Saw this while at Hertz today,Would you haul it tied like this ??
Well I aint a truck drive BUT: Looks ok .. They chain D11R's down in the same mannor althou with bigger chains ..
I think it needs more chains. Lol:tong
Well it looks good to me.:beatsme I have hauled just like that many times,never lost anything yet, course it has been awhile and something about it is probably illegal today.... :cool2
I was just wondering,Maybe this group can put up some other examples of what you would Haul or not Haul
Ok but two things,,,1, bigger chains,too small and 2, in the back where the chain fits into the tear drop slots in the frame that wouldn't cut for me,the hook needs to be planted in around a D ring or frame it.
Nope not with those snap binders.... and i would shorten the chains....
Ok Tiny heres one,I use to do some crazy hauls.I had a Link belt crane with 50" boom on this trailer,had the operator follow me to turn the crane when I had to make a corner.To bad I don't have those pics
I have to wonder why they'd secure it down to the opposite sides? Seems to me, that if the machine wanted to roll over, in the direction of the red arrow, there's nothing really applying any downward force to keep it from doing so. Why not simply go from the near side directly down to the attach point, as illustrated by the green arrow? Also not sure why they'd bother attaching to two different points with each chain. That seems like an awful lot of slack to have to take up, especially with snap binders. :beatsme
I don't exactly know why, but I've always cross chained, maybe I just saw it done that way :beatsme Though I think it helps keep it from shifting side to side, because your chains are at more of an angle, where as chaining down on each side doesn't give you as much force to prevent lateral movement
Thats the same with me monkey , cross chain everything.Never lost anything like that.
Good point there Digger .. Always seen equipment cross chained .. And with ratchet's not Snap-Biders (another good point) The D11's are also chained down on the bed with exta chains and crossed over the Hoist yokes.
I wanted honest opinions and am glad to have them . I think we all need to hear others opinions. Thank You . As far as the cross chaining gos I have done it for years and i have had a lot less movement crossed . A 5/16 chain I don't go to the extra work of a screw boomer. Two attachment points are because none are rated over 5,000 lbs each and it"s a habit
um tiny your missing a hub cover....
Those dang things never stay on
pffft silicone works wonders....
Yup, looks good. I would add wire to the boomers and call it good. I like my boomers facing up when closed and when closing them. But some of the bigger guys have no prob. a little side ways. As far as the chain doubled back, normaly I would use that when chaining iron as there is not much give. So when you take a link it realy is only half a link. muzy
Next Question, Median barrier.How would you tie it down ? I gotta haul a couple of loads tomorrow. Precast concrete 12 feet long and around 6600 lbs.
I am in agreement with Digger242. I do NOT cross chain EXCEPT when the tire on the equipment does not allow the chain to run straight from the tie down on the machine to the D-ring or chain slot on my trailer. I try to keep the distance from the tie down on the machine to the trailer as short as reasonably possible. When standing at the back of the trailer looking forward, I like to have chains as close to vertical as possible. When looking at the trailer from the side, I like to have the chains angles somewhere between 45 and 60 degrees. I haul lots of sprayers and combines, which are wider than the main deck on my trailer, making vertical chaining possible. The D-rings on my trailer are rated for 7500 lbs and the chain slots are rated for 8000 lbs. I usually use the slots whenever possible. Grade 70 5/16" chain is heavy enough for most things I haul--if something is heavier, I use more chains. We recently had a DOT officer put on a training seminar for our company. The way he explained chaining, if the chain leaves a tie-down, goes through a loop on the machine, and returns to the original tie down point, you can figure the whole weight rating of the chain. If the chain does not go to the same tie down point, it only counts for half of it's capacity. In this picture, if I understand the rules correctly, the chains could only count for half of their rated capacity. I will try to remember to get some pictures of how I chain things down, now that I have a phone with a camera that works.
As for the barrier it will depend how they are being loaded and unloaded. Forklift they have to be on dunage, crane-on the deck. as far as securement they suck as most are smooth with no tie points. If they had liftting points, run chain thru from one side to the other. If not then a piece of dunage chained down in front to limit forward movment incase of emerg. stop. Probly would end up with 2 over the top (chain or belt) one across the front pulling back, one on the back pulling forward (chain) per. group. Maby a third over the top. I think with these it would be hard to get 2 differnt scales to agree. good luck, but you have hauled more loads of these than you could remember. I am confidant what you have been doing will make the grade. muzy
Here you go Tiny. Do you think this guy has this load properly secured?
Deerhuler, I understand what you are saying, but am in disagrement with the dot officers interpitaion. We recently had a DOT officer put on a training seminar for our company. The way he explained chaining, if the chain leaves a tie-down, goes through a loop on the machine, and returns to the original tie down point, you can figure the whole weight rating of the chain. If the chain does not go to the same tie down point, it only counts for half of it's capacity. In this picture, if I understand the rules correctly, the chains could only count for half of their rated capacity. If will look at how lifting is done we see that rigging has diferent working load limits depending how it is used. If we use 2 diferent anchor points for the same chain, we have created a basket. So in my opinion that would also increse woking load limit of that device by 2. I have been challanged by dot and have had discusion on this method. No warning or ticket issued. I would not argue that it would give twice the holding capacity but would be confedent at 1/2 the capacity ei- 1000 lbs increse to 1500lbs. muzy
LOL Cat Wrench. muzy
Tiny, Tying down barrier is as easy as it gets. Depending on your preference 3,4,5,6 Chains however many you want just thrown across them and tightened down. That's all I and all the other guys at the precast company did. We placed them lengthwise and we had 10 footers and we did 10 on a truck, 3 over the drivers, 3 over the trailer wheels and 4 in the center. I'd figure what 8 or 9 on yours?
like this with the chains going thru the holes in the jersey barrier (shown in green)
Just the way it is right now is how I'd do it, I'd have one more chain on it across the top but that would be it. 3/8" chain and snap binders.
Ok... back to the fork lift,I tried it that way and it didn't feel right.Next time it will be crossed Lol. also wanted to see how much I can over tighten one corner that way (last pic) .....Never had a problem getting chains tight.
Now for the barrier , Neither Missouri or Kansas barrier have hole in them like shown but to be honest I wish they did.So this is what i have been doing and never had a cop even look twice at it. I had a lowboy tractor so only 8 pieces at a time 3 , 3 and 2 . Used all but two short chains , All the lowboys have their own 1/2 inch chains on them so this lowboy truck only get 10 chains .
Tiny, you chained the forklift almost exactly how I chain 90% of what I haul. On newer John Deere tractors the chain points are big loops cast into the mechanical front wheel drive axle. On tractors with Independent Front Suspension, the chain points are on the lower A-arms. On these tractors I will cross chain the front of the tractor so the tire does not touch the chain. The forklift in the first picture has tie-downs far forward enough to make cross chaining unnecessary, in my opinion.
I agree with Deerehauler.Thats how we secure our equipment. We had a trailer come unhooked from a truck (long story) with a roller on it. The roller was secured in this manner with 4 individual chains. Trailer went in the ditch on its side but the roller stayed on the trailer. I might be able to find a picture of that..
