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 
OPERATOR EXPERIENCE
Page 167
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
DAF FT2500 DHS 4 x2.
ORIGINALLY TESTED: 8/1/83.
ENGINE: DHS 825. 244 bhp. GEARBOX: ZF S6-90 12 speed, BACK AXLE RATIO: 5.03:1.
TESTED GVW: 32.5 tonnes.
OVERALL RESULTS: 7.42mpg/40.82mph. ORIGINAL TEST REPORT PLUS POINTS: set new fuel economy record (at time)/highly respectable overall speed/low kerbweight/ 'willing worker, easy to drive/good torque at low revs/good gearbox/light clutch/progressive action brakes/low cab noise/'extravagant seating equipment'.
ORIGINAL TEST REPORT MINUS POINTS: second gear not smooth to engage/ long park brake release delay/no VISAR fuel economy device option/heating and ventilation system inadequate/insensitive heater controls with no illumination/poor cab stowage space/no steering wheel adjustment.
OPERATOR REPORT Operator 1 is part of a multi national organisation. He has over 300 mixed vehicles on high street distribution. Operator 2 is contracted out to a high street retailer. He has 50 vehicles operating in his customer's livery.
Operator 3 has 10 Daf vehicles under contract to a large knitwear organisation on high street distribution.
The one common factor the operators share is that they are all engaged in lightweight, high volume, high street distribution. They all felt that the vehicles 244 hp rating was ideal for their operation. All three praised the performance and torque levels of the vehicle. Reliability was another key factor for their operations and all commented on the high reliability levels of the Daf.
Operator 1 stated that his drivers liked the vehicle. They felt that, with a low weight operation, the performance was good and cab comfort was high.
Operator 2 runs a mixed fleet and also felt that his drivers preferred the Daf cab to that of rival makes. He also felt that the majority of the test report minus points were not relevant to his operation.
Operator 3 did say that his drivers had complained of the poor performance from the cab heater and the lack of stowage space. However, he felt that, in the main, they were happy with the vehicle.
Fuel consumption returns from the three operators were all between 7.5-8mpg which they all felt was satisfactory.
Service from the dealers and the cost of service items and replacement parts was felt to be good. Operators 1 and 2 tended to maintain the vehicles themselves once out of the warranty period. Operator 3 had all his maintenance work carried out by his local dealer.
Operator 1 and 2 had both experienced heavy brake wear and had experimented with different brake linings. They felt that they now had the problem under control. Operator 3 had a clutch and a compressor replaced under warranty and could remember only 'minor and niggly problems since then'. Rusting on the door sills and been experienced, however. Interior door handles breaking was another complaint mentioned by Operators 1 and 2. This was put down to the number of different drivers a vehicle had. Both ran a 24 hour operation and both felt that their vehicles stood up to it extremely well.