Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Off topic
Post Reply
User avatar
heinkeljb
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:49 pm
Location: Lewes, East Sussex - UK

Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by heinkeljb »

Sorry another rant at the makers!
I am sure those of you who are members of this forum will have read the various exploits of Lurch and others of his family. Most have been about how to correct some issue that has occurred during ownership of a Haflinger or during restoration on one.

Like most people, looking at a Haflinger you assume "military roots" and then, "it must be well built". I suppose "well built" and "well designed" are two totally different things.

My current issue with the Haflinger is the design of the thing. There just seem to be so many places where the mud can collect and cause rust to form. You would have thought as it was always going to be a vehicle that was going to be used off road that it would have had sealed box sections / tube sections (or atleast ones with only a small hole though which you could does the inside with a rust preventer). Instead it has no end of "L" shaped sections which catch and hold the mud and which are impossible to clean without dismantling the whole platform - No wonder there are so many "complete rebuild" jobs out there!
All down the side of the platform, you have a "L" shaped section with strengthening ribs, the amount of mud, both old and new which must be hiding in some of the more inaccessible corners, must add several Kilo's to the weight of the thing!

I have spent hours cleaning the mud off Lurch after I have been down some muddy track, but I still find muddy water appearing if I go back and have another go at removing the mud. I have tried using brushes of all shapes and sizes, pressure washers etc, but I am sure you would still find mud in places even after that.

So what's the answer? There isn't one as far as I know! If it had been designed with flat panel from front to back on the underside of the platform (a hollow box section platform). It would probably still have been a rot box due to poor rust proofing, but if you then as an owner did a rebuild, you could do a better job of rust proofing and it wouldn't collect mud the way it does!

As you can tell, I am, like Gary, feeling more than a bit frustrated with this vehicle. When it is working, it works well, but when it throws a tantrum!

OK, rant over - I still think the designer had their heads in the clouds when they designed the Haflinger.

John
Haflinger 703AP LWB 1973 - (Once owned by Lady Sutherland & Sons.) Now called "Lurch" !

Have you hit the "DONATE" button at the bottom of the page after reading this post? Many thanks if you have!!
User avatar
Julian B
Posts: 872
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:07 pm
Location: W Sussex, UK

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Julian B »

I think that it was designed to keep squaddies busy when back at base. Endless tasks for cleaning, stripping down and re-greasing.

When you have an army (quite literally) of people that need to be kept occupied then the cost of labour is not a priority ;) .
Julian B
W Sussex, UK

| '62 Early Series I SWB | '72 Series II LWB |
| '56 Citroën Traction Avant |
User avatar
heinkeljb
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:49 pm
Location: Lewes, East Sussex - UK

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by heinkeljb »

How very true! Didn't think of it as tool to keep people occupied... I thought it was to be used!

John
Haflinger 703AP LWB 1973 - (Once owned by Lady Sutherland & Sons.) Now called "Lurch" !

Have you hit the "DONATE" button at the bottom of the page after reading this post? Many thanks if you have!!
Bigdougal
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 3:19 pm
Location: Lot et Garonne, France

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Bigdougal »

As Julian says the Austrians and the Swiss had large conscript armies. Probably not a common view but I would prefer to be out in the field in an earlier jeep that the Haflinger was designed to replace,a lot more chance of being able to fix it. I spent a few years as a Rupert in the RAF Regiment and the Rock Apes that I new would not have taken kindly to have been issued with a HAF. Give me an air portable or my 109 anyday.

Having said all of that, Land Rovers are too fat to get down my vines otherwise I would have stuck with my Defender 90. I know there are a few contributors who are very anti Land Rovers but I think I know which I would prefer if I was a long way from home.

Hafs are an example of the SDP engineers not listening to their marketing people.

