Not really wanting to fuel the flames of your foolish fire any more (but I will)…
There are just as many drawbacks with 6x4s. A major one is loss of traction when you only have axle locks, and with 4 way lockups you lose steering. Yet again, you are displaying an odd business sense… Losing 1/2 a tonne of payload is a problem, end of story.
Yes, my truck is fairly light. With a 53’ van, I tare in at 15120kgs, and US max gross is 36.5 tonnes on 5 axles. On 5 axles in Canada we run at 39500kgs so you are dripping like an old tap again.
You say you are a fan of Yank trucks, but no fan would be so condescending as to call them Yank… Got to say it, Malc says you can’t possibly be like this in real life, but I think you probably are…
Carryfast:
…I still can’t understand the thinking behind using a lifting axle 6x2 let alone a lift axle double drive set up.Why bother with all the aggro if you’re loaded most of the time and even empty a fixed double drive should get the job done between loads.
Maybe it’s because lift axle offers something good which double drive can’t ? 8x4 Trakker in my picture was empty and had it’s double drive engaged all the time. Reason he lifted the rearmost drive axle was because he didn’t get moving otherwise. Wheels were just spinning as there wasn’t enough weight on any drive axle. By lifting rearmost axle up and engaging the “longitudinal differential lock” he got few more tonnes to drive axle and got moving again, after which he lowered axle back down (as double drive was engaged all the time, this lifting system likely isn’t anything factory fitted by Ferrari).
Lifting tag/dumping air out of it/raising it just a bit with a steel suspension makes life often much easier when you are doing some tricky reverse or are going to some other awkward place (steering tag is also wonderful for this) or just are trying to get moving in winter without need to shovel grit under tyres. Everyone I know does this, even when loaded and they do it only at slow speeds when it’s necessary. With good tyres you don’t need to do this that often on public roads.
Carryfast:
But keeping a 6x2,or even sometimes a 4x2,artic moving is another matter when conditions are’nt good enough for them and it’s in that scenario on the road,with a loaded truck,in which they won’t let you run a loaded 6x2 as a 4x2
Mostly correct, but we aren’t running loaded 6x2 units as a 4x2 unless load is so light you can do it legally. Often you want to put tag axle down even with loads which would be legal to haul with a 4x2. When speed raises ride will wobble too much for what one would deem to be comfortable (or even safe), at least if you have air suspension. When loaded, lifting tag/dumping air is not meant for traveling a journey, it’s for getting moving. I agree with you that there are conditions where double drive win hands down, but most of the time single drive axle offers more value to the money than double drive on the road haulage. I think this is the real reason behind its popularity. “Off-road haulage” is different game and there double drive an offer real benefits (tippers, loggers, etc.).
bobthedog:
Yes, my truck is fairly light. With a 53’ van, I tare in at 15120kgs, and US max gross is 36.5 tonnes on 5 axles. On 5 axles in Canada we run at 39500kgs so you are dripping like an old tap again.
Out of interest, how much of this is from your tractor unit? It’s easier to compare that way. I did a quick check from one dealers homepage and tare weight of available 6x2 tag axle tractor unit seemed to be somewhere between 8600 and 9100 kg. Midlifts seemed to be little lighter. With curtainsider that would make tare weight something around 16 tonnes with max gross of 48 tonnes. Those tractors are also likely to be rated for 60 tonne GVW which requires a 1 mm or so more thickness to chassis compared to 40 tonnes.
