I’ve come across this Bedford a few times in the same industrial neighbourhood in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, so it must belong to someone working in the area. This type of vehicle has always appealed to me as a Goldilocks ‘just right’ vehicle in size and capability, but not necessarily as they came from the factory.
The Bedford CF was released in August 1969 to replace both the smaller CA and larger TJ vans, and updated its CA predecessor’s setting of the modern van layout (ignoring fwd) of a front-mounted engine, the historic cab-over van setup, passenger car front suspension (GM stablemate Vauxhall Victor in the case of the CF) and drivetrain for good drivability, by replacing the separate chassis with a robust van unibody. Ford had a march on the van market at this time, not only with the October 1965 Transit, but in North America the front-engined Econoline was launched over a year earlier (January 1968 as a 1969 model). Both Chevrolet and Dodge would debut their front-engined vans for 1971 in the US, while Dodge never did replace the old cab-over Commer in the UK.
The CF van came in 106″ (2.7m) and 126″ (3.2m) wheelbases and GVM ratings from 4816-7280 lb (2185-3303 kg), giving load space from 201-268 cu.ft. (5.7-7.6 m3) – less 16 cu.ft. if you added the optional passenger seat! The longer wheelbase van had dual rear wheels giving a load capacity of 4021 lb, quite an increase on the entry level 2039 lb! Engines were 1.6L & 2.0L Vauxhall gasoline or 1.8L & 2.5L Perkins diesels, which would be upgraded over the years.
Picture from car-from-uk.com
Like the Transit the CF was available as a cab-chassis should you want something other than a plain van. As you can see the chassis had ‘top hat’ sections that I assume were added to box in the standard chassis rail sections that would normally be welded to the floor of the van. Load capacity by the time you added more than the most basic tray was probably slightly lower than the van; base kerb weight was only 300 lb lighter. The cab-chassis was available in the same weight ratings as the van, however from the examples I’ve seen the 35 cwt model seems to have been much more popular than its smaller brothers.
Picture from flickr user Jamie-A
The CF was also available as a “cowl chassis” or even a bare chassis in the UK. As a piece of trivia, the town of Luton in Bedfordshire where Bedford was located had already given its name to the Luton Peak style of van body, which extended over the cab as seen above. This was developed to provide more volume for carrying straw hats, that were a traditional product of the town.
From 1973 Holden dropped the 75 hp (56 kW) Vauxhall 2-litre four in favour of their own 173 cu in (2.8L) 6-cylinder with 112 hp (83.5 kW) and 160 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm (217 Nm), still in gross power ratings at this time and in Low Compression form to run on Standard grade petrol. I imagine that this would have involved extending the ‘doghouse’ rearwards for the extra two cylinders; by comparison Ford Australia used the existing extended-nose diesel bodywork when they slotted the Falcon’s 6-cyl into the Transit.
Transmission options were 3 or 4-speed manual depending if you bought the short or long wheelbase, or a 3-speed automatic. In 1978 the larger 202 cu in (3.3L) six brought the option of some extra power and torque. Final drive ratios were raised (!) to 4.625:1 on short wheelbase models and a tree-climbing 5.222:1 on the long wheelbase. Later this changed to 4.1:1 standard or the 2.75:1 “highway” diff – you can imagine this was a pretty important choice to get right! Brakes were power-assisted four wheel drums.
Picture from www.bedford-cf.co.uk
Of course there were those who wanted more, and more than a few CF’s have had a V8 slotted (and hacksawed and ground and bashed) into the engine bay, usually the Holden 253 (4.2L) or 308 (5.0L) because they would drop straight onto the original 6-cyl engine mounts at least.
The Bedford CF van ran until 1981 in Australia, which meant it did not receive the 1980 facelift nor was it replaced by the second generation as per UK models which ran through to 1987. Instead the Bedford name was dropped completely and an Isuzu-based Holden Shuttle van took over, and since 1991 Holden is no longer in the commercial van market. Isuzu trucks had also taken the place of the larger Bedford trucks.
You can see the large LPG tank in this shot; a dual-fuel setup was and is a very popular option to reduce running costs, and as a bonus it would probably double your range.
Picture from www.buga.com.au
As a car nut, the thought of a dedicated hauler has some appeal, and is how I would want to own a CF (with V8 on LPG). This example has the 140″ wheelbase version available on the Cab Chassis from 1975, which is probably not necessary for the small cars I’d put on it. Note the recess in the centre of the floor to allow clearance for low exhausts or similar.
