I reckon you'd be surprised how truly awful some modern truck automatics are, they really are only larger versions of the fairly hated ''automated manual'' found on many modern cars.
They seem to be popular with many drivers now, but as you mentioned the wonderful Eaton twin splitter, i would say that most old timers would rather still have a good crash box of that or similar type, but coupled to an old fashioned engine with loads of torque.
I've got an 12 speed automated manual and can truly say its the gearbox from hell.
It thankfully does have a clutch pedal, but that is only to be used to actually start and stop movement, all other changes do not require the use of the clutch.
Most of these boxes can be operated fully auto or manually (clutchless), and i use manual all the time, because the time waiting for the box to decide which gear it wants (usually wrong) is frustrating in the extreme and is so slow pulling away from junctions as to be dangerous.
To be fair if it was a case of main roads all the time, they are ok, but when say approaching a roundabout or other junction and you need the box to get the right gear at the right time, to continue under power, forget it.
Bet that rings a bell for those with similar boxes in their cars.
Obviously some different makers have differing versions, and some have better systems than others.
Have to say i mourn the passing of the old crash gearboxes, it kept a lot of people out of lorries who really shouldn't be there, for the simple fact they wouldn't get going anyway.
Think we had a thread about that sort of thing recently.
Most complicated i ever drove was 'mickey mouse' Foden, with their own 12 speed box(4 gears and 3 unequal splits, some times 2 gearsticks, or split shifter on steering column, all without power steering) that really took some getting used to.
|
I drive 8-wheeler tippers delivering bulk animal feed to farms. Auto boxes would be pretty much useless to me, as a lot of my driving is off-road or on narrow country lanes. Those of you who do off-roading will know that a manual box wins hands-down in these circumstances.
Most dustcarts and the like seem to have them as standard these days though, obviously makes life a lot easier for the driver when he's doing stop-start work and I would guess cuts maintenance bills too, less clutches to change.
gordonbennet, I just had to laugh at your comments on gearboxes baffling poor drivers! Years ago when I was an HGV fitter/relief driver, we had the old Fuller 9-speeds on a mixed fleet of Seddon-Atkinsons and ERF's. An acquired taste but by no means a bad box; however it didn't stop a few rookies from wrecking them because the gates were opposite on the different makes!
BTW I cut my teeth (and ground a few) on a Scammell Pioneer, no power steering, 5-speed sliding mesh box and a gate the size of a drain cover. My instructor's words, "When you can go up and down this without missing a gear, me lad, we MIGHT just make a driver of you"!
|
Harleyman, i worked for a long time for a similar fleet as you and i'm really sad that those fine vehicles are no more.
We also ran scammell crusaders, and apart from the hub reduction axle they were fine too.
How many onlookers were baffled when you lift the grill, undo the wheel, and swing the radiator to one side on its hinges.
Its probably not the right forum but it would make an interesting discussion to work out why we no longer build some of the best trucks in the world, some examples of which 40 or so years later are still running all over the warmer parts of the globe.
Was there ever a better combination than British rolling chassis, with big cummins engine, eaton/fuller gearbox and rockwell axle? And British brakes.
They may not have had the kudos (is that possible with a truck) of a European truck, but they were more economical, far more powerful (with the correct user specified running gear), and IMO more satisfying than the syncromeshed and usually woefully underpowered foriegn vehicles.
I'll get me tin hat on now.
|
|
|
|
The OP asked whether buses and trucks used the same engines and gearboxes.
The engines are basically the same but are often fiited horizontally under the floors of buses and coaches, necessitating revised cooling, lubrication, etc systems.
Service buses are almost always fully automatic these days. Semi-auto boxes were popular in the 70s and 80s but full autos are less vulnerable to abuse.
Coaches are generally manual (synchromesh) but automatics are gaining market share, especially on coaches that are mainly used in urban areas or are driven my many different drivers, eg on express services.
One aspect of this arrangement is that a driver trained by your local bus company only needs an "automatic" pcv licence, making it more difficult for him to moonlight with, or move to, Bloggs Coaches where he would need a "manual" licence. In theory.
|
>>>I've seen many artics reverse solely with the aid of mirrors.
This makes me laugh when people boast of parking sensors in their cars.
Yes, but look at the number of bent under-run bumpers on the backs of trailers!!
|
.Quote>>>>Most complicated i ever drove was 'mickey mouse' Foden, with their own 12 speed box(4 gears and 3 unequal splits, some times 2 gearsticks, or split shifter on steering column, all without power steering) that really took some getting used to.
Did it have Foden's own supercharged 2-stroke diesel engine too?
|
Did it have Foden's own supercharged 2-stroke diesel engine too?
Only ever used a 2 stroke in yard as it was too old and tatered to be roadworthy, i cut my teeth (and a few gear ones too) on the gardner engined versions.
