OPINIONS and QUERIES
Page 43
Page 44
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Supporting the Associations.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3927] Sir,—Further to our reeent letter respecting haulage rates, which you kindly inserted, we would like to add that there is not the slightest justification for any firm to join an association, as they only indulge In combating proposed legislation at the expense of members, which is far from being sufficient.
Are the leaders of the Road Haulage Association doing anything tangible to raise the standard of our trade? Are they themselves indulging in rate cutting?
Again, many clearing houses seem to do just as they like with regard to rates, and it is certainly difficult to understand what their policy is in this matter.
The duty of the associations should be to further the interests of the trade and not to waste time and money dealing with proposed legislation.
tif the Salter Report does not go through will we be any better off? We are afraid not, as the policy of wearing the other man out will not benefit anyone. E. CLIFFORD, Director,
Brentford. For Cliffords (Fulham); Ltd.
[Mr. Clifford has raised important points which can best be replied to by the associations concerned. We believe that organizations representing road transport interests are essential because the individual operator is virtually powerless, and surely their members have some say in the activities in which these associations are engaged?—ED.]
A Call for Leadership.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
13928] Sir,—I have read with considerable interest the letters from Mr. W. Wood and Mr. H. C. France appearing in your issue of November 25. They undoubtedly voice the opinion of a very large number of hauliers throughout the country.
I suggest, sir, the calling of a public meeting of hauliers of all grades at which those with constructive proposals to put forward should be invited to do so.
Personally, I should he happy to devote my leisure to any active forward movement in the commercial interests of the haulage industry, which, summarized, appear to be:
(A) Adequate tonnage of a suitable class.
(B) Maintenance of rates at a practical level. (0) Elimination of inter-industry cut-throat competition.
(D) Co-ordination of long-distance goods services.
I am of the opinion that if, say, 500 hauliers representing 10,000 tons load capacity pledged themselves to support a "leader," the situation could be saved and the future of the industry assured.
London, S.W.11. E. H. B. PALMER.
Interesting Facts on Oil-engine Performance.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3929] Sir,—Having read with interest letters regarding the above, may I give my experience of the use and maintenance of oil-engined vehicles, which extends over a period of three years?
You published a photograph of our lorry and trailer over two years ago iniyour journal, and it may interest you to know that this same vehicle has now completed 105,000 miles—the majority of which has been with trailer, carrying loads of 10 to 12 tons. The maintenance cost of the engine of this vehicle can easily he covered by a £10 note, and the outfit is still doing 1,000 miles per week.
I notice in another paragraph that " S.T.R." gives as a reason for increased maintenance cost the fact that the vehicles are driven by inexperienced drivers, but in contradiction of this, I would say that two of my drivers have had no previous experience of oil engines, and have not the slightest idea of mechanics, but find they prefer to drive oil-engined lorries.
You will also, no doubt, recollect publishing a photograph of my recent purchase of a further oil-engined vehicle, and you mentioned the fact that this was a repeat order after two years' trial.
May I add that, although the oil engine is cheaper to run, it cannot be used to obtain haulage business by rate cutting, and I trust that prospective buyers will keep this in mind.
C. G. GREATOREX, Director, For the Burton Transport Co. Burton-on-Trent.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3930] Sir,—With reference to the letter signed by "Maintenance," in your issue dated November 25, may we, as a firm with large experience of the running of the direct-injection engine to which Mr. Goddard refers, be allowed to reply endorsing all that Mr. Goddard has said about the maintenance costs of these engines being extremely low?
We can say that, approximately, the maintenance costs of these engines are less than 30 per cent, of those of petrol engines. After running petrol engines for many years we can only say that the results which we have obtained are astounding. The Gardner oil engine is trouble-free and extraordinarily reliable in every way. It has the advantage of being started by hand from cold and getting away quicker than a petroLengine. If ours can be started in this way, any Gardner can, as our lorries are never garaged, our oil engines and petrol engines being parked side by side as they come in.
.'We can state truly that Mr. Goddard's enthusiasm is 132U indeed well founded. This is backed in our case by over 328,000 miles of running in all weathers and over all kinds of roads. Your correspondent " Maintenance " evidently has had some results from other makes which perhaps have not shown such fine results. Should he care to visit our garage, he can make any test lie wishes and stay as long as he likes.
We have had some experience of steam wagons, and we consider that the fuel cost for a day's running of a Gardner-oil-engined lorry is practically the same as the cost of raising steam from cold on a steam wagon.
As showing our confidence in these engines from actual experience, we may point out that we had the
• first one in July, 1931, and we now have 14, -which we have installed by progressive stages, practically one each Month, the reason for this being that we have overhauled our existing petrol chassis and put in Gardner engines, this without any alteration to gear ratios.
The last wagon we converted was in October, and we are continuing with our conversions as quickly as we conveniently can. " Maintenance " will see from this that we, ourselves, have every confidence in the direct
injection engine. 3. MoLEAN, Darley Dale. For Taft Bros. and Tomlinson.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3931] Sir,—In answer to your correspondent, "Heavies, Nelson," whose letter appeared in your issue dated November 18; I shall be very pleased to have the opportunity of telling him all about the steamers referred to, and if he has the dine to spare I shall be still more delighted to show them to him. If he cares to accept this invitation and can fix a convenient date,
I shall be glad to be of service to him.