Ironically the modern equivalent of this truck, the Vauhall Movano (here in quite a nice press photo) or its Ford Transit, Mercedes Sprinter etc competitors are a good deal taller (12″+) and longer than the CF, making them that much harder to live with and house. The bumper-to-back-of-cab dimension of the Movano is over two feet longer than the CF; for quite good reasons (cabin space & crash safety) if you drive one commercially! But for a hobby hauler for smaller cars, the demands are not the same.
Ironically when looking up information on CF’s I actually came across this very vehicle for sale on Gumtree! You have missed it though, the asking price of $2,990 must have been snapped up last October, so it looks like I won’t be seeing it around any more.
Further Reading:
CC Outtake: 1966 Bedford CA Ice Cream Van – The Sun Always Shines in England (the predecessor to the CF)
Storage Field Classic: Vauxhall Victor 101 Super – Almost Mine (source of the engine and front suspension)
Curbside Classic: 1969 Ford Econoline – Ford Builds a Better Box
CC Outtake: 1972 Ford Econoline 200 – Big White Generic Box (this one contains a great shot of the first and current Transit, I don’t think anybody has done a CC on that yet)
Cohort Capsule: Ford Econoline Euro-Style Truck (a US equivalent of this truck)
The styling here is definitely from the same school as North American van designs introduced in the late ’60s/early ’70s, like the 1969-74 Ford Econoline.
In North America, vans were used as the basis for “box trucks” like the one in the fifth photo, but you didn’t often see them configured as the other types of vehicles depicted in this post, the last link above notwithstanding.
What’s the small SUV in the background in the 9th photo, and the antique car being transported in the 10th photo?
The family resemblance to a ’71-96 Chevy Van/GMC Vandura is pretty plain to see!
#9 looks to be a long-wheelbase Suzuki SJ/Samurai variant, #10 is a pre-GM Vauxhall of some sort, the most famous being the 30/98 “Prince Henry”.
Exactly what I was going to say! Note the distinctive scallops on the side of the hood, a styling feature Vauxhall would retain into the 1950’s.
If I was covering the van instead of the cab-chassis I would have mentioned the online confusion by the Scooby Doo movie featuring both a Bedford and a Chev/GMC van as the mystery machine.
Ah, the Luton body. I’ve driven a few Transits with Luton bodies. Transit Lutons, they were always known as, even though it sounds about as right as Chevy Dearborn…
This was sold as Opel Bedford Blitz in Germany, right? Curious name for a British vehicle after WWII…
Blitz is not short for Blitzkrieg.
It is in Britain.
I see. Don’t mention the war. And that brings me to a joke of a Dutch comedian, in which he asked a German audience if they would like to listen to Edvard Grieg’s Peer Gynt Suites. Rather long, hence his question: “Wollt ihr ein kleines Stuckchen oder wollt ihr den totalen Grieg ?”
hehehe.
Wait on… I don’t understand German.
I hope he didn’t ask that soon after WW2. 😉
He asked, “Do you want a little bit, or do you want the total Grieg?” As in, do you want to listen to the entire piece, or just a bit? But in certain accents, “Grieg” the composer can sound like “Krieg,” and the question becomes, “do you want a little bit, or do you want total war?!”
“Wollt ihr den totalen Krieg ?” comes from a speech given by Joseph Goebbels in 1943.
Also the Canadian Military Pattern (CMP) trucks built by both Ford and Chevrolet are commonly referred to as Blitz trucks.
“Blitzkrieg” was coined by a British journalist, & was never a term used by the Wehrmacht.
Georgy Zhukov, not the Germans, first employed modern combined-arms warfare in the little-known Battle of Khalkhin Gol, in which he surrounded & wiped out the Japanese 6th Army. This was why Japan gave up designs on Russia & aimed for the Pacific instead. The Soviets earlier had developed a doctrine like “blitzkrieg” called “Deep Battle,” but most of its advocates were purged by Stalin, which was why Barbarossa was at first successful.
And here’s Opel’s renowned Blitz-logo. A lightning, that’s all. Plus of course the name for their truck model of yore.
I owned two of those around 1987, both used as small campervans, with a interior we ripped from a old caravan.
Travelled Europe and the Middle-East with those, one had a Perkins diesel engine, and a topspeed of 90 km/ph, the other one used a Opel engine, think a 2.0, and that was a good bit faster.
The Perkins powered van was a bit lifted, and besides the standard 60 liter dieseltank, we fitted a custommade 150 liter tank over the rear-axle, so 210 liter diesel, which made it possible to drive from Holland to Spain without having to stop for fuel.
