When 3-tonners became 4-tonners

#1
Back in the day, the Bedford 3-tonners we used to use to ride (uncomfortably - kit-kat arrse, anyone?) around in were suddenly renamed 4-tonners, but nobody ever seemed to know why and I always wondered.

It's not that I'm losing sleep over it, but does anybody know the official, or a plausible, explanation?

MsG
 
#2
They became heavier?
 
#3
:lol: :wink:
 
#4
sounds like it happened when they still had bows and arrows!! I always remember 4 tonners! but then I could have been asleep and that is quite posible!
 
#5
When the UK adopted the metric system??

Edited to say that must be wrong as aparently 1 imperial ton is .98 metric tonnes.
 
#6
If I remember rightly...........

The Beford RL was in fact a 3 tonne truck (i.e. its payload is 3 tonnes, it actually weighs more than that....)

They went in the bin and were replaced with Bedford MK. These have a payload of 4 tonne and are quite whittily called '4 tonners'

So the name changed when the trucks did...................
 
#7
Battsimm said:
If I remember rightly...........

The Beford RL was in fact a 3 tonne truck (i.e. its payload is 3 tonnes, it actually weighs more than that....)

They went in the bin and were replaced with Bedford MK. These have a payload of 4 tonne and are quite whittily called '4 tonners'

So the name changed when the trucks did...................
Which would be a sensible explanation, Battsimm. But what actually happened is that (practically overnight) the same Bedford 3-tonners were redesignated as 4-tonners. They never moved from the spot and suddenly acquired a further ton (or tonne) of load capacity. That's why nobody could ever really understand it.

MsG
 
#8
maybe the overall weight of the gear we were expected to carry to war increased and rather than buy new vehicles they just arbitrarily made 3=4!!!
 
#9
oh and by the way can anybody remember the bedford tk? the none 4 wheel version of the mk- what was all that about?
 

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#10
oldmanron said:
maybe the overall weight of the gear we were expected to carry to war increased and rather than buy new vehicles they just arbitrarily made 3=4!!!
Sounds about right. I've seen storeman who, (on a stock check) make 4 items on the books = 3 Items on the shelf! :?
 

Legs

ADC
Book Reviewer
#11
oldmanron said:
oh and by the way can anybody remember the bedford tk? the none 4 wheel version of the mk- what was all that about?
Was it a Robin Reliant look-alike?
 
#12
oh so funny legs :lol: -i nearly fell off my zimmerframe just then :? 4 wheel drive i meant.-still dont know what purpose it was supposed to fill as it had as much guts as most hedgehogs after a night stroll on the m6!!
 
#14
Not a unique event...

when CR2 replaced CR1 it was noticed that its weight put it over the MLC for a Medium Girder Over Bridge. One option was to redesign the MGOB to cope with the extra weight...

... or just take a black marker to the stickers with the MLC on and change the numbers and voila MGOB now able to carry CR2 :roll:

What it probably comes down to is the kit being overengineered in the first place and when the extra capacity is required it is investigated and found to be up to the job.
 
#15
It's going back a bit, but I have a vague recollection of being told that the RL rear suspension was up-rated. I'm trying to remember a five-minute conversation from 30 years ago, but have an idea that an extra leaf was put in the springs. At the time that I joined in '75, we'd just been issued with the MK, but there were plenty of RLs on the road, prompting me to ask the question "Why are they both called 4-tonners when the RL looks like the 3-tonner that I've seen in films?"
 
#16
The truth can now be yold. Some RCT/RAOC staff officer came up with the bright idea how to cut the tpt fleet without affecting the lift capacity. Redesignate the 3ton vehicles as 4ton vehicles and voila. Less vehicles can lift the same load and a 25% saving in vehicle costs.

Shortly after he collected his MBE, HMG brought in the rules for HGV class 3, and the savings had to be spent on driver trg.
 
#17
I seem to recall that it was more to do with the legal age limit for driving vehicles over 3 tons laden capacity. The WD (so named in a time when we went to war instead of merely defending ourselves) designated it's most common load carrier a 3 ton vehicle to avoid young soldiers having to wait until they were 21 before they could drive the things. Once the law changed, probably about the same time we went all PC and ceased to make war at the drop of a hat...

(S'funny, I could have sworn I heard someone say 'Iraq?' :roll: )

...And 3 tonners magically became 4 tonners! :lol: :lol:

Anyway, that's the way I remember it... My AER unit had never seen a Bedford RL, when I learned to drive. There were still a few QLs about but I got to learn on one of those god-awful long-nosed Commer tippers; the ones with the big bats'-wing mud-guards. Crash gearbox (no sign of a syncro-mesh when that b'stard was built) and the engine lost revs so quickly that you had to rev on the way up the gear box.

Double de-clutch anyone? 8)
 
#19
rob_heath said:
mmmmm crash box

grinnnnnnnnnnnnddddddddddddddddddddddd CLUNK
:lol: Oh, yes.. to begin with....

Then it was as smooth as silk, baby! 8)

...er, well, sometimes; heh, heh.. :oops: :oops: :oops:
 
#20
what happend was a pissed remf was doing a naafi bird on the scales as the goc walked passed so he saw it reading 4 tonne and made a fuss hence the redesignation.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
AsterixTG Old & Bold 73
StumpyHussar The Intelligence Cell 10
Bondi-Babe-Magnet The NAAFI Bar 13

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top