Go Back   Team-BHP > BHP India > Commercial Vehicles


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th October 2010, 13:21   #151
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Faridabad/Delhi
Posts: 1,585
Thanked: 424 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
THe major advantage of AL in my opinion is - they can develop a dedicated engine for Indian market conditions, while I think TML has to use (or adapt ) an engine from the Cummins global product portfolio.
TML is under no compulsion to use Cummins engines, although being 50% owner of Tata-Cummins, it'll be inclined to buy from Tata Cummins than from another engine manufacturer. By the way, Tata-Cummins only makes the B series. TML procures C and L series engines from Cummins India Ltd. The new 3 L engine which is meant for upcoming LCVs and MCVs has been developed in collaboration with AVL (not Cummins), just like the Safari 2.2L engine.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
And AL knows what Cummins' product portfolio is- after all AL too buys Cummins Engines for some of their products.
Cummins B series has become the NATIONAL ENGINE for CVs, just like Fiat 1.3 MJD has become for Indian cars. AMW and a few bus manufacturers too use the B series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
I'd say since Neptune was developed in house with assistance- they must have had tagets which should be equal t or better than comparable cummins. I'd put my money on Neptune, But the market has the final word.
I'm so happy AL made the effort to develop a contemporary engine in-house. At first, AL too thought of taking the collaboration route, having signed a fresh agreement with Hino that was later called off. Perhaps the Japs were demanding too much royalty or were otherwise difficult to work with? I too want the Neptune to be successful. Our auto manufacturers must grow and learn to stand on their own. Neptune is an important step in that direction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashley2 View Post
Come of yaar.. None of the manufacturer in India has the capability to develop their own engines without any Exteranl assistance. TML is yet to develop such a engine even with partnership.
So what about the 407, 608, Sumo, Indica and Nano engines? Safari petrol 2.1, 2.2 DICOR and the upcoming 3L CV engine too were developed in-house, although in partnership.

Last edited by directinjection : 28th October 2010 at 13:35.
directinjection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 14:15   #152
BHPian
 
A350XWB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: BLR/FRA/STR
Posts: 775
Thanked: 494 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
So what about the 407, 608, Sumo, Indica and Nano engines? Safari petrol 2.1, 2.2 DICOR and the upcoming 3L CV engine too were developed in-house, although in partnership.
In partnership is the keyword here. Do we know the % of help or expertise of the partners? I don't know about the other engines, but for 2.2 DICOR, the help from AVL was not so insignificant that I would not call it an in-house developed engine.
A350XWB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 15:44   #153
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Faridabad/Delhi
Posts: 1,585
Thanked: 424 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A350XWB View Post
In partnership is the keyword here. Do we know the % of help or expertise of the partners? I don't know about the other engines, but for 2.2 DICOR, the help from AVL was not so insignificant that I would not call it an in-house developed engine.
I'm keen to know the nature and extent of help taken from AVL for the 2.2 Dicor. Kindly do through some light on that if you are in the know. I myself said that it was developed in partnership with AVL as also the upcoming 3.0 L truck engine. What I'd like to know is who owns the rights to the engine design - Tata or AVL? If it's the latter, then Tata is merely license manufacturing it. About the Safari 2.1 L petrol engine, I'm sure Tata owns all rights to it although some assistance was taken from AVL for this engine too. This engine was developed from the locally designed Sumo engine. The other engines I referred to were in-house designs. Tata even got the Indica engine validated from a French certifying agency, just to make sure no one raises any design infringement claims.
directinjection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 16:06   #154
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Ashley2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NH7
Posts: 2,085
Thanked: 1,428 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
..... were developed in-house, although in partnership.
Thats what I mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
What I'd like to know is who owns the rights to the engine design - Tata or AVL?
None of the design consultancy can claim rights for their development but for few of the patents for they hold.
Ashley2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 16:27   #155
BHPian
 
