Opinions from Others.
Page 19
Page 20
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Subventions !or Contemplated
Brazilian Motor Lines.
The Editor, TOR COMMERCIAL ?therms 1,293] Sir,—There is one little slip in the paragraph under the above heading this week, which is doubtless a printer's erne:, but which makes a considerable differeuee to the proposition mentioned. You state that the value of the Milreis is " about 4s. 6d." This is an error. The vs tie111. the Milreis has been steadily appreciating now over a. period of some years, and has varied in the rate of esehange between Is. and is. 6d. It has now been lixed by Government, within the last few weeks, at Is. .Id.
We happen tcr know .something of the Subvention matter referred to, and except for the fart that the Government has in mind the ultimate heavy adoption of motor vehicles ter transport work by the commercial community, and is looking ahead to that end, it does not interest motor manuiacturers at present, but it does interest those engaged in road-construction husiness.—Yours faithfully, STURMEY MOTORS, LTD.
Mb January, 1911.
Road Transport by Carriers.
The Editor, THE COMMKRCIAL MOTOR.
[1.294] Sir,—In the second part of your excellent. review ()I' the uommercial-motor world, which appeared in your issue of a fortnight ago, you state, in reference to motor haulage by carriers in the north of England, that, contrary to general belief, there are not many " plums " in this class of enterprise. Whilst this statement is undoubtedly correct., as to the general experience of Lancadiire carriers during the past. 12 months, the causes which are hinted at, far the absence of the plums, only represent a part of the whole general cause which has produced this effect.
The state of trade in Lancashire during 1910 has been one of an acute struggle towards improvement after two rears of extreme depression. Naturally, competition has been keenest this year, as traders struggled to secure their share of the extra trade. Prices have. ruled low, end motor haulage, although still in its youth, has had ti) compete with all the existing forms of transport in the keen tight that has been raging. That it has more than field its own, is evidenced by the steady growth of the numbers of motors owned by motor carriers.
The methods pursued by the Bolton authorities still continue to be a serious cheek upon the free development of the industry in Lancashire; whilst Bolton is absolutely within its rights in demanding that the regulations shall ht4 observed, it has allowed its demands to become oppressive. Its officers adopt a policy of hunting down motors, nnd its magistrates inflict fines for trivial offences, which, although quite legal, are clearly outside the bounds of common equity.
The possibilities of motor haulage in Lancashire appear to he unbounded when the facilities it offers for the quick and direct dispatch of goods arc compared with those of its competitors. The fact that privately-owned vehicles are on the increase is not a factor of serious import ; it is Lot a natural development, which however, is not likely seriously to impede the progress of the carrier. The business of maintaining a regular service by motor vehicles on tho road is one which will not, in the long run, appeal to ny e hose chief occupation in life lies in other clinnnels. The greatest danger which the road-transport. companies he vii to face at the moment arises from internal and not external causes. Carriers stand in danger of selling their rightful heritage for a mess of pottage; they forget that carrying is a business which requires studying, that there a ra rules to be observed: in selling their labour, if profit is to be reaped. At present there are many newcomers in the field who do not seriously regard these facts; they let out their labour at so much a day, no matter what class of
t ;raffle they are dealing vith. They give away too much to one customer, and, therefore, are !tumble to offer anything to another. No allowance is made for risks, either due to the nature of the work, or to Um class of goods serried ; these considerations are melted down to so much a day's run, or so much a ton-mile. Naturally the public are exploiting this new factor in carrying fur all it is worth, and they are unfortunately blaming the system for the failure which inevitably follows. This is, undoubtedly, the gravest danger to be faced at the moment. It will disappear in time, hut before that day arrives, it may succeed in placing road motor transport upon a very much lower plane in the eyes of the public than would otherwise have been the ease.
Carrying is not a speculative business, and the conditions attaching to it, as a whole are too well known to allow of extravagant rewards; in company with many other industries, it provides for one of the elementary requirements of mankind, and in return, demands a living for itself— for any further return than that it must depend upon the genius of its members.—Yours faithfully, "A LANCASIIIRE CARRIER.”
