dave41855 Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 Can you imagine if truckers here in America were allowed to pull trailers like this what the bulk of the population would say about it??? Wouldn't the NIMBY's have a field day with THIS!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 The American trucking industry is too busy ruining their reputation with the cheapest drivers and equipment they can buy to be bothered with improving productivity with quality drivers and trucks like this. That said, this quad is pretty much an outback restricted outfit, though it makes sense there. But fact is, we could legally run B doubles and B triples with at least half again the cubic capacity and twice the payload of the current 53'/40 short ton combinations with improved safety and productivity and less wear on the roads...If the law allowed us to. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjh Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 If you tried to pull a load like that here in bc on some of the hills we have here there would be differential parts and Trans parts littering the hyw! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsmackpaul Posted October 9, 2016 Share Posted October 9, 2016 20 minutes ago, fjh said: If you tried to pull a load like that here in bc on some of the hills we have here there would be differential parts and Trans parts littering the hyw! I would agree 100% I have stated many times on here most people dont realize how flat Australia is, it's the flattest continent on earth hence we can pull thumping big loads over a huge distance with what may seem like a small amount of power to do it with 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 7 hours ago, fjh said: If you tried to pull a load like that here in bc on some of the hills we have here there would be differential parts and Trans parts littering the hyw! I agree 100% with what you say, yes, but there are places in the mid-west and mid Canada that short triples could indeed be used. However, just out of curiosity, I wonder what the gross weight of the road train in the photo weighs in at?? Any guesses anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 7 hours ago, mrsmackpaul said: I would agree 100% I have stated many times on here most people dont realize how flat Australia is, it's the flattest continent on earth hence we can pull thumping big loads over a huge distance with what may seem like a small amount of power to do it with And by the way, I did get to see a lot of Australia on 2 US Army R&R tours. I fell in love with the country! I spent time in Perth, Sydney and the outback where there weren't any such thing as bombs, IED's and bullets!! God willing, I'll go back there someday before I die!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Yup, that quad is only workable in an environment like the Australian outback. It's only got about 3 HP/Ton which would never be tolerated on busy highways. There's only about 10% of the weight on the drive wheels, so it'd be useless anywhere ice and snow are common. But cut it in half and make a B-double out of it and at 75 metric tons it'd have decent performance, stability, and acceptable snow covered road traction' 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlotpilot Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 consumer driven pricing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmyb Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 2 hours ago, dave41855 said: I agree 100% with what you say, yes, but there are places in the mid-west and mid Canada that short triples could indeed be used. However, just out of curiosity, I wonder what the gross weight of the road train in the photo weighs in at?? Any guesses anyone? 175t. It's based in Western Australia and under concessional loading you can 23.5t on each tri axle group. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmyb Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, fjh said: If you tried to pull a load like that here in bc on some of the hills we have here there would be differential parts and Trans parts littering the hyw! There are a few hills hills around that triples/quads are supposed to break up to go over. But the experienced will simply come to a stop at base of hill and crawl over in 1st or 2nd to avoid such problems. Edited October 10, 2016 by Timmyb 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, Timmyb said: There are a few hills hills around that triples/quads are supposed to break up to go over. But the experienced will simply come to a stop at base of hill and crawl over in 1st or 2nd to avoid such problems. And down under while being flat it must STILL take some serious horsepower under the hood to get quads started and keep them rolling, right? Also in mph, what kind of average road speeds are we talking about here? 30-ish?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsmackpaul Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 4 hours ago, dave41855 said: And by the way, I did get to see a lot of Australia on 2 US Army R&R tours. I fell in love with the country! I spent time in Perth, Sydney and the outback where there weren't any such thing as bombs, IED's and bullets!! God willing, I'll go back there someday before I die!! Well give us a shout if you do make it back over and we can have a beer or two and chew the fat for a while 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsmackpaul Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 hour ago, dave41855 said: And down under while being flat it must STILL take some serious horsepower under the hood to get quads started and keep them rolling, right? Also in mph, what kind of average road speeds are we talking about here? 30-ish?? I would guess around 45 - 50 MPH average speed not many towns in a lot of Australia and no you dont need a lot of power to get moving I have 320 under the bonnet and it is rated to 115 ton from Mack and you can easily get that moving under most circumstances have had one occasion I had it jump out low 2nd climbing a hill came to halt I needed deep reduction to lift off and was wheel spinning on the bitumen but that was more waiting for the last axle group brakes to release I was fairly tightly wound at the time and if I was a tad calmer it would have lifted of fine OOP'S The biggest thing in keeping these bigger loads moving at any speed is wind head winds crook if I have the breeze coming across at a 45 degree angle across the front thats a fair bastard and I have spent the odd hour or two at 30 MPH As for higher power Timmy I think would give a much better answer than me Paul 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmyb Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 For the most part, our engines are exactly the same as what you have there, except the Mack has a different rating. Starting off would be low gear. But also the diff ratio would be slow, like around 4.89. They are speed limited to 90km/h here, that's about 56mph. If I were to guess (and that's all it is) I'd say 85% of their driving would be between 75km/h (46mph) 90km/h. