Opinions from Others.
Page 15
Page 16
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 si.2e of the paper only and typewritten by preference. The right of abbreviation is reserved, and no responsibility for views expressed is accepted.
"Coal-gas or Nothing."
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
114381 Sir,—Char-k-bancs proprietors must be very grateful to you. for your efforts to -prevent the extinction of a whole industry, without any compensation, through an order framed only to economise petrol. To include ordinary paraffin, even if made of petroleum, it is necessary to ignore the usual meaning of " motor spirit" in Regulation 8G., and to apply only the definition from the Finance Act, 1910.
This definition taken alone would also include such solids as coal f6r steamers and "spots" for internalcombustion engines, and also such gases as coal-gas and acetylene.
The danger is that new instructions may make gas cylinders and gas holders as useless as paraffin carburetters, if we cannot get a reasonable reading of " motorspirit."—YOurs faithfully, For RAPID MOTOR TRANSPORT CO,. LTD, ALEX. STEUART, Managing Director. Glasgow.
" Express " Tramcars v. the Public.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[14391 Sir,—I have seen it stated somewhere that it is the desire of the long-distance passenger to have non-stop cars. I do not think I have ever heard of a more ludicrous proposition. Let us for a moment think what this innovation would be like : Loops would have to be made to enable the fast cars to pass the slow ones,. thus still further taking up the roadway space and blocking the roads for legitimate traffic.
Breakdowns are bad enough now, goodness knows, but it is unthinkable that anything in the shape of the monopoly of our main thoroughfares by Juggernaut ears would be allowed by the authorities. The blocks in the traffic, which are caused by the tramcars, are quite easily explainable—the real cause is not only breakdowns, but the constant stoppages to set down halfpenny fares, together with the perfect farce of so many stopping places, encouraging laziness as we see every day.
Not only this, but the annoyance to long-distance city people is notorious. These are oftendeft behind at the different termini because of the rush of the cheaper fares, which latter cause delay all along the route, so that the city man never knows when he is going to get to work or home again. If the cheap halfpenny fares must be retained why not Nix them before nine o'clock in the morning and after six o'clock at night? By this means the legitimate passenger, the city man, would come into his own. I say nothing of the frauds that are perpetrated every day by unprincipled persons taking cheap tickets and rsding far beyond their distance, the unfortunate conductor or conductress being powerless on overcrowded cars to check the evil.
Now there must be a remedy for the present state of things. Possibly an increased service of motorbuses, or the making of underground tubes would suffice, more especially as our■railways have miserably failed to keep pace with the times. Anyway, in our main thoroughfares the tramcar is a nuisance to traffic and is responsible for many accidents which occur. We have also to .remenabersthai tramway
tracks do not last for ever, as witness the daily patching that goes on. With heavy traffic of all kinds continually passing over the lines and junctions, the outlook as regards expensive upkeep must always be the enemy that the county council has to fight against. —Yours faithfully, A. MACDONALD.
[Any demand for non-stop tramcars in London, whilst it may voice a desire, must remain of no effect. It is one penalty of using the rail-bound system, that overtaking is not possible. The car that would go on must wait behind any other that is stapped. We agree with our correspondent's str[ctures. Tramcars are already more than a sufficient hindrance to ordinary wheeled traffic.—En.] Credit Due to Lanchester.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1440] Sir,—In THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR dated the the 15th February, on that rather lively news page entitled " One Hears—," there is a, paragraph which refers to what has been admittedly the roughest war service having fallen to the lot of the most-highly-finished chassis, the Rolls-Royce. •
We agree with your paragraph in every respect except one, and that is the name of the chassis. We would like to point out that the armoured cars and high-speed lorries operating in the Caucasus and the Balkans are under the command of Commander Locker-Lampson and are Laeichesters.
This fact was very widely distributed recently by contemporaries of THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR, and in the pictorial newspaper Press ; in the latter case, of course, no names appeared.
Photographs. which we have in our possession illustrate very vividly the conditions under which the cars are working, and we may add that so far we have not heard of a single case of mechanical trouble.
We may also add that we have supplied to other allied countries a further number of Lanchesters, and it is more than probable that these are doing service of a much more strenuous nature and under worse conditions than those in the Caucasus and the Balkans.—Yours faithfully, THE LANCHESTER MOTOR CO., LTD.
