OPINIONS and QUERIES
Page 52
Page 53
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Gas Producers Successful in Australia. Attractive Hotel Buses. The Danger of Follow ing Through. A Suggestion for a Bus With Front-wheel Drive. Making Best Use of the Various Advant ages Afforded.
Gas-Pro-ducer Vehicles in Australia.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
• [3189] Sir,—We were very interested to read a short
article, in a recent issue of The Commercial Motor, on the question of the use of producer-gas, and in this connection think you would like to be acquainted with the results which have been obtained in Australia with the Guy gas-producer vehicle.
For the past two years the Committee of Mechanical Transport of the Development and Migration Commission has, through its Producer-gas Sub-committee, been carrying out trials on a Guy 2-ton producer-gas lorry over a distance of approximately 2,800 miles.
To give some indication of the performance capabili ties of this Guy vehicle, a trip was made to Mount Danclenong on June 20th, when the vehicle was carrying a total load of 2 tons 11 cwt. A distance of 26-i miles with a total rise of 1,460 ft was travelled in 2 hours 18 minutes, at an average speed of 114 m.p:h., on 81 lb. of charcoal. The return trip was made in 1 hour 37 minutes at an average speed of 15.9 m.p.h. on 714 lb. of charcoal. Thus, the fuel consumption works out at 1.13 lb. per net ton-mile.
The vehicle has since been taken over by the transport section of the Postmaster-General's Department and has formed one of the units in the Melbourne fleet.
As a result of the trials, the sub-committee considers that the use of producer gas obtained from Australian charcoal offers an economical and effective alternative fuel to petrol for commercial vehicles, more especially in parts of the country far removed from the seaboard, , where imported fuels are dear but where waste wood for the production of charcoal may be plentiful and cheap. R. BISHOP, Wolverhampton. Publicity Manager.
For GUY MOTORS, LTD.
Making Hotel Buses More Attractive.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3190] Sir,—As motor body builders specializing largely in the construction of small shooting-brake and station-bus bodies, we were very interested to read the article by your coachbuilding expert on 'Attractive Hotel Buses" which appeared in the issue of The Commercial Afotor dated September 9th.
Whilst we appreciate the points raised about handsome appearance, we would like to ask the author where customers can be found who will pay for the extra cost of building bodies to such designs. Our experience has been that the factor of cost plays a very important part in deciding the body lines and specification. Your expert suggests that The modern small bus should have the panels extended a few inches below the top of the chassis ; but for every inch by which the body line is thus lowered there must be a corresponding increase in the cost of construction.
The least expensive of the types of body illustrated appears to be the one at the top of page 123; even this, however, is not very cheap to construct. The roof rail—presumably for light luggage only—is shown on the part of the roof extending from the windscreen to the first window pillar ; the cantrail, therefore, would
c30 have to be stiffened up considerably to carry this load, and we think also that the windscreen pillars would need to be much stronger than those shown in the sketch, to prevent any possibility of trouble. We would be interested to learn what your expert considers would be a reasonable price for building and mounting such a body on a 80-cwt. chassis, complete and ready for the road, including a modern floating dash, the advantages of which are well known. These criticisms are not, of course, intended in any destructive spirit, as we would naturally prefer always to build bodies with high-class lines if only our customers would pay the price! J. E. G. HARWC-OD, B.A.. M.I.M.T., Director, London, S.W.4. For K. M. SINCLAIR AND CO., LTD.
[We fully appreciate the points raised in this letter, and we value most highly criticisms coming from the actual producers. The great problem is, of course, to educate the buyer and to prove to him that the extra initial expenditure is more than counterbalanced, by the publicity value afforded and the additional comfort provided for the. passengers. A good proof of this is afforded by the increasing luxury of the vehicles operated by hotels on the Riviera, each proprietor vieing with the others in giving the finest service.—En.] Our Warning Regarding Beet Haulage.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
1:31911 Sir,—I have read with very great interest " S.T.R.'s " article in the issue Of your excellent journal dated August 26th. The warning which is • given therein to hauliers, re the beet industry, is sound and timely. I should be glad if you would send me your Tables of Operating 'Costs as I am greatly interested in the haulage of beet and am convinced of the sound policy of adhering to a table of charges. I consider that your tables are invaluable to hauliers and contractors and are worked out most precisely.
