Red Horse

well not the best picture but took this a year or two ago. I call it "60 years of Spokes" Im on the scale at the quarry and this Granite has pulled up in back of me. too bad I could not have had a better shot of it because it is a beauty

Nice rich-do I see a "twisto-wrist"? How many hours?

Wow-best case with five axles on that tank on the ground, happy was the guy that sold the owner springs and hangers!

Admit it Rich-reason you won't do it is because you don't want to spring for the wire rope!!

Amazing huh? They probably cleaned this up with those two single axles. Today? Let's see- "we better have at least two if not three triaxle Roto booms for this one".

the one and same!

Patsy- OK I give up-other than 3 more marker lights and a chrome horn, nothing else to do to this thing! Ok maybe a can of compound😎 A beauty as is!

Jim, Beautiful Super Duty- Never saw that one at any show in last few years- any clue where it is? Looks like Pirolli & Sons beautiful B stake body parked next to it??

TS- No thank you-above my paygrade or skills. When I did drive, it was 7600 gallons on five axles. Of course that goes back in days when we had spokes, and tanks had two meters, two direct lines, two 4" hoses and in a 3" Blackmer pump on some tractors. My region was not in the "weight savings at any cost" mindset. In fact I remember one of the old fleet maintenance supervisors who had a saying..."aluminum is only good for teakettles". Later in my career I was the regional staff guy responsible for fleet and we were still not that weight conscious. Rest of the country was into Alcoas and we were still on spokes! Big change came here I think when an R-700 pulling a Fruehauf bath tub dump, probably grossing over 100,000 lost control on a road under spans leading to Tobin Bridge. Knocked bridge pier out and this major span over Boston harbor was shut down. As a result of that Mass started big crack down on overweight trucks but also passed legislation raising 5 axle limit to 99,000 lbs while eliminating requirement to comply with Fed bridge formula. Picture is what we then used- 11,800 gallons, no bridge formula, trailer tandems were 50,000 pds and the LT 9000's had 40 rears and 12 fronts. But the first time you drove one of these you knew center of gravity was VERY different. Later on rest of New England followed suit but required triaxle tanks. All that is except Conn. They are still at 80,000-and bridge formula. Maybe my imagination but I think this may have led the push to bigger trailers-and with more axles vs. combinations as used in Michigan.

TS7 ....Here you go Early Astro judging by mirrors

If not the parts business must be very good in Michigan😎

Hah-talk about scuff-or do they turn??

"T"-and do the oil companies still use Michigan trains? I have Pictures of the ones from the 60's and the tanks looked like boxes-talk about high center of gravity.

Kitt Foxx was bankrolled to the tune of $400 grand by Geo Soros. Also Michelle Obama big fan and cheerleader. The amazing thing is this POS comes to the microphone and makes a speech like he was "exonerated"! No dirtbag-they let you off because you paid a fine-the 10 g bail money and because of your past "community service"-more absolute bullshit but they were trying to package it like he was in fact punished. Just think-if the cops hadn't cracked this case as quick as they did we would have had another looting spree as in Ferguson Mo. when dirt bag Mike Brown got what he deserved.

Can't argue those points-unless you are in a mountainous terrain and the power of the Ford 6.7 translates into real trip time improvement. And I would not want to argue that point. It IMO is usually a driver bitch.."this thing has no balls" Some guys just never have enough power-as long as they are not paying for the fuel.

For sure on the hypocrisy of the "smoke free" effort. Camels will f-up your lungs. Weed-only your mind!

No doubt-I'm just referring to the "heavy haul" tractors of today-usually a triaxle tractor, triaxle trailer (with probably 8 wheels per) and maybe a jeep-depending on how much money the customer has or how tough the ruling jurisdiction is.

Paul, And who was Sawmill? I always thought somehow they were involved with Gerosa? In any case, amazing what used to get hauled around on 5 axles in the old days.

Hah-and in the dumb ass state of Mass, our gov is now very worried about law enforcements ability to ID an impaired driver as the technology is not the same as alcohol detection. Wonder why the legalization of all these "recreational shops" was not delayed until the issue of "driving under the influence" was not nailed down first.

Well Kevin I guess we should give them the benefit of the doubt? When you screw up and it is obvious, do you have the stones to admit it? Note Hinrichs said they can adjust the pace of expansion as AV market changes-or words to that effect. Maybe adjust pace as the public wants no part of AV's at least to degree the planners thought would take place. that means "Car and Driver" is NOT changing its name to "Car and Sofa"!

Well if Ford's case was marginal, you think GM's position would be that much better? Then again, as I said, Ford blinked first. With them out of picture better market position for survivors. Doesn't sound like a good position though for someone else to jump in-unless Brazil's economy-as well as rest of SA makes a big turn around.

As Neville Chamberlain said...."peace for our time". And for sure no one at the higher levels knew anything about dieselgate.

Hmnn. I wonder if the discussions with Ford have anything to do with this? Probably not but just how many dance partners can you have? Kevin, what do you think?

$17,857 At 2080 straight time hours per year that is 8.58 per hour.

Agree- I would think if this guy got stopped or worse yet was in an accident the lawyers would be looking for everyone connected with this deal. Maybe benefit of the doubt? He did not want to hold up truck in back of him so threw quicky straps over while he pulled out to yard to properly chain down?