Pity, would have enjoyed a 2 stroke, one of my old mates nearly got the sack for overtaking the boss in his MGB on the M1 whilst doing (the boss) 70mph, would have liked to hear that in full song at 75mph or so. Bosses, they are so temperamental.(he was in full song too)
If you remember, Bedford used the GM 2 stroke in their TM model (and in rare cases KM artic units) in the 70's and 80's.
Trouble is if you gave them some welly you could get them down to 3mpg.
Forgot to mention, did any of you drive the old MAN with column change, that was fun.
Blimey we've burnt some diesel on here recently, time to chill in the cafe, if there's any left.
Talking of gearboxes, how many of the old school suffer with arthritic left knees trying to hold down the unassisted clutch pedal on those old motors, with hands and fingers still cracked twenty years after roping and sheeting vanished.
Nostalgia, its all in the past.
|
|
|
|
>>>>> Yes but look at the number of bent under-run bumpers on the backs of trailers!! The point was that HGV drivers do at least USE their mirrors!
Could you do better Spud?
|
A crash box for me - it's such a direct driving experience. I used to drive a 1964 MAN 13 tonner with a six speed crash box, rather than using the clutch brake as NC describes, I used to knock it into neutral and then dab the exhaust brake and change gear without the clutch on upshifts. No margin for error, but so satisfying. I tried to teach another driver how to do it on his similar truck, but he ripped the centre out of his clutch trying.
The modern auto boxes can be quite good though, go through a peage and then just hit 'resume' - the truck accelerates up to the speed limiter, going through all the gears, without you having to touch any of the pedals.
Try this in an empty top spec new MAN though, and the acceleration limiter cuts in, to prevent it spinning up and knackering the tyres on the drive axle. It's quicker to change gear yourself on these.
|
Re the stopping distances - ever seen the trucks in the States, careerring down the highway at 65mph (and more!). Stamp on the brakes, and they're lucky to stop by the next turn off!. Never been so scared in my life as being sandwiched between two megamonsters overtaking me when I was doing 65mph on the highway.
Maybe they have anchors that they can throw out??????
|
|
|
|
Yes but look at the number of bent under-run bumpers on the backs of trailers!!
Thats just cars not paying attention and taking longer to stop then the truck :o)
|
Allison are still selling their automatic gearboxes for trucks up to about 600 hp. I see that even Volvo and Renault are offering them on parts of their ranges alongside the manual boxes.
|
I didn't know there are so many HGV drivers in this forum!!
Thanx a lot guys.
I have another question, I saw in pictures that there are quite a good number of dials and gauges in the lorry cabs (compared to cars). What are they for?
Also, I noticed in National Express coaches that rev counter contains red/green marks, probably to indicate optimum rev range for performance/fuel economy.
Why don't we have similar marking in cars' tachometers?
|
You have extra guages for the pressure of air in the air tanks.
PS - I'm not a HGV driver any more and haven't driven for over 6 years. It was my p/time job whilst at Uni (Long story!)
|
|
This is the result of an artic at full speed not seeing car stopped in front or was aiming for cop car - if the cops pull you over get right over- tinyurl.com/ypzey8
|
|
I'd like the red/green bit too, although the HGV that gave me a lift a few years ago (driver worked for the same firm I do) had red, amber, and green marks on his tacho.
|
|
Again depending on model, you may have air pressure usually 2 of, battery charge, oil pressure, fuel gage, turbo pressure and on newer trucks a gage for the "ad blue" which is an environmental additive!!!!
Although most modern trucks now have digital displays so the actual number of round dials is either reduced or non existent.
As for the red/green zones, yes they are there to show the most efficient rev range for the engine, normally goes into red at no more then 1600 rpm, just over where your car will idle on a cold morning!! Hence the need for so many gears, as you only have 6-800 rpm to actually use in each gear.
|
Regarding reversing arctics solely with mirrors.
To pass the test you have to reverse without taking both hands off the steering wheel; impossible to do this unless just using the mirrors.
Also, bear in mind with the use of mirrors, that as soon as the cab has swung past a few degrees one of the mirrors is totally useless. i.e. the driver can only see 1 side of his trailer. Remember that when you want to drive down the side of him/her !
When reversing a trailer you may also note that rhd drivers will reverse into an opening on their right hand side (where possible) for the extra vision they can get by looking out of the cab window. Obviously lhd do the opposite. A good point to note when a lorry is reversing near you. Which ever side he prefers to reverse in with; the other side is totally blind!
|
Regarding reversing arctics solely with mirrors. To pass the test you have to reverse without taking both hands off the steering wheel; impossible to do this unless just using the mirrors.
