In your issue of August 18th a correspondent, "Maintenance," asks the above question. Experience leads me to believe that in some instances he is right, whilst in other instances he is •arong ; it all depends upon who is in charge of the maintenance of the vehicles.
In the hands of a careful and conscientious man, who is allowed sufficient time properly to look after his fleet, the splitpin might, with advantage, be replaced by nuts which can be periodically tightened, but under the conditions in which some maintenance is conducted— where nothing is attended to until the vehicle will not run any more—the splitpin has the merit of preventing a nut from completely falling off, although its bolt may not be functioning properly.
A loose nut which allows a bolt to cease to hold parts together tightly is bad, but it is better than having a bolt drop out altogether. I have seen holes, that once contained bolts, filled up with a long accumulation of mud and dust, thus throwing undue strain on the remaining bolts, until something gives way. In such circumstances as these splitpins would be an advantage.
It may be said that bad maintenance is rare to-day, but it is not altogether unknown, and where it is likely to be the rule splitpins may be considered a security.
As loose nuts are a constant source of trouble and expense in maintenance, it may be well to consider The causes of nuts working loose. My own experience is that provided a bolt or other screwed part be up to its work in size and quality of material, cut with the British standard fine thread and fitted with a robust spring washer, such as the genuine Grover, not the thin, weak kind sold at a low figure, there is not much trouble to be feared with nuts coming loose.
I may mention here a point which seems to have escaped the notice of designers, that is the size of the heads of bolts and their nuts. For the sake of neatness and lightness the motor trade has adopted smaller beads to bolts, and smaller nuts than those laid down in the old Whitworth standards. The old large leads may seem ugly and necessitate bigger bosses, but they undoubtedly do stand up to their work better than the smaller sizes on account of the larger surface they present to the parts which they have to hold together, and for those parts of commercial vehicles which are subject to severe vibration I would certainly recommend a return to the bigger heads and nuts.
Another cause of bolts working loose is, in some instances, the poor material of which the bolts are made, this being selected on account of its easy machining qualities when the greater part of the metal forming the head has to he removed to form the stem. Another point is that as one nears the centre of a bar the metal decreases in tensile strength.
I may be criticized, but in my opinion we would have better bolts if each were made from a bar of the 1346
diameter of the body, screwed at both ends and with a ' nut, firmly secured by some means from turning around, to act as a head. With regard to splitpins, and the trouble of removing and replacing them while tightening a nut, it would appear that the makers of these pins have gone to endless trouble to make this one of the most difficult and trying jobs a man can have to do. The head is so made that it buries itself completely in the castellations of the nut, making it almost impossible to remove unless one can get at the other end to punch it out. A pin with a double eye was described in The Commercial Motor some time back ; in this type one of the eyes stood clear of the castellations. I believe these pins can be obtained from Nettlefolds. Another point, why are the two ends of a pin made exactly the same length,, thus making it so difficult to open them out? ENGINEER. London, N.4.
The Tax on an Agricultural Tractor.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3510] Sir,—You recently stated that the licence fo: a tractor, if used for haulage solely in connection with agriculture, is £6 per annum. Does this cover its use for the delivery of farm produce tO the station or to the consumer? Also, would it cover its use in taking return loads (artificial manures, feeding stuffs, etc.) to the farm?
What would be a fair charge for the haulage of shkp and lambs in small quantities (six or eight animals at a time) in a 1-ton lorry from a farm to a butcher 11 miles distant?
We thank you for the information previously received, which we found of great assistance. Abbots Bromley, TIMBER MERCHANTS.
[The £6 per annum revenue tax on an agricultural tractor will cover its use for delivering farm produce and collecting return loads as you propose. The only stipulation is that its use must be entirely in connection with agriculture.
You should charge 2s. or 38. per sheep or lamb, according to whether you carry eight or six.—S.T.R.]
Hauling Hay on a 2-tonner.
• The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3511] Sir,—I am a regular reader of The Commercial Motor and would be pleased if you would give me the following information :—The addresses of reliable clearing houses at Newcastle, Liverpool, Manchester and London. The overall length allowed by the law for 2-ton vehicles. What would you consider to be a fair charge for the haulage of hay in 2-ton lots, a distance of 35 miles, returning empty, the vehicle being a 2-tonner? T. R. WARP. Darlington.
[The charge you should make for the haulage of hay in 2-ton lots, over An outward distance of 35 miles, with no
prospect of a return load, depends (a) on the weekly mileage you are covering with your vehicle, and (b) on the profit you consider you should earn.
If the weekly mileage be 300-350, then your vehicle actually costs you about 85. per mile to operate, and the actual cost of the road journey will, therefore, be £2 6s. 85. Assume that a further expenditure of Bs. 4d. is involved in establishment costs, and the total cost to you of the journey is £2 10s. For a profit of 10s., therefore, you must charge £3, which is equivalent to SOs. per ton.
The maximum length of a four-wheeler is 27 ft. 6 ins. The names and addresses of some good clearing houses are as follow : London : Carey, Davis and Thomas, Ltd., 145, Kingsland Road, E2, Walter Gammon, Ltd., 85, Ghiswe.11 Street, E.C.2. Allan Simpson, Ltd., 16, Water Lane, E.C.3. Liverpool and Manchester: Ex-Army Transport, Ltd., SO, Drury Buildings, Liverpool.
I am not acquainted with any clearing house in Newcastle, but you miglet try J. Blaney, Imperial Garage, Sunderland Road, Felling.-S.T.R.]