But what the heck. They stop us watching too much TV.
Cheers

Doug Hart

1972 AP 700
Bigdougal
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 3:19 pm
Location: Lot et Garonne, France

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Bigdougal »

There of course should be a k in knew.
Cheers

Doug Hart

1972 AP 700
User avatar
AustHaflinger
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 1:27 am
Location: Canberra Australia

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by AustHaflinger »

John all you do is put your diving googles on, get your high pressure washer ready, climb under and start squirting. Best from under the vehicle. Alternatively park on the grass and put a garden sprinkler under the car and turn the hose on and leave for a few hours.

With the Haffie laid up, I have my 101 parked in the drive and have been working on it - I have a huge pile of mud on the drive that has fallen form under it - I collected that mud last June and have washed the underside about 3 times but all the mud still keeps falling out.

Likewise my Range Rover was playing in the mud last October and I still have mud falling out from under it.

So collecting mud is not just a Haffie thing.

But I do agree - I really could not see the Haflinger being a reliable vehicle in warlike circumstances. It is too hard to maintain out in the field and would tend to be left there.

Personal resilience is the name of the game :)

Garry
Haflinger 700AP (73)
Range Rover Sport TDV6 (07)
Landrover FC 101 (77)
Landrover Series 1 SWB Station Wagon (57)
Landrover Series 1 SWB (57)
Jaguar E-type Roadster V12 (71)
Jaguar XJ12C (76)
pinzmeister
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 2:24 pm

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by pinzmeister »

I think all the development went in to the engineering side of things, the platform was just something to sit your a***e on and they had no interest in it, that's why they rusted so badly.
Vampyr
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:58 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Vampyr »

I tend to agree with Garry, garden hose with sprinkler, works on mud, sand and salt water, big problem in Australia if 4WD, on the beaches. Having spent most my working life in the Army where every vehicle is in mud, water, sand, dust and everything else. I thought the Haflinger is designed great. Little work to remove the platform is a great time saver. You got to remember military vehicles are checked twice each day, have weekly, monthly, 6 monthly and yearly servicing. Key word for me is light weight, great payload. I look at what's out there today to compare from a military view with same capabilities. not much. Polaris 6x6 with trailer was used a lot here in recent /current conflicts and I'd go the haffy. On closing a saying as an Aussie digger is, It's a soldier's right to Bitch. Danny
walderse
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:34 am

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by walderse »

Wouldn't life be grand if only SDP had followed the lead of Land Rover in building Series body panels out of aluminum? But wait. Their bulkheads were made of steel...that rusts horribly. And, as far as the venerable box frame idea, if these are so magnificent, why in the world would vintage Series Land Rover owners every need to consider purchasing one of these?

http://www.roverparts.com/Parts/1

That's right. The original welded steel box frames RUST! And the manufacturer did not learn from their early models as the same issue appears to transcend the production run starting in 1948 and continuing to date.

http://www.roverparts.com/Parts/ANR3951G

Actually, I must admit that I do not know if the most recent Defender vehicles are delivered from the factory with galvanized box section frames or with what degree of rustproofing. But why would a manufacturer of military vehicles produce trucks so susceptible to rust a full four times longer than the production run of the obviously flawed Haflinger?

Until someone comes up with a Haflinger body pan made of either aluminum, fiberglass or carbon fiber or a factory reproduction of a new AluZn steel tub (what Volvo used to re-body the Swedish Army C-series trucks in the late 1990s), it looks like we will all have to just deal with the nuances of what these little trucks have to offer. I am constantly impressed with the degree to which some of the European owners will go to in restoring extremely rusted Haflinger bodies. I admire them for their tenacity in not throwing in the towel but rather embracing their projects and restoring their trucks to "like new" status. BRAVO! Keep up the fine work in keeping this breed alive and well.

Take care...one and all.

Jim Molloy
Waldersee Farm
http://www.northwestmogfest.com
User avatar
heinkeljb
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:49 pm
Location: Lewes, East Sussex - UK

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by heinkeljb »

I have to say, on the face of it the sprinkler idea sounds good, until you think a bit further, it throws water in a set pattern, aso you would have to keep moving it for it to put water in all the nooks and crannies and then it is probably not at high enough pressure to remove the mud in a corner.
They have car washes with "underbody" spray wash but I don't think you can have just that and anyway, I doubt the owners of the car wash would be happy with the amount of mud and rubbish which would end up on / in their system!

