Let the Operator Advise the Maker
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
An .Important Manufacturer, Two Dealers and a Haulier Approve the Suggestion of Better Co-operation and Raise More Interesting Points No Doubt as to the Advantages By Geoffrey Cozens (Deputy Managing Director, Conromer Cars, Ltd., and Karrier Motors. Ltd.) I HAVE read with interest the articles appearing recently
in " The Commercial Motor " under the heading " Let the Operator Advise the Maker." Not that the subject is a new one, which, surely, is far from the case. Operators have done and do conSta,ntly advise the maker: but the approach is new, and if it results in the formation of a panel or committee of operators' engineers, who are able to reconcile the divergent and often conflicting requirements of their industry, and are able to speak with one voice for the operators, then that, certainly, will be a great step forward, 5.nd one which will be welcomed by all commercialvehicle manufacturers alike.
That some of the contributors should infer that. vehicle manufacturers resist au.gestions from operators, or even build vehicles just as they think they should be built and without reference whatever to the operators' requirements, must come as a great surprise to those who, for years prior to, the war, maintained staffs of service and sales representatives, and, in certain cases, special technical liaison engineers, both in the British Isles and abroad, to keep up the closest possible contact with the users. It is ridiculous to suggest that manufacturers, particularly the volume manufacturers, are not continually sifting and collating this information for the use of their technical staffs responsible for vehicle development.
No manufacturer aiming at a reasonable voluirie of business could hope to produce any vehicle of a given weightcarrying capacity that would meet every operator's needs, and present specifications undoubtedly represent a fairly, accurate cross-section of the users' ,requirements, including the important question of price, which has been touched on but lightly in this correspondence.
I do not consider that standardization between individual manufacturers should be over-stressed, as this would tend to limit that degree of development in our industry so essential if we are successfully to meet world competition. Obviously, the first steps towards establishing an organized exchange of views between operators and manufacturers must be taken by the operators themselves, to ensure that the proposals are acceptable to all classes of user, large and small, 'and cover all conditions of road vehicle transportation. When this is done, I have no doubt as to the advantages both to • operator and' manufacturer. and the operators may be assured of a cordial welcome 'and an honest attempt to interpret their needs in the most practical mann&., Include Dealers in the Panel
By T. Marriott-Moore,
THE views eipressed in the series " Let the Operator Advise the Maker" have proved most interesting to me, and the entry of the manufacturers into the discussion nearly completes the circle of those concerned. So far, however, no one has spoken on behalf of the third party—tte dealer himself. Here, to my 'mind, is the perspn most competent to act as liaison man, because, after all, he is the man whose view and experience are the more varied, and the one to whom the customer conies with his complaints and whose business suffers if they be not handled efficiently and promptly. With his clients handling a wide variety of jobs with the,average type of driver, he is the one who knows thoroughly the weaknesses.and strong points of the nianufacturers' products.
As Mr. Palmer Phillips states in his contribution to this debate, the manufacturers " have always endeavoured to keep a finger on the pulse of what might b.e called user opinion," and their contact men are constantly referring to the dealers for their opinions. 'The dealers themselves are constantly on the look-out for better ideas and often express themselves very forcibly on *9.9
'points which concern their customerst. well-being and satis
■ faction.
I would suggest, therefore, that dealers' opinions should next be sought, on this problem—their s-iews should be very valuable.. Certainly, I fail to see why our friend Mr. Faro should have omitted them from his proposed panel, and the majority of the contributors, so far, from their sugges tions. Any problem which -affects road transport also affects the dealers, and as we have all been partners in the job of keeping the road wheels turning during the difficult years of war, so we should all co-operate in the year of _ reconstruction which lie ahead.
That Institute of Road Transport Engineers
By John Hutchinson (Fred. Robinson (Transport), Ltd.).
Asa" road 'transport engineer.'" I was interested in the suggestion of Mr. J. H. Vincent (London Carriers, Ltd;) ,• in "The 'Commercial Motor " dated October 20, that the Editor 'should lead his influence to assist in the formation of the " InStitute of Road Transport EngineerS," a body, which, in my opinion, Watild eater for the " maintenance engineers " who,. by their Skill and zeal, have risen to the position Of " fleet engineer' " and yet, owing to their lack of " academic qualifications, " are ineligible for admissiOn to those institutes which cater for
this class of engineer. .
An Institute; such as is suggested, has unlimited possibilities, in so far as the latest -technical knowledge and details of developments 'may be' imparted, together with an interchange of . ideas, methods of maintenance and experience of the reclamation of worn parts, etc. Discussions could be arranged from which suggestions could be forwarded to manufacturers' in connection with their products, and they would carry a weight which no individual could expect to aspire to.
• A basiS for admission would have to be formulated,-and here are my suggestions:—
The applicant to be is time-served engineer (this Might be waived in certain instances) : to have full charge of the maintenance of a fleet with a .minimum carrying capacity of 200-250 tons (maker's-rating), or a minimum fleet of 25 p.s. vehicles (any type), or be an engineer of a public . commercial garages with facilities to maintain the equivalent of one of the aforementioned fleets.
Now, you engineers Who can fulfil these qualifications, why not forward your na.thes, with brief details of your, experience, etc,, together with Your ideas and suggestions, to tile Editor, who will then be able to gauge whether there is the demand for an " Institute of Road Transport Engineers," and do not forget-that it should prove of equal value to the large and the small fleet engineer if we are 'successful in its formation.
Distributors Often Consulted by Makers •
By Thos. Housley, M.I.M.T. (Housley's)
I HAVE been keenly interested in the articles appearing in " The Commercial Motor" under the heading " Let-the Operator Advise the Maker." Whilst I agree with most of .what has been, said, I would like to point out that there are some manufacturers 'who do 'appreciate and Welcome the advice of the operator.
I have the good fortune to represent, as distributor, a manufacturing concern' the polity of which has .been, and still is, to consult its distributors as to,, the requirements of . the operator before placing a new model on the market. This.policy has been fully justified in the new Vulcan 6VF 6-tonner, hich is giving such excellent service and satisfa ctinn.
. I would like to congratulate "The Commercial Motor " for directing the thoughts of the industry to the very vital subject of co-operation between the manufacturer and the Operator.