Opinions from Others.
Page 20
Page 21
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects conflated with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be on t.ne side of the paper only, and type-written by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for the views expressed is accepted.
Commercial-vehicle Design: Epicyclic Gear and Engines Down Below.
The Editor, " THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR."
[9°81 Sir :—Without going into the many peculiar views held by your correspondent " A.E.A.N1.T." upon points in American commercialvehicle design, which views he puts forward without any arguments for their support, but merely as somewhat dogmatic statements of opinion, we should really like to ask him a direct question concerning two points raised by him. As we are not guilty —or only partially guilty--of the enormities which your correspondent is so horrified at, we can discuss the point from an academic point of view without any " vested interests " to consider.
Our first enquiry is—why Mr.
denunciation of a Tcrtical motor under the driver's seat or foot-boards? According to him, to carry out such a design would be " deliberate attempt at commercial suiride," yet the Austin Co., the Wokeley Motor Co., the Argyll Co., and a number of other firms, and, in fact, nearly every new aspirant, to fame in commercial-vehicle work, is pursuing this—according to " A.E.A.M.T."— suicidal course! We may say that, were we called upon to fit a vertical motor, we should have no hesitation in putting it under the foot-boards, for we can see no valid reason why, if a V-type engine will work satisfactorily—as it does—in this position, there should be any different results with a vertical engine. As we are more than doubling our trade of last year now with a V-type engine beneath the foot-boards, it is plain that " commercial suicide " does not lie in this direction. Your correspondent does not suggest that it does, but we are puzzled to see how, if we set MY cranks at the more conventional angle of ISO degrees, " commercial suickle "is more likely to follow than if we set them at eo degrees as now.
Our next point is in regard to the use of epicyclic gears for loads over 25cee. Why does Mr. "A.E.A.M.T." make this distinction? Why does he draw the line here—or anywhere in fact? He admits that such gears " when well designed "—and we are only speaking of well-designed gears —are suitable for chassis to take loads up to 25cwt., and he makes this broad and dogmatic assertion : " above this, the fitting of such gears is unwise, especially for country work and for greater loads than 25cwt. ; he should have the ordinary sliding gear, etc.". But he does not tell us why! We are nut making vans for loads above 25cwt., so we can ask him to explain why, if we should find our business extend to larger-load vehicles, we should be " unwise " in adopting a form of gear which, after nearly three years' experience, has proved unequivocally and absolutely satisfactory? When gears of this type, as we have proved, can show absolutely no signs whatever of wear after 15,000 miles' use in vehicles ranging in load capacity from to to 2ecwt. in the hands of novice drivers, and when we can say—as we can say and prove—that, in the whole course of our experience with this type of gear—as we design it on " Lotis " cars—we have never yet had to replace or repair a single part of our gearing, or had a single complaint concerning it, we entirely fail to we why, if suitably proportioned for its work, such a gear should not be equally satisfactory under larger loads, and, were we proposing to build vehicles of larger calibre, we should have no hesitation whatever in adhering to our present system. Indeed, so entirely satisfactory has our experience and that of our customers been, we should never even contemplate doing anything else, and we should really very much like to know what experience " A.E.A.M.T." has had with " well-designed " epicyclie gears, upon chassis for loads over 25cwt., which causes hitn to make the positive statement, that, for such work, the fitting of such gears is " unwise."—Yours faithfully,
SIVRMEY N1OTORS. LTD.
Coventry.
The Editor, " Tim COMMERCIAL MOTOR."
[ooe] Your correspondent "A.E.A.M.T.," in discussing the type of American commercial vehicle, does so, no doubt, with the knowledge he has imbibed from the American paper for which he is English representative. As English representative of the other, and I believe prior established. American commercial motor paper, I should like to point out that there are other vehicles besides the Packard that place their engine under the bonnet, and which use water cooling. I would mention the observation-car chassis turned cut by the American Motor Truck Co., the light postal vans turned out by the Overland Automobile Co., of Indianapolis, anti one or two others. Also, from a list I have before me of the internalcombustion-engined vehicles carrying 8,000 to to,000lb. weights, I note that of 13 patterns all have four-cylinder vertical engines, all are water-cooled,
one has four speeds and reverse, nine three speeds and reverse (six of which are of the sliding gear type), and only three have epicyclic two-speed gears.
1, of course, do not pretend to compete with " A.E.A.M.T." in knowledge or in initials, but does he put the Darracq cabs running in New York in the category of cheap vehicles?—Yours, etc., Purley, Surrey.
Users' Experiences (VII).
The Editor, " THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR."
1910] Sir :—We have once again managed to get through a fair alHOUIlt of work for the week, despite the weather, which has been exceptionally trying. The state of the roads has been quite abnormal, after the continuous fluctuations of snow, frost and thaw, and in places it was almost impossible even to walk, owing to the greasy mud which lay on the surface of the road. Local snowstorms have trapped us on more than one occasion, causing unpleasant delays. Under the circumstances, I think we have managed to compile a very creditable log sheet.