So we are left with needing an outdoor ramp which get the Haf up high enough for you to walking in underneath with a high pressure washer. Then you have the problem that high pressure washers put water into places you don't want water like Hubs, Gearboxes, Diffs!

I agree if you make a box section, it will rust unless you treat the inside surfaces afterwards. It will rot where the welds are. As with most vehicles made at the time that the Haf was made, Rust proofing was not considered a top priority or even in the top 5!

Actually, I doubt any car manufacturer actually thinks their product is still going to be in use in 40 / 50 years time! They are all expecting you to buy a replacement before then!

John
Haflinger 703AP LWB 1973 - (Once owned by Lady Sutherland & Sons.) Now called "Lurch" !

Have you hit the "DONATE" button at the bottom of the page after reading this post? Many thanks if you have!!
Bigdougal
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri May 09, 2014 3:19 pm
Location: Lot et Garonne, France

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Bigdougal »

Does anyone know:

How many parts in a Land Rover Defender 90 and how many parts there are in a Haflinger?

No point being made, just interested.
Cheers

Doug Hart

1972 AP 700
HaffyHunter
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by HaffyHunter »

Hi John & Others,

I hope you can all appreciate a very different point of view on the for better or worse aspects of the Haflinger design. I resisted for a while in participating in this thread for fear that my post might not be taken in the spirit it is intended. As some of you know, my history with Haflingers goes back to the 1960's. Back then in Canada, just as today, the Haflinger was quite rare, relatively expensive for what it was, described as "cute" by many and was a source of curiosity and conversation. What the Haflinger also was (and still is) was extremely capable for its intended purposes and innovative beyond its years. For those old enough to recall what was available in the automotive marketplace at that time and even now, think what you could buy that had a 5-speed gearbox, full independent suspension on all corners, on the fly 4WD engage/disengage, on the fly front & rear locking diffs, carried four passengers and could deliver nearly 30 MPG. From my memory there was nothing that could compare. Now for those that can remember that period in auto history, everything rusted and did so very quickly with some worse than others. It was typical that the family car (or pickup truck) would be replaced every 2-3 years because a 5 year old vehicle was basically scrap due to rust and engine wear unless it was owned by the proverbial little old lady who only drove to church on Sundays and kept it in her garage the rest of the time. To prove this point compare the number of Haflingers produced to the number that remain today. Compare this to the numbers of Landie's or AMC Jeeps produced during these years to those remaining today. By percentage it's a hands down win for the Haflinger especially when you consider that most Haf's have never known anything other than slogging off road for their entire life. Little wonder they appear so tired and worn out when found in a field or behind a barn today. More often than not the lowly Haf was completely unmaintained in civilian ownership yet they still exist today which is a testament to the robustness of their design.

This leads me to the heart of the reason I truly appreciate Haflingers. Simple put, they are an engineering marvel when you consider how mechanical designs were developed in the 1950's and 1960's. There were no Computer Assisted Design (CAD) systems in existence, there were no Computer Assisted Manufacturing (CAM) systems, there were no computerized modelling and test systems and there were no automated robotics to execute consistent assembly of parts. These vehicles were hand designed, hand drawn and hand manufactured by large teams of masters of their craft working on individual components that were somehow miraculously expected to function in unison to achieve very high expectations. As an engineer I think of this challenge as being nothing short of impossible without the modern design tools which we now use.