I would move the genie with a couple of changes. Move the back chains closer to the back of the machine and use a single chain each way. On the front one of the cross chains is hooked into the chain slot with the clevis hook, the chain link should be hooked into the slot and not the hook, the point of the hook is not designed to be pulled at an angle and could fail. I would also wire the handles of the binders down with steel wire.
Hey Norite, good catch on that clevis hook. Did not notice that. Tiny your methods are good. But what is most important is you are aware and althou I am sure you are not wet behide the ears. You are still looking for new ways and idea's to improve the work that you do. and that my freind is the differance between an acident waiting to happen and an acident prevented. TGIF. muzy
To be honest I wanted to get guys thinking by cussing and discussing.Some one wanting Ideas on how to secure a load may be looking for info. Its been my Belief that if you laid all the truck drivers in the world end to end they would still point in all different directions. Ask 5 guys how they would chain something and get 5 ideas. Some good, some not. Thought I would be the guinea pig because my hide is tough and most can't upset me. But there are two different ways to tie that lift shown , which one is better??why??
Well, what I have to add is this. First, all snap binders are supposed to be secured, wire, rope, zip tie, bungee cord, something. I got that ticket on my last trip through the inspection station. I had missed securing one handle. As far as cross chain or not, there are many variables, and I believe no hard rule. I do on some, not on others. Depends on where there is to hook, and the angle of the pull. That brings up what to me is one of the most important but least talked about parts of this. Pay attention to the direction the load is being secured from moving in, and then have the chain as directly in line with it as possible. Just like in rigging, the angle of the pull affects the strength. Take a 2 way choker and look at the difference in capacity between a straight pull, a 60 deg pull, and a 45 deg pull. The more angled the securement is from the force applied, the less force it takes to break. In the example above with the lift with the rail, the rear chains are looking good to me. A balance of strenght both side to side, and mostly in line with restraining forward movement. The front chains are OK side to side, but the angle resisting rearward movement is almost straight up and down. It would not take much force rearward on the machine to break those compared to the chains on the rear. With that said, you are much less likely to have a load roll to the rear than for one to try rolling forward, such as under hard braking. Some machines do not give much choice, so then I use a bigger chain, or a basket arrangement, as in the first set of pictures. That brings up my disagreement with the derating of the chain due to 2 attachment points. ***??? Each point should hold what it is rated for, so starting and ending in 2 places should double capacity in theory. Like Muzy says, double is not real, but 1/2 again works. This way each leg of the chain shares the load, and each tie down point shares the load as well. One more thing Tiny If you lined up 5 truck drivers, I am pretty sure you would get 10 or more ways to do it, as most of them will not be cosistent from one answer to the next. Good topic, and hopefully lots of people pay attention. I hate dodging loose loads as they roll of onto the road. Now, if you want a hauling challenge, try tying down a 988 loader with no park brake for a trip out of the local mountains with grades up to 23%. Make sure you pack some extra chains for that day.
actually if its tied to the trailer in two points its considered an "indirect" tie and is allowed to use 1.75times strength and one point is 1times....???? (i forget how the riddle goes) TINY; it looks as if in the first post you have met the new DOT guy running round KC lol.....he's an ass. we all thought the Female was bad and i guess the young guy is trying to make a name for himself lol...i got a few freinds i call when we do something we shouldnt be doing to find out where theyre at . today we moved a little PC200 on a 25ton 5axle rig and knowing my guys he prolly dint have a chain at all lol.... no actaully, if u guys knew the KC DOT you would understand that TINY's chain down would still be considered in-sufficiant for some damned reason. so we try to do the best we can with how many ever many chains we have Pj
i forgot to add a couple of pics..... They are petty enough to screw with under CDL trucks when theyre bored i guess? I guess with a bumper hitch trailer the front axle of a truck would be overloaded Pj
Makes you hope that a rock breaks his load cell, doesn't it.
lol, funny you say that cause he told me "stop easy on these scales cause theyre expensive and you dont want to damage them!" ..... so what did I do?....I went from one pedal being on the floor to the other one being on the floor lmao......to bad it was a frigging duramax and neither of the pedals do much haha just a little FYI; I had a buddy that got tangled up with them one day and got a overload ticket and as it turns out, there is no way to certify a mobile scale, so he took it to court and got outta trouble Pj
I heard of a guy who stomped on brakes hard enough to blow out the load cells in the portables. Problem was, then he was given the choice to either wait for another set to be delivered in a few hours, or follow the officer to the nearest set of scales to get weighed. Not to mention that his level 1 inspection became much more thorough after that. Good advise on the lack of certification! I'll have to tuck that info away for the day I need it.
Here are some pics of how I chain down a combine using grab hooks. Sorry for the order of the pics, I intended for the second pic to be the last one. Oh, well....
RE. portable scale. It has been my expereance when I was weighed with them the officer asked if I wanted to contest the weight. And gave me the option to do so. If I wanted to challange them then we would go to a inspection site and reweigh. Other wise the ticket would stand. I was over gross and knew it. I was ticketed and alowed to proced. muzy
DeereHauler I like your custom grab hooks you are using on the machine. Did you make them or buy them?
Here's something like what I see in the picture. http://www.awdirect.com/t-grab-hook-spd2/hooks/
95zIV What you posted is a very light duty tie down hook. I would not use it for anything much bigger than a compact car. Notice it is only grade 40, which is basically junk, IMO I was referring to a heavy hook to grab into a frame hole or such on equipment, with a chain grab hook on the end. Most all of my tie down chains are grade 100, with some grade 80. I do not even like to use grade 70. On big iron, it is barely better than nothing.
If I dare enter into this discussion, of which I have NO expertise... but have wondered this question, in securing my own little loads.... nothing as big as the equipment in this discussion... What, exactly, is the GOAL when securing the load? I kind of assume that number 1 goal is to prevent movement when traveling.... as in, if it doesn't start moving, you don't have to stop it. Right? Further, is it a goal to secure the load enough that if you lost control of the truck, or left the road, etc, your load stayed secure to the trailer?... this seems like a far greater challenge, if not impossible... like in a rollover. Somewhere mixed in there is the goal of not getting a ticket from the guys in white trucks.... or is that the priority goal?
My goal in load securement big or small is not to hurt anyone myself included, and to get the job done!
I agree with Tonka,not enough cops to make them a huge concern.My goal is to control the load and not damage it and keep it from falling on someone or thing.I don't need anything crashing through the back of the cab. Get the job done and go on to the next thing.Cops and DOT are low on my list .
My goal is to get the load off of the trailer in the same condition that it went on without endagering anyone in the process. As far as DOT is concerned, I can tie down a load that would be according to there regulations but would come loose on the first pothole or I could tie down a load that would be far beyond secure but fail an inspection so they are not a great concern of mine. Every officer has his or her own Idea of what is legal yet none of them would be able to tie it down if they had to so I do it whatever way is safest. When you get into the larger equipment you have to look at it more like your trying to chain the trailer to the machine and not the other way around.
