A Sideways look at Six-Wheelers in the Sixties (and a bit beyond) - Part 2 by Bruce A. Macphee

(Torque 7)

The "Ergomatic" tilt-cab was comfortable and afforded easy entry but had a very poor aerodynamic shape, due largely to the flat front and vertical recessed windscreen. It might be worth mentioning that the power required to overcome wind resistance varies with the square of a vehicle's speed: If it takes 30bhp to push a certain lory along a flat road at 25mph, when the speed is doubled to 50mph, the power required is 2x2x30 = 120bhp! To this must be added friction and rolling resistance, although these do not have such great effect. This simple example illustrates the importance of streamlined vehicle shapes today compared with the 20mph era!

Another drawback, which became apparent later in the life of the Ergomatics was that they had a tendency to rusting, and they were not the easiest to repair satisfactorily. The driver's seat and platform did not tilt with the rest of the cab and a rubber gasket formed the seal between the two parts, that is until it became perished or torn, which was then accompanied by an increase in engine noise and draught inside the cab!

Mechanically, the Ergomatic cabbed Leylands were not greatly altered from those with the LAD cab, which continued to be offered on all the Leylands and Albions. The new AEC range which came out in 1964 also used the new cab, but of course, mechanically they were pure AEC with no shared major units (apart from the AEC gearboxes being used in some Leylands as mentioned before). The new cabs differed according to which make of chassis they were fitted. One could easily see differences in respect of the decorative grille panels, but also the Albion cab was built Of lighter gauge steel and had tapered bolts for locking it down, whereas Leylands and AECs originally had overcentre catches. The Albions had electric wipers as against air motors on the other two, and the AECs had wider front wings! Inside, all three makes shared the same instrument binnacle, in my opinion the neatest ever design, and the same pedal-gear. Handbrake levers were different on all three: the AEC had a fabricated lever, the Leyland had a Leyland forging and the Albion had an Albion forging. Incidentally, the Albion Clydesdale maximum-weight four wheeler must have been the last lorry to be fitted with a multi-stroke ratchet handbrake (1972), The 400-engined Leyland might have been expected to have the same gear lever as the Albion as they shared the same box. Not so, the Leyland had a near-vertical lever sprouting from near the handbrake, the Albion's came through near the driver's left elbow and was cranked forward at an angle.

The next new Leyland six-wheeler was the Super Comet 20 tipper or mixer chassis. It had the forward entry LAD cab as used on the heavy Leylands and the Albions, the same 0.400 engine, Albion 6-speed box and hub-reduction axles as Super Comets, Albion Clydesdales and Reivers, and like the heaviest Reiver of that time grossed 20 tons. Was it therefore, an Albion Reiver with a different name and badge?

The Albion Reiver, a very popular choice for tipper work. It was light, had good off-road traction and reduced the incidence of half-shaftfailures. The LAD cab continued to be specified even after the introduction of the Ergomatic, being less vulnerable to damage. Earlier models had 8-stud wheels, later models ID-stud. Some had ID-stud front, 8-stud, rear! (Photo — BCVM Archive taken July 1962, with Mac-41pine 22 RB Excavator).

No! Despite sharing the same major units and cab, this and other Leylands were quite different from equivalent Albions: Leylands used their own front axle with the usual button type king-pin thrust, while Albion used their own axle, thrust being taken by low-friction washers in an oil-bath with reservoir mounted on top of the stub axle. The Leyland cam brakes were applied by means of worm and wheel slack adjusters, Albions had two-part levers with staggered adjustment holes on the Vernier principle. From outside, the rear ends of the lighter 6x4 Leylands and the Albion Reivers looked much the same. They both had Albion axles, and four-spring non-reactive bogies. Looking underneath the chassis (or over the top in the case of a tipper, first making sure the body was securely propped!) revealed a more significant difference: Drive on the Leyland went from the gearbox to the leading axle, which incorporated a lockable 3 ^rd diff., and thence to the rearmost axle. On the 6x4 Reiver, drive from the gearbox went via a short shaft to a relay box, which incorporated the 3^rd diff., thence by two separate shafts to the two driving axles. The layout of the relay box was such that the output was of opposite rotation to that of the input, so the propshafts turned in an anticlockwise direction when moving forwards. The single-drive (6x2).Reiver had no need of a transfer box, so had conventional transmission of clockwise rotation. Another Leyland-Albion difference was in the exhaust system. Other than tractors and tankers, Leylands usually had a silencer mounted mid-way along the chassis. The Albion had its silencer (echo chamber would be more precise!) transversely mounted under the gearbox, as with its forebears from Scotstoun; thus an Albion still sounded like an Albion whatever engine was fitted!