The Steering Gear of Motorbuses.
The Editor, Lis COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
L1,29:3] Sir,---I am glad to see that someone has taken the initiative, and has protested against the recent suggestions far re-arrangement of the steering gear of motorbuses in order to eliminate a supposed danger. Such accidents as that which occurred in Regent Street, must be avoided at all costs, but. while your correspondent, Mr. Godfrey Brewer, defends the existing arrangement, he does not suggest any improvements. The raked column and low seat would certainly not make for better control, hut might encourage the sleek methods adopted by many smart private-car drivers, where the arrangements lend themselves to their assuming a semi-recumbent position. The motorbus driver must be alert, and for that reason he must be made comfortnble, but not too much so. The Ito ppy mean, I think, would be better attained by a trifle more rake on the steering pillar than is general at present ; a, little easier seat, with. inclined footboards so that there should be as little continuous muscular strain on the driver's legs, arms or spine as possible, would also greatly add to his comfort.
Given a goraa steering gear, and an alert driver, itshould not be possible for anything touching one of the front wheels (unless it be a traction engine) to cause more than a momentary swerve. Apart from the personal factor, steering gears are supposed to be irreversible, but we all know that they never are. Again, the steering of a motorbus is far too heavy, while the backlash which develops in a short time is often excessive. A larger rim means greater leverage, and I think 3Ir. Brewer's 16 in. could be made 18 in_ with advantage. Joints should be larger nod more easily renewable than they are at present, while the worm and segment, or nut, are also open to iniprovement in many instances.
In the writer's opinion, the only really-ellicient steering system for all vehicles, and heavy vehicles in particular, is Renouf's, in which the pivots are contained in the hub. The wheels then require a minimum of effort to turn them, whilst, after a slight deflection, they tend to run straight ngain. With this type of steering gear, too, there is a minimum of stress on the tie rods, etc.. and the pivot is relieved of the twisting stress imposed upon it by the usual type of stub axle.
in the matter of comparative gear ratios in ears and buses, I am afraid Mr. Brewer Inns put the cart before the horse. The steering gears of cars may have higher gear ratios because the effort required to steer is very small, but when heavy vehicles came into u.se steering gears had to be geared low, otherwise the effort required to turn the wheels would have been too great for the driver. Time is not the factor, and, if it were, hoses would need to be geared higher, not lower. Speed, in fact, makes the
effort of steering easier, it is at low speeds that lower gear ratios are required. The ratio of a steering gear must always be a compromise between quickness of action and mechanical advantage, and, undoubtedly, the best compromise is offered by the central-point steering.— Yoors faithfully, GEO. H. CUTHCSII.
"The Circus Tricks of Taxi-drivers."
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,296'i Sir,—Yours correspondent, Mr. P. C. Meers, jç perfectly right, and his letter draws attention to a matter which the writer briefly mentioned during the discussion upon Mr. Critchley's paper, at the R.A.C. last week. As Mr. Meets says: If you give a driver an excessive lock, he will use its—and ruin his cab. This is one of those exaggerated, and wholly-unnecessary regulations which Scotland Yard has indulged in, with a result that the taxicab, considered as a motor vehicle, and as a mechanical production, is spoiled.
By the requirements of this 25 ft. turning circle, the constructor is compelled to employ very small wheels and tires, whilst the stresses thrown upon front axles. wheels, bearings, and steering-gear connections are excessive.
The Wolseley Co., which we believe at one time went heavily into the motorcab business, now refuses to build such vehicles at all, and we ourselves, since Scotland Yard caused us some hundreds of pounds expense to comply with their regulations, and then altered the regulations, have refused to spoil the Lotis cab for the purpose of getting possible London trade, seeing that London is the only city in the world where such eccentric regulations exist. Of course, we should not refuse to build a cab to comply with the regulations, if required, but we should want a very substantial order first, and we have no intention whatever of spending any money in producing an abortion complying with Scotland Yard's requirements on the off-chance of getting orders for it.
