charles wrote:
In article ,
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
John Williamson wrote:
There are two-stroke diseel trucks. The Commer TS-3 was two-stroke.

Abandoned by the makers half a century ago as too complex, too expensive
to produce and too inefficient. Next...

Commer was part of the Rootes Group which went near bankrupt. Car makes
they owned included Humber, Hillman, Singer, Sunbeam and Talbot. Were
taken over by Chrysler who also failed. The European side was sold to
Peugeot.
Another classic example of a UK car company who failed because they didn't
invest in enough new models. The one which they did - the Imp - had many
design flaws when introduced. Which, of course, were blamed on the
workforce. Although there were problems there - the government of the day
forced them to build a new factory in a part of the world not used to car
building - Linwood, Glasgow.

not quite sure I understand the logic of that. is there an inherited gene
which makes car building easier? If so, how did Toyota succeed at Derby?

Not a gene as such, no, but in the Derby area, there is a history of car
and aircraft building, so the workforce were used to working at that
scale before Toyota opened the plant. In Glasgow, the engineering
background was in shipbulding, and the skills aren't so easily transferable.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.