This and other forums have seen more than their share of postings that bemoan some aspect or another of the Haflinger design and making comparison to the way it is done with other utility vehicles. I argue that for every criticism made of the Haflinger an equal or more vigorous argument can be made against the vehicle the Haf is being compared to. I say this with confidence as I've either owned, driven off road, towed or repaired just about every make and model of vehicle that can be compared to the diminutive Haflinger. On the whole every vehicle may be said to have its design faults and if there were a perfect utility vehicle then the variety we find today would not exist except for the one. My experience with Haflingers has been nothing but enjoyable when I discount the disappointments that in the end were caused more through my own faults or ignorance than that of the Haflinger or its designers. The Haflingers in my life have taught me a lot and among the lessons are that every aspect of their design was done for a specific technical reason and nothing was left to chance given the means, methods and science available at the time of manufacture. The design and build execution of the Haflinger humbles me and my abilities to this day. Yes, they can be tedious and somewhat difficult to understand reasons for why things are as they are with Haflingers but my belief is that this can mainly be attributed to a lack of clear documentation and some "dodgy" language translation on the manuals that were produced. Given some time with tools in hand and some innate common sense any Haflinger owner can maintain and repair their Haflinger to keep it alive without butchering it in the name of "making it better" than the designers could.

To summarize my feelings on the subject, the Haflinger isn't the perfect choice for everyone. If it's not perfect for you then pass your Haf along to someone who feels it is for them or appreciate it for what it is and enjoy it for what it can do like no other vehicle. Above all, preserve for the next person who falls in love with it, whatever their reasons.

Cheers,
Steve
User avatar
AustHaflinger
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 1:27 am
Location: Canberra Australia

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by AustHaflinger »

Hi Steve - nice input.

Personally I dont have an issue with the Haflingers from the rust aspect because as you point out all vehicles were like that.

My issue is with the Haflinger is that its fine design engineering is too complex for what was required in its design spec - a military vehicle to replace the Jeep.

The Haflinger reminds me a lot of the Austin Champ of a couple of years earlier - a magnificent vehicle that I would love to own - it, like the Haflinger was a complex vehicle for its time and did actually go to war where it was a dismal failure because of its complexity - it was too hard to work on in the field. The series 1 landrover of the time was not quite as capable but was cheaper to build, cheaper to repair and easier to service in the field and as a consequence more effective in military operations.

Later the Brits relearned this lesson when the Pinzgauer replaced the 101 and was not a success - the Pinz was far more complex but in its role as a tow vehicle not all that much better but was far more difficult to maintain. The Australian Army is currently learning a similar lesson where the MB G wagen recently replaced the Aussie version of the 110 and 6x6 but it is not working out well as the vehicles are more fragile and difficult to maintain in the field even though the MB delivered to our Army is nearly 30 years newer.

Yes I find some of the design quirks of the Haflinger strange - like the swing arms holding the diff oil - why not external CVs at either end of the drive shaft ad oil free swing arms - my main grief is that what was produced did not meet the original design brief for a military vehicle.

There is a saying related to design and construction - "the right way, the wrong way and the British way" - this should be changes to "the right way, the wrong way and the Austrian way".

I think these sort of discussions, both positive and negative should continue as it helps us all to understand our vehicles better.

If you see my list of vehicles below - there is some high tech machinery there and in my view none should be placed on a pedestal and worshipped.

Garry
Haflinger 700AP (73)
Range Rover Sport TDV6 (07)
Landrover FC 101 (77)
Landrover Series 1 SWB Station Wagon (57)
Landrover Series 1 SWB (57)
Jaguar E-type Roadster V12 (71)
Jaguar XJ12C (76)
walderse
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:34 am

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by walderse »

Steve,
Your first hand Haflinger experience predates mine by a decade. You are a very lucky fellow. When I first drove a brand new Haflinger in early 1973, I knew this little truck was an extremely well designed and well made piece of equipment. One need only read the ample news accounts, magazine articles and technical journals of the time to understand just how impressive these little trucks were (and still are). One of my all time favorites comes in the form of the UK-based industry journal AUTOMOBILE ENGINEER. Their two part article in the June and July 1962 issues cover a total of seventeen pages of fine print text, photos, graphs, tables and technical drawings. Several of these drawings I have yet to see in any other reference. It is obvious that this technical journal was given very open access to the SDP engineering drawings (and the engineers that developed them). The June entry begins as follows: "STEYR-PUCH HAFLINGER: Remarkable Cross-country Vehicle With a Backbone Chassis, Independent Suspension, on all Four Wheels and With a Two-cylinder Horizontally-opposed Air-cooled Engine." SDP engineers (and all those responsible for actual assembly) certainly greatly impressed their contemporaries at the time.