Jerry, I only posted that because it is the only FACTORY MADE hook like that, that I could find.
Thanks guys... Yes, with my loads too... my goal is to get them to their destination safely... AND, as I'm driving, that's definately the goal. BUT, while in the process of chaining down your load, and calculating in your mind what you think is going to keep this load on the trailer... are you assuming the trailer is going to stay upright and on the road? or do you try to secure the load enough to keep it trailered during a rollover? just wondering...
To be honest, I cant say I have ever tied one down worrying about how it would react during a roll over . Have thought about some top heavy loads and done stuff different . I have had two different loads tested . Not by me thankfully but the wildest one was a load of counterweights for a crane,4 pieces with the two biggest weighing in at 17,000 . I dropped the load and left it tied down , Another guy backed under and didn't not check to see if the 5th wheel was latched . He got to the street and lost it . trailer was twisted up . front of The deck was at 45 degree from the rear but the weights stayed on.
And minor boss said "you're" hard on trailers. Go figure. :tong
Never tried to tie one down with a roll over in mind. I did get hit by a car on the freeway once though and went over the bank, truck stayed on it's wheels and the 3 axle dump truck and mini ex I was hauling never moved an inch. The Best part was that the highway patrol that was following me way too closely rear ended my trailer right before I went over the bank and got every bit of it on his dash cam so I came out of the whole deal with no fault!
Nice...:drinkup
I have never chained down a load and thought is this going to stay on if a turn her greasy side up.... I always chain a load down and think is this going to be in the same spot on the trailer when I get to where I’m going... Now I had a trailer go over when i was younger, because i had to much weight on the rear of the trailer i was towing. It got to fish tailing and spun my pickup/trailer around and rolled the little JD 870 i was hauling broke in half. It was not a good sight because it belonged to a rental company i worked for... good thing was i never signed it out of the yard( paperwork was made, i never signed it) nothing they could do but let me go a few weeks later...lol
Jerry I agree chains and hooks need to be heavier than you think as what's a normal stress becomes abnormal in an emergency situation. Years ago I turned into a driveway a little fast and my steer wheels slid in loose gravel and the flatbed I was hauling a articulated AC 540 lifted it's right rear wheel, the load shifted when one undersize chain broke and the rear of the machine went over the side with the front chain holding the front. so it was half on half off. Broke one hub and the steering cylinder. had to cut the remaining chain, drop it on the ground, and then winch it upright and off the road, all at 1:30 AM with no cops around. Cost me several thousand to repalce the busted parts and a lesson learned in using matching chains, screw boomers, and having good D ring tie down points. Never have likes chain slots in the frame. Hard on the links and will wallow out on rough roads.
The only place I have been able to get these hooks is from Deere factory. I had one of our sister store's drivers pick some up for me when he went to the factory to get a combine.
This has turned into a pretty interesting discussion. laketreefarm, I hear you on matching chains, but if they are all matched to the lesser quality, you are still in trouble. One more thing to remember, even if you have good chains, the binders are at least as important. As I said, I replace with all G-100, but still had some G-70 binders. I was hauling a 140G blade one day, came around a curve on a rural road, and when I crossed the small bridge, there was a pretty good dip at the bridge end. I was going about 45 or 50, and did not have time to slow when I saw the dip. When I went through, both binders holding the rear of the machine broke in two from the flex in the trailer. I did not know it right away, but suspected something may be wrong. I was only a mile from the site, so I slowed down and went easy into the job. When I got out to look, those 2 chains were loose, and only a couple pieces remained of the binders. The G-100 chains didn't even show any marring where the hooks were, no streched links or anything. It pays to use good chain.
Jerry I talked to our lowboy driver today and he said they can still get you for over gross with portables, just not over on the axles. At least that is how it is in Wisconsin.
Oklahoma will get you for over on the axles with protables. Just paid it! I had a permit too, but due to a lift axle controll location, the guy wouldn't give me my weight. I wonder what would happen if we just started refusing to weigh on those portables. I think a Oklahoma permitt for me is usually about $750, but the fine for not having one is like $300. Why even weigh then? Just pay the fine and have a nice rest of your day. As far as tie down work, I had a DOT man here tell me that the best practice is to simply analyze your load and chain so as to arrest movement in any direction. I'd have used 4 short 3/8" chains with slip hooks through the eyes on the Genie, and 4 screw binders on the trailer to tie it down. I don't like to use boomers as I broke a hand with one a couple of years ago.
In Michigan, the portable scales are certified on a regular basis and admissible in court. The county road agency I work for only has portable scales and all our tickets hold up in court. Refusal to get weighed is a misdemeanor and affects your CDL according to our chief weigh-master.
Nope, it is the reverse. From the Federal Motor Carriers Cargo Securement Rules: Minimum Working Load Limit for Cargo Securement Devices and Systems The aggregate working load limit of any securement system used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half the weight of the article or group of articles. The aggregate working load limit is the sum of: One-half the working load limit of each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle to an attachment point on an article of cargo; and The working load limit for each tiedown that goes from an anchor point on the vehicle, through, over or around the cargo and then attaches to another anchor point on the vehicle. In the original picture the chains that attach to two places on the trailer are credited for their full WLL. If the chains had been attached just from the trailer to the Genie they would only be credited for 1/2 their WLL.
Thank you, Trihonu. This reinforces what others were saying about basketing. The next time I see this officer I will get some clarification. Two chain runs are better than one, right
TriHonu Thanks for the quote. Can you let folks know where it came from, as some of the DOT enforcers have misunderstood this section, and like to argue with the drivers who are doing it right, and are convincing them that the wrong way to figure WLL is right.
It is from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's Cargo Securement Rules . It is the twelfth paragraph. You can also download "Understanding the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Cargo Securement Rules PDF" 44 pages, 898 kb. This section is on page 4. You may want to print a copy of this and put it in the glove box. If you want to make your point, show them a copy of their rules with the appropriate paragraphs highlighted. From what I found online, there is a pending clarification/modification to the last paragraph in this rule that will read similar to the following - The original draft of this section made a distinction between direct and indirect tiedowns. They chose not to put the wording and definitions in this section due to it being very technical in nature. The have now found that there are loads being secured that meet the current requirements and are not safely secured. This is complicated by enforcement officials who do not fully understanding these rules or understanding the full intent of each section. If you Google "Cargo Securement Rules Direct Indirect" you will find notes of numerous meetings/hearings on these rules and the issues being presented by trucking organizations, shipping companies, trailer manufacturers and other groups that are impacted by these regulations.
Cross chain. The pivot point is going to be the tires where they touch the deck. Being the chains are inside and above that point I don't see how it could flip off the trailer. Cross chain or not to cross chain I think is a judgement call depending on the load. The less angle of the chain the less leverage downward, the greater you gain down but I would think lose side to side. Maybe I'm wrong, haven't chained that much large stuff down.
I maybe reading with a accent, but this contradicts Securement guidelines for Direct and Indirect. I do count binder at 1/2 there WILL when I chain down just so I don't have to worry about it though.
