AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

TIPPERS AND RIGIDS

10th February 2000
Page 37
Page 37, 10th February 2000 — TIPPERS AND RIGIDS
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?

TESTERS' CHOICE MAN 32.364 YR 8x4 Never mind comparing apples with apples—this year's round-up of rigids Is a veritable fruit cocktail. With one truck from each of three major distribution sectors, the only comparability was provided by the brace of 8x4 tippers that topped and tailed our 1999 testing programme.

First up was Volvo's latest big tip per, the FM7 9x4. Its 7.3-litre engine produces a nominal 290hp in a market where outputs in the 335-355hp range are commonplace, but once up to speed It maintains it easily enough.

With a design weight of 37 tonnes, the FM7 is carrying extra reserves of strength compared with opponents designed to carry a 32-tonne plate, but it still manages an impressive body/payload allowance of 23.45 tonnes.

Our example came with the steelsprung B-ride bogie, and in the ride and handling department it coped well with everything our varied Midlands test route put its way. Driver accommodation was remarkably civilised—maybe even a bit too plush for some operations.

Perceived wisdom says that a large. lazy engine should be more fuel efficient than a small hard worker, but not thistime. The FMTs 8_28mpg overall

itt snatched the F_uro-2 retard for

the class, only to be pipped by the MAN later in the year, but its amazing 10.03mpg on the motorway section remains a target for the opposition.

Our next rigid, and the year's sole 7.5tonnee was a true cosmopolitan. Sold in the UK by Volvo, the Japanese Mitsubishi Canter is assembled in Portugal. Its compact but well thought out and generously equipped cab gives the sort of carlike driving experience sometimes sneered at by fans of "proper' trucks, but the sneering stops at the weighbridge where the Canter is an object lesson in maximising payload.

Fuel consumption was no more than adequate, and the 134hp 3.9-litre four-pot could do with a touch more grunt, but it can still earn its keep in town and country.

Nearly a decade after the rest of Europe, our masters finally let us run two-axle rigids at 18 tonnes. The pioneer was another FM7, propelled on this occasion by the 250hp version of the 7.3-litre D7C.

Again, the Volvo delivered the goods. with a fuel consumption that bettered any Euro-2 17tanner previously tested. A well appointed sleeper cab and a well sorted chassis, complete with electronically levelled four-bag air suspension at the rear, gave a satisfying drive. But the FM7 as tested weighed 1.5 tonnes more than its FI.618 predecessor, which more than wiped out its gain in GVW.

The next rigid to be tested had nothing at all to do with Volvo—or so we thought this time last year. While 6x2s with rear-steer axles are becoming increasingly popular for specialist applications involving farmyards, their use in the high street is still less common, so the Scania P94.260 only had its older brother. the P93, to beat in comparison. But beat it, it did.

Nearly five years on. today's 26Leaner is cheaper to buy and cheaper to run. Extra toys and better sound proofing inevitably carry a weight penatty. but only of 100kg. The improved efficiency of more tightly controlled fuel systems, greatly helped by electronics, meant that the 1999 Scania was an amazing 2mpg better than its 1995 predecessor.

The virtues of Stania's P-cab are well documented and the chassis performed as competently as expected. Our only real disappointment was with the gearbox. The eight-speed unit fitted lacked a low enough gear to start on more than a 20% (1-in-51 hill, while the ponderous range-change gave cause for concern when needed in a hurry.

The second of the year's 8x4 tippers crept in just in time for Christmas. In many ways the MAN 32.364 YR. is the complete antithesis of the Volvo. Rags of power, a true 355hp from its 12-litre engine and a road-optimised "Highway" suspension layout with an air-suspended rear bogie—but a cab which is far from new, although it still does everything required of it.

We started the test dubious of the value of air suspension on a tipper, but the benefits to traction and stability make it well worthy of consideration. Despite its lack of dedicated crawler gear the MAN had sufficient grip and power to shrug off a restart on the 330c (1-in-3) test hill in fine style.

Going back to our earlier comments about large engines versus small engines, the MAN muddied the waters even further with its class-leading 8.32mpg, although it could not match the little Volvo on the motorway section.

Payload is not quite the best in class, but is well on the right side of average. We searched long and hard for something on the MAN to criticise. We settled on the slow steering, which limits progress through the very twisty bits. And, or, that's it.

The cruellest part of any Testers' Choice is picking a winner as it implies the rest are losers. But in this category. at least, nothing could be further from the truth—all the contenders are more than capable of performing their intended functions efficiently.

But a winner there must be. For its all-round mix of virtues, and for simply being a pleasure to drive, we give you the MAN 32.364VFL.

by Cohn Barnett

Tags


comments powered by Disqus