Carryfast:
I reckon that the half a mile per gallon would be worth the advantages
This statement alone confirms you as a fool, 1/2mpg at current fuel prices is 10k a year off the bottom line, people are lucky to be breaking even in today’s economic climate, take 10k out of their sums and an appearance at the county court is inevitable
Do you know why the ‘yanks’ run 6x4s? I’ll tell you, for the same reason that they ride piece of junk Harleys, it’s the way it’s always been, they don’t like change, because that involves…thinking
85% of Americans believe that the world is flat, because they’ve only ever seen it as a map on a wall Your ‘ideas’ about effiency would earn you about as much as a globe salesman in the good old USofA
If everything else remains the same a 6x2 unit will be 1 full mile per US gallon better on fuel than a 6x4. That’s physics, even you cannot put a valid argument against those laws, no doubt you’ll try though
Carryfast:
I reckon that the half a mile per gallon would be worth the advantages
This statement alone confirms you as a fool, 1/2mpg at current fuel prices is 10k a year off the bottom line, people are lucky to be breaking even in today’s economic climate, take 10k out of their sums and an appearance at the county court is inevitable
Do you know why the ‘yanks’ run 6x4s? I’ll tell you, for the same reason that they ride piece of junk Harleys, it’s the way it’s always been, they don’t like change, because that involves…thinking
85% of Americans believe that the world is flat, because they’ve only ever seen it as a map on a wall Your ‘ideas’ about effiency would earn you about as much as a globe salesman in the good old USofA
If everything else remains the same a 6x2 unit will be 1 full mile per US gallon better on fuel than a 6x4. That’s physics, even you cannot put a valid argument against those laws, no doubt you’ll try though
On the subject of motorbikes I’ve never bothered with them anyway but in the context of the choice between a Jap kamikaze machine which will either kill it’s rider at the speeds it’s capable of or blow up over the distances there,whichever comes first,they’ve probably got that about right with the Harley too .But on the subject of fuel efficiency the tonne/mile benefits of increasing payloads together with some fuel tax rebates to reflect that seems better than just taking traction and axle weight flexibility out of the truck so the yanks are half right on that one too it’s just that they need to convert the fleet from zb great big artic outfits running at less than 38 t gross to zb great big drawbar outfits running at 65 tonnes.I’m surprised that you keep on banging on about those useless dumb yanks concerning one of their best design features but you’re happy enough to carry on with using a zb great big artic outfit which is blowing more of it’s efficiency potential away in payload losses potential versus it’s size.So while we agree that the yanks can be stupid we disagree on the definition of stupid in this case and the typical yank type artic outfit definitely fits that definition.But not because of it’s axle configuration but because the thing would be more efficient as a drawbar outfit capable of hauling twice as much in payload in which case the economies of scale would make those fuel consumption differences,between 6x4 and 6x2,seem too small to bother about just like they would/should be here and in Scandinavia.Having said that the proof,that even at 32-38 tonnes gross,a 6x4 yank was a viable economic proposition,even in the UK,on general euro haulage,is out there.
Yep, you are definately this sad in everyday life, aren’t you, Carryfast, and you gave the game away a bit there. Too much use of the word “yank” I’m afraid. Now you are simply putting things on here to try to incite more spouting and are a little too obvious. You are no RobK so why not go back to your lego and leave the grown ups to do as they choose.
By the way, could you possibly start using paragraphs and punctuation? Makes life a little easier when the crap is spaced out a bit.
