Ford Transcontinental H A4231 tractive unit at 32 tons gcw
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
TAKING Ford into the heavy category for the first time, the Transcontinental was introduced earlier this year. Spanning the 34 to 42 tonnes (33.5 to 41.3 tons) categories, the truck range uses cabs from Berliet, engines from Cummins, gearboxes from Fuller and axles from Rockwell—all assembled at the Ford factory in Amsterdam.
The particular model from the new range that I have just finished testing was an HA423I artic designed for 42-tonne operation—the first of the Transcontinentals to be available for a full test. At Britain's 32 tons gcw it is not in its normal element, which would more typically be long-distance Continental work.
Performance
Although the Ford was one of the most powerful trucks ever tested by CM with its Cummins engine delivering 227kW (308bhp), it did not feel like it from the driver's seat. It was only when the stop-watch readings were checked that it was obvious how well the truck had per formed. In the cab there was no sensation of speed at all, so smooth was the application of power.
With the particular rear axle ratio fitted to the test truck, the Transcontinental had a maximum speed (pulling speed as opposed to overrun) of 100km/h (62mph) at which it would cruise all day. On M6 section of the test route from AS to the Forton lunch stop only four changes of gear were necessary. The notorious Keele "slow lorries" section was completed in top gear with a minimum speed of 79km/h (49mph)—but I have to add that for the first time in many tests I had a clear run at the hill.
That the Ford had power in abundance was made quite clear during the performance testing at MIRA. The hill restarts on the 1 in 6 and 1 in 5 gradients were easily disposed of, but the 1 in 4 proved impossible owing to wheelspin. In spite of the fact that the diff-lock was engaged and the test hill surface was dry, wheelspin prevented a restart. A minor redistribution of the load (the rear axle clocked 9,310kg (9 tons 3cwt)) might have helped, but I doubt it.
One of the hills used to check the truck's performance on the road, the Carter Bar climb on the England/Scotland border, was scaled in the fastest time ever recorded-4 minutes 24sec. This is around 20sec faster than the previous best, and the Ford managed the gradient without even going into low range in the _Fuller gearbox.
In terms of overall roundtrip journey time the Transcontinental improved marginally on the figures recorded by the New Generation MercedesBenz reported in last week's issue. But with a difference of only a few minutes in around 16 hours this difference is
Above: In spite of its size . Ford Transcontinental proved v easy to handle on the ( operational trial.
rather academic being so ( pendent upon traffic con tions.
Thirsty
Regrettably this performan was paid for in terms of fi consumption. With an over figure for the round trip 2.09km/I (5.9mpg) the Fc was about the worst in tl department that CM has test in recent years. Although t extra wind resistance of t container would not ha helped I was still very d appointed with the fuel cc sumption results. Many tinin the past a high-power
gight Two-piece spring-mounting 'rackets ease shackle-pin changng. Owing to the high-tensile arength of the steel used for the :hassis, ample warning against frilling is displayed.
:ruck has returned good fuel igures because the engine had peen operating well within its :apabilities necessitating fewer Jown-changes. This was not :rue of the Ford.
Whatever the type of road, :he fuel consumption was about the same—on or around the 6mpg figure. The severe A68 section gave a stage figure Df 1.98km/I (5.6mpg), which . was creditable. However, the easier "40mph section" of Al gave only a minor improvement to 2.12 km/1 (6.0mpg). Disappointing perhaps, but at least consistent.
Driver comfort
The cab of the new Ford heavy must now be regarded as one of the market leaders in terms of keeping the driver happy. Apart from the fact that the sheer height of the cab will probably make him feel superior to his other colleagues on the road, the cab comfort will certainly appeal to him. The seats, for example, were upholstered with cloth panels, which made them extremely comfortable throughout the variable weather conditions of the test.
Cab visibility was first class with it being possible to see over the top a most trucks if it was difficult to see round them. One difficulty I encountered with the Ford was that when I had the seat correctly adjusted for driving comfort as regards height I was looking directly at the trim of the cab above the screen. This meant that I had to duck slightly to see more than a few hundred metres in front of the truck. I have the same problem when driving Berliets, which is not really surprising when you think about it.
The' instrument layout of the Ford, where the needles of the gauges all read 3 o'clock when the systems are functioning normally, worked very well indeed. The briefest glance across the panel was all that was necessary. This is the sort of commonsense ergonomic thinking which is long overdue in many trucks. • The noise level inside the truck was very acceptable, but this particular model strengthened my theory that Ford is building no two trucks alike in terms of noise insulation. To date I have driven six Ford Transcontinentals of varying specification, and the variation in in-cab noise level has been mystifying. The road test model was very quiet at cruising speeds with the Cummins grumble deepening to a mild roar when full load was applied.
In spite of the large frontal area presented by the cab, the lack of wind noise was remarkable—and it was very windy indeed during the first leg of the road section.
Ride and handling
In spite of its bulk the Transcontinental was a very easy truck to handle—the excellent power-steering helping in this respect. I wonder how much the straight-line precision coupled with an easy action around the corners can be attributed to the twin-ram power-assistance?
On all types of road surface the suspension coped very well, giving the driver a very easy time. On some sections, however, a slight pitching motion was induced which seemed to originate from around the fifth-wheel position —it made the outfit ride like a drawbar combination in certain instances. Very little roll was evident 'from the driver's seat when cornering.
• The braking figures recorded at MIRA on a dry track were acceptable, but not outstanding. The trailer axles locked each time, which obviously did not help, and the stopping distance of 37.6m (123ft 21n) from 64km/h (40mph) was below average.
Maintenance and accessibility
The Ford cab tilts to 70 degrees for major overhaul although the usual level checking can be accomplished without this. In fact the Ford has an instrument system which allows the driver to check the oil level, water level and etectrics without getting out of his seat. He merely presses to the left a switch on the panel above his head to check that the warning bulb is working. If this lights he then presses the switch the other way—the warning light comes on if the fluid level is low but stays off if all is working. As a "belt and braces" arrangement the driver can use a dipstick in the normal way for checking the Oil, but as this particular component on the Ford is about 6ft long I don't think the driver will use it very often.
Maintenance or rather the reduced necessity of maintenance is one of the main advantages that Ford is claiming for the Transcontinental. Such items as oil-rather than grease-filled wheel hubs are hoped to reduce maintenance and down-time costs.
One interesting detail of design is the spring-bracket mounting. These are in two pieces and this eliminates the necessity for burning out old shackle pins should the need arise.
Summary
It is extremely difficult to write a full report on the good and bad points of the Transcontinental as the major advantages of the machine as stressed by Ford, ie, durability and reliability, are features which cannot be appraised sensibly in a three-day test. Certainly there are many points in the design which show that a lot of thought has gone into reducing operating costs through down-time. The reputations of the various proprietary components are well known-it remains to be seen how well they work in the new Ford package.
In terms of performance this particular model, which toyed with the gross weight of 32 tons, was very impressive. Its round-trip journey time was among the fastest ever and this was accomplished with little or no driver fatigue. The high kerb weight of the Transcontinental range (this test model weighed over 7 tons) will obviously make the Ford management cross their fingers as to if or when a 38-tonne maximum will be introduced. At this increased limit the few extra hundredweight for the chassis will be insignificant.
On the debit side, the overall fuel consumption of 2.09km/I (5.9mpg) can only be considered as poor.
The basic price of the Ford Transcontinental HA423I as tested was £13,600 without the fifth-wheel. Several optional extras were specified on the test model, which included centre passenger seat at E67.40, twin bunks. at £164.15, radio at £87.50 and 450-litre fuel tank at £58.15.