Opinions from Others.
Page 21
Page 22
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
The Editor invites correspondence on all subjects connected with the use of commercial motors. Letters should be on
one side of the paper only, and type-written by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for the views expressed is accepted. In the case of experiences, names of towns or localities may be withheld.
Shows at Manchester.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR
(1,3181 Sir,—We are quite satisfied with the results of the Manchester Show, the orders booked having exceeded our expectations, and also the previous show held at Manchester. We are of the opinion that the show would have better prospects if held in a more-convenient and central position.
We were certainly disappointed at the small amount of space allocated for commercial vehicles, and trust that in future Manchester Shows our industry will receive more consideration in this respect.
We are not in favour of the holding of a separate show in Manchester for commercial vehicles at the present time.--Yours faithfully, For COMMERCIAL CARS, LTD., R. BARRY COLE, Sales Manager. London.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,319] Sir,—We have not yet had a full leport from our representatives in attendance at the exhibition, but, judging from the large amount of interest by the general public in the different types of Albion commercial vehicles shown, and from the number of inquiries received from representatives of well-known firms, we consider a very-satisfactory business should result.
The commercial vehicle, in our opinion, has had most-unfair treatment at this show, the very-limited amount of space allotted to this section being totally inadequate to the requirements of the trade. Judging by the number of pleasure vehicles shown on many of the stands, it is quite apparent that the space allowed for stands in this section was in a number of cases needlessly large. We certainly think Manchester a first-class centre for the exhibition of commercial-motor vehicles, and, if suitable accommodation can be arranged, we are strongly in favour of such an exhibition being combined with that of pleasure cars.—Yours faithfully,
THE ALBION MOTOR CAR CO., LTD.
2 f th February, 1911.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,320] Sir,—Further to our letter to you of 24th February, we have now had an opportunity of going fully into the business at above exhibition, and have no hesitation in saying that we have found it very sai isfactory in every way.—Yours faithfully,
THE ALBION MOTOR CAR CO., LTD.
Glasgow.
Cast-steel Wheels at the North of England Show.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
(L321] Sir,—With reference to your paragraph on p. 532a in the issue of the 23rd ult., relating to the
• couple of wheels which were exhibited at one end of the Commercial-Car stand," we wish to take this opportunity of pointing out to you that these two orphans have, in consequence of your unkind notice and publicity, been of very-great interest to and much admired by those who paid a visit to see them, both motor manufacturers and the public, thanks to your original advertisement of same in your columns. We can assure you that we willingly accept the responsibility for the existence of these wheels, and so account for them and relieve you from any anxiefs as to their origin, and we feel sure their future will be watched with great interest.
We shall be at all times willing to furnish you with full information as to their whereabouts, and the progress they make in their career.—Yours faithfully,
THE ATLAS RESILIENT ROAD WHEELS, LTD. Ma nchester.
L.G.O.C. and Chassis Building.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,322] Sir,— Referring to your leader of the 2nd ult., I agree with you, as I think the trade have very little to grumble about in regard to the L.G.O.Co.'s policy of manufacturing their own chassis. This appears to be a case where, had they not been able to build them themselves, the Silent " X " and " B " types would never have reached the practical stage, as they would not have been prepared to place an order in the trade for, say, 200 machines, for reasons which are well known. They had to adopt an economical policy, and I consider that they are to be congratulated for their venture and upon the successful issue to their undertaking.—Yours faithfully,
"OPEN AIR TO EVERYWHERE."
Roads Finance.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,323] Sir,--In your editorial references of 2nd March, you call attention to the speech of Mr. Harcourt Clare, the Clerk of the Lancashire County Council, and evidently invite comment on those of his remarks in which he calls attention to the heavy expenditure on road maintenance, which he says is distinctly traceable to the heavy and illegal axleweights of the traction engines, and especially of some of the motor wagons which are used in the Lancashire district. Before I comment on this part of his speech, I should like to call attention to the rather misleading nature of his remarks on the shortage of county funds, caused, as he says, by the Government's having failed to contribute a sum of 250,000 towards road expenditure.