How about these decked trailers bad idea or is there a better way ? sorry bout the pics someone had a finger print on the lens
Same thing here , Look ok ? I dug the thread back up because of the info in it........... good stuff in my feeble mind
I would doubt that the trailers are tied down properly.
I would like to know why you think they are not tied down correctly Also, Don't worry .I'm married so my feelings are all gone LOL. If you don't like the way you see something done . Please tell us why . I really want to know
Other than top trailer being aired up yet looks good to me. Nice to see your chain links all straight like that. You could haul my crap for sure.....if I had any. muzy
All I haul on my Contrail 12,000 lb GVWR is my Bobcat 773 and attachements. For years, I saw contractors around here hauling 742B's on drop-axle Cronkites without any chains at all . I agree with all you--the direction of the tie-down is crucial. I was disgusted with seeing $4-6,000 trailers with only 4 or so different tie-down locations. Rather than welding and burning the paint off a new trailer, I just had Towmaster/Contrail make with one with several additional tiedown points, allowing more angle-of-pull choices. From the factory, this cost me less that buying the D-rings and welding rods. I confess to a weak link: The trailer is enough to handle a rented T300, but the hitch on my 2007 Classic GMC Duramax is not rated high enough for the maximum trailer weight. The only solution is to jerk that off and install a heavier receiver hitch, for example, by Curt. 99% of the bumper-pull rigs around here exceed the rating of the hitch. GM, Ford, and Dodge brag about torque and towing capacity and then put a 1/2 rated hitch on the vehicle. It seems wasteful to jerk it off and replace it--would be more effiicient for them to fit the maximum capacity hitch from the start. I like ratchet binders--not the imports, either. There is only one se for "snap" binders--where you have a chain going through 2 or more points, with some slack and the links drag through the rings or whatever, the snap binder is great for quickly pulling the slack out of the chain, minimizing the need to reposition and unwind the ratcheting screws to take up slack. Ratcheting binders have another advantage: I stop after the first 1/2 or so and snug the binders to take up any minute slack that develops as the load position "settles". I've driven a road tractor one time: I was 17, on a highway construction job (Atco: Pellissippi Pkwy between Solway and Lovell Rd). It was bobtail, on a raw compacted red-clay subgrade. . . after an afternoon thundershower. I was not only young, I was bad stupid. Raced it up to about 45 mph and then stomped the brakes. Round and round and round and round. . . but thankfully, not down any embankment. ointhead
Just for S and giggles i would have thrown a set of chains on the top trailer going to the middle trailer
Would I haul it? Umm.........NO! A driver stopped in today and loaded an SK200LC. Just drove it up on his de-tatch and shut it down with the centerline of the track chains hanging over the side. Then simply put ratchet binders from bed rail to inside of track pad, binder damn near vertical. Good Gawd ya lazy driver! You're already overwidth, put your damn sideboards on the cleats and be a little nicer to the track chains! Not to mention, you just might lose that machine because your lazy!
Atco , Was that a company machine or just in for repairs ? Does your outfit have a policy for hauling your rental stuff ?
That's a machine going to auction, had another company haul it for us. I had this same driver try to load an SK480 without sideboards once, I did put a stop to that one. I don't claim to be a truck driver, but I know a little about loading and dogging down equipment. Gonna have to talk to boss about this fella.
LOL, ya you better talk to that drivers boss. Had to look it up but SK480 is 12 ft wide pad width 34.5 inches..... would put that drive chain at 9foot. Ya thats no good. Mabe the driver thinks the machine will stay on better when the tracks are kinda wrapping around the trailer frame. Moma mea. muzy
Well, I was in the shop when that fella walked in and said he couldn't get that 480 on his de-tatch, which baffled the hell out of me??? I go down to the rig and trailer, seems he was having trouble, as you stated, getting that wide machine up the ramps of the de-tatch before it would get to the side boards, tracks would get in all sorts of a bind. Good grief...truck driver my arse! Machine was partially up on trailer, headed up the ramps, tracks in a bind. I got in the cab, spun the house around, dropped the bucket on the ground and raised the rig up using boom cylinders. Walked the machine on the sideboards while extending the arm out and set her squarely on the sideboards. Geeezzzz...this ain't rocket surgery! :Banghead
Now i ain't gonna get in a ****'n match with you ATCO, but they haul stuff like that out west all the time with no ext. and side boards...
So what is the comfort level with this? BTW we cross chained it on the truck.
You always always cross chain any rubber tired or track equipment. It will never move. I have hauled some really scary loads and never dumped anything. I have seen guys that don't cross chain and it will come loose and it will slide. Check out our web site google mintys moving ltd. we are out of Onanole manitoba canada. To date we have never lost a load we haul or move anything. We always cross chain that way each chain is pulling in 2 directions and it is imposible for your load to move
No worries tonka. I'll be the first to admit I ain't no truck driver. And there's no doubt the extra wide machine are loaded and hauled everyday without incident. I'm only saying, the load is over width anyway, the trailer had the sideboards on the deck, the trailer had the extension cleats, why not plop two boards down that you already have and put a little less stress on the track chains. That's all I'm sayin.
Not to bad, good pucker factor going over wheels though. muzy
yeah it was great with no brakes, ya gotta love used logging equipment
OK here's a random drive by......What say you , Would you haul it that way ?
No!
Pass, thnx thou. What the temp over there Tiny? Looks like nto a bad day. muzy
That was Tuesday , near 60
I didn,t notice any rating tags on the binder or chain? DOT around here are getting picky
I think D.O.T. is stepping up enforcement everywhere , All of our chains have links that are stamped or embossed with the rating (G70 I think)
That chain would have to be 3/8'',not 5/16'' looking at the size of those binders.I am a big proponent of diagonal cross chaining,much safer all around.The thing I don't care for here is the long slow angle of the chains in the rear.The geometry is all wrong if there were stresses being created during an oopsy that might release the rig from the trailer.For sure with all that slack,those binders would have to be constantly re-adjusted.I hate moving those genie lifts,especially when I'm all by myself as your vision is limited.I'll get off and on the seat 10 times at least to make sure I'm all squared up nice.
I haul skidders and cutter all the time like this, don't even cross chain, they never move, I've found the trick with articulated machines is to secure all corners so it can't move
the crane operator lied to me about the weight, I told him if it was over 55k pounds that I wasn't hauling it, good way to stress test a lowboy
Interesting trailer here, ready for "The Dragon", US 129. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4piCoFfA7Q&NR=1
CONVOI EXCEPTIONELL, indeed
How 'bout this one. . . a pretty good load. Wonder how it's chained. . . . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eZkn5TdK1k&feature=relmfu
Can't go on the dragon with that one, it's not a Swift truck
And this one. . . Where's the sleeper? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFBlu42Em0c&feature=relmfu
Who needs a lowboy--you don't need one to haul an excavator, do you? OK, finally a practical example for us regular folk. Would you haul like this ? All the sniveling about being "hairy to load", Atco's fussing about no sideboards, "stress on the track chains", etc. Who needs a lowboy anyway? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE02T...eature=related
Did you mean this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1oPusMRZHE
DrJim, I tried to edit it with the link you sent me, but still got the same result: It must have something to do with your avatar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE02TxLlRQU I think i found it. I did some google searches.