Great Easton. STANLEY G. SCOTT.
The Dangerous Practice of "Following Through."
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3192] Sir,—May I, through your columns, draw attention to an extremely dangerous practice on the part of drivers of motor coaches? Four times recently. between Basingstoke and Bagshot, I narrowly escaped being hurled off the road because of the following procedure: Two covered coaches are driving along, one behind the other. The driver of the first pulls out to pass a slower-moving vehicle, seeing that he has just time to do so without incommoding me—advancing in the opposite direction. The driver of the second coach, however, whose view of the road is completely blocked by the first coach and the slower-moving vehicle, pulls
out immediately and follows the first coach. The result is that by the time the first coach has regained its left-hand side, of the road, the second coach and myself are due for a head:on collision. It was only frantic and furious braking on my part that averted disaster in each case.
On the first occasion r did not identify the coach
In any way, but the next two offenders were brown and cream vehicles proceeding to Torquay, and the fourth proceeding to Bournemouth.
I am sure that the criminal folly of this practice of "following through" only needs to be pointed out to coach drivers for this danger to be averted, and I suggest that the people who should do so are the proprietors and managers. I have always found myself that motor-coach drivers are a very good type of man, sensible and alive to their responsibilities. I am sure that only ignorance is the cause of this bad driving.
As I frequently travel this way over the week-end, it is my intention, if such 1..)d driving occurs again, to complain to the police. I trust, however, that publicity in your columns will be sufficient to abolish this extremely dangerous practicer May I add, finally, that I am not exactly a novice, as I have been driving since 1911'? N. C. DIBBEN.
London, W.11.
[We urea with Mr. Dibben that the practice to which he refers is a very dangerous one, and we have already dealt, in a leading article, with the grave error & driving coaches in convoy formation.—En.]
The Possibilities and Advantages of Frontwheel Drive.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR. .
[3193] Sir,—There appeared in The Commercial Motor dated August 5th, 1930, an article on "The Possibilities of Front-wheel-drive Chassis," explaining the difficulties to be overcome and the advantages to be gained should such a change of chassis layout be adopted.
One paragraph of this article is very interesting from the body designer's point of view: "The most outstanding advantage that the change-over of driving media offers is, of course, the fact that frame design woula be entirely free from restrictions imposed by the requireinents of a normal transmission layout.
"The floor level would be determined by the depth
of the frame required, combined with adequate road clearance for the underside of the members, and. not as it is in normal designs, by the height demanded over the rear axle, "Another advantage is that propeller shafts, with :their attendant centre bearing, would not be 'required ; this should then tend to give quieter running. Further, it would seem that, a reduction of weight should 1),:e effected."
The advantages made possible with the front-wheeldrive type of chassis are, in my opinion, coincidental with the future tendencies in passenger vehicle design, namely : (1) Strength ; (2) lightness; (3) low height ; (4) greater comfort. I believe that these features can be more easily incaporated in body design for frontwheel-drive chassis than in body design for even the latest types of chassis of normal construction.
. Towards the end of your article, when discussing the difficulties of distributing' weight over the f.w.d. chassis, it is stated : "One way out of the difficulty would be to carry the engine and driver right in front of tile wheels, the position of the clutch, gearbox and final reduction being behind the engine instead of in front of it. This, however, involves unsightliness:" I am taking the liberty of-sending you a drawing of a f.w.d. chassis of the Bumpier type, with a conventionally shaped saloon body mounted upon it.
The seating accommodation is slightly reduced, owing to the forward position of the engine, causing a restricted overhang at the rear, which, if increased, causes the overall length dimension to be greater than the 26 ft. normally permitted by the Ministry of Trans
port regulations. [This can be increased to 27 ft. 6 ins, in special instances.—Ed.]
In my opinion, however, the general appearance of the vehicle does not seem Festhetically incorrect, and any slight divergence from conventional shape is amply made up by the advantages brought by .suchtrans gression. DONALD C. OnAnsLEv. Weston-super-Mare.