AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

■ Iew regs turn operators nto weight watchers

8th August 1975, Page 38
8th August 1975
Page 38
Page 39
Page 38, 8th August 1975 — ■ Iew regs turn operators nto weight watchers
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

Tim Hoare

SIGH OF RELIEF from the jority of bodybuilders can expected on January 1, r6. That's the date when the ;is changes for defining the ight of vehicles requiring hgv licence. Always proed the Parliamentary proses are completed in time, hgv licence will be necesy when a vehicle is under tonnes gross—instead of, at present, under 3 tons laden (as required by Article )f EEC Regulation 543/69).

The industry will become pectable again," one bodyElder commented to me.

[his rating change has been 3ected for two years, but ly became a certainty after tam's massive "yes" to the C referendum.

[Cs a change which will take ay from bodybuilders much the responsibility for getting -Jew vehicle below the preit 3-ton limit. Equally, the ponsibility for making sure operates within 7,5 tonnes )ss will be placed on the )ulders of the operator.

3odybuilders will, however, II be very weight-conscious in building boxvans, since the change will be losing the operator something like a ton in payload capacity.

Bugbear

From the bodybuilder's point of view the main bugbear has been the wide variance in unladen weight of the bare chassis from one vehicle to another of the same type. And there is no doubt, of course, that while the old limit has encouraged new design techniques and the use of new materials in order to get below 3 tons it has also led to a wide variety of abuses and rather wide interpretations of the law.

Perhaps the best known examples of this are vehicles equipped with a light-alloy floor which would not support the weight of a bag of crisps and which, after weighing, is then fitted with a plywood "overlay." Another dodge is to have the chassis fitted with a light platform body which is then weighed, fitted with twistlocks and a container which then acts as a conventional van body.

The limits within which the bodybuilders have been compelled to work have often been so fine that even the addition of a simple option like rear dampers could make all the difference, and it has not been uncommon for bodybuilders to have shortened the chassis and body to compensate for this.

Advantages

The advantages of the new limit include the possibility now of a more rugged specification which will make these lightweights more suitable for longer distance work, For example, the only vehicle which can operate within the 3-ton limit with a six-cylinder engine with comparative ease is the Bedford KE. With the new limit, however, the Ford D0710, Commer Commando RGO8 and Leyland Terrier with optional six-cylinder engine are all practical possibilities. Most of the manufacturers have been producing 7.5-tonne vehicles for some time.

British Leyland is offering a spring conversion for the Terrier 750 and also new 7.5tonne plate for when the regulations become operative. The company has also, of course, been offering a 7.5-tonne version of the Terrier.

Bedford too has been offering a "down-plating" service for operators of the KD range, currently plated for operation at 8.5 tons. Like the Terrier the KD can be modified by a change in springing and by fitting the wheel and tyre equipment from the KC.

Ford's D07 series are already designed for 7.5 tonnes and no changes or options are being made available for any other vehicles in the range. The same applies to the latest vehicle in this category the Commer Commando RG08. Provided the supply situation eases the Commando should come into its own from January. Its comparatively advanced specification has not enabled it to get below 3 tons unladen with any degree of certainty.

Construction

Actual construction is unlikely to see any major change. Imperial, for example, plans to change the side-pillars, which at the moment are tophat pressings, to an alloy extrusion which is already used on their larger van bodies. Apart from the extra strength which will result there is also the advantage of being able to use parts standardised throughout the company's range. Another possibility is the substitution of galvanised steel longitudinal runners for the light-alloy ones currently being used. Again the extra strength is an advantage but so also is the standardisation which results (because steel is also being used on the larger vehicles) and also a possible cost reduction.

One body-builder who does not anticipate making any changes to its range is Hawson Garner. The company has had the benefit, in some ways, of introducing bodywork suitable for the 3-ton limit about three years ago. Starting with a clean sheet of paper, the company designed the body on air craft principles as integral unit rather than a platform with cladding. A major problem has been the use of rollershutter doors which have been left open when the vehicle has been running unladen. This has often caused the body to lozenge quite severely because of the weight of the folded roller concentrated in the upper part of the body.

Hawson Garner got around this problem by building the rear frame from steel which provided more than enough strength to prevent distortion.

Equipment

It will also be possible, of course, to incorporate more optional equipment into simple bodywork designs. There have been criticisms in the past of lack of load security, again because of the necessity of keeping the weight down. This is no longer a valid argument and there should be no excuse for not having some form of load securing device.

Different types of bodywork should become more feasible provided, of course, that bulk rather than weight are the main requirements of the operator. The previous limit allowed some vehicles to operate comfortably up to 8.6 tonnes (8.5 tons) without the need for an hgv licence so the new limit will not favour those operators who are currently using their 3-ton vehicles at near the gross limit.

Perhaps the operators likely to benefit most from the change are those engaged in refrigerated transport. At the moment such operators are restricted to a payload around 2.75 tons. Depenc on the type of refrigeral equipment used this payl could be increased to betw 3 and 4 tons. The change law also allows a wider clic of reefer equipment to fitted. Dry ice, liquid nitro and some forced-drau evaporator systems have been found to be the rn suitable for a multi-drop (1 delivery programme. ( bodybuilder who specialises the manufacture of ref: erated bodies is Zeromol and marketing director I Camfield sees the wide use more sophisticated syste• possibly extending to eutec plate systems (a sort of st age heater in reverse).

Many units are now be powered direct from vehicle engine in order to s; weight, but after January one would expect the wi use of a separate donl engine as a more effici power source.

Reefers

As for other operators E cylinder engines are likely become the norm but for • reefer operator chassis E body length will also ben, with increases of up to 1. (4ft) being possible.

In conclusion operators mi be reminded of the licensi anomoly which results fri the change. Many curri vehicles with unladen weigl of less than 3 tons gross considerably more than tonnes, so there will instances where a driver v require an hgv licence al January 1 for driving a vehi, with a plated weight Ugh• when compared with what was driving previously.

A likely solution to ti problem is the addition another licence category whi will be issued to drivers w can show that they have be habitually driving vehicl below 3 tons unladen grossing more than 7.5 tone gross for six months or mc during 1975,

Tags

People: Tim Hoare

comments powered by Disqus