Not true. When I passed Class 2 then 1 in 2006, never taking hands off the wheel was never mentioned. Besides when you reverse the examiner is actually outside the cab watching several things, how you are using the mirrors, whether you are about to flatten anything. I have no recollection of the guys training me mentioning keeping hold of the wheel. In any reverse situation in a HGV, you will rely on the mirrors but watch any driver and you will see him or her hanging out of the window at some point.
As to the original question. Given my novice status, a manual for me. On longer runs the auto is better but for short run work and reversing the manual offers better control.
|
|
|
Allison are still selling their automatic gearboxes for trucks up to about 600 hp.
That was one box i always hankered after and if i'd bought my own truck (personal probs scuppered that) it was a luxury i always wanted.
Do they still operate by hydraulics to give constant power?
I used to deliver them all over the country to manufacturers of heavy plant and earthmovers etc, i always thought if they can stand that, truck life would be a doddle.
(strewth thats 30 years ago).
|
It's Allison World series automatic gearboxes fitted to the Dennis Sabre fire engines I drive, the same as in the Volvo appliances from 1992 onwards. Fully automatic 5 speed box; D,N,R and MODE to engage PTO for the pump. There are selectors to limit gearbox range so as not to allow the box to 'change up'. Dennis wagons have a very effective retarder.
The other machine we have on station is a MAN prime mover for use with (with my station) with the high volume pump (HVP). 12 speed semi automatic gearbox. Gears selected through the right hand stalk. The older hands drive that wagon in manual, me being a youngster leave it in automatic....
|
Excellent thread this - makes a nice change to read about real vehicles and real drivers! :-) I've never driven an artic on the road, only in a yard when I started HGV lessons about 12 years ago. Had to give them up due to cost, unfortunately. But I passed my PCV (PSV back then!) test 10 years ago so I'll comment from that angle.
The first bus I ever drove was an early 70s Leyland Leopard with a crash gearbox and no power steering. And that was when I still had my provisional PSV! I passed my test first time in that thing and I'm still waiting for old Nick to turn up to collect his side of the bargain!
On the subject of gearboxes, I'd far rather drive a semi-auto than a fully auto. I used to really enjoy driving the Leyland Nationals and Atlanteans around Southport. There's a lot of satisfaction to be had by changing gear properly in a semi auto and not just banging the gear selector into the next gear without lifting off the throttle. Autos are all very well and good but there's not the full control there in snow and ice. Not that we get much snow or ice in Southport but you know what I mean!
The coach company I currently I work for runs four Bovas (a Dutch integral coach), three of which are four years old with DAF engines and auto gearboxes. The other is 23 years old again with a DAF engine but a manual gearbox that has no synchro on 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th. Much fun. I suppose I've got lazy over the years as I'd much rather drive the four year old ones with the super smooth auto boxes. The boss is thinking of getting a new coach for this season's tour programme and got a Volvo demonstrator brought to the yard for us to have a play out in. It had something called an I-shift gearbox which I couldn't get on with at all. You put it in 'D' but then it changes gear like a manual, ie with the pause through the gears. It was also painfully slow pulling out onto busy roundabouts and junctions which is not ideal. Hopefully, the boss'll change his mind and buy the Scanias that we all want him to!
Cheers
Edited by Badwolf on 11/01/2008 at 11:11
|
I have to agree with the majority on this one.
I have now had my first Automatic lorry for 5months and hate it with a vengeance.
Having always driven both manual cars and lorries to me there is no contest. The gear selection is slow, the ability to manouvre in confined spaces between forward and reverse takes forever, and worse still the driver gets bored.
Add the climate control, cruise control and there's a recipe for disaster.
Pat
Edited by pda on 12/01/2008 at 07:22
|
I sort of agrre with Pat (pda) whilst I am a transport manager I do drive occasionaly and the Volvo's with the 14 apeed box are less tiring to drive than the autobox whist the autobox is fantastic add aircon cd player heated seat etc and it's easy to become lazy.
The Autobox's (we use) were purchased purely for cost reasons as they are £3k more expensive but clutch life is now guaranted, we instantly get an extra 1 mpg from the trucks and the residual value is £3-5K more predicted therefore we estimate a £12-15K benefit over 5 years!!
|
Automatic trucks are now becoming increasingly common. gone are the days of the six speed allison autos fitted to heavy cargo trucks, they use their own purpose designed multi-ratio boxes now.I've driven many,many different type of truck, I have to say I prefer a manual box because the way it is going Truck manufacturers will be offering nothing but autos before long.
I learnt to drive in a Leyland Roadtrain with a 10 speed spicer crash box, took some learning but once you mastered it you could change like a knife through butter.
I was one of the unlucky ones who could never get on with the eaton twin split- it made some lovely grinding noises though.