That's the one, dirt hauler. I don't know why the link wouldn't paste correctly--I tested it here before I sent it. Like I said. . . who needs a lowboy. . .! Don't even need a roll-back.
For your judgement LOL , My way to do a bobcat.
Left chain first pic is loose. But yup that will work for me. muzy
If that weighs over 10k lbs, you will need 4 attachment points on the machine and one on the bucket to make the law man happy.
Yair...it's not that extreme. A float probably would'nt work on the roads they haul that ex. Pretty slick operation if you ask me...it's obvious they do it often. I used to suck an HD16 straight onto the back of a "B" model rig truck. These days anytime folks see the front wheels of a truck come of the ground there seems to be some consternation. It was normal practice on the oilpatch loading mudpumps and such.
That may have been back then. Nowdays, here in the states, DOT cops eat truck ball bearings for breakfast.
Yair...ATCO I realise things have changed...them darn rules and regulations take all the fun out if it I reckon. Just say'in, thats all.
What about the load rating on the tarz ? Hit's a thousand wonders they don't pop 'em loading that track hoe. I've seen tarz pop, first one then the next like dominos.
For the next entry , A non road worthy lube truck . 1/2 inch chains .
Tiny Why don't you use the D rings on the low bed? The angle looks good chain wont hit tire.
Thats a hard head thing on my part , most of the time they are in the wrong spot and the boss asked why I was bending so many chain links compared to everyone else . Pulling over the sharp edge will do that .
I dont know a lowboy driver out there that uses the D rings for anything.
D rings are useless
Let me add to that, when they arn't being used. No doubt they are not that handy cuz you waste 2 1/2 feet of chain to bring the hook over the frame or it will just jam under the I beam of the float. So I'll say almost useless. Back to the load, yup can do. Say did you bend that handle on the on boomer with your bare hands? Or did you have gloves on? lol. Like the springy things keeping out rigers in. muzy
I notice the paint isn't worn off the D-rings. They're good in some cases but most of the time they just get stuff torn up.
and there noisy!:Banghead
I used a fontaine trailer once , it had "Bent" d rings . They were kinda handy
By the way hope them boards under the truck are secured. I know they will never go anyware, but the dot dude dosent care what I think. muzy
How about this? http://www.tarpstop.com/media/CHN/Chained_Down.jpg
LOL, highly unlikely you see that coil on a truck. No bandding around coil = some body elses problem. muzy
Yeah, I was seeing what you drivers would say. Lol
Hi, new here, and this is my first post.. Trucks are some of the WORST loads to chain down on a lowboy.. Not much to chain to, and often there is so much 'stuff' (side boxes, battery boxes, fuel tanks, air tanks, aero-skirting, ect..) hanging in the way that it is difficult to find places that you have room to chain and have room to operate the boomer.. looks fine to me -- depending on the type of chain and the weight of the off-road truck -- factors we cant tell in the pic..
As has been said, 10 drivers, 10 different answers. I have read portions of this thread over time but started at the beginning today and read all the way thru. One thing that comes to mind on the Genie pics. On anything that is rubber tired I was taught to cross chain and have a pretty good angle to the tie down point. The purpose of this was to allow the machine to have some room to bounce without shock loading the chains if they were pulled straight down from the corners. (Actually, it wasn't explained to me that way, it was more like just do what I say and quit asking so many questions ) That was many years ago. Fast forward to today. I always have enough securement to equal the weight of what I am hauling, ie 120,000 lbs = 12 chains and binders that have a WLL of 10,000 lbs each. That way I am covered to half the weight of the load I am hauling and within the rules. The securement is supposed to keep a load from moving while in transit. Once it starts to move, if moving under duress, the chains are worthless. Only once have I ever had a load get loose on the trailer and take off. I was moving some M-48 Tanks from Port Orange,Tx to Red River Army Depot, circa '78. I had chained the tank with 4 cross chains on each end. Weight was 98,000, and these were WWII tanks, no brakes, going for scrap/storage, to Red River. Enroute,I did a Panic stop, and the next thing I knew, I was watching the Tank climb the front deck. Fortuanately, I was able to get off the brakes and the Tank rolled back into the well of the trailer and once it settled down, I eased to the side and put 7 cross chains on the back, and 2 on the front, and soft pedaled it the rest of the way to Red River. I don't recommend this form of education to anyone, the cost of underwear has become to costly. All that aside, this is a good thread for different ideas and opinions.
That is what I had hoped for , A place to ask questions about securing loads with out fear or being Flamed or made fun of . You not only told Us how you would tie a load down you also told us why ,Thanks that helps a bunch .
Another outfit is hauling beams from a job , What do think of the beams laid down ? 4 or 5 pieces was all he was putting on . I wondered if the beams hauled upright might work out better .
Standing them up would make it difficult to keep them stable due to the different widths of the flanges seen in the picture. If the flanges were all the same dims, standing them up would be my preference. But from what I see, they made a good choice in laying them down and overlapping the flanges. Is just my opinion though.
Tiny, both ATCO and grandpa say they experience a combined sense of fear and terror, reading this thread... just from seeing your avatar... :lmao Just kidding, of course... lol :thumbsup... for the above, Tiny... sure shows you have a lot of insight about how a forum like this should work, and... how it shouldn't. Good thread. OCR
Yeah, I tend to go along with rigandig, I think that's a good opinion. That type of load is really awkward to secure properly, and we can't see the whole load, so can't make an informed judgment about how the fellow proceeded. One thing I would do, in his situation at least, is to try and use a D ring, rather than hooking onto the top trailer flang... sure looks like the chain is pulling at an "unnatural" angle, to the hook. There's a couple of other things I might be concerned about, too. You don't happen to have a full picture, Tiny? OCR
Tiny, both ATCO and grandpa say they experience a combined sense of fear and terror, reading this thread... just from seeing your avatar... Avatar.... both Turbo and Qball have seen him in person and say that avatar picture is the real picture of Tiny...
I looked and don't have any better pics , We are a sub contractor to this guys and that is their guy . I have worked with him before and he does his own thing .
Ok Gentleman these pic are not mine and I am not involved in any way But what do you think? . . . . . . . . . . .
DOT just took all his money that the scrap yard was going to give him... then there is the tow bill... Cause the Kansas DOT would have parked it, then made him either unload it, or haul it on a wrecker or trailer
I would bet money he built a ramp and ski jumped it into the pick up
At least he's got it tied down.
Ha Ha Ha, that looks impossible. Man never under estimate the determind. LOL. Thanx I know for a fact I will still be laughing when I wake up. muzy
I have long marveled at the things done by amateurs hauling scrap. My long-held conviction is that things like that only work because the people are too dumb to know it won't. If someone convinced this man of all the reasons this won't work, it would immediately fall off. Thanks for posting this.
