1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220 
The Leyland 240 van
Page 92
Page 95
Page 96
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Graham Montgomerie
DESCRIBED on the preceding pages is the new light van range from the Austin Morris division of British Leyland, encompassing gvws from 1.85 to 2.5 tons. The 240 variant from this range was tested by CM prior to the official launch, with rather mixed results.
The 240, so called because of its gvw of 2.40 tons, was fitted with the low compression ratio version of the 1798cc (110 cu in) petrol engine which develops 49kW (65 bhp) at 4900 rpm.
The sheer straight line speed of the 240 was very impressive indeed. Fully laden on the high speed circuit at MIRA it almost reached 90 mph, which certainly isn't bad for that engine size pushing such a frontal area. In fact, it would probably have gone even faster but the gale force winds were having such an effect on the vehicle that I decided against it.
Admittedly, the 240 took quite a long time to reach this speed, but once there it would charge along.
Fuel consumption
The fuel consumption of the Leyland was tested over a route comprising long stretches of motorway and a lot of stopstart heavy traffic driving. In fact the traffic section of the route was typical of that encountered in urban delivery work, where nothing higher than third gear was used for long periods.
The fuel consumption recorded on the "traffic" section of the route was 7.2km/1 (20.3 mpg) which was excellent for those conditions. The consumption for the motorway section also included the testing at MIRA and worked out at 7.8km/1 (21.8mpg). A fuel figure of this order is exceptional considering that the MIRA tests included stop-start hill-climb tests and maximum-power acceleration runs.
Braking performance
The braking figures of the 240 were not very impressive. Part of the trouble stemmed from the fact that severe axle hop was experienced under maximum braking, as could be seen from the marks left by the tyres on the road surface in the form of dotted lines. I think the brakes were out of adjustment on this particular vehicle as the pedal travel was excessive and there was a tendency to pull to the left after some heavy stops.
The handbrake was very effective, holding the laden van safely on a 1 in 3 gradient facing uphill and down.
In the cab
The cab interior is typically Leyland, with familiar bits from various other vehicles including the steering wheel which is from the Austin 1800. Only one main dial is fitted — obviously housing a speedometer, but also two smaller gauges for fuel and water temperature. Hazard lights are fitted, and there is an in-cab warning light for trouble in the braking system due to low hydraulic fluid.
All the controls are within easy reach and the gear lever is cranked over towards the driver. The pedal positions are comfortable but I would appreciate another inch or so between the throttle pedal and the wheel arch. I don't think anyone wearing shoes larger than size 9 will be able to get more than half throttle with the present pedal positioning.
The two-speed wipers are a good feature, the fast wipe being essential on one day of the test when I ran into a cloudburst on the motorway.
The windscreen washers were incredibly powerful for such a relatively small vehicle. Two twin-hole nozzles deliver a more-than-satisfactor9 volume of water in the wipers. Although the washers are not electrically operated one push on the button is like opening an artery — very seldom was another jet required.
For a panel van there was very little body boom at speed. As the 240 had a low mileage on the clock the mosi irritating noise on the whole vehicle wal. the squeak from the rear suspension a5 the springs settled down, which cleared on each journey after about 50 miles.
One little point which deserves a mention is the pains that BL have taker to ensure that the sliding doors arc draught-free when shut. Along the. tor of each door is a long "toothbrush' rather than the usual rubber sealinf strip, which flexes against the door for E draught free seal. It was certainly mosi effective on the test.
That was one good point which was. rather cancelled out by the poor nearside mirror positioning. From the driver's seat my rearward vision through this mirror was partially masked by the front door pillar and, with the presen1 mounting points, there is very little that can be done about this. Silly.
Handling
I normally discuss handling and vehicle ride in the same section but foi this test report I am making an excep. tion. The handling of the Leyland al speed left a lot to be desired and although much of the test took place during exceptionally windy conditions] am not convinced that this was the whole cause. (Incidentally, the tyre pressures were exactly as recorn. mended).
The wind will obviously have a marked effect on any slabsided van btu the 240 frightened me on several occasions. I found it impossible to drive at my normal cruising speed on the motorway as the effect required to keep the vehicle straight was unreasonable. Although a heater is fitted in these vehicles I can't see many drivers needing it on the motorway — they will keep warm with the exercise required to keep the van from using more than one lane.
I wonder how much the long, narrow shape of the new Leyland affected the handling? Compared with its obvious rivals, the Transit and the Bedford CF, the Leyland is eight inches longer in wheelbase and on average about seven inches narrower in the track.
At lower speeds the handling was quite reasonable, indicating that the wind could have been having a disproportionate effect on the van, although there was still a tendency to lurch at the rear especially over the extreme changes of camber on the MIRA ride and handling circuit. I also think this is a 'vehicle which cries out for power steering as standard.
The 240 rode over all surfaces extremely well. The single-taper-leaf springs on the front had just the right amount of "give" to absorb all irregularities comfortably but without making the vehicle feel soggy to drive. On really bad sections of ro'ad there was no sign of the usual light van tendency to jump from bump to bump the 240 took them all in its stride.
The Leyland 240 is a difficult vehicle to sum up in a few words. I have already gone into the handling in detail and discussed many of the good points of the vehicle but one point in the specification intrigues me. Do operators really want a light van with such a high performance? This particular van had a top speed, fully laden, equal to most medium saloon cars if the throttle was pressed hard enough. Once drivers discover the performance available they will use it to the detriment of vehicle life and fuel consumption. This would be a pity as the Leyland showed itself to be potentially an economical vehicle.
The price of the Leyland 240 as tested was £.1,560.60 (inc VAT).