Crazyfast, my 550hp struggles on some of the hills here at 36 tons, more weight would amplify that considerably, add inclement weather, of which we get rather a lot and you’ll understand why we run at 36 tons Double drive is unnecessary though, similar traction could be attained with a 6x2 in any configuration
Oh and BTW, what’s all this running down arrow straight multilane superhighways about? Unless you’re in a big city the interstates are all two lanes each way and seeing as though the interstate network runs north/south or east/west you’ll find lots of trucks running the old US highways as they cut across rather than taking a dog leg on the interstate, I regularly run from Western Canada down to Houston, Texas and apart from a 100 mile stretch at the top of Montana I run US highways through the rest of Montana, all the way through Colorado and Oklahoma and 500 miles of the 700 I do in Texas are on a US highway Many of the runs we do are spent almost entirely off the interstates and most of our runs are 1500 to 1700 miles each way
newmercman:
Crazyfast, my 550hp struggles on some of the hills here at 36 tons, more weight would amplify that considerably, add inclement weather, of which we get rather a lot and you’ll understand why we run at 36 tons Double drive is unnecessary though, similar traction could be attained with a 6x2 in any configuration
Oh and BTW, what’s all this running down arrow straight multilane superhighways about? Unless you’re in a big city the interstates are all two lanes each way and seeing as though the interstate network runs north/south or east/west you’ll find lots of trucks running the old US highways as they cut across rather than taking a dog leg on the interstate, I regularly run from Western Canada down to Houston, Texas and apart from a 100 mile stretch at the top of Montana I run US highways through the rest of Montana, all the way through Colorado and Oklahoma and 500 miles of the 700 I do in Texas are on a US highway Many of the runs we do are spent almost entirely off the interstates and most of our runs are 1500 to 1700 miles each way
It was actually Wheelnut who was saying that all the roads in the States are arrow straight multi lane interstates not me. If you’d have read my post I was actually making the point,using some good old fashioned humour ,that they’ve actually got plenty of single carriageway roads just like we have here. .But you’re right ‘similar’ traction ‘could’ be obtained with a 6x2 just so long as VOSA (and/or the DOT over there) won’t mind you running at max gross weight (36t there and 44 t here) with what is effectively a 4x2 unit when you’ve lifted the undriven axle to get it,and just so long as the going does’t get to be the deep and soft enough type of snow for that heavy drive axle to just dig itself in faster and deeper than you can dig it out again or slide sideways putting the outfit into an L shape or a V shape and just so long as you can keep sufficient weight distribution on the unit to always provide a lot more weight on the driven axle than you’ve got on the undriven one right next to it. But having said that the average A train runs a lot heavier than 36 tonnes gross and they probably don’t park them all up in that inclement weather.Which is probably why they’d prefer a 6x4 unit to a 6x2 one to pull them with too. But if the old DAF 2800 could run up to the Blanc at 38 t gross (maybe a bit more depending on who loaded it ),with around 300 horses,then the yanks should be able to come up with something good enough to pull around 60 t let alone 36 t but you’d be better off keeping the 6x4 driveline to put all of that power down on the road.
Carryfast:
and that there’s plenty of Brit drivers from those good old days who’d agree with me.
Yes, maybe, but they are not on Truck Net are they■■?
No probably because unlike me they just can’t be bothered with trying to put across the idea that the benefits of a 6x4 truck outweigh any so called drawbacks.They’ve probaby also got bored by the continous references concerning the idea of going to all the trouble of fitting a truck with lifting gear together with 6x2 axle configurations,which they’d understand as being a pointless way to add complication to a truck,just to end up with a relatively inferior,compromised configuration at the end of it anyway in regards to doing the job of combining axle weight capacity with traction,which has probably just been forced on designers more as a reaction to our stupid fuel pricing issues,than good engineering practice.Broken record maybe but the argument is a good one.
6x4 is’nt necessary untill you exceed 70t, look at our long established heavy operators your Rawcliffes, CGS’s etc the bulk of their fleets are 80t gross 6x2 tractors with a hub reduction drive axle & a rear lift on twins that will be factory rigged to lift at any weight. It wont lift off the floor of course but will impose the bulk of its weight onto the drive axle hence your traction is increased. As stated once you do this your steering becomes very light & understeer can be an understatement, I’ve many times felt the need for a change of underclothes whilst doing this on site I’ve just got rid of a 70t gross FH12 on steel & it had better gradability than many 6x4 trucks, I now operate a 65t gross FH13 which is on air its a got a 3m wheelbase whereas the old 1 was a 3.2m the newer 1 understeers less fact. But due to TCS & all the other electrical nonsence I prefered the old 1 on steel you knew where you were at with that 1. I don’t know carryfast what you drive or where you go in it but IMHO you’d be better with a spec like mine under 70t without a doubt. Your 6x4 talk ■■■■■.
