Pork Traders from Liverpol had a wagon and drag on (obviously)pig transport it could have been on a E plate.I saw it in Pannnal cattle market in 1976 and later at Chelford where the full rig was sold with some other cattle wagons in May 1978.When I was a drivers mate back in 1973(!!!) a Fridged Freight wagon and drag was an occasional visitor to the cold store in Manchester meat Market.
Having grown up around Fridged Freight, and then cutting my teeth at MRCT, where pulling hanging meat was fairly common. I remember talking to my father (Jim McCluskey) about why two of the 6x2 lb76’s at Fridged Freight, which were originally artics were converted to Rigid’s. His belief was that they were “unstable for the task” as artics. Having pulled many a load myself, hanging from the roof, and knowing the nature of how careful you had to drive with these loads, rightly or wrongly I have tended to accept this, especially when looking back at Wyatt’s home grown trailers (which were unique). Now looking through a lot of these photo’s, where the majority of the heavier lb’s appear to be rigids, was this an accepted opinion as being better suited as a drawbar than an artic?
in scandinavia we had different weight and long regulations (finland artics 16m rigid drawbar 18 sweden fri until67 then 24 in the time the lb was lanced,63 they had no big market i europe and uk and it was first cabover since the 30,es.first axelconfigurations where lb 4x2 3,45m/4,6m lbs 6x2 4,2m in 64 lb 5,0 lbs 4.6 and as late as66 lbs 3,45m. so in beginning the market was in scandinavia (and dutch was a strong market). but artics where rear birds in north that times, and 8 weelers never seen, i,ll think hej benkku 
Ooh you have started something now Gilbert lol! I have always thought that the rigid & drawbar was miles better than an artic, from the operators point you could have more floor space = more pallets , they were more stable than an artic, better weight distribution, better traction, also from the drivers point of view you didnt have to keep swopping trailers (which i thought was the point of articulation anyway) so you kept your own gear. One of the down sides was that sometimes you got trapped in customs and could not get your lorry out if it was running under TIR regs. with an artic you just dropped the trailer.And the old problem of drivers - not everyone liked to drive drawbars - i did.
i have never in my life drive ainch whit artics so can,t say but in my opinion arigid +drawbar is more flexible in work and god to handle even in slippery condsions,that have i dirven 26 years.couse it dipends on what work you do
I got the impession from Gilbert’s post that it referred to LB and LBS76’s specifically, rather than a straight artics-vs-drawbars argument. Then I am drawn to bma’s comment about the double frame. If I remember correctly, the LB110 had a single chassis frame. Was there a question-mark over the rigidity of the 76 series chassis?
well think 4x2 artic,s have not double frame, but 6x2 6x4 lbs and lbt as well76 to1series had double, from 2series m single h and e double 4series l single g and c double,even longweelbase rigids4x2 whit double in same as abouve.the problem some times is rust gets between the balks and it rust from inside. hav had the problem whit a motor we put of traffic in spring ,and we did,n wasch up it ,so it get salt between the balks ,same it was whit 76 i had .and the answere to simple couestion of the first 76 artics only 4x2 ,and 6x2 were made to rigids whit long fame only until 66.i don,t think the frames was bad at all only whit amotor standing long the rust can get a problem. 
LB76:
0
I don’t know how many they had but there was a lot of work on them when new to make them comply with tanker regs. The lights and wiring had to be converted to double pole earth return system, the rear cab windows were changed to strengthened Dutch type glass and a fire screen fitted. A front mounted exhaust had to be fabricated using the original silencer and tailpipe.
You don’t see this level of mods on modern tankers have the regs been relaxed a little?
hej lb the one,s you drive, i.ll understud where change from artics to rigids, where they orginal 6x2 whit taglifts,ore taged in britain 
They were both original 6x2
Hi Bill. The picture of the Halpin unit is interesting. When you compare the same configuration with the pictures of Wyatts, and especially the length of trailers he built, there is quite a difference in the overhang from the pin. As we all know, in the days before air suspension, abs and other gizmo’s etc. carrying hanging meat on leaf springs was a style of driving you either got right, or as many found at their peril, didn’t favour the ambitious! Do you have any pictures of tankers with the 6x2 unit layout?
Irrespective of wheel bases and configurations etc. To have seen an lb76 at full tilt on a Motorway when they first came over in the sixties, must have been a real head turner!!
Found this yesterday- an L55, presumably with the two-speed axle that bma mentioned. Interestingly enough, it is a range-change, not a splitter.
If the range-change is operated by the valve on the stick, what is the other lever, on the bottom right of the picture, for? Also, what is that ball-valve doing in the ashtray?
You engage the power take off with the small stick on the floor. About the two speed axle it’s the same function as a splitter, i.e. you have two gears with the gearstick in the same position. But ball-valve is a big mystery, I have never seen anything like it before on a S-V in Sweden… 
/Stellan
I would put my money on an unnoficial mod to the wipers as the air wipers were a pain and very prone to busting/going wrong, bet somebody else has had a gut full of them and done their own mod!