The Leyland Super Comet 20.SC/3R tipper and mixer chassis for Ready Mired Concrete, 5th February, 1968: the Same 400 engine, Albion gearbox and cab as the Reiver, but notjust a Reiver with a Leyland badge! (see text). The non-reactive linkage can be seen between the chassis rails. Note the small fuel tank; mixer chassis need to be as light as possible to make up for the heavy drum and associated equipment. (Photo — BCVM Archive)

The 0.400 engine had been modified for use under the Ergomatic cab and now had both manifolds on one side of the head. Later on, the 0.400 gave way to the 401 which reverted to having the manifolds on opposite sides, If one wished to fit the later engine to an existing vehicle, this necessitated having different engine mountings which inclined the engine to the left, otherwise the cab would not go down!

If we take an arbitrary date in 1966 and look at "Leyland-Albion" six-wheelers only, we find this selection from which to choose:

The three makes of gearbox were all basically 5-speed constant-mesh with the option of an overdrive 6^th speed. The Leyland and Albion boxes had further options of a crawler gear (7-speed) or splitter (9-speed) engaged by a separate lever. Both types of back axle were hub-reduction; the Leyland axle generally used for the heavier applications, although there were already three different sizes of geared hubs used on the Albion axle!

Although outside our mandate or (!) brief, AEC also offered two six-wheelers: Marshal with AV505 engine, DI 97 6-speed box and double-drive single reduction or single-drive double-reduction bevel axles on a four-spring balance-beam type bogie and Mammoth Major with AV691 or 760 engine, D203 6-speed box and double-drive double-reduction axles normally with a two-spring bogie.

A further addition to the crop of six-wheelers was the Bear; basically the Super Comet 20 with the option of a turbocharged version of the 400 series engine and provision for a hydraulic pump on the front of the crankshaft for driving a mixer drum. Either the LAD or Ergomatic cab could be specified.

In 1968, the 500 engined range reared their fixed heads and initially comprised the Lynx four-wheeler and Bison six-wheeler. They both used the same 8.2 litre OHC engine of which much has been written and many strong opinions held!

They were later joined by the heavy-duty Buffalo and Super Buffalo (4,6 wheelers). AEC gearboxes were used in the basic models with Eaton range-change boxes in the higher-powered turbocharged machines. Rear axles were as before with the addition of yet another hub-reduction unit, the Maudslay. A new lighter two-spring bogie became available, overcoming the weight penalty previously associated with this type, and the non-reactive bogie now had its linkages arranged outside the chassis rails. Fail-safe spring parking brakes replaced the air-assisted handbrakes and cabs were now mounted several inches higher and needed a built-in hydraulic jack for tilting.

The Bison introduced in 1968 with the "revolutionary 500 fixed-head engine". Described as "entirely new", the gearbox was an improved version of that used in the Retriever since 1963 and in AEC "mediumweights" since 1961; back axles were again Albion. The gearboxes and axles did not give much trouble! The "500" engine was further developed over the years and later became quite a reliable unit, but was then dropped in favour Of the TLII and LIZ. (Photo — BCVM Archive).

The 500 range was to replace the 0.600/680 powered models, so out went the Badger, Beaver, Retriever and Hippo. Many operators had been happy with these, but that was tough luck! One vehicle did continue for many years with the 0.680: The Scammell Routeman. Although various options were available, that with the 0.680, AEC box and Albion axles must have been one of the most successful 8-wheel tippers ever.