With regard to the weights he mentions, I cannot understand why he compares a six-wheeled steamer with a four-wheeled oiler. If he wants a real corre parison I snail also be pleased to show him an oilengined six-wheeled three-way tipping machine, which is heavier than his six-wheeled steamer.
Leeds. E.NtGINEER.
Direct-injection v. Pre-combustion Chamber Oil Engines.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
139321 Sir,—May I be allowed space to reply to Mr. Tangye's letter in your issue of November 11?
I have exchanged letters with Mr. Tang-ye on the matter of consumption, and he agrees that instead of 6 per cent., the difference is 14 per cent., but stipulates that I should obtain an independent test result instead of accepting Gardner's published consumption curve. On any working day, anyone interested can call at the Gardner works and see at least 16 engines on test, each one showing the figure I quoted, i.e., 027 lb. per b.h.p.-hour, and even better.
Mr. Tangye was surprised when he saw the copy of the actual consumption figures, and had no idea that they were so good. Therefore, there is no need for an independent test record.
Taking the other tabulated points, (1) Higher output per litre. This depends on the speed ; one should also take into account the form of the power curve and the speed at which it starts to fall away to the horizontal. Most chamber engines show less power per litre than direct-injection types. For example, the Mercedes-Benz—the best-known prechamber engine—gives 10.08 b.h.p. per litre at 1,600 r.p.m.
The Dorman-Ricardo gives 11 b.h.p. per litre at 3,800 r.p.m. The Tang:ye 92-litre engine gives 13.04 b.h.p. per litre at 1,750 r.p.m., which is high for chamber engines, but at this point the power curve starts to fall away somewhat.
The Gardner six-cylindered engine of 8.4 litres gives 12.14 blip, per litre at 1,700 r.p.m., But the curve 1330 follows up its line; and at 2,000 r.p.m. it gives 13.33 blip. per litre, but this advantage only shows up in size and weight of the engine, not in the economy to the user.
(2) Crankcase dilution. In the latest direct-injection engine there is no crankcase dilution. In some pre-chamber engines there is the opposite fault, i.e., thickening of the sump oil, which causes trouble. (3) The ability to use pintle nozzles may be an advantage, but on the other hand, with proper filtering, no trouble whatever is found with direct-injection sprayers with fine holes. It is a common experience to find these running 20,000 miles without any need for taking them out for examination or cleaning.
(4) All chamber engines require high compression ratios—mostly 151 or 161 to 1, and this means heavy reversal pressures, and therefore Diesel. " knock " (as it is called). A well-designed direct-injection engine should be—and is—much quieter than a pre-chamber engine, working with much lower compression pressure and, therefore, lower reversals.
(5) Ability to run at high speeds. It is interesting to bear in mind that the two makers with the greatest experience in the world limit their engine speeds as follow:—
Mercedes-Benz, chamber-type, 1,650 r.p.m.; Gardner direct-injection, 1,700 r.p.m. Pre-chamber engines made in this country have been tried out without governors, but this was a failure; and they had to be governed. The pre-chamber engine has no more ability to run at high speeds than a direct-injection engine, in fact, rather less. (6) Ability to adapt itself more rapidly to varying conditions, etc. It is generally admitted by the experts that in this matter, the direct-injection engine is superior. If one studies the combustion cycle in the two engines, this is quite easy to understand. The haulage man wants the most ton-miles per gallon _ that he can get, other things being equal (or better), and the direct-injection engine is the one to give him
this. W. H. GODDARD. Leeds.
Every Steam Wagon Finds Work for One Miner.
The Editor, TEE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3933] Sir,—I would like to call your attention to your issue of November 18, page 460, with reference
• to coal used by steam wagons.
would point out that if 100 tons were hauled 100 miles by steam wagons on solids, the coal consumed would be about 5 tons. I should estimate the coal used by rail transport would be about 1 ton 10 cwt.
• In my own case I use 16 tons per week. If all the hauling I do was done by rail it would not make any difference to their coal consumption. I think this point should be stressed, because every steam wagon in commission finds work for one coal miner.
Glutton. L. G. PRITCHARD.
Starting a Milk-collection Service.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[3934] Sir,—Two months ago I purchased a 1929 Chevrolet lorry, paying /25 down, which left me to find £3 12s. 6d. per month for a year ; since then I have worked up a coal round, but I have thought of going in for a milk contract to work within a 12-mile radius. What should I charge? W. SHEPPARD. Trowbridge.
[The charges you must make for milk collection can only be determined with the full knowledge of the conditions, particularly the time and mileage. Your actual operating costs will approximate to is. 9d. per hour and 3d. per mile. If, for example, the work takes you four hours and you cover :16 miles, the total cost will be 7s. for time and 9s. for mileage; total, 16s. To that you must add profit and some allowance for sundry expenses, subsequently allocating the charges pro rata, according to the number of churns and the distance. —S.T.R.