LEAVES FROM THE INSPECTOR'S NOTEBOOK.
Page 11
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Which Is the Hardest Model to Perfect? To Pneu or Not to Pneu ?
SALESMEN at Olympia will, by now, generally have reported that there has been a considerable volume of inquiry for the two-tonner and not a little for machines carrying about 10 cwt. less. Some of the leading manufacturers are already giving increased attention to the two ton chassis, either by pushing ahead with the production of an existing type of this capacity or, on the drawing board, to the evolution of a new design to fill the gap. All this activity is distinctly to the good, but it raises several interesting points for discussion, and particularly does it remind us of the extraordinary dissimilarity between the Ford one-tonner, or, shall we say, such a conversion set as the Baico-Ford to take two tons, and such sturdy machines, for instance, as the Leyland or Dennis two tonners. There is a vast deal more than 2 cwt. difference in the designs. The contrast between them, as a matter of fact, is almost absurd. One or the other is unnecessarily light or heavy, and I am not at all sure wherein lies the fault.
It remains to-day, and as a deduction from the contrasts noted in the previous paragraph, that it is a most difficult task to produce the ideal 30 cwt. model. And yet it is 'one for which there is a very useful demand. The 30 ewt. model should be a lot "heftier" proposition than the Ford conversion and its associates, and it should be a very great deal lighter than the Dennis or Leyland or any of the other accepted two ton models. It must be designed for the load from first principles. The facts are that the available British-built 40 cwt. machines all yield strong evidence of having been designed "down" from a long line of sturdy and bigger brothers, whilst such . attempts as have been made in-the past with the one tonnes represent design "upwards" from touring car practice solely.
The fight moderate capacity van chassis has, in my opinion, yet to be designed, but it wants tackling de novo and by someone who can discard touring car dimensions and who is not obsessed with the need for great tare weights and exceptional strengths. The 30 cwt. machine is the most difficult one-to tackle from the designer's point of view, but that it can be tackled with success is shown by the recent production of the 23 cwt. Albion, and, when the relatively small load gap betwen the Ford one-tonner and the British vehicles mentioned is considered, the difficulty of this 10 cwt. either way task requires no emphasis.
The one-tonner is; of course, a model that definitely requires pneumatics; not so the two-tonner. As to what is the best " footwear " for the intermediate size I am not persuaded, although I am inclined to favour the pneumatic • single all round. That is one of the many points that want thrashing out before we can produce a 30 cwt. model—a type for which many people are asking who regard existing two-tonners as too heavy and powerful for their jobs.
It is, of course, possible to find Yankee machines of capacity rated at 3,000 lb. load, which is the American's wdy of saying 30 ewt., but that such machines are not what we should produce on British lines of thought, it is unnecessary for me to remind " C.M." readers. There is variety enough in the lighter American " truck" designs—and that not only in names—but they are obviously not the types that are going to take hold of British users, who, very often, it would appear, know more about what they want than the American can guess of what they should have. I do not look for the 30 cwt. solution from across the Herring Pond.
It is an interesting question—Which is the hardest model to design ? I unhesitatingly suggest the machine for 1 ton net loads. I do not mean the twotwiner running light or the one ton conception staggering under an extra 10 cwt. And, at Olympia, it was conclusively demonstrated that an increasing number of people -want something on 30 cwt, lines— but they must be good lines !
To Pneu or Not -to Pneu ? The Owner-Visitor to Olympia Proves Cautious.
The "stunt" that has been most in evidence at the Olympia Show has, undoubtedly, been the pneumatic tyre. We have had a tremendous lot of propaganda and opinions ,from the tyre people and a considerable amount of more guarded suggestions in the columns of the technical Press—and precious little from the user. Now we have had the advantage of the bluntlyexpressed comments el users, and particularly chara-basscs users, from all parts of the country • who attended Olympia in great numbers.
It has been the writer's privilege to talk to a considerable number of these owners, men who now know what-it is they can make most money out of. In the vastmajority of cases they are interested in the proposal, buts to say the least of it, are very sceptical as to the money-earning side of it. They say, in effect, that the claims of the tyre -companies that increased speed is possible is bad propaganda, and that any attempt to push the pneumatic on that score should be sternly discountenanced.
They admit The possibility of added comfort, but question its necessity at proper speeds. They admit that they may save much in maintenance on badlybuilt or ill-designed chassis, but doubt if the saving would be traceable on first-class machines. The charasbancs owner thinks if big pneumatics have a chance it is only on 'ehars-a-bancs. Generally speaking, he dislikes the giant type for its appearance, its weight and unhandiness, and he is obstinate as to the
illeffects of punctures. He scoffs at the tyre makers' disclaimer of the possibility of punctures. He says that may be true for a thousand or two miles, but that he will seldom be running on new pneumatics. He rather inclines to the twin if he has a preference, but dislikes the certainty of stones between them— of which he is quite certain—arguing from his own twin solids. It has to be remembered the owner here, as a rule, has not a lot of use for figures and facts from America alone. They carry actually no weight with the British user. He wants facts from Lancashire oi Durham!
But what disturbs him most is the additional prime cost—a matter -of several hundreds, all in. He is obstinately certain that he will not see it back. He declares he will have to reduce fares next year, not increase them!
The few orders that have been placed are for experimental sets on single-deck buses and chars -a'bares, and until data are available therefrom, no general move towards their adosstion can be expected. The writer, so far, knows of a set of 23-seater charasbancs twins that are on their -say to 9,000 miles.