AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Opinions from Others.

10th August 1916, Page 21
10th August 1916
Page 21
Page 21, 10th August 1916 — Opinions from Others.
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?

American Competition.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL M-oToR.

[1378] Sir,—On every side we hear of organization to.,meet competition after the war. Generally it is discussed with a view to eliminating the German and all his works from our daily life, and surely this is a desirable object.

Our preparations, however, to be complete, should include measures designed to enable us successfully to compete with all corners not perhaps so much with our Allies—a basis for mutual agreement with them might readily be fixed upon after discussion—but with those who, whilst not actually against us, have not shown themselves to be very energetically for US. Much has been said about the enhanced productive capacity of this country owing tomunitionsrorgan. ization. It seems to be overlooked that the United States has, owing to the demands of the Allies, been able probably to increase output to almost the same percentage of increase, and that without the expenditure of money on wan—Yours faithfully,

" ENGINEER."

Types of Two-fuel Carburetters.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[1379] Sir,—My attention has been drawn to a letter appearing in your issue of the 3rd inst. from Messrs. C. sinks, Ltd.

I do not intend to enter into any controversy or further correspondence on this matter, and only wish to state that the King paraffin attachment, as fitted to the Zenith carburetter and the Smith carburetter, employs the well-known principles of the Zenith carburetter and the Smith carburetter, and its success is partly due to these principles ; how it is possible for Mr. Rinks to make the ridiculous suggestion that these principles were invented by himself passes my comprehension. Would it not be as well for Mr. Binks, before making these assertions, to be quite clear and fully understand what he is writing about ?

Although we start up on petrol through the agency of the first jet, directly the suction increases this is automatically cut out, therefore avoiding the turning of any taps which rely on the judgment or otherwise of the driver to do so at the,psyChologibal moment.

We have had the opinion of a large number of wellknown experts on this invention, and they not only think it Cr novel," but distinctly one of the main features of the invention, as it eliminates the human . element which is so essential under modern conditions.—Yours faithfully, LAWRENCE KING AND CO., LTD: C. F. LAWRENCE KING, A. M.I. A.E., Managing Director.

Coal-gas as Fuel.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[1380] Sir,—Your Editorials and article on the possibilities of coal-gas as fuel have been of great interest, but we may be pardoned for thinking that neither you nor Mr. Tookey have made the most of these opportunities for helping those in difficulties over motor transport now. The rubber-tired steam Wagon is surely the best way of avoiding petrol troubles both now and after the war.

Coal-gas fuel would be an interesting experiment, and possibly more successful than the other petrol substitutee, though we greatly doubt it. You have named some of its disadvantages, and we think few users would suffer these for the problematical net saving in running cost.

Taking the case of a user with a 4-ton petrol lorry now running 6 miles to the gallon at 2s. It is calculated, theoretically at least, that he would be able to run 18 miles on 3s. worth of coal-gas and thus save 2d. a mile in fuel cost.

As, however, the gas cylinders for only this 18 miles fuel supply will weigh nearly 1 ton, the user must cut down his paying load.and,'therefore, his earnings by 25 per cent. Users can calculate how much this would be, but we should say it is a loss of at least 4d. a mile, and certainly enough to turn the calculated saving into a loss. If the user still tried, as many would, to carry 4 tons as before breakdowns, costly stoppages and big repair bills would be frequent. As, in any case, the wagon would always be loaded with 1 ton of dead weight, maintenance is sure to be more costly

The drawbacks of r-equiring a gas work S with compressor plant every 18 miles or less, of training present drivers to handle gas at 1800 lb. per square inch pressure, of the dangers of this used in vehicles in unskilled hands on public streets and of sacrificing body space and height for the cylinders, etc., need only be stated.

Rubber-tired steam wagons for loads of 3 tons and upwards, though somewhat heavier in tare weight than petrol vehicles, have always been much more economical, as fast, more•reliable, and longer lived.

Why not, then, advise..,hose having such loads to purchase a rubber-tired steaniawagonwhich will run on gas coke, or on coal if preferred; and save from 35. per cent. to 50 per cent. of petrol running costs while giving better service? This will be much more profitable to them than experiments with coal-gas or any other petrol substitute, both now and after the war. and even if it means laying off a displaced petrol wagon, will still pay.—Yours faithfully,

ALLEY AND MACLELLAN, L.

Sentinel Motor Wagon Works, Shrewsbury.

The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.

[1381] Sir,—Referring to the article on " Coal-gas as Fuel for Internal-combustion Engines for Commercial Vehicles" which appeared in your ISSUe of 27th July, we note that Mr. Toekey expresses the opinion, that " probably the power of the engines with coal-gas would not be seriously reduced, if at all, compared with that given on petrol."

It may be of interest to state that we recently carried out a comparative test with gas obtained from the local gas works, the calorific value of which we understand to be about 510 B.T.U., and find that, at from 600 revs, up to 1500 revs., coal-gas showed 75 per cent. of the power shown by petrol. We also found that the consumption per hour on a 36 h.p. engine came, out at about 600 cubic ft. per hour.—Yours faithfully.

For COMMERCIAL CARS, LTD., II. UNDERDOW.N, Managing Director.

Tags

People: Tookey, Toekey

comments powered by Disqus