Bedford Trucks

[Dougy FV432]

Hello All,

 

These questions have probably been asked and answered already, but I'm going to ask them again.

 

So your stater for ten.....

 

What is the difference between the MK and MJ?

 

When did they enter service?

 

And your bonus questions......

 

What about the TL and TM when did they enter service?

 

Thanks in advance

 

Dougy

[REME 245]

For a start the MJ has a Turbo.

[listerdiesel]

Hello All,

What about the TL and TM when did they enter service?

Dougy

 

The TL by memory was the tilt-cab version of the updated TK, introduced in the latish 1970's.

 

The TM was the big one with the Detroit Diesel "Screamin' Jimmy" engines, V6 and V8. That was around the same time period.

 

We lived close by theVauxhall works in Luton at the time (Falconers Road) and these bl**dy things would be running round in the early morning and evening in the trailer park, making a hell of a din.

 

There was also a version with the 500 in-line 6 diesel.

 

TJ was the bonneted normal control truck, TK was the ubiquitous council truck, KM was the big 16 tonner with the 381 and 466 engines and double bumper, and it was the only one at the time that had power steering. The TM was a replacement for the KM.

 

Peter

Edited July 23, 2009 by listerdiesel

[Predictable Bob]

:-D

 

MJ entered service in the early 80's - possibly as late as 84/85. I remember a couple arriving at the 3rd Anglians in Minden - they managed to blow the engines pretty quickly as they didn't let the turbo's cool down ...

 

:shake:

[LoggyDriver]

The MK and the MJ are the same trucks except the MK has a multifuel normaly aspirated diesel engine and the MJ has a turbocharged engine but is not multifuel.

[Richard Farrant]

The MK and the MJ are the same trucks except the MK has a multifuel normaly aspirated diesel engine and the MJ has a turbocharged engine but is not multifuel.

 

Another difference between MK and MJ was the later had the more modern plastic air pipes throughout, replacing the old steel ones which were prone to rusting. Also the electric fuel pump on the MK was done away with going back to the conventional lift pump on the MJ.

[Dougy FV432]

Thanks Everybody, would the smaller two wheel drive ones been M's or did they retain the TK status?

 

Back in the mid 80's we had to rebuild the engines on the MJ's. We had to remove the pistons and fit new rings and deglaze the bores, something to do with that the metal used on the rings was to hard and scoring the bores. Some had to have short motors fitted if they'd gone to far. Still remember the torque settings for most of the bolts, we did so many. We used to get 17hours to do them, and I think we got it down to 4 hours, was good as we were on bonus, and we did it all without taking the cabs off.

 

Regards

 

Dougy

[Richard Farrant]

Thanks Everybody, would the smaller two wheel drive ones been M's or did they retain the TK status?

 

Back in the mid 80's we had to rebuild the engines on the MJ's. We had to remove the pistons and fit new rings and deglaze the bores, something to do with that the metal used on the rings was to hard and scoring the bores.

 

 

Dougy,

 

The M denoted 4x4, the 4x2 Bedfords with same GS body were TK.

 

I built hundreds of Bedford 330 diesel engines ( also 300 and 214 petrol, etc) on a reconditioning line in Army workshops. Around the time you mentioned, we had a batch of new MK trucks ( might have been MJ) come in and all the bottom oil rings had to be removed and the oil consumption, etc was to be monitered by the operating unit. Think the likely outcome was not to fit the bottom ring when new and only fit it after a certain mileage..........if it ever reached that point !

[LoggyDriver]

Dougy,

 

The M denoted 4x4, the 4x2 Bedfords with same GS body were TK.

 

I built hundreds of Bedford 330 diesel engines ( also 300 and 214 petrol, etc) on a reconditioning line in Army workshops. Around the time you mentioned, we had a batch of new MK trucks ( might have been MJ) come in and all the bottom oil rings had to be removed and the oil consumption, etc was to be monitered by the operating unit. Think the likely outcome was not to fit the bottom ring when new and only fit it after a certain mileage..........if it ever reached that point !