Oh and BTW Crazyfast, our man flysheet has driven the 6x4s over here, yet still felt them unnecessary at 65/70t in the UK
Blimey it looks like the yanks or all of those who used those 6x4 yanks over here never listened to his advice. By the way what’s the drive axle weight on those 80 tonners when they dump the load from the undriven axle to give the drive some help when it needs it on the road.
bobthedog:
Yes, my truck is fairly light. With a 53’ van, I tare in at 15120kgs, and US max gross is 36.5 tonnes on 5 axles. On 5 axles in Canada we run at 39500kgs so you are dripping like an old tap again.
Out of interest, how much of this is from your tractor unit? It’s easier to compare that way. I did a quick check from one dealers homepage and tare weight of available 6x2 tag axle tractor unit seemed to be somewhere between 8600 and 9100 kg. Midlifts seemed to be little lighter. With curtainsider that would make tare weight something around 16 tonnes with max gross of 48 tonnes. Those tractors are also likely to be rated for 60 tonne GVW which requires a 1 mm or so more thickness to chassis compared to 40 tonnes.
Btw. you have a nice blog page
Comparing like with like this one’s rated for 90 t so it’s chassis is’nt exactly going to be paper thin either.It’s also got a ‘bit’ better living space too .It’s a selective comparison admittedly but it’s a start and I think that this one would be built like a tank compared to either the euro competition or those old 1980 spec versions built for the euro export market.
According to the DOT, the main reason for 6x4 is road damage. They reckon that twin drive simply doesn’t wear the roads as badly as any other configuration. same is true of the gross weight allowance. The 36 tonnes is a US thing. In Canada it is 39500, which is only 500kgs less than the UK on 5 axles, and on 6 axles it is 46500 which is more than the UK.
In point of fact, there may be something in the US point of view as they have some great roads whils Canadian roads suffer, but I suspect that is just as much to do with the weather.
Having driven on the lakes, I would want the 6x4. The dual drive allows for even compensation, so the weight is better distributed, but the UK is unlikely to ever need to drive lakes, are they?
Isn’t it funny that you seem to think so many contradictory thoughts. I am still thinking you are nothing more than a troll and like to try to catch others out. Surprised you haven’t given up and moved on to street rods or some other forum. You haven’t caught anyone out yet.
Crazyfast is no troll, I don’t believe he means any harm either, in fact he’s quite good entertainment, he’s just as silly as a box of frogs
And I know a good truck when I see one too .Those tare weights are getting lower all the time.If only I could find some from those old imports that they were using 30 years ago.By the way of course it’s all about road damage because that’s the idea of low axle weights but you can’t use the princible of a heavy drive axle in that case.And Bobthedog if I was a troll I would’nt bother with wasting my time trying to help those yanks to educate you.
Carryfast:
By the way of course it’s all about road damage because that’s the idea of low axle weights but you can’t use the princible of a heavy drive axle in that case.
Erm, WTF are you burbling about now? Doesn’t make any difference what the weight of the axle is, only the weight imposed by it. In the US, the weight per twin wheeled axle is 17000 lbs, 34000 for a tandem. That is the same for trailer axles and drive axles. So 15422 kgs, for the tandem!
You don’t get him at all, he’s totally crackers, but very tenacious, I disagree with him on almost everything, but have a grudging respect for his irrepressability, he just doesn’t give up…ever
I’ve just got rid of a 70t gross FH12 on steel & it had better gradability than many 6x4 trucks, I now operate a 65t gross FH13 which is on air its a got a 3m wheelbase whereas the old 1 was a 3.2m the newer 1 understeers less fact. But due to TCS & all the other electrical nonsence I prefered the old 1 on steel you knew where you were at with that 1. I don’t know carryfast what you drive or where you go in it but IMHO you’d be better with a spec like mine under 70t without a doubt. Your 6x4 talk ■■■■■.
but you can’t use the princible of a heavy drive axle in that case.And Bobthedog if I was a troll I would’nt bother with wasting my time trying to help those yanks to educate you.