A 30 ft. turning circle would be. for all practical purposes. as gond as 25 ft. and would result in an infinitely better and more practical vehicle.—Yours faithfully.
STURMEY MOTORS, LTD.
Heavy Motorcar Axle-weights.
The Editor, TRE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,297] Sir,—I note, since you published my letter (No. 1,282) in your issue of the 29th ult., several other letters have appeared on this important -subject.
" Motor-Wagon Carrier " draws attention to the hardship caused by fines of k10 and upwards which are inflicted on drivers. Such fines, surely. are for a third or fourth conviction, or where the owner is also the driver. The tare weight was retained, in 1904, to make a clear distinction between a traction engine weighing 12 tons in running order and a motor wagon, with its load selfcontained, of the same total weight. if " chassis weight " were to be substituted for the term " unladen weight " the same distinction would be preserved and ninny of the present difficulties removed.
" No Ambiguity " points out how certain Lancashire boroughs have acquired expert knowledge of the limitations under which steam wagons are permitted by their hostility to heavier forms of steam traction. Their contention is that a large volume of traffic, with resultant wear of their roads, has been sanctioned by the Motorcar Act. hut which traffic does not concern the goods or vehicles of their own ratepayers. who. thereby, have been called upon to Lear the extra cost. Appeals to the County Council result in no adequate help. The law having laid down definite restrictions to safeguard the road, it is only logical that the authorities should say-very well, you may pass over our roads with eight and four-ton axle weights at five miles an hour, but if you exceed, by so much as one hundred weight, over the maximum axle-loads, or by 100 yds. an hour your legal speed. we will inflict such penalties that it won't be worth while to attempt any evasion of the restrictions. " Registration," as noted by you, has misread Article V.
Section 2, which states " the slim of the registered axleweights of a heavy motorcar shall not exceed 12 tons." In the case of a tractor and one trailer, the tractor is a heavy motorcar, and, provided it weighs under five tons empty, and has wheels of the requisite diameters and widths, it may weigh 12 tons alone. The trailer and load may be eight tons total—four tons per axle.
" Puzzled " raises the same question as " Registration " which is answered above. I regret I cannot haul 12 tons net with one driver. because of the limitations explained in my letter. I see no reason why I, or anyone else, should not move 20 tons gross with only one man provided it can be done with safety to the public and without damage to the road. " Puzzled " need not apologize even if he is in error, as the Motorcar Act is difficult for any user to interpret. For example, what is the maximum speed allowed for the following machines: a rubber-tired tractor with back and front axle-weights of four tons and two tons respectively. running alone ; a rubber-tired trailer and a steel-tired trailer ? Further, how would you paint these speed limits on the tractor? " Sad But Amused " should cheer up and refer the Local Authority to Article II of the Statutory Rules and Orders, 1904, where it expressly states in the definition of axle-weight " when the heavy motorcar or trailer is loaded." A much-more painstaking official. when this Act first came into force, used to have a steam wagon towed on to the scale empty of all supplies; he then placed 56 lb. weights evenly over the platform until the gross weight was 12 tons, and then refused to register the wagon if either axle had more than its correct proportion. Needless to relate this excess of zeal simply stopped that authority's revenue from registration fees. To summarize the present position under the Motorcar Act of 1904, and its accompanying regulations under the Local Government Board, as applying to commercial-motor
Class A, motorcars, motor carriers, light delivery vans and lorries. Class B and following classes, heavy motorcars. motor omnibuses, large delivery vans and light steam and petrol wagons. Class C, large petrol wagons and steam lorries (rubber tires). Class I), vehicles similar to those of class C but the wheels are fitted with iron tires. Class E. steam wagons, tractors and large petrol wagons if fitted with iron tires. Class F, as for Class E, but with one trailer weighing up to 1 tons. and Class G, special vehicles owned by the Government for military purposes with special unladen weights of six tons for a heavy motorcar and two tons for a trailer.—Yours faithfully, *41N OWNER NEAR BOLTON."