Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120


17th October 1922
Page 29
Page 29, 17th October 1922 — OPINIONS FROM OTHERS.
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?

. The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be on one side of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.

Hauler or Haulier ?


{20151 Sir,—What is a man who hauls? No, this is not a conundrum, but a really serious question which has caused me much thought lately. Chambers's, Collins's and other dictionaries all bank heavily on "hauler," but that infallible authority The Skoteh," who contributes such interesting notes to your journal, has two columns on Hints for

Hauliers,' " Now, the question is—Is a hauler a haulier, or is he not ? If he is1 which is •hia correct title? If he is not, what is the difference between the -man with an " '' and the man without an " i "I Incidentally, a West of England paper read 1.)37 the undersigned last week spoke about a haulier '7 who had been drunk and disorderly. (He, of course, drove a coal cart and not a motor lorry.) On the other hand, a migrant from Sussex maintained that there was no such man as a "haulier," as carters were called " haulers " in the south-eastern counties.

Perhaps you or " The Skoteh " can say which is which or what is what.—Yours faithfully,


G. E. FROST, Deputy Manager. Poland Street, London, W. 1.

Assembled or Made Under One Roof.


[2016] Sir,—The reply of Mr. Maughfling in your issue of October 3rd to my previous •letter is rather difficult to answer in short compass as it touches so many different points. I will, however, reply as briefly as possible.

First, as to the percentage of " us" who regret there is no commercial motor exhibition this year. It may be correct that the census of the S.M.M. and T. showed less than one per cent, in favour, but this census was, presumably, only of probable exhibitors who are, after all, a small minority of those "interested." Certainly, they pay the piper and are entitled to call the .tune ; the rest cannot grumble, but may regret.

I am not concerned to " boost " American methods as such, but economic laws are the same the world over, and my contention is that it is not economic manufacturing for every small firm to manufacture, say, its own eregines or rear axles, perhaps for several models. What applies to small firms applies to the larger one, although not in the same degree. Mr. Maughfling's statistics are interesting, but not very germane to the question, as: he does not tell us how many of the 388 manufacturers built their own vehicles throughout.

Should think it very probable that a large majority of the 68.4 per cent. were firms which did not adopt standard components, but made unnecessary expenditure on designing, patterns, jigs, etc., -with often doubtful results, and that, if they had adopted the methods I advocate, they might still be in existence and probably flourishing. Comparisons are proverbially odious, and it is a pity to talk of the difficulty of obtaining spare parts for American vehicles. There is, I have no hesitation in saying, far more difficulty in obtaining parts for the older models of English manufacturers who are still in business, than in obtaining parts for a defunct American make built of well-known Isomponents, and for the good reason that the component manufacturers are still in existence, and are able to give service such as few "single roof" manufacturers cduld afford to attempt. After all, the question I asked was briefly : "Js there any good reason for each manufacturer making the whole vehicle under one roof and is there any good reason for decrying a vehicle incorporating specialized components of repute merely on the score that it is "assembled "I I contend again that chassis built or standard components are not merely equal to trucks specially designed throughout, but far better, as they contain the combined brains and experience of many of the finest firma in the industry, are understood by every repairer, whilst spares are always to be had at reasonable prices whether chassis are obsolete or not. I grant that, given the best of components, there is still much room for design in assembling the whole into a good vehicle. Needless to say, my remarks were not intended to apply to such firms as J. I. Thornycroft and Co., Ltd., who did their experimenting at great cost before it was possible to buy components outside. Finally, I may say the question of first cost d'oes not enter into the argument, for there are some pretty poor expensive vehicles in both,categories.— Yours faithfully,


Cable Street, London, E. 1.


[2017] Sir,—In his letter in your issue of the 2nd inst. your correspondent Mr. Maughfling implies that the building of assembled vehicles from specialized components was responsible for the failure of a number of firms in America in the commercial vehicle industry between 1909 and 1919. Mr. Maughfling quotes from an American publication, showing that during the period of 1918 and 1919 there was, approximately, a 25 per cent. increase in firms manufacturing commercial vehicles, and that within a short period after these dates a number" had ceased to exist.

I cannot think that Mr. Maughfling has not heard of the 1919-1020 boom in the motor industry in America, with its subsequent slump, nor can I believe that he has not heard of the subsequent recovery of the industry to-day, which may just as reasonably be attributed to those same methods of using specialized components. It is, I believe, a fact that builders of the highestgrade components in Ainerica have never had such full order books as during the present year, not even exelading the boom period of 1919. Your correspondent asks where purchasers of the vehicles made by those firms which have gone out of business can get service and spare parts. In asking this, Mr. Maughfling scores a point in favour of the specialized component, insomuch as that the component manufacturers have service stations in every State and the necessary service and spares can be obtained very readily.

The purchaser of a vehicle made "under one roof " from a manufacturer who has gone out of business is indeed in a much more unfortunate position. . Mr. Maughfling's remarks at the end of his letter condemning the goods of competitors, whether of home or foreign make, will not help him to meet the steadily increasing competiton from those firms which are taking advantage of the specialized components to assemble into their vehicles.—Yours faithfully,


a, Berners Street, London, W.1.


Locations: London

comments powered by Disqus