A350XWB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: BLR/FRA/STR
Posts: 775
Thanked: 494 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
I'm keen to know the nature and extent of help taken from AVL for the 2.2 Dicor. Kindly do through some light on that if you are in the know. I myself said that it was developed in partnership with AVL as also the upcoming 3.0 L truck engine. What I'd like to know is who owns the rights to the engine design - Tata or AVL? If it's the latter, then Tata is merely license manufacturing it. About the Safari 2.1 L petrol engine, I'm sure Tata owns all rights to it although some assistance was taken from AVL for this engine too. This engine was developed from the locally designed Sumo engine. The other engines I referred to were in-house designs. Tata even got the Indica engine validated from a French certifying agency, just to make sure no one raises any design infringement claims.
Actually, you have sort of answered your question in one of your old posts.
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/645997-post59.html

"AVL is primarily an engineering consultant that develops engines for clients, usually be reworking on existing engines that clients provide. As usually happens in such arrangements, the Intellectual Property Rights for the final product developed by AVL would go to the client, AVL's work being a commissioned work."

Ashley2 has also mentioned it in the above post.

I know somebody who was involved in the development of the DICOR 2.2 VTT engine. So, I know the amount of input which came from AVL and my comment is based on this fact. I cannot reveal further details, sorry.
A350XWB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 16:40   #156
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Faridabad/Delhi
Posts: 1,585
Thanked: 424 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A350XWB View Post
Actually, you have sort of answered your question in one of your old posts.
http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/645997-post59.html

"AVL is primarily an engineering consultant that develops engines for clients, usually be reworking on existing engines that clients provide. As usually happens in such arrangements, the Intellectual Property Rights for the final product developed by AVL would go to the client, AVL's work being a commissioned work."

Ashley2 has also mentioned it in the above post.

I know somebody who was involved in the development of the DICOR 2.2 VTT engine. So, I know the amount of input which came from AVL and my comment is based on this fact. I cannot reveal further details, sorry.
What makes the Dicor 2.2 project interesting is that Mahindra is also using 2.2 in Scorpio as mHawk. Both engines admeasure 2179 CC and both were developed in collaboration with AVL. So it is reasonable to suspect that Dicor 2.2 and mHawk are both differently badged versions of the same engine, somewhat like Fiat 1.3 MJD that's used by more than one car maker but is variously designated as DDIS, Multijet, Quadrajet, etc. Are there significant design differences between Dicor and mHawk? Is it not possible that in this particular case, it is AVL which owns the rights to the engine and has merely given license to Mahindra and TML just like Fiat has done with MJD 1.3?
directinjection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 17:50   #157
BHPian
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doha
Posts: 139
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

As per it's website, AVL does the following:

Development of Powertrain Systems: AVL develops and improves all kinds of powertrain systems and is a competent partner to the engine and automotive industry.

Simulation: In addition AVL develops and markets the simulation methods which are necessary for the development work.

Engine Instrumentation and Test Systems: The products of this business area comprise all the instruments and systems required for engine and vehicle testing.

In most cases the first step will be followed by 2 & 3, I guess.

Now in what capacity AVL is employed by a customer, determines the extent of indigenisation. If it is the first, there is hardly anything to boast about. It is this path that Tata & Mahindara took when they developed / improved their respective 2.2L diesel motors. In all likelyhood, AL's story can't be very much different.


Though there is no denying that nothing substitutes self sufficiency, we cant hold a manufacturer at fault if it decides indigenisation is just not worth it, can we? In any case there are many things that are not indigenous in a vehicle - GB, axle to name a few.
VINUMON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 19:10   #158
BHPian
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Doha
Posts: 139
Thanked: 2 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
What makes the Dicor 2.2 project interesting is that Mahindra is also using 2.2 in Scorpio as mHawk. Both engines admeasure 2179 CC and both were developed in collaboration with AVL. So it is reasonable to suspect that Dicor 2.2 and mHawk are both differently badged versions of the same engine, somewhat like Fiat 1.3 MJD that's used by more than one car maker but is variously designated as DDIS, Multijet, Quadrajet, etc. Are there significant design differences between Dicor and mHawk? Is it not possible that in this particular case, it is AVL which owns the rights to the engine and has merely given license to Mahindra and TML just like Fiat has done with MJD 1.3?
I am afraid not. Both have been derived from existing engine platforms and afaik, the stroke / bore measurements are also different.