Another event which occurred about this time was the BMC take-over, on which I will not make comment in this article. They did bring with them a ready-made range of heavy vehicles, the "Big J" Guys. Originally listing Cummins V-6 and Gardner 6LX engines, later came AEC 505, Leyland 400, Cummins 14 litre and Rolls-Royce with an equally wide range of gearboxes. Guy had developed their own hub-reduction axle, so that made four distinctive types within the group! The Guys were simple and very reliable, but did not score too well for comfort or engine accessibility.

1972 saw an end to the proud Albion name, but improved versions of their existing models continued to be produced with the Leyland badge. They now had a tilt-cab similar to the Bathgate-built "BMCs", had an uprated Albion gearbox incorporating constant-mesh reverse and a group front axle with Girling sliding-shoe type brakes. Engines were now the 401 and 410 (turbocharged), but with increased power output, reliability sadly was not what it had been with the earlier 0.400.

The same year, Bathgate joined the "heavy" market with the Super Mastiff 6 wheeler. At first glance, it resembled the latest Reiver, but apart from the cab, was completely different. It had a Perkins V8 driving through an Eaton range-change gearbox to AEC axles similar to those of the Marshal. The chassis frame was that of a Guy Big J!

AEC, meanwhile, brought out a third 6-wheeler, the Marshal Major. As the name implied, it was somewhere between their other two. It had an AV760 engine de-rated from 205 to 185bhp, driving through a D203 box to a Marshal double-drive, single reduction balance-beam bogie. The Mammoth Major, like the Hippo, had become too heavy for general haulage, penalised by taxation (then based on unladen weight), and restricted legal payload. Its markets then lay largely overseas and for military use.

To take stock 6 years on, Leyland 6x4 production comprised:

	Engine	Gearbox	Back Axles (hub reduction except*)
Reiver	401/410	Albion	Albion (anti-clockwise)
Bear	410	Albion	Albion
Bison	500	AEC	Albion
(Super)Buffalo	510	Eaton (range-change)	Leyland or Albion
Super Mastiff	Perkins V8	Eaton (range-change)	AEC single-reduction bevel*

To these we must add three AEC models, also Guy whose permutations of engines and gearboxes I could not even guess at! Guys were now more common as tractors than multi-wheelers and competed successfully with the other "assembled" trucks such as ERF and Atkinson, although possibly not as popular with drivers!

The Super Mastiff shared the same cab as the "Leyland" Reiver but all running units were different. The cab, described in 1972 as "new" was developedfrom that used on the BMC FJ in 1962. Both Super Mastiff and Reiver were well suited to tipper work The "Bathgate" cab was less susceptible to damage than the Ergomatic and much more comfortable than the LAD! (Photo — BCVM Archive)

The decision-makers at "BL" now decreed that the way forward lay with the 500 fixedhead range. Those who favoured Guys were told that the competition was now with people like Volvo who made everything "in house" and that trucks assembled with proprietary units were irrelevant. I do not remember the reason for AEC being closed; those who drove and maintained the trucks weren't consulted!

So we go full-circle; a standardised range to a more varied range, taking in those of associated companies and using the best of each to further expand, then rationalising to another standardised range. Well, not quite full circle; The Leyland trucks of the 1950s gave good service and were well regarded, those of the 1970s rather less so. Guy and AEC operators joined those who had sworn by Retrievers in swearing at Bison and Buffalos. Many went to see what the Europeans had to offer, not to return.

Years ago, all small businessmen had a little sign on their desk; unfortunately, some bigger ones did not feel the need. The sign read: "The Customer is Always Right".

Luckily, the moulds for the 0680 and AV760 had not been thrown away, and these excellent engines re-emerged as the TLI I and L12, which survived into the T45 era. That was in the 1980s, but I don't remember that far back!

Join the discussions on