It’s difficult to see the idea of these.It just creates more unnecessary tyre scrub when turning and creates havoc with load distribution by putting more weight on the rear axle and removing it from the drive. 
What donkey is in the Handyman? I’m just imagining a 680 screaming in the left ear all day long!
tonyj105:
couple from me , although one is a box but its still a Ferrymasters box and I had picked it up from teesdock inbound from Denmark with a load of fairy cakesand I still love the photo of our old handyman.
tony
Love the Handyman pic! Robert
bestbooties:
I was going to post one of mine, but you’ve saved me the trouble by posting three of mine, thanks Robert.
Glad to oblige, Ian, and at the same time sorry not to have acknowledged your pics! Trouble is, I have a mixture of pics I downloaded quite some time ago all mixed up with pics I took myself and in my haste, I have delivered them all without pedigree - forgive me! Robert
Carryfast:
It’s difficult to see the idea of these.It just creates more unnecessary tyre scrub when turning and creates havoc with load distribution by putting more weight on the rear axle and removing it from the drive.
Spot on CF! This is why they invented the tri-axle trailer with all the extra cost and extra wear of a third axle. It worked on all counts, so the industry accepted it and stuck with it. I only cite the old tandem spread-axle here as an industry model because it is a (slightly romantic) evocation of those days 
. Robert
cav551:
What donkey is in the Handyman? I’m just imagining a 680 screaming in the left ear all day long!
The 680 was a very good engine, but yes it was loud! On the very recent LARF thread it was suggested that certain Scammells of that era were fitted with Leyland 0.600-derived engines and AEC Thornycroft-derived 6-speed constant-mesh 'boxes. I don’t suppose this was one of them! Robert
robert1952:
Carryfast:
It’s difficult to see the idea of these.It just creates more unnecessary tyre scrub when turning and creates havoc with load distribution by putting more weight on the rear axle and removing it from the drive.Spot on CF! This is why they invented the tri-axle trailer with all the extra cost and extra wear of a third axle. It worked on all counts, so the industry accepted it and stuck with it. I only cite the old tandem spread-axle here as an industry model because it is a (slightly romantic) evocation of those days
You could carry more weight on a spread axle, if you went for a tri axle you ended up with 2 different tyre sizes
Dieseldog66:
robert1952:
Carryfast:
It’s difficult to see the idea of these.It just creates more unnecessary tyre scrub when turning and creates havoc with load distribution by putting more weight on the rear axle and removing it from the drive.Spot on CF! This is why they invented the tri-axle trailer with all the extra cost and extra wear of a third axle. It worked on all counts, so the industry accepted it and stuck with it. I only cite the old tandem spread-axle here as an industry model because it is a (slightly romantic) evocation of those days
You could carry more weight on a spread axle, if you went for a tri axle you ended up with 2 different tyre sizes
According to my 1973 Lowe’s a widespread tandem could carry 10ton on each axle so at least one ton more on the bogie than a normal tandem. The outer axle spread of a triaxle would have needed to be even greater to equal the bogie weight.
Most triaxles of the day used to be seen on shorter trailers ie pre 1972 GCW increase so with five axles you could run at 32 tons. IIRC the widespread tandem was the way around this allowing 32 tons on four axle.
This is just lovely 
Danne
robert1952:
cav551:
What donkey is in the Handyman? I’m just imagining a 680 screaming in the left ear all day long!The 680 was a very good engine, but yes it was loud! On the very recent LARF thread it was suggested that certain Scammells of that era were fitted with Leyland 0.600-derived engines and AEC Thornycroft-derived 6-speed constant-mesh 'boxes. I don’t suppose this was one of them! Robert
Yes it was a 680, but with a 5 speed plus splitter seminauto box, fastest change ever, but no clutch pedal, reversing was an interesting experience, loads of vibration as you juggled brake and throttle
A few from my Meadows freight collection.
Ashford Transport (2) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Tony Byrnes Fiat and rentco rental.
Cyril Mc Guinness (5) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Ferrymasters tandem tilt
Cyril Mc Guinness by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Ferrymasters tandem box
Interstate (8) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Ferrymasters tandem axle box.Look at that axle at the back!
Moorefreight (10) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Meadows 1644 and Dennisson spread axle
Nicky Butterly (3) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Ferymasters tilt
Van Himst (4) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Next 4 are van Himst from Belgium.If I recall,all the oldies were Van Hool trailers.
Van Himst (4a) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Van Himst (6a) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
Van Himst (23a) by Niall Daniels, on Flickr
gazsa401:
We ran quite a few spread axle flats and box van trailers at Stirlands unfortunately I’ve no
photos to hand but I’ll keep looking
I tried to find a spread axle flat to go behind my Seddon Atkinson before illness forced me to part company with my 401
Sorry it’s a bit out of focus
I know its not a tilt but it is a shot of one of 5 wide spread flats we ran for a while, the idea was OK in theory as they were a 20ton bogie but they were damned cruel on tyres compared to the close coupled bogies. The only other redeeming feature was the smooth ride you had in the unit, no nodding !! Cheers Bewick.
Bewick:
0 I know its not a tilt but it is a shot of one of 5 wide spread flats we ran for a while, the idea was OK in theory as they were a 20ton bogie but they were damned cruel on tyres compared to the close coupled bogies. The only other redeeming feature was the smooth ride you had in the unit, no nodding !! Cheers Bewick.
Absolutely, Dennis! The old spread-axle was certainly a stabliliser for a better ride. But as you say, they were not kind to the increasingly more expensive tyres of the day. Robert
Another flat,but from a different angle:
cav551:
According to my 1973 Lowe’s a widespread tandem could carry 10ton on each axle so at least one ton more on the bogie than a normal tandem. The outer axle spread of a triaxle would have needed to be even greater to equal the bogie weight.Most triaxles of the day used to be seen on shorter trailers ie pre 1972 GCW increase so with five axles you could run at 32 tons. IIRC the widespread tandem was the way around this allowing 32 tons on four axle.
Thanks for that bit of insight, ‘cav551’! Robert
Dirty Dan:
This is just lovelyDanne
I agree! Robert