[We regret the slip. The Rolls-Royces did their " stunts " amongst the Sanussi, and elsewhere. We apologise to the Lanchesters, which have so much to their credit in the Caucasus, the Balkans and elsewhere.--ED.] Power Plough in g.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1441] Sir,—Believer as I am in the eventual success of agrimetore and motor ploughs of all sizes and descriptions, the letters from Mr, J. Falconer, and Mr. J. Allen in your issue of the 22nd February, pointing out the advantages of the steam-cable system of ploughing, are really very welcome. At present I am amazed at the ideas people have got in regard to what tractors will do, and I Ease claims set up for them suggesting they will do hundreds of acres in a Se* weeks. As a user of motor tractors for many years, I know that such claims are simply ludicrous, and would not in my opinion be set up by the manufacturers themselves. They raise hopes, and users will be most unduly disappointed when they find that they have limitations. They are extracedinarily useful things and will improve enormously as time goes on, but many of the present tractors, which I see advertised and being sold, will prove a great and grievous disappointment to their owners. The truth is, all the different systems have their uses in their proper place and at their proper time ; no one system really meets the want of every farmer at all times of the year, but at least the motor tractor should ask to be saved from its friends. There is much claimed for it, and an amount of work it is not capable of doing, and therefore I think it will do good to see someone standing up for the doubleengined wire rope ploughing tackle, which has another great advantage under present conditions that it does not require imported fuel to run it.-
Yours faithfully, S. F. EDGE. Cable v. Tractor, for Ploughing and Cultivating.
The Editor, THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR.
[1442] Sir,—There have been some interesting letters respecting the above subject in the recent issues of your paper, and by the comparison of various views your readers may get good insight into these matters. My reason for writing is that according to my experience not one of the letters and reasons for and against is completely correct.
At the start I may say my experience of land cultivation began with the old -roundabout set of ploughlug tackle, and no doubt better work with the plough is done with this method than with the double-engine system. Then I had some years' experience with the double-engine tackle which did good work under certain conditions, but the speed at which the impleinent is drawn causes the work to be done at a, very uneven depth in the great majority of cases. Since then I have had several years operating motor ploughs and cultivators, and for good all-round work the motor is certainly the best, but the four-wheel tractor and separate plough is not the outfit that will hold the market in this country, as you will find that a very small percentage of farmers are satisfied with
' What they have seen and tried. Yet they are nearly all convinced that the motor is the thing they want, not the two-engine system.
Mr. J. Allen and Mr. Falconer both state the motor is using up between 30 -and 50 per cent. of its power in propulsion. This is not a fair comparison with cable cultivation. The point is that the motor is using a certain proportion of power to propel itself across the field according to its deadweight. We will take this weight at, say, three tons, to cultivate 9 ft. in width. low the steam cultivator, to do this width, will weigh at least two tons ; then there is the steel rope dragging on the land and the braking effect necessary on the drum that is paying out the loose cable which altogether will take quite as much horsepower to get across the field as the three-ton motor. Hence there is no difference in power in-this item. I suggest., therefore, that one way of transmitting the power to the implement is as economical as the other. As to the steam cultivator being the best implement for cleaning the land of couch, this dependsentirely whether the weather is wet or fine, as in .a wet season the plough will give the best results. The steam cultivator is an excellent implement for dealing with very soul land, but the motor cultivator is quite its equal except when the land is so foul and rough that a motor could not possibly' travel. But lot us leave the cultivator ; the plough is the principal implement in this country and ploughing is the motor's job, or rather the displacement of horses from the land, as the right type of motor .tractor will do any of the work horses can do even to pulling the manure cart, as well -aS driving the threshing machine, and what is more important at a cheaper rate. As Mr. Allen says there may be disappointments ; the number of motors , standing idle will prove this, but farmers have been so fixed that they have gladly bought whatever was available. The depreciation on a properly-designed and manufactured motor plough is very small, probably no more per acre than a steam plough, as every part is dust-proof and runs in oil.
I do not think the motor will supersede in a competitive sense the steam cultivator as they each have their particular uses, but I do say the motor will kill the steam ploughs for the reason that each farmer will have his own motor and the need to hire will not arise.
ID 'other correspondence I have seen it stated that the best machine on the land is not the best on the road, but I have no hesitation in saying that eventually it will be found that the best read tractor for farmers' loads will be the best on the land—an ordinary motor lorry will not fetch loads out of the fields or
up farm lanes.—Yours faithfully, F. WALLER.. Stafford.