Again AVL is an engine developer not a manufacturer per say. So, it is unlikely that they will be approached for sourcing engines by OEMs; another established market player, let's say Cummins, MB, VM motori or Isuzu fit that bill better. But yes, AVL can act as consultants.
VINUMON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 19:46   #159
BHPian
 
Jomz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit, MI,USA
Posts: 808
Thanked: 287 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post



Cummins B series has become the NATIONAL ENGINE for CVs, just like Fiat 1.3 MJD has become for Indian cars. AMW and a few bus manufacturers too use the B series.


Cummins B series is the most sold engine even here in THe US. The Dodge Ram pickup also use the Cummins B series Diesel.

Given an extensive market, I don't know whether the B series is the ideal solution for India- But yes It might be the cheapest and most widely avaliable. I expect it to be a global engine than a national engine.

The problem is TML has not made a step in developing an engine which is specific for the Indian market. Having more resources and R & D budget than AL. I would expect TML to do so. TML's engines were mostly development of old MB designs or Cummins designs. Maybe TML thought for passenger vehilcles, developing a India specific engine was of importance.

It shows an attitude of they could do it-- but they don't want to.


I have never heard of any fresh agreement of AL with Hino, eventhough- I have spent considerable time working in AL Engine R & D. Talking of J series?? Neptune is superior.

Last edited by Jomz : 28th October 2010 at 19:56.
Jomz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 22:40   #160
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kottayam
Posts: 1,081
Thanked: 153 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by directinjection View Post
I'm so happy AL made the effort to develop a contemporary engine in-house. I too want the Neptune to be successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
Cummins B series is the most sold engine even here in THe US. The problem is TML has not made a step in developing an engine which is specific for the Indian market.
TMLs strategy is to become an international player and Prima is the first step in that direction. It is better to use a engine, proven all over the world than developing an India specific one. What will AL do for export markets? do they use the same Made for India Neptune engines, or source from some one else? These are all stragegic decisons, In my opinion, AL took higher risk than TM, who is right, only time will tell.
teamveevee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 22:59   #161
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KOCHI
Posts: 367
Thanked: 81 Times
Default

There are always some positive & negative sides for various strategies adopted by AL and TML. But looking thus far for CV segment in India, AL's tradition of innovation is highly appreciable.
Back in 2000 when the BS1 norms came into effect, the AL engines (both Leyland & Hino) could easily comply with it. But the 697 & 497 series of engines used by TML was modified with addition of Turbocharger to attain the emission levels. And TML cleverly & effectively made "Turbo" a marketing weapon.
In 2005, when BS2 was enforced, TML again added "intercooler" to its CV engines (both 497 & 697 series) and the fuel system changed from Inline mechanical FIP to electronic Rotary FIP. But AL only added turbocharger & intercooler. While the Hino E series attained BS2 status even with old Inline FIP system.
Again the engines made by AL is comparable to Cummins, because if we consider 5Lakh Kms as average engine life, TML 697series seldom achieve this mark, while AL & Cummins easily cross it very often. (Source: any STU - KeSRTC, TNSTC, APSRTC etc). And this is the very basic reason for Cummins engines being widely accepted by TML customers rather than TML own engines.

Similarly India's first CNG engine was from AL. Again India's first BS5 CNG engine was developed by AL with MPFI system. TML sourced HCV Bseries gas engine from Cummins, even today.
Transsenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 23:13   #162
BHPian
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KOCHI
Posts: 367
Thanked: 81 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
TMLs strategy is to become an international player and Prima is the first step in that direction. It is better to use a engine, proven all over the world than developing an India specific one. What will AL do for export markets? do they use the same Made for India Neptune engines, or source from some one else? These are all stragegic decisons, In my opinion, AL took higher risk than TM, who is right, only time will tell.
1.TML sourced Cummins iSBe engine for Prima here because there is no other option for them as far as higher power engines are concerned. The Prima needs 220HP and upwards which TML does not have. And PRIMA's international edition will be powered by IVECO engine and not Cummins for that matter. The TML NOVUS (outside india) is powered by IVECO and not Cummins.

