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 
These 40-tonners can squash all protests
Page 60
Page 61
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
VE DON'T BELIEVE it's possible ) put commercial vehicles in ome kind of points-system :ague table as each has its relave merits.
What a series of tests like this an do is to highlight the strong nd weak features of each ehicle. Even at 40 tonnes gross le Bedford, DAF, Ford and 'olvo were working below their esign weights and were never 1 any difficulty.
The Foden was nearer its limit ut nonetheless returned by far le best overall fuel consumpon, and the results also conrmed the reputation of the Deroit Diesel 8V-92T as a thirsty nit.
How much a vehicle drinks is nportant of course, but it's cerlinty not the only criterion by ihich vehicles should be Aged. Remember the TM4400 ower and torque ratings are lassive and if you are looking )r a vehicle to beat all records ver hills like Carter Bar, or the alian Alps for that matter where is designed to operate then the M4400 will do you proud.
At a time when there is much ;tionalisation in the commerial vehicle industry, it was sur prising and refreshing to find such variety in the specifications of the tractive units the manufacturers supplied. They came with from nine gears to 16, constantmesh and synchromesh; singlereduction and hub-reduction rear axles; two-stroke and fourstroke engines ranging in cubic capacity from 11.6 litres (708cuin) in the DAF to 14 litres (845cuin) in the Ford, with superchargers, turbochargers and intercoolers, but, significantly, none naturally aspirated.
A more general conclusion that can be drawn from the te3t results is that a 40-tonne-gro, ; weight limit makes economic sense.
With a tri-axle semi-trailer, our axle loads at 40 tonnes were generally no more than they are at 32.5 tonnes with a tandem axle semi-trailer, yet even with a tilt trailer weighing about three tonnes more than our usual flat test trailer we were able to carry around four tonnes more payload.
The extra fuel needed for that in the Foden's case, for instance, was just 68 litres (15 gal). Over 1,199km (746 miles) that works out to 50 miles per gallon with a
four-tonne payload. Even the Mini Metro can't match that!
An EEC Commission has proposed a formula for taxing goods vehicles not according to their unladen weight, as at present, but according to their road damage factor.
This factor is calculated by adding up the fourth powers of a vehicle's axle weights and dividing by the vehicle's gross weight multiplied by ten. If this scheme was adopted, then 40-tonners with tri-axle semi-trailers, such as those we tested, would be taxed less than current 32-tonners with tandem-axle trailers.
The respective road damage factors are 58.9 and 60.1 — surely this destroys the myth that heavier gross weights would necessarily cause more road damage.
What about the visual intrusion of heavier vehicles? There is no way of being certain, but it's reasonable to assume that nearly all the people who saw our five vehicles on their way to Scotland and back had no idea that they were laden to more than the normal limit.
This is a view backed up by the attitude of the police who stopped us on a few occasions (usually because of the trade plates). Only one wondered how much weight we were carrying.
Yes, the outfits turned heads in towns, but new vehicles with brightly painted semi-trailers that even if they are unlade!'
Some people argue that a 4 tonne weight limit is not enoui and that we should go straight a 44-tonne limit with three-a) tractive units that inflict evi less road damage. But mc operators would not be able take advantage of that nE upper limit until they could place existing vehicles with E pensive new equipment.
Our tests confirm that tracti units that are currently bei operated at 32 tons gross col. operate at 40 tonnes easi safely and indeed more ecor mica! ly.