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swishy Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Typical Mack Titan Road Train spec 600 + HP 2000ftlb torque max rpm =20000 RoadRanger duble OD 18 speed 48000# RSend by law ....... max speed 100kph (60mph) @ =1700rpm cya §wishy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 We in America way overestimate the HP needed to move a load. In real world road tests, anything over 10HP/Ton tends to be wasted, unless you're going up and down mountains all day. On flat roads the power needed to maintain 60-65 MPH cruise speeds is rather modest, about 60-100 HP to overcome wind resistance on a modern aerodynamic truck and 1.5-2 HP per ton of weight to overcome rolling resistance. That explains how a torquey 300 HP engine can pull turnpike doubles at 50-60 tons on the Indiana and Ohio 'pikes just fine. Don't try it with a gutless wonder like the 270 HP L10 Cummins though, Hostess' turnpike doubles rig would only do 45 MPH and the troopers made them drop the 2nd trailer at the first service area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 My bad, should be 3-4 HP per ton. Maybe if I did all my figurin' in metric it'd be easier... Let's see, how many KW/ton is that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 1 hour ago, TeamsterGrrrl said: We in America way overestimate the HP needed to move a load. In real world road tests, anything over 10HP/Ton tends to be wasted, unless you're going up and down mountains all day. On flat roads the power needed to maintain 60-65 MPH cruise speeds is rather modest, about 60-100 HP to overcome wind resistance on a modern aerodynamic truck and 1.5-2 HP per ton of weight to overcome rolling resistance. That explains how a torquey 300 HP engine can pull turnpike doubles at 50-60 tons on the Indiana and Ohio 'pikes just fine. Don't try it with a gutless wonder like the 270 HP L10 Cummins though, Hostess' turnpike doubles rig would only do 45 MPH and the troopers made them drop the 2nd trailer at the first service area. Years ago my "brother" was hp crazy and each truck he bought was more hp than the last. When Cummins came out with the KTA-600 he just had to have it. KW had a dealer down in Manchester NH and they had several W900's with them in it. Well, he bought one. Yup, it was a nice truck, pretty, comfortable and the interior sure was sweet, but as time went on, he found out that 600 hp really was just to much. He'd wear out drive tires 2 to 1 faster than I would. Oh that truck sure would fly, yup, I know he had "more than one" speeding ticket with it. I knew one was for 104 mph out in Arizona on I-40!!! But we figured that the drive tires must have been spinning at high speed overcoming wind with a box trailer. After that truck, we downsized and returned to Mack and never again had any issues!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeamsterGrrrl Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 I've been following some truckers on Facebook that are shooting for 9+ MPG and in some cases achieving that. One of them is running a Volvo with the same lift pusher axle Mack is offering and the D11/MP7 engine. He put hubometers on both the drive and undriven pusher axle and noticed that the drive axle was noticeably doing more miles, indicating measurable wheel slip... One can imagine the wheel slip he'd get with a 600 HP engine! He's lowered air pressure on the drive axle tires to 80 PSI to get better traction and also had Volvo fit a front anti-roll bar to deal with the sloppy handling of the Volvo chassis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 44 minutes ago, TeamsterGrrrl said: I've been following some truckers on Facebook that are shooting for 9+ MPG and in some cases achieving that. One of them is running a Volvo with the same lift pusher axle Mack is offering and the D11/MP7 engine. He put hubometers on both the drive and undriven pusher axle and noticed that the drive axle was noticeably doing more miles, indicating measurable wheel slip... One can imagine the wheel slip he'd get with a 600 HP engine! He's lowered air pressure on the drive axle tires to 80 PSI to get better traction and also had Volvo fit a front anti-roll bar to deal with the sloppy handling of the Volvo chassis. Volvo's are one truck I've never really had any contact with. I know here in New England there are a few owner-operators do have them, but KW and IH seem to be the predominant trucks. There used to be a Mack dealer over in Lancaster NH but they went out of business years ago. Manchester Mack to this area is a long drive, Burlington VT is the closest. You mention 9+ mpg.... WOW!! I always thought that my ole MAck did quite well at 4!! When we all hauled pulp and logs, our trucks were all very heavy. My light weight was always 37,000 or a tad more. I had an overweight permit, only valid in VT, for 90,000 gross. Trouble is, VT would only allow about 1750 or so over that and if you pushed say 91,000, the fine dropped back to the 80,000 limit!! THAT got expensive VERY quickly!! 9+ mpg today, extremely light weight and aerodynamics are the name of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
41180 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Doesn't mcdevitt sell macks in Lancaster nh ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave41855 Posted October 10, 2016 Author Share Posted October 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, logtruckman said: Doesn't mcdevitt sell macks in Lancaster nh ? Well son-of-a-sea biscuit!!! I forgot all about them! Yup, you're right about McDevitt. Lancaster Mack folded years ago after the Fournier boys retired. Not sure when McDevitt took over but it must have awhile after Lancaster shut down as I remember the old lot was empty and bare for awhile. Guess I oughta make the pilgrimage over there and check them out!! Thanks logtruckman for jogging my memory! It's hell getting old! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
41180 Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 29 minutes ago, dave41855 said: Thank you ! I'm from southern vt but when I was a kid I used to hear about white Mountain mack/ Lancaster mack they used to sell serco log loaders up there as well with Mack? Back in the late 90s me and my brother were hauling cherry up to Ethan Allen in beachers falls vt and blew a pinion seal in our CL and swung in there to get one on the way home they seemed like good people they had mack pride in think they were still an independent mack dealer then not a mega dealer . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsmackpaul Posted October 10, 2016 Share Posted October 10, 2016 Im getting a fair bit of topic here but when talking fuel economy in the fuel crisis back in the 70's a lot of research was done the single biggest factor was speed once you went above 80 kmh it made a huge difference the figures from memory was something along the line of twice as much hp to travel at 100 kmh with a van type trailer flat top tarped loads were the best double stock crates were the worst 7MPG was common back then on interstate trucks or at least it was achieved in large fleets under test Talking about wheel slip on drive tyres I have noticed the only tyres that get real hot are drive tyres so I reckon there must be a fair degree of wheel slip in trucks pulling big loads and a huge amount in trucks running fast Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve p Posted October 11, 2016 Share Posted October 11, 2016 all road trains must limited to 90k's either by electronic or gear bound 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.