Probably the best 'box around today is the 16 speed manual used in the DAFs, a lovely quick change.
Iveco Stralis uses a fully auto 12 speed, no clutch pedal, you have to balance the "bite" on the accelerator when manouvering and its very tricky. when heavily loaded I find it easier, as with most automatics, to overide the auto box and change gear yourself- you can see the gradient ahead, the truck cannot.
MAN use a very pleasant 12 speed auto, with a simple D N R switch, again you can overide it if you need to using the column stalk, but its one of the best autos out there, always seems to be in the right gear.
Mercedes has not had a decent gearbox for a long time. They went throught the '80s with their awful EPS box (electro pneumatic shift) with it's box full of neutrals, then introduced the actros with its only slightly better tiptronic box. this was a small paddle you moved forward to change up, back to change down, if you didnt get the clutch just right it wouldnt go into gear and just click at you. uphill changes were so slow you would lose a good 5 mph just waiting for it to select a lower gear. The manual box in the axor isnt too bad, an 8 speed with a knock across gate range change, but it really needs a splitter.
Renault's Premium automatic is awful. it will not allow you to exceed 1500 rpm before changing up, not ideal if you are climbing a hill as it will forever hunt between gears.
Our company which runs an all Scania fleet has recently changed from manuals to all automatics, and they are terrible. They retain a clutch pedal, but this is only used when starting and stopping. They rev far too high before changing up, the gearbox cannot be "played" on the throttle and 12th is ludicrously high, on the speed limiter its doing 1100 rpm which is right at the lowest end of the power band meaning the slightest little incline will make it downchange, all of which has made them 2-3 mpg WORSE than the 4 year old mega-mileage trucks they replaced. across the fleet, this is an extra £100,000 a month in fuel costs ALONE.Its the usual thing, the fleet manager is not a HGV driver, and never thinks to ask the people who actually DRIVE them what would be best!!
what's wrong with fitting a gearstick that the driver actually moves himself?
|
what's wrong with fitting a gearstick that the driver actually moves himself?
It's progress - apparently!
|
oman5, thats a very good and interesting summary of nearly all the recent and current truck gearboxes, learnt a bit meself. Thanks.
Could be an idea to cut and paste it and put into most traffic office's inbox, nah second thoughts they still wouldn't have a clue, and buy what the salesman tells them makes him the most commision, sorry should have said buy what the salesman tells them is best for their needs.
|
>>>>> Yes but look at the number of bent under-run bumpers on the backs of trailers!! The point was that HGV drivers do at least USE their mirrors!
Could you do better Spud?
My lorry reversing was unblemished apart from one Morris Minor rear wing, which got in my way when I was being directed backwards by someone in the dark at a flour mill!
They just waved me back and back until something stopped me!
Edited by Sofa Spud on 18/04/2008 at 21:15
|
On the subject of crash gearboxes, was the last car to have an all non-synchro box the old rear-engined 2-cylinder Fiat 500, or did the 126 have the crash box too?
|
|
The Fiat 126 had synchro at least on 2nd, 3rd and 4th, not sure about 1st though !
|
Splendid machine !! I taught my late wife to drive in one { many moons ago }. She always told people that the only reason that she passed her test was that the examiner was mightily impressed that she could do noiseless double-declutch changes.
|
With regards to the Merc Axor (I'm not an HGV driver by the way). I know some drivers who use them & they say you can easily rip your shoulder tendons as it's an antiquated gearbox.
The MAN comfortshift gearbox has been favoured most because of it's ease in changing gear in comfortable position positively.
I can remember having the 03-reg Ford Fiesta a year ago, what was impressive about it was the positive gear lever position, the stick was just at the right height for me to reach.
Unlike the Renault Clio i once test drove which had a short gear lever & had to lean over it slightly to select the gear, once select the gear, the lever felt like it was snatching it from your hand.
|
>>>>>all of which has made them 2-3 mpg WORSE than the 4 year old mega-mileage trucks they replaced. across the fleet, this is an extra £100,000 a month in fuel costs ALONE.Its the usual thing, the fleet manager is not a HGV driver, and never thinks to ask the people who actually DRIVE them what would be best!!
what's wrong with fitting a gearstick that the driver actually moves himself?<<<<<
I actually did ask that question of my Boss because I used to return average 8.49MPG on a manual and since I've had the auto on the Scania it's dropped to an average of 7.65MPG.
His answer was that over a fleet of 65 drivers there are more bad ones ( fuel consumption wise) than good ones by far and where it pulls the good ones down it considerably raises the bad ones up so making it far easier to project outlay on fuel and therefore quote for contracts.
I preferred a manual and hate to hear the noises tha autobox makes when it's revving away like mad.
And I agree with most of the posters on here, the old crash boxes were the best ones!
Pat
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