Whole new meaning to "Car Pooling"
LOL, still laughing when I look at that. But sereously if I seen that in person while I was driving, would have scared the crap out of me. muzy
I never haul anything with chains crisscrossed on a flatbed trailer! I would hook the chains underneath it somehow. Just seems dangerous and has a risk of rolling anytime it feels like it! Oh well, to each his own...
On the original post with the forklift, it's all about the CG. If it's high, you have a tipping motion to control. If it's low, you have to address the sliding motion, not it tipping. To me, more chains, lower holes to near side. That covers both bases. The nearside ones on the forklift don't really count since that is a loose joint between the fork and the main body.
Hey, I have learned alot from this site! I posted some pics of my load and would like some feedback on how its chained down. I never actually towed it yet as I am waiting to get my Condition 15, which allows me to haul a trailer weighing more than 4500 kg. I will be towing it with an 2004 F-250, 6.0L.
Looks good to me. Don't forget to wrap and tie the loose chains at the back.
If the outside of the machine is about 10" inside the edge of the deck I would chain machine to the same side , any thing wider I would cross chain . This might be a bit out there but I think you and other road users are safer to have the load secured so it will hold under severe conditions but not so that it will take the whole unit with it , if you get to the stage where the whole unit is going to roll over . Are you better to have to load , say 20 ton ( 44000 lbs) , or have the whole unit , say 40 ton ( 88000 lbs ) rolling down the road ? What do you think ? We have to chain loads on here so that if King Kong called grabbed the truck and shook it upside down nothing would come off ! Isn't the load better off down the bank than the whole thing with the driver in there as well ???? Your comments would be good to hear .
Can anyone here provide me with a link saying that securement chains have to be crossed? I know here in New Brunswick they don't have to be. I'm just curious as to what the regulations pretaining to this is in other countries. I was just discussing this with a CVE officer is how I got my information.
The chains don't have to be crossed here . I cross them on wide loads for my own peace of mind . We have to have 2 ton of rated chain strenght to 1 ton of load
That would be a hard call to make Haddy. At what point would you determine that your load is secure for severe conditions but it would not take the unit over with you? Sooo many different things can happen in that situation. I think if you follow the guidelines and secure your load properly, then thats all you can do. Sounds like you are one of those people that does it right..
Looks good! Welcome to HEF fellow east coast Canuck! Hey Gramps...another one ....lol on edit..see you joined last year..must have missed your posts
Suppose he works for the gov. too....ha hah
This thread is a great read. Bumping it for those who might have missed it!
Yea I would have to agree with Monkey. With it being cross chained, it allows more tension on the chains where as if they were not, if a slight pull in the opposite direction slack would be on both sides, not just the one. Hope that came out clear. Does anyone know the best way to haul large machinery that have Magnet Generator attached. How would you tie this down to keep from swinging?
Maby if you thought about it you would figger it out. But insted you would rather ask simple questions just to get you spam links on site. Set it on the deck and tie it down. As if some one would leave it swinging trying to transport it. Give your head a shake. muzy
Simple, just drop it onto the steel deck and switch it on. RnR.
what if it's an aluminum trailer. heck if the trailer is steel, then turning the magnet on would magnetize the whole trailer. Eliminated the need for chains entirely. MMM I wonder if DOT has a rule for magnetized hauling of a load.
I cross chain everything from D9's to pick up trucks. But with a single line not doubled as shown. Brake over binder are good but getting as i get older ratchet binders are a bit easier on these old bones...
itl work
Sure, but I can't figure out why he had the need to use all of that chain and rig it how he did. It's not going anywhere IMHO..The chain appears to be small in size too but I really can't tell by the photo. The loop are way too big , closer to the machine , like in stright down from where it is mounted vs half down the trailer bed and skip the criss cross , go directly down for max adheresion to the trailer deck. Like I said, it messed up in rookie level IMHO but, I really don't think it would move much as long as it was tight and stayed tight for the duration of the move.
How many chains you want boss?????? all 1/2", 2 cross chains each end, 1 vertical hold down at each corner and if i could have found anyplace to put more i would have. C-500 KW, 150 ton single drop oilfield lowboy. this load needed outriggers in the wind!!!!!
Not heavy equipment related but a learning experience none the less. A friend of mine that runs a towing company got called out to this mess. The truck pulling the boat obviously rear ended another vehicle, problem was they didn't have the boat tied to the trailer.
Thats kinda tall Big Iron, was it more than 30ft. How was the sway factor? Chain looks good. I probly would have 4 more crossed from top of brace.( for hiway) Yard move differant. muzy
some pics of projects (I cant post pics yet) 510k transformer Rotor Generator enclosure
never did measure it but i would guess 25' +/-. even on a 12' wide 150 ton trailer it still needed outriggers. move was about 10 miles gravel roads if memory serves me
I dont reckon its going nowhere but dont like the hook into floor bit lol
Probably a stupid question, but here goes: When I'm taking up slack with my screw type binders, the hooks attached to my chains start to twist as tension is being applied making it difficult to tighten them properly. Am I doing something wrong? I've got three lever-action (snap?) binders and two of the ratchet/screw type and am using grade 70 chain to secure my 7k TLB. Seems I can get the snap binders more secure more quickly than wrestling with the other type. Other than the obvious mechanics involved in tightening is one better than the other, and why? Thanks for taking my questions and hope someone can help me out.
Use a bit of lube on the screw binders. lube the screws as well as the cogs and the little "ball bearing that is in the handle for the directional control of the cog. Once you get the screws lubed well, that twisting problem should go away.
I like to keep a can of fluid film or rust check in the truck/trailer and spray them either every time I use them or about once a week depending on how much its getting used.
The lube film is probably a little less problem in relation to run off, but i alwaays looked at it as nothing stays on there for long, so whatever was handy. When I found my can of spray on was empty it was time to hit the fifth wheel for a dab of the extra grease that always seemed to be present around the edges.
Thank you for the response, and why didn't I think of that?! When you look at them they're pretty dry and "cranky" when I go to tighten 'em up...I'll try it. I was told to keep two things on hand at all times...WD40 and the other thing is duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, spray a little WD40 on it. If it moves and it shouldn't, use the tape! Thanks!
WD-40 is as worthless as t!ts on a boar. Get some PB Blaster!!
We have the same problem sometimes. Used to use WD40 but the stuff would just go away after a couple of uses. Then my dad grabed a can of chain lube we had down the shop. That stuff stays around for a long time. Just don't get any on the barrel or handel. Gets on your hands and won't come off.
Will this man lift pass muster ??
Looks good from here, nice rig too.
Automatic transmission fluid is a good lubricant if nothing else is available. Acetone and ATF mixed is a penetrant. WD40 is not really good at anything but is used because it is handy, no hang on it is good at dispersing water and starting Diesel engines.