A Lorry and Trailer Proposition.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3512] Sir,-I am considering running a 8-ton lorry with 5-ton trailer to Cork via Waterford, a distance of 180 miles,
The lorry and trailer will be loaded to full capacity (II tons) on the outward run. On the return run empties will be carried.
The outfit will make three runs to Cork and back per week, a total, distance of 1,080 miles. Do you think this scheme practical?
I should be grateful for your assistance in this matter and would welcome a copy of your Tables of Operating Costs to enable me to work out the costs.
Dublin. F. COTTELL.
[I see 110 reason whatever why the contract you have in mind should not be carried out, provided that the times occupied in loading and unloading are not so long as to make it impossible to do the distances named, but I presume that you have taken that into consideration.
For your guidance .1 have calculated that the approximate total cost of operating the 6-tonner and trailer, under the conditions you name, will be £45 per week, which is equivalent to 105. per mile. That, of course, is not the figure at which you must do the work for your customer. Your price must be greater than that by the amount involved in the running of your business and by the profit you wish to earn.
If, for example, the former amounts to £2 per week and you desire to make a profit of £7 per week, then your charge must be one shilling per mile, calculating the charge on the total distance out and home.-S.T.R.]
Insurance and Hire Purchase.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
135131 Sir,-1 shall be glad of your advice on the following point :-I have a Leyland lorry on which I owe about £70 to the hire-purchase company, and which I have not used since March 24th, when both licence and thsurance expired.
As I have not been using the lorry I have not renewed the insurance policy. I heard nothing about it from the finance company until recently, when I received a letter stating that unless an insurance policy is taken out immediately the company will claim the lorry. As the instalments are up to date, would the
company be entitled to do this? HIRE PURCHASE. London, E.3.
[It is probable that your hire-purchase agreement provides that you shall keep the vehicle insured, and that if you fail to comply with any condition the hire-purchase company shall be entitled to terminate the agreement and take back the vehicle. If that be so, the company would be entitled to take back the vehicle on the ground that you have not insured it.
Although you are not using the vehicle on the road it is essential that you should insure it against loss or damage by theft or fire, even if, for the time being, you do not insure it in respect of third-party risks. We
strongly advise yon to take out a policy immediately and to produce it to the hire-purchase company. You must, however, be very careful to see that the policy is extended to cover third-party risks before the vehicle is driven on the road, as omission to do so would render you liable to heavy penalties under the Road Traffic Act,-ED.) Carrying Bricks at a Loss.
The .Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3514] Sir,-Being a regular reader of The Commercial Motor, I beg to congratulate you on the very valuable information it conveys to its readers.
I am in business as a builder, etc., and have purchased a 30-ewt. tipping wagon for my own use. Business becoming slack, it is engaged at the local brickyard when I do not need it. I find by reading your useful notes that I am not being paid enough for the work my wagon is doing to show a profit, according to your Tables and my own comparison.
These are the prices that the local brick company is paying to haulage contractors with 30-cwt. machines. These wagons carry t00 bricks (a little over 2 tons). and payment is made per 1,000: Single journey.
Miles.
Bedlington to Newcastle ... 13 12s. per 1,000 Morpeth 8 8s.
Blyth 5 7s.
Hexham .. 36 20s.
HazeIrigg ... 11 118. „
11
.13
11
I make out these prices, according to my bookkeeping, to be about 31d. per 2-ton mile, which I know
is too small. BUILDING AND HAULAGE. Bedlington.
[If you were to obtain twice the prices you are getting for your brick haulage you would still be unable to make the work profitable, and I think that you would be well advised to cut out the work altogether,' since it is not paying as much as it costs you to run the vehicle. The long-distance run to Elexham is at the rate of 25. per mile, hardly paying for petrol and oil.-S.T.R.] Are They Operating at a Loss ?
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3515] Sir,-We are regular readers of your valuable journal, The Commercial Motor, and should be glad if you would kindly give us your expert opinion on the following.
We are running two subsidy A-type Maudslay lorries between Leighton Buzzard and the London docks, each doing five journeys a week, an approximate distance of 500 miles per, week per lorry. They take a 6-ton load to and from the docks and each lorry earns a total of £22 10s. per week. There is one driver to each, at a wage of £3 10s, per week, and the petrol consumption averages 1-7 gallons a day per machine.
The vehicles are kept in good order, are equipped with pneumatics, and the latest types of carburetter and magneto.
There is often a long wait at the docks, and the usual heavy traffic to encounter in and out of London.
According to the Tables you have given we are out of pocket ; we should be glad of your further advice.
Leighton Buzzard. INQUIBERS.
{The best thing I can do to help you is to set before you your own actual figures of cost for each lorry. They are as follow (per week) : Petrol, £4 5s.; licence, 17s. 65. ; wages, £3 102.; rent and rates, say 12s; insurance, 10s. : tyres, £4; maintenance, £2 10s.; depreciation, £3; oil, 5s.total, £19 9s. 65. To that amount you must add :El per week for interest on first cost before you are justified in claiming to make a profit on Your venture. That is to say your minimum costs are £20 9s. Od. per week, so that you have a ealance of only £2 Os. 65, to pay your establishment expenses and allow for profit. Another way of locking at this problem is as follows :You are receiving 450s. per week per vehicle travelling 500 miles per week. It is known that it is impossible to operate 6-ton lorriee at a profit at 1s. per mile.-S.T.R.}