 

 

 

 

Very interesting.

 

So would this have been done to all MJ's in service on rebuild? What year are we talking about. If my engine is the original then it would be 1986 (ish). Did Bedford sort this problem out at some stage or was it a continual problem? In the 8 years I did in the army we ragged plenty of Bedford MJ's and the only truck I remember having any engine trouble was one that blew a turbo. They were more or less bomb proof.

[Richard Farrant]

 

So would this have been done to all MJ's in service on rebuild? What year are we talking about. If my engine is the original then it would be 1986 (ish). Did Bedford sort this problem out at some stage or was it a continual problem? In the 8 years I did in the army we ragged plenty of Bedford MJ's and the only truck I remember having any engine trouble was one that blew a turbo. They were more or less bomb proof.

 

This trial involved only a very small batch of vehicles which were to be monitered closely, I cannot remember now whether bottom rings were left of on building, suspect not. Someone probably recollected a old procedure, from the good old days, when vehicle engines often had skirt rings fitted only after a set amount of miles had been acomplished.

 

Regarding 330 engines being bomb proof, don't know about that, but in the 22 years I was at REME workshops, our rebuild line was turning them out over that whole period, along with other types. Not often would you see a "leg out of bed", unless they had run out of oil.

[berna2vm]

The Leyland 401 /402 series of engines had a groove on the piston below the gudgeon pin which was for an extra oil control ring... These were only fitted on high mileage(high oil consumption!) engines. I have fitted many a set of these rings to Leyland Clydesdales in the late seventies /early eighties.

The AECs never needed anything like this...Better engineering methinks...

[Mark Ellis]

We received MJ GS wagons when our 6 MK Winch Wagons went back to RAOC in 82 and 83. I think you'll find that the MJ started with the H registration letters - HG, etc. I was Royal Engineers in Germany, so we got the new GS kit after UK units and Infantry. You'll have to ask some ex RAOC about allocation priority

 

Just reading your description of the MK verse the MJ

 

The change was more than just the engine.

 

The MJ has the steel cat walk on the roof to stop the roof collapsing in when walking on it to apply the cam net. The collapsing in and pushing out again made the metal crack and leak. It also had the solid cupola lid compared to the canvas one.

 

The Marshalls body is also different. The MK had the capability to strip and store the canvas and superstructure on the vehicle without taking up any space in the loadbed, but the stowage was not fitted to the MJ.

 

The Mk has shoes at the front of the bulk head to sit the center and rear superstructure hoops into. These shoes are in groves and had a chain, and could be lifted out for some reason. They made a great step for accessing the load bed from the cab when driving drop side and flatbed MKs.Straps half way up the bulkhead secured the hoops when stored.

 

The MK body also has a long stowage bin above the fuel tank, jerry can and oil can holders. This long shallow bin is for the longitudinal bars of the canopy superstructure. This is why the GS G10 toolkit included the flat head screwdriver and spanner

The MK body also has more of the square stowage bins fitted to the vehicle, as these are for the stowage of the canopy's canvas sheets.

 

The need to strip down and store the canvas and superstructure was due to changing rolls in the field. I guess the MOD decided that the need no longer existed when they purchased the next batch of 4 tonners, so removed the stowage to save money. The MJ has a beam underneath the body to replace the long stowage box.

 

00 FJ 53 is an MK With Winch, or MK WW for short. The winch wagons had an extra bin for storing the ground anchors and strops - two bins in front of the rear wheel instead of one.

 

These are my own photos

 

 

Edited February 1, 2015 by Mark Ellis

[Richard Farrant]

There were other changes mechanically, such as hubs if I recall, think it was rears.

The last MJ's to enter service were built by AWD and only arrived as chassis/cabs. In Workshops we removed GS bodies from cast vehicles, refurbished them and fitted to the new AWD's.