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 
NIANUFACIURER FEEDBACK
Page 184
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Since the road test, versions of F10 to similar spec have been fitted with gearbox having a 'stronger' detent. Choice of eight or sixteen speed gearbox depended on the customer and the dudes the vehicle had to perform. In our experience fleet customers preferred the eight speed which matched comfortably with the torque characteristics of the engine. The sixteen speed box was therefore offered as an option to those operators who felt that there were efficiency benefits to be obtained and that these could more than offset the increase in weight and cost of the sixteen-speed box.
It is difficult to comment on the 'rust' point mentioned because little is known of the vehicle in question or its history. However, as a general statement, the level of 'anti-corrosion' treatment has been substantially improved over recent years and this includes the use of galvanised panels in hitherto 'vulnerable' areas.
Again, it is difficult to comment on the fuel pump problem as no history is availableit would appear to be an isolated case.
The F10 4x2 tested in 1982 should not be compared with the F10 which is available today. In fact, the F10 of today has few, if any, of the major components included in the F10 tested.