Trying the Transcontinentals
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
by Graham Mongomerie
DRIVERS will love the Ford Transcontinental. That is the opinion I formed of the new Ford top-weight truck after test driving three models from the range in Holland. From the five vehicles available I drove a drawbar truck and a 6 x 4 artic, both grossing 38 tonnes (37.4 tons), and a 4 x 2 artic at the British limit of 32 tons.
The first drive was in an H 4227 truck coupled to a Crane Fruehauf three-axle drawbar trailer. The wheelbase of the truck was 4.5m (14ft 91n) and it was powered by the turbocharged Cummins engine which developed 204kW (273bhp).
The two-speed fresh-air heater provides air to the footwells, the base of the screen and the side windows.
The type of nine-speed Fuller gearbox fitted to the Transcontinental was the RT 9509 C which has a crawler first gear with the remaining eight in superimposed 'H' pattern—not the anticlockwise pattern of the overdrive RTO box.
This had a markedly notchy change which was made worse by the setting of the clutch stop. These devices are very helpful in engaging crawler or reverse when at rest but, on this model, the clutch stop was slowing down the engine too much between upward gearchanges. I got round the problem by not fully depressing the clutch pedal, but this was obviously not a satisfactory solution.
The brakes had a firm pedal action but this was balanced with a very progressive brak ing effort. There was no trace of the "all or nothing" braking characteristics common to many trucks. For a truck which is conspicuous by its sheer bulk, the Transcontinental is fitted with very small pedals— almost passenger car size in fact.
I think the Ford must be a contender for the quietest truck I have ever driven. Even at full load up an incline the engine could barely be heard in the cab, although at the higher end of the speed range the turbocharger whine became very noticeable. Possibly the extensive sound cladding which is used under the cab does not have as much effect an the higher frequencies.
Visibility from the high cab was absolutely first-class—it was the only time I have over taken an F88 Volvo looking down at it! The instrument layout was easy to read but I would have preferred a larger dial for the rev-counter and to have it directly in front of the driver instead of offset. I can think of two reasons why Ford have chosen this layout : the first is the need to keep the "state of the vehicle" gauges such as the oil pressure dial all together to allow the "3 o'clock" system to work, and the other is that a hump in the panel would be necessary if the rev-counter and tachograph were moved to the centre.
The ride on this vehicle was disappointing but I think it was due to the drawbar coupling which gave the combination a very bad pitching motion.
There was no exhaust brake fitted to this particular model, which was a pity as I could have used it to advantage in the traffic conditions.
Totally different
The 6 x 4 artic, the HA 4227, which I tried next was a completely different vehicle. Laden to 38 tonnes it was in RHD form coupled to a tandem-axle tilt trailer from Crane Fruehauf. This Ford was fitted with the 13-speed Fuller box, whose ease of operation was in complete contrast to the other vehicle.
Crawler gear apart, the 9513 operates on the eight-speed range-change principle, with a splitter in the high range. This unit had a very easy action with none of the notchiness apparent on the drawbar outfit. One minor criticism was the very loose range-change/ splitter switch on the gear lever which made it simple to go from overdrive to low range in one easy movement.
This particular truck had the 204kW (273bhp) engine which, again, was very quiet in operation and pulled strongly from well down the speed range. The slide valve exhaust brake fitted to the 6 x 4 worked very well in terms of retardation hut there was a disconcerting delay in response from the foot button when I pressed it. In keeping with the rest of the vehicle the exhaust brake was one of the quietest I have ever used, which meant that it could be used in built-up areas without causing annoyance.
The ride of the artic was excellent although the road surfaces on the test route would not have tested any truck's suspension severely.
The last big Ford I had time to try was the HA 4231 4 x 2 artic in RHD form, laden to the UK limit of 32 tons gross. The gearbox was the same nine-speed box as fitted to the 38-tonne drawbar combination but I had no complaints at all about this particular installation.
Having removed my criticisms in one area this Ford spoilt the effect by being extremely noisy (at least in comparison with the others) at full load. The in-cab noise level was acceptable at medium cruising speeds but it increased rapidly as more throttle was applied.
The Transcontinental cab must be the highest on the market but in spite of this I found it extremely easy to enter and leave. With the latest designs of British and Continental cabs, easy entry is not now a problem, although getting out can sometimes be tricky.
With the Ford cab height a drive: could seriously hurt himself if he missed his footing coming down, so the step design has been arranged at a slight angle and the steps themselves are perforated so at any paint the driver can see exactly where he is putting his feet.
I am in two Minds when it comes to summarising my early experience of the Transcontinental. The drivers will like it—there's no doubt about that. But operators will need to be convinced of the advan tages they are getting in return for the high kerb weight. At 38 tonnes on the European routes this will be a negligible factor but at our tiny gross weight limit it becomes more significant.
As a design exercise the Transcontinental is a very well thought out unit which will have a big impact on the heavy end of the market throughout Europe. I look forward to taking one over the CM Scottish test route as soon as possible.