Do you reckon these guys have adequate load restraint?? I'd hazard a guess, that if these items started to move, there would soon be some chain links flying! http://oi48.tinypic.com/169kpxh.jpg http://oi50.tinypic.com/34evxiv.jpg http://i45.tinypic.com/15s0zlv.jpg http://i46.tinypic.com/33m1uoj.jpg http://i47.tinypic.com/2hokx35.jpg http://i46.tinypic.com/18y6c8.jpg
Yair . . . OzDozer . No worries mate she'll be right. LOL. Actually we never used do chain 'dozers on at all . . . just blade down on the gooseneck and handbrake locked on tight. Cheers.
I use spray on graphite on my rachet binders it works real good until it rains then I need to spray them again! Jerry
Maybe they'd rather just loose the load than the load and trailer!
Yair . . . ben46a That was the theory mate . . . it mostly worked for me. Cheers.
We never used to chain our dozers down when working in the wheatbelt for farmers. You'd sometimes only move a few kms to the next job, and the move would occupy far less time, than the time taken to chain down! Besides, you'd be lucky to see 2 or 3 other vehicles a day, so the traffic wasn't even a consideration. Even taking a tractor back home to the shop, in 50kms or 80kms, you might only pass half a dozen vehicles. In heavy traffic, or on highways, or over long distances, chaining down is a necessary part of travel. The whole thing about tie-down is that its really designed to stop any initial movement, that creates a whole heap more problems. If a trailer rolls, its rare to see a chained load stay together with the trailer, and all the chains stay intact. In most cases, the chains just reduce the overall level of damage, by preventing the load from being flung further than it would be, if it wasn't restrained. I hate seeing chain links being pulled over sharp edges and corners, this is good way to totally negate any chaining down. If one link fractures because it was pulled over a sharp edge, there goes all your chaining down efforts. I can recall a bad smash many years ago, when an East-West truckie left Sydney or Melbourne for Perth. He had a loader bucket chained down at the front of the semi-trailer. He travelled about 90% of his trip without any problems - but unknown to him, a chain link had broken where it was pulled over a sharp edge of the bucket. The constant bouncing of 2,500 miles of travel had broken the link, and he never noticed it, in the dark of night. There was a sharpish bend in the Gt Eastern Hwy about 30 or 40kms East of Merredin. The truckie approached this bend late at night, right at the same time as an East-West 45 or 50 passenger coach approached from the other direction. They passed right on the bend, and the truckie obviously leaned hard into the sharp bend. Right at that point, the bucket broke free, and launched itself off the semi. It smacked right into the coach windscreen, killing the driver instantly, and destroying the entire front of the coach. Luckily it was flat country, the bus ran off the hwy out of control, but stopped without hitting anything, and stayed upright. If the bucket had smashed into the side of the coach, it would have taken the side right out of it, and the death toll would have been in the dozens.
Oz, I suppose you didn't want to tell the story of how your D7 deadaxle got bent
Ben, I think that story is already on here. Besides, we've all had our little "mishaps", haven't we?? :tong
Yes we certainly do Oz! That's where experience comes from.
Hey Everyone, Looking for information on moving a Michigan Clark 475 wheel loader, any of you guys interested? What needs to be done? What trailer? etc. Here is the info. Not looking to go broke over it http://www.volvoce.com/construction...Clark Michigan/pages/Clark Michigan 475C.aspx
At 185 tons, it won't be cheap.
So your saying I should try to find a heavy duty rental trailer and hook my isx and get it myself?
167000 lbs anyway, not tons!
Anybody got some more info? So far the pricing i have got is out of my range thus far. Need to find someone with a backload, and a large enough trailer to not have to totally dismantle it.
Where are you moving it? Any public road move is likely going to require some amount of disassembly to get it to dimensions that will be allowed. Also, the linked specs say 167,000 KG, but I am pretty sure it is a misprint and is really Lbs
either way its heavy. 85 tons or 185 tons
Ritchie Bros has it at 168k lbs, 13.5 ft wide, 16 ft, tall, 41 feet long
gonna have to remove the cab to take it almost anywhere, even on a rail trailer. That height is hard to deal with. This won't be a backhaul for anybody.
removing the cab and tires would get it to about 12 feet high and 10 wide. with the arms and bucket removed. my guess would be around 8 truck loads, maybe less.
Maybe you could get shipping wars to haul it
I wouldn't be buying a 475 if you don't have the 10,000 to move it. Cause that's what I will cost if you're lucky.
I would be more than happy with ten thousand, but I don't have 60 to ship it like what I'm seeing as quotes, and I still handle all the crossing papers at that. It needs to move from Dubois, PA to Maidstone, SK. I'm trying to find reasonable shipping before I do agree to purchase it, and at 60k I'd rather find a rental trailer(which may be near impossible) and go get it myself.
Not a shipping expert by any means but here are a few thoughts to get the overall weight/measurements of the unit down to reduce the shipping cost but you could be robbing Peter to pay Paul if the cost of disassembly/reassembly exceeds the reduction in freight costs. Remove: - 1. Bucket. 2. Tyres/wheels. 3. Rear counterweight/fuel tank. These 3 will get both the height, width, & total weight down significantly, although they do have the disadvantage that the machine can't drive itself on or off the lowboy. It may also be necessary or desirable to remove the cab and anything else exhaust/air filter/handrail related up on top. That would get the height down even more. Does the cab come off in one piece or is it like some cabs that "split" at the level of the bottom of the windshield..? If it's the latter I'd surely take the top half of the cab off, a harder decision if the cab has to come off in one piece. You might be able to load all of items included in 1-3 above on a single 40ft flat deck trailer. So that would get your machine down to basically 2 loads.
Oh hell, I assumed you were getting it from the prairies. 60 is pretty reasonable then. Your crossing a whole country, every state requires different permits. And escorts. You won't be moving a machine that big on one trailer in one trip. Its going to take at least 4 trips and a couple cranes. That's the only way. Its too big and too heavy.
For a move like that, 60K is about what I would expect. It is multiple loads, and I believe you will not have a choice buut to remove the cab and all exhaust for height. I had to do that on a 990 Cat moved recently, and it is much smaller. You will have to remove the bucket, and possibly some counterweight. I am not sure how the 475 is set up for that. The big question is to remove the tires, or leave them on. Eastern US regulations are typically more strict than out West where I am familiar with. By the time you remove those items, if the tires are included, that will likely be two flatbed loads, due to the weight. The remainder of the machine will be a load for a 9 to 13 axle combination, and good luck finding any heavy hauler who will rent out a trailer like that. Add to that that each state will require permits, odd routing due to the height, even after the cab is removed, but less if the tires are off too, and most likely 2 pilot cars the whole trip, plus the regulations for crossing the border. Another interesting thing is weights legal in US are different than Canada. I know a hauler taking large items to Canada who has to unload them, reconfigure the trailer, and reload in order to get from the US into Canada. All these things add time and money that there is no way around. The cost of moving it has a lot to do with the cheap sales price for the loader. Good luck, whichever way you go.