Sonic years ago, the Government, instead of allocating to the County Councils a sum equal to about half the cost of upkeep of the main roads, and which sum was supposed to be derived from the carriage and other licences, handed on to the County Councils the duty of collecting these licences for themselves, and it is to the shortage of these licences which Mr. Clare must refer to when he says that the Government failed to contribute. The facts are that calls on the county purse for education, police, and other matters are increasing yearly, and, as the proceeds of the licences are insufficient, the county budget suffers, and the public are informed that, nowadays, the whole cost of the main roads falls on the county ratepayers, which is, of course, absolutely misleading. The new Road Board, being prevented by the terms of the Development Act from making grants towards road maintenance, are apparently following the sensible policy of inducing the county councils to spend money on road improvement, by making their grants conditional on the counties finding a large share of the cost of these improvements themselves. Mr. Clare seems to admit this, but fails to notice the most-important fact, which is the key of the road question, and which is that, if these grants towards resurfacing the roads are judiciously spent, the future ratepayer will benefit by the greatly-increased durability of the roads ; that is to say, if the traffic keeps at its present figure, or, on the other hand, i: it, as is very probable owing to the increase of mechanical haulage the traffic on our roads, should increase by leaps and bounds, and with enormous economical and financial advantage to the (Jaunty. Turning, now, to the other question, which is also raised in another part of your issue by a correspondent who signs himself a "North Country Member [of the Commercial Motor Users Association. —ED.], Mr. Clare says, and your correspondent seems to agree with him, that road surfaces can be made to stand 95 per cent. of the traffic, but they will not carry the heavy traction engines and all the motorwagon traffic which sometimes use it. This traffic does not wear, but actually breaks the road crust, and is the chief cause of hea.vy cost of road maintenance. This part of the road problem is of the highest interest, to engineers especially. The railway engineer, who throughout his life has been studymg the transport question from its economical side— what would he think of a railway manager who purchased locomotives intended for a road laid with 100 lb. rails, and put them to work on weak pioneer lines laid with 65 lb. rails 1 Yet this is just what the motorwagon owner is doing every day. He buys a steamdriven or petrol-driven wagon with wheel diameters and tire widths suited to the strong roads of our great cities, or the best of our trunk roads, and runs it through the counties which are provided with roads only strong enough to carry light and fast traffic! In the days that are now, fortunately for the car owner, days of the past, a few passages of the overweighted, small-wheeled motor wagon did some harm to the main roads in all soft spots, the sub-soil under the light road crust was displaced, forced out sideways, and the top broken up. The surveyor grumbled, sent his roller along, scarified the broken surface, added a light coating of new road-metal, rolled it down and, at the cost of a few pounds, repaired the damage. No one was much hurt. But, nowadays, the ease is utterly different. The same surveyor, pressed by the motorists as well as by the frontagers whose premises abut on to his road, is forced to make up his surface on one or other of the modern methods. He finds that he can do this, so that his road, although more costly to resurface in the first instance, will last so much longer that, if he can get the full life attainable by it., his masters, the ratepayers, will actually make a saving in future upkeep. He finds that he can provide for any number of motorcars and commercial vehicles, up to axle-weights of five tons, without his road suffering in any way ; but, any time, however, he may find that, by a few passages of a motor lorry loaded to 10 tons on its back axle, his costly and beautiful waterproof surface is fractured, and forced out of shape, so that pools of water rest in the hollows. If this sur veyor owned the lorry as well as the road, he would be forced to adopt one of two courses : either to strengthen the road ; or to redesign his lorry. I am told that to thicken up the crusts of the principal roads of the United Kingdom, to enable them to stand up satisfactorily to 10-ton axle-loads, would cost any sum between 10-20 millions sterling. On the other hand, most of the same roads, in the ordinary &nine of resurfacing, can and will be made to carry five-ton axle-loads without risk of reducing their normal wearing life. What hope is there of bringing this so forcibly before the present owners, that they will, of their own consent, keep the heavy-axle vehicles to the towns and first-class roads, and compel manufacturers to supply, for use upon the weaker ones, vehicles having their loads better dis:.ributed. The ways and means of doing this are wellknown to designers. As in railway work, the crushing load on single drivers was abolished by using coupled engines ; so, in road work, crushing loads can be got rid of by driving on all four wheels, or by using light tractors with larger wheels, or by using large-diameter driving wheels on the motor wagons. traction engines, so much howled at, are not the chief offenders : their seven-foot wheels seldom damage the road surfaces, and certainly do not disturb the subsoil as much as the small-wheeled motor wagon. Those who know are determined that the use of vehicles, whether they be the wagons drawn by traction ebgines, or motor wagons which punish the subcrust of our roads by loads in excess of 700 lb. per inch width of tire, must be restricted to roads strong enough to bear them. It would be far better that reform should come spontaneously from the owners of this heavy traction plant, than that the road authorities should move the Local Government Board to schedule our roads and entirely to prohibit the use of heavy vehicles on three-fourths of the roads of the kingdom.—Yours faithfully,
" CIVIL ENGINEER.
The Tenpenny Initial Fare.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1,324J am rather surprised to notice that
the suggestion for a tenpenny initial fare for London inotorcak-)s, which Lord Grimtlaorpe made at the last
annual general meeting of the Motor Cab Co., Ltd., appears to have been allowed, temporarily, to drop into abeyance. I, in common with other owners, had hoped that this bold public pronouncement of a suggested improvement in London's tariff would result very quickly in some concerted action which would improve the prospects of operation in the Metropolis. It cannot be denied that, while the driver is making quite-a-comfortable living, and one. which it is admitted is more-than-sufficient reward for his somewhat-limited talents, the owners and operating companies themselves, in almost-all cases, are finding that the returns are not remunerative enough to warrant the locking-up of large amounts of canitai.
The tenpenny suggestion is the best that has been made so far, and, although I am given to understand that Scotland Yard is by no means inclined to favour such a. change, on the scores that the drivers do not want it, that the public would resent it, and that the owners are by no means unanimous, I do not feel any hesitation in urging all those who have the opportunity to do all they can to further the agitation in favour of this useful and necessary modification.
What has the Motor Cab Proprietors Association got to say on the subject ? Very little, from all I can hear If associations of this kind are to preserve a reputation for usefulness, they should seize on such an opportunity as that afforded by the discussion of the tenpenny suggestion, and thrash it out in order to find whether it is acceptable or otherwise.—Yours faithfully, " JERRY BUNDLER." Camden Town.