2. TML & AL can only target developing nations, gulf & other african countries for export market and not US or UK. Hence Neptune is more than enough.
Transsenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th October 2010, 23:15   #163
BHPian
 
Jomz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Detroit, MI,USA
Posts: 808
Thanked: 287 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teamveevee View Post
TMLs strategy is to become an international player and Prima is the first step in that direction. It is better to use a engine, proven all over the world than developing an India specific one. What will AL do for export markets? do they use the same Made for India Neptune engines, or source from some one else? These are all stragegic decisons, In my opinion, AL took higher risk than TM, who is right, only time will tell.
I believe the engines/vehicles should be market specific, I wouldn't buy car because it is proven all over the world, I would rather buy a car which suits my needs.

THe point is if AMW uses the same 6BT engine, What is advantage of TML over AMW?? tomorrow If i start a HCV company, I can deliver almost the same product as TML by buying an engine from Cummins and putting together some aggregates. R & D work on just integrating aggregates does not give techincal advantage. There should be pure research, which AL is making baby steps towards to.

There is the Unique selling points for each product, TML's stategy maybe to deliver a product sources from various global suppliers and concentrating on the after sales and service aspect, maybe.
Jomz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th October 2010, 10:04   #164
Distinguished - BHPian
 
Ashley2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: NH7
Posts: 2,085
Thanked: 1,428 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
There are always some positive & negative sides for various strategies adopted by AL and TML. But looking thus far for CV segment in India, AL's tradition of innovation is highly appreciable.
Back in 2000 when the BS1 norms came into effect, the AL engines (both Leyland & Hino) could easily comply with it. But the 697 & 497 series of engines used by TML was modified with addition of Turbocharger to attain the emission levels. And TML cleverly & effectively made "Turbo" a marketing weapon.
In 2005, when BS2 was enforced, TML again added "intercooler" to its CV engines (both 497 & 697 series) and the fuel system changed from Inline mechanical FIP to electronic Rotary FIP. But AL only added turbocharger & intercooler. While the Hino E series attained BS2 status even with old Inline FIP system.
.......And this is the very basic reason for Cummins engines being widely accepted by TML customers rather than TML own engines.

Similarly India's first CNG engine was from AL. Again India's first BS5 CNG engine was developed by AL with MPFI system. TML sourced HCV Bseries gas engine from Cummins, even today.
Great Transsenger! Nice write up.
AL has also made wonders with its inlile FIP's by using it in 3116,
Watching the progress and the market responses TML is unlikely to develop its own range of M&Hcv engines.They shall stand only with Cummins in India.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transsenger View Post
1.TML sourced Cummins iSBe engine for Prima here because there is no other option for them as far as higher power engines are concerned. The Prima needs 220HP and upwards which TML does not have. And PRIMA's international edition will be powered by IVECO engine and not Cummins for that matter. The TML NOVUS (outside india) is powered by IVECO and not Cummins.