The closest "modern" vehicle to a Haflinger that I have seen recently was the Daihatsu Mud Master-C concept vehicle unveiled at the 2007 Tokyo Auto Show.

http://www.autoblog.com/photos/daihatsu ... /#image-25

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2e5EUnjDTw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXPV2qYMCLg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbbf6mcxetY

The Daihatsu Mud Master-C is a compact agile forward control all wheel drive load carrier with portal axles. The Haflinger prototypes predate the Daihatsu by just under fifty years and actually show far more advanced technologic features in their design. Bravo Erich Ledwinka and the entire SPD team for a job very well done and for a gift we as owners are very fortunate to have received.

Take care....one and all.

Jim Molloy
Waldersee Farm
http://wwww.northwestmogfest.com
User avatar
heinkeljb
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 12:49 pm
Location: Lewes, East Sussex - UK

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by heinkeljb »

That is my point - "advanced technological features" on a vehicle which which A) shouldn't have needed them and B) made the thing so expensive, and complicated, compared to other vehicles, people bought other vehicles instead even if they weren't as "capable".

VW for all it's failings and supposedly "borrowed / shared" ideas had portal axles on the Type 2 range. They were not "wet" like the Haflingers. All the Haflinger's contemporaries have rust issues - you would need to go to luxury vehicles like Rolls Royce if you wanted "proper rust proofing" at the time.

I grant you that there was (and probably still), is no other vehicle available on the market which fits in exactly the same segment - Japanese 4x4 mini vans come the closest.

I like my Haflinger, even if some of the things on it would have been nicer had they been differently designed and executed.

John
Haflinger 703AP LWB 1973 - (Once owned by Lady Sutherland & Sons.) Now called "Lurch" !

Have you hit the "DONATE" button at the bottom of the page after reading this post? Many thanks if you have!!
ogdenenterprise
Posts: 426
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2013 7:40 am
Location: Cairns , Australia

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by ogdenenterprise »

Hi , Jim or anyone . have you a copy that could be uploaded or a link to the article, automobile engineer which you mention in your previous post. I would very much like to read it.

regards Dave
kerry460
Posts: 211
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:19 am
Location: Launceston Tasmania AUS,

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by kerry460 »

no vehicle is perfect .
but judging an old design , comparing to possible perfection .
is wrong .


what current vehicle will still be going after so many years ?????
with or with out rust , i will not talk about computers !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kerry
ex Tasmanian Haflinger agent .
1984 G Wagen 300GD auto
walderse
Posts: 164
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 4:34 am

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by walderse »

Dave,
I have located the scans of the two Automobile Engineer articles and am happy to e-mail them to you. From there, if you would like to upload them somewhere, feel free. Please send me a note through our NWMF website.
Thanks.

Jim Molloy
Waldersee Farm
http://www.northwestmogfest.com
Vampyr
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:58 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: Sorry to say - another nail in the SPD coffin.

Post by Vampyr »

Great stuff this discussion, many informed views and opinions. If I may add an observation. Vehicles evolve as problems present themselves, my understanding is that the Haflinger has different mods and updates as issues presented themselves. I agree that the engineering is exceptional when I look at my 41 year old vehicle. I remember when the Australian Army replaced their ageing land rover series fleet with the Perente (110 defender) . What a great vehicle, but soon their were 140 modifications to be done that did not present themselves in the trials. In the end we had great vehicles but their use by date has come and gone and now we will start again with the MB G wagon. Their will also be an issue with this vehicle because it is filling a different role than the Perente . Can anyone tell me the different roles the Haflinger was used for as to the Pinzgauer ?. For myself the joy of the vehicle is worth any pain to maintain it. The comments I get about where can I get one don't cease. Danny
Post Reply