We had the opportunity of testing a petrol lorry (luring the week, and comparing its performance with that of a steamer. Being accustomed to be snugly tucked behind a warm boiler, with a good canopy over us, it came as rather a shock when we felt ourselves being whirled at 12 miles an hour, against a biting north wind, without a vestige of protection. We were little better than icebergs when we got home, and one of the boys is still in bed trying to thaw a cold he contracted. There can be no question that rubber tires absorb a tremendous amount of the destructive road shocks, and they must add to the life of the machine, as well as making it possible to run in any kind of weather. We felt there was rather a want of elasticity in the power, as compared with a steamer, and this was particularly noticeable when we got amongst the hills. I would suggest that manufacturers of steam motor wagons should turn their attention to a wagon which would constructionally resemble a petrol lorry, having vertical single-acting highspeed engines, and with the cycle so arranged as to keep the connecting rod always in compression, no glands being required. Superheated steam to be used, and a fire-tube boiler in preference to a flash boiler, and the gearing to be after petrol-lorry practice. As far as I can judge, a innchine on these lines could be run on
certain classes of work with at least the same financial advantage as the present type of steam motor wagon, and one would, moreover, have the special advantage of a bigger radius of action, and probaoly fewer failures due to vibration. I do not believe that such a machine as I have indicated would supplant the present type of motor wagon altogether, but it certainly would be the best means of dealing with the higher-rated classes of traffic.
It is my opinion that the use of rubber tires should have a direct bearing on the cost of the upkeep of the roads, which it is essential motorwagon users should do all in their power to minimise. They should also save the trouble with any policemen who trouble about 5m.p.h.
I have been discussing the question of drivers, in previous letters, and there is one point on which I have omitted to touch, namely, how far (Evers should be held responsible for any fines which may be imposed upon them for any breaches of the law. This question would be very touch simplified if magistrates imposed such fines as a man earning, say, 365. a week could afford to pay; but, unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, they have got the impression that a motor wagon must be fined in proportion to its size and value, and the fines imposed are of such dimensions that to insist on a driver's paying them is impossible. This imposes an unfair burden upon motor-wagon carriers, who are open to the risks of having to pay large sums of money for indiscretions of their drivers over which they have no control. I invite vou, Mr. Editor, to enlighten us as to how Far an owner of a motor can be held responsible for the action of his servant, and to what extent magistrates are justified in imposing fines of such magnitude that they must necessarily be borne by the owner. [See first page of this issue.—ED.] As the law is administered at present a motorwagon driver who exceeds the speed limit by a mile an hour (or less) is dealt with much more severely than the drunken husbano who hammers his wife most unmercifully and neglects his children. Tn one district we pass through, a police officer has been detailed on the sole duty of watching motors, and securing lines for overweight and overspeed. I hope next week to give some particulars of this gentleman's methods, and to invite an expression of opinion from you as to whether it is not time such a state of affairs was ended.
The following is our log sheet for the week : earnings, 452; mileage, 728; tonnage, 13S; percentage of work done, 96; coke used, 7 tons 6owt.; oil (gear) 14 gallons ; and oil (cylinders), 4 gallons.—Yours, etc., [The Thames steam lorry was designed and constructed according to petrol-vehicle general arrangement. This was exhibited at Cordingley's Show of DK and our report (issue of the 21)th March) contains descriptive particulars. We are unaware that this type has been sold to any great extent, thongh of nndoubted interest. -Fe.) The War Department's Trials.
The Editor," LIE COMMERCIAL MOTOR."
19I 11 Sir :—As one who was present during the 1901 military trials, at Aldershot, I have followed your recent reports with great interest, and I am sure that many of your readers will heartily agree with your remarks in regard to the application of such tractors for many haulage jobs outside military operations. Your unique illustrations of the passage of the bog in the Long Valley are most convincing, and they should go far to prove
that transport by tractors of this class is a practicable undertaking over virgin country, whether the weather be dry or wet. All who recollect the tests of December, 1901, must agree that considerable strides have been made, and I look for the day when these long-distance machines will be more generally employed in this country. It is largely a question of price, as .4:975 is a bit " tall "for an engine which cannot draw more net load behind it than that which a steam lorry can carry upon its own platform. We, in England, have not the same opportunity to turn to account the particular merits of the Thornycroft and Broom and Wade machines : those qualities must appeal much more directly to our Colonial brethren.
I want to send six copies of " No. 210 " to friends of mine abroad, and I beg that you will spare, for the the general issue, six copies of tile supplement. —Yours faithf ully, "CONTRACTOR." Nk!wcastle-on-Tyne. We have had pleasure in supplying copies of the supplement, as desired.En.)
The Editor, " TILE COMMERCIAL MOTOR."
1912] Sir :—The table of consumptions in this week's issue has greatly
interested me. The difference between the totals for the two machines with in engines is not nearly so great as I should have expected, having in mind that one of the engines has a single 81-inch cylinder and an 8-inch piston-stroke, whilst the other has four 6-inch cylinders and a 7-inch piston-stroke. The large percentage of " low-gear " work, consequent upon an excessive overload, would, however, partly account for No. to's heavy consumption. But what of the difference in water consumption : No. 4, 4.53 gallons ; No. to, 194.25 gallons? Yours, etc.,
Aldershot. H. PrILEN. [No. 10 used water inside the cylinder as well as for cooling.—En.] Yorkshire Makers of Petrol Vehicles.
The Editor," THE COMMSRCIAL MOTOR."
t3J Sir :—Our attention has been
drawn Jai an illustration on page 25 of your issue of February 251h re Manchester Show. The illustration is of " Karrier " cars, and the title is "The only Yorkshire petrol-built vehicles at the Show." We believe that Sheffield is still in Yorkshire, and think it worth while drawing your attention to the error, lest it should create an impression that " Churchill " vehicles are not Sheffield built. As we believe you are aware, the whole of the " Churchill " chassis (with the exception of the engine, which is an Aster)
is built at these works, and, as we re gard the matter of locality of works as of considerable importance to the buyer, we shall be glad if you could draw attention to the error above referred to.—Yours faithfully, For DURHAM, CHURCHILL AND CO., FRANK CHURCHILL.
Grimesthorpe, Sheffield. r We apologise for the slip. The line should have read "in the heavy section" : Mr. Churchill's ve hicles were shown in'the :Stain Hall—En.