2. TML & AL can only target developing nations, gulf & other african countries for export market and not US or UK. Hence Neptune is more than enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
I believe the engines/vehicles should be market specific, I wouldn't buy car because it is proven all over the world, I would rather buy a car which suits my needs.
Here I have a opinion.
The way we are looking at the "market specific" carries different meaning.
Its not only related to emission norms but also considering service options as well.
I feel the competency of the service Industry, the maturity in handling advanced tools, the adoption of advanced technology are prime factors in designing engines.Normally a engine developed with advanced markets in mind ( using high end tools for service) meets it end in markets where service industry is not competent enough to handle such engines like India. THis is one of the point why AL - Iveco Cargo failed in India.But say if its other way around - An engine meeting EuroV, meeting all legal compliance and developed with simple service options can be accepted in mature markets.(Though the brand factor plays a vital role apart from this)
Ashley2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th October 2010, 12:38   #165
Senior - BHPian
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Faridabad/Delhi
Posts: 1,585
Thanked: 424 Times
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
Cummins B series is the most sold engine even here in THe US. The Dodge Ram pickup also use the Cummins B series Diesel.
The B series is popular worldwide including China because of its simple design and long life. Mercedes Benz (as a minority equity holder in TML) didn't like it when Tata collaborated with Cummins. They wanted TML to take technology from MB, not from elsewhere. However, Tata found the engine offered by MB too big for the Indian market and so, the "World Truck" project (with which the new engine technology was to come) went to MB's Brazilian subsidiary, instead of TML. I'm talking about the early nineties here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
Given an extensive market, I don't know whether the B series is the ideal solution for India- But yes It might be the cheapest and most widely avaliable. I expect it to be a global engine than a national engine.
TML chose B series due to its simple design. Design simplicity is good for a less developed country like India. Also, Tata Cummins Ltd. (TCL) has made changes to the engine to suit Indian conditions. When the engine was first launched in TML vehicles, there were frequent overheating problems because the electronic thermostat malfunctioned in Indian climate. So TCL developed a non-electronic thermostat that was more rugged and the problem was taken care of. More recently, TCL has come out with a mechanical Euro-III version of the engine for India since a CRDI Euro-III engine would face problems in India due to lack of sophisticated service facilities. When Europe went Euro-III, Cummins had taken the CRDI route but for India, the mechanical route has been deliberately taken. Incidentally, India is only now shifting to Euro-III as far as CVs go given the fact that over 90% of CV sales take place outside of the metro areas where BS-IV prevails.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
The problem is TML has not made a step in developing an engine which is specific for the Indian market. Having more resources and R & D budget than AL. I would expect TML to do so. TML's engines were mostly development of old MB designs or Cummins designs. It shows an attitude of they could do it-- but they don't want to.
Agree with you. In the olden days TML used to invest heavily in R&D, much more than AL which didn't have a facility like TML's ERC in Pune. It was partly due to the fact that there were Govt. imposed legal and policy constraints in obtaining foreign technology. Also, TML allowed its technical collaboration with MB to expire in 1969 while AL's collaboration with British Leyland continued. So AL had a less stronger need to invest in local R&D. Since technology can now be freely imported, the path of indigenous R&D has perhaps been abandoned by TML, something I'm not too happy about. For the upcoming LCVs and MCVs though, TML is developing a new 3 L engine in collaboration with AVL although I'm not in the know about the relative contributions of AVL and TML in the R&D effort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
I have never heard of any fresh agreement of AL with Hino, eventhough- I have spent considerable time working in AL Engine R & D. Talking of J series?? Neptune is superior.
Yes I was referring to the J series for which a fresh collaboration agreement was signed with Hino in April 2003. Seems like it didn't materialise. Check this link for a news report on the subject:

The Hindu Business Line : Ashok Leyland ties up with Hino

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jomz View Post
Neptune is superior.
I'd be keen to know what attributes make the Neptune superior to J.

Last edited by directinjection : 29th October 2010 at 12:42.
directinjection is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mahindra Truck & Bus division rolls out 15,000th HCV from Chakan plant Aditya Commercial Vehicles 1 27th August 2015 21:55
NGT issues notices to DTC, Tata & Ashok Leyland for plying empty buses embee Commercial Vehicles 14 27th August 2015 17:52
How Bajaj Auto, Tata Motors, M&M and Ashok Leyland gave birth to auto MNCs darklord The Indian Car Scene 0 17th October 2013 13:06
Tata Marco Polo vs Ashok Leyland Rear Engine on DTC Fleet MileCruncher Commercial Vehicles 28 4th December 2011 09:51
Ashok Leyland to be renamed as Hinduja Leyland? Ashley2 Commercial Vehicles 8 15th April 2011 13:14


All times are GMT +5.5. The time now is 02:30.

Copyright 2000 - 2017, Team-BHP.com
Proudly powered by E2E Networks