Friend of mine had one with a Ford Granada 2.3 V6 and a automatic in it, made it feel real fast compared to mine.
The only thing, a lot of them were rusting like mad…..had to replace body parts on a regular base.
Good to see a working Bedford CF ! Plenty of them were around here too, but it was always outnumbered by the competition from Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen.
That Vauxhall Movano is designed and built by Renault. The French call it the Renault Master, it’s also offered as an Opel Movano -of course- and as a Nissan NV400. All of them are powered by a Renault 2.3 liter diesel engine.
Question: when is a ute big enough to be called a truck ?
The large vans have certainly converged in design, which together with the great promo photo was why I chose to use the Movano here. It is not sold in Australia, but is here in Renault form.
This sort of vehicle would never be called a ute, although pickups customarily are. The term ute is short for ‘coupe utility’ which is a car-derived goods carrying vehicle with an integral cargo bed. Even the current Falcon may not technically be a ute due to the separate pickup bed, depending on your interpretation.
You might have people call a small van-based cab chassis with a factory (ie painted steel) dropside tray a ute, but that would be the minority who would use that term, less so if it had an aluminium tray – a less uniform appearance? I suppose that once they get longer than a car and as tall as vans of that size are (even from the CF era) any resemblance to a ute is lost.
Thanks for the explanation. And that is indeed a very nice press photo of the Vauxhall ! Regarding modern car haulers, one size smaller than the Vauxhall and the others is this Fiat Ducato I shot recently.
Ute becomes a truck when you need a heavy license to drive it. Tare weight over 3500kg
That certainly sounds logical.
That doesn’t work in Australia though, where the threshold for needing a Light Rigid truck license is 4500kg GVM.
There are many small trucks that squeak in below that, they typically weigh around/just over 2000kg as a cab chassis.
The Transit really followed the example of the CFs predecessor, the CA with the engine out front and a more car-like driving position, but they let the CA run on 17 years (1952-69) before replacement. The styling is definitely junior Chevy though the LWB high roof version tended to look quite chubby. Very popular in Britain for Ice Cream vans, Ambulances and Motor caravans (e.g. the classic Bedford Dormobile). There was also an electric version that was briefly sold Stateside.
Like the CA before it, the front suspension was independent, something the Transit didn’t have until 1986.
Thanks Bernard. I saw a chassis diagram with the engine between the seats which must have been for another van because the strange styling of the CA clearly has the engine in the front. I’ll amend the text.
I’m not sure if they were common as ambulances in Australia, but it would only be relatively recently that they would have lost the mantle of most common ice cream van solely thanks to the rust worm.
Common as ambulances in NZ theres a dead one nearby.
Ambulances in my state were F100/F150 based – may have been the only reason Ford sold them for so long, as there weren’t many private buyers.
Ford didnt have a beam mounted independant front suspension to use in the Transit its cars used Macphearson struts, Vauxhall had SLA suspension in its large cars.
And I guess they didn’t want to modify the Transit after several years in production to use the Mark 3 Cortina front end.
These CFs sold like hot cakes in NZ Govt department private contractors everyone had these faster on highway than the Ford Transit with a better ride and larger range of engine options they were very popular, the LWB van and pickup/cab chassis could also be had with a 283 Chevrolet engine though not for local assembly in NZ, many had dealership fitted Holden six engines dropped in no panel cutting is required though a better choice with hot rodders and customisers was a Vauxhall Cresta 3.3 as it bolts to the Bedford 4 speed box and the highway geared diff head can be harvested from the same car you got the engine from, same with the Falcon powered Transit you used a Zephyr six diff head but of course those were tricks the Aussies never learned, I drove a Powered by Holden CF up and down the entire east coast of Australia a slow noisy gas guzzling junk heap of a van that low compression 173 was not an improvement on the OHC Vauxhall 2.3 four by any stretch of the imagination but it was a very cheap local content assembly fix.
Plus it meant less parts for the Holden dealer to stock. The Vauxhall OHC fours, in 1600 and later 1760 form, saw limited application as the ‘big engine’ option for the LC and LJ Torana fours, at a time when almost everybody was buying the six. So mostly it was a CA-only engine here.
Bedford vans used the 2000 OHC and later 2300 OHC here anyway the 1600 only appeared in the base model FD Victor it wasnt a big seller.
If you like the Bedford vans then check out:
http://www.bedfordcf2van.blogspot.com
How cool is the sliding front door on the one in the “Holden Powered” ad?
Like step vans, the door could be locked in the open position while driving!