What a nightmare
We had a local entrepreneur that bought a 675 from a coal mine in KY. He was going to load sand trucks in his sand pit with one bucketful . 8 truck loads to get it here. Got stopped at the OH / MI border due to weight restrictions in the spring (That didn't cost anything ) . Got it all assembled and not 1 trucker would let him load their truck . So, he decided to drive it to his house a couple miles away. Punched the tires on the front axle thru a corduroy road 1/4 mile from the pit. Had to have the local heavy wrecker guy get him unstuck. The bank foreclosed on it and the heavy haul guy that trucked it from KY bought it real cheap. Finally just scrapped it a couple years ago.
What kind of trucks was he loading with this 675? A 980 Cat will load a truck in one scoop and it is a reasonable size machine.
Back to the 475. We just had 2 new 854K Wheel Dozers delivered. A tad bigger than the 475 but not much, basically a 992 with a dozer blade instead of a bucket. This is how they shipped from the factory: - Chassis with Axles installed - 137,000 pounds - lowboy. 4 x 45/65R45 tyres installed on rims + cab (packed in a case) + 4 packing cases of smaller parts - 40-foot flat deck Blade accessories - 2 push arms, crossbeam (8 tons alone!), tag link, 2 tilt cylinders on pallets, ROPS structure - 40 foot flat deck Heavy Duty Blade - 25,000 pounds - 30-foot low deck. I can find out the cost of overland freight for that lot from the factory in Aurora IL, to Miami FL for comparison purposes if anyone needs it.
Our trucks in Michigan are a little different than most places in the world. A typical michigan train will have approx 25-28 tons in the first trailer, and about 20 in the pup
Having never been there, this makes me curious. Even so, wouldn't a 475 be able to get that much on the truck? And how do they distribute this if it's one scoop along the bed? Dump the bucket while the truck moves slowly? Even so it seems like 2 scoops for the 980 would do it almost as good but I'm sure you know that method well already.
Here is a link to our load restraint guide
Ok , Whats wrong with a RATED cam lock binder that has the handle properly secured ? I moved a lot of industral equipment, lathes , forklifts, mills, construction equipment . never had a issue. have seen bent equipment from ratchet binders though. to me all rated binding equipment has its use and place. it takes time to binder your load BUT it gives me a good piece of mind, knowing its right and Legal.
I agree to you 245dlc. I think they need more chains for it, so that the equipment will be secure.
Just a couple I saw Friday . One on the way to work , another on the turnpike in Kansas
...
Ha, I see I'm not the only one driving around with a cracked front glass. LoL
Can't comment on the straps on the steel load but I chain my 953 down in a similar manner. 4 short chains and binders from the track pads to the trailer and one chain and binder over the bucket. However I get the chains higher on the track pads at the top of the sprocket and idlers. In relation to the pick, the short chains would be 2 pads up on the sprocket.
The 963 looks just fine to me as well. That is pretty much how I would do it. The straps on the load of beams is an accident waiting for a panic stop to happen. I hope the truck has a good headache dack on it, because too much brake pedal and it is likely to get tested.
I would haul it like its chained down but not how I would have done it. I also cross chains sometimes but try not to if I can because it always seems like more trouble and takes longer to do. Most of the time I don't think crossing chains really help in securing the load but it dosen't really hurt either. I would run chains at each corner but I don't like to run the chains completly thur the eyes, I just hook the chain back to itself up near the eye. Than slap a boomer on it. I'm also am becoming less of fan of the type of chain attachment pictured above, the type where you just slide the chain in the slot. We have a couple tilt trailers with that type of chain attachment and over time the slots like to bend and can also cause the chain to bend and break over time. Maybe I am doing something wrong to cause this but have never had a problem with this any other time. I think my favorite piece of equipment to haul as far as loading and chaining down is an excavator. I can lower the trailer, load excavator and boom in down in around 10 mins. I don't use any chains, just put boomers on tracks at all 4 corners and one chain and boomer over bucket.
Sorry, didn't realize there were 15 pages of post for this thread. My post was refering to the original post picture. I'll pay more attention next time. As far as the 963, thats exactly how I would haul it and is actually how I was saying I haul an excavator. I also haul our D5 like that but it is more diffcult because the tracks are wider and you have to have it exactly in the middle of the trailer or the boomers won't reach.
How about this guy, he rolled into the new winery job site with roofing sheets that go under solar panels and one strap on the whole load, the job boss was not happy...
Guys like that get away with stuff like that for years and I get pulled over for having 6 chains on a loader and still get a butt chewing for not having a properly secured load. Chain across center pivot point was unnecessary and chain across bucket was inadequate load rating but that was 5 years ago or so.
Trick is to drive ahead slowly like they ask but when they say stop slam on the brakes, it destroys the load cell. Here in the great white north DOT wants everything cross chained no matter what, my self I believe that using the shortest chain possible giving the load less chance of movement and ratchet binders. I rarely use chains on any load smaller than 1/2 ", why ? Because i HAVE them and a DOT officer is never gonna say why did you use a bigger chain than you have to.
This is the Africa way
Man, we should order Tiny one of those signs, it would fit him perfectly!
Which one . The 80 or the 40 ?
I was thinking of the "Abnornal". Just weld one to everything he drives....
Lmao
i know this is an old thread but here is my two cents, one binder per chain. never use the same chain to secure two separate corners even if there is plenty of slack in the middle ( a guy told me a DOT gave him a ticket for it), i dont have a problem with it i just dont want any more tickets so i try to do what others have paid for. im pretty sure there is a picture of this being done on the first or second page. i always use the four corners/four chains and binders rule.
i am referring to post number 27 (the middle picture)
I can't believe post #217, that looks so dangerous. Here is one I found on my local CL. Not looking secure there. Wow.
Fastdirt, I agree it's not secure enough for me to haul, but for some unexplainable reason, I really like the truck and trailer set up..... You can call me crazy, I don't mind
It is a neat looking setup, but up here we would only be allowed 48,000 lbs gross, and I'm guessing the truck and trailer would be in the 20,000 range.
No, I would not haul it. I really like this thread but usually a post means somebody is pushing the limits. Here's 17,000 lbs. on single wheels. Saw this Sunday.
Whats wrong with this i have hauled 2 F450s and a midsize car in one load. On the other hand i cant see how they are tied down.
Doug, from the pictures that truck is overloaded. Not good for the truck or public safety.
It does look like a load for that pickup. The cars many weigh 12000 at the most.
If the cars weigh 12,000, and the trailer weighs....unless it's one of those new-fangled ones with the helium filled frame?
The total weight don't look bad, if it was on a dually, but I bet he is well over the weight rating for the rear axle. The hitch weight on the trailer looks to be around 6K to 7K, then with the truck tare, the rear axle may be around 8 to 9. Too much for single tires, in my opinion.
...
Tiny, did you set it up for the rear axles to swivel somehow?
Nothing wrong with it at all. He has a overkill six point tie down set up. I don't know if I would have bothered with the fork carriage, it's probably a corporate policy. Need bigger chains? Huh, what? I really can't tell if those are 3/8 or 1/2 but 3/8 G80 chains using a 6 point contact would be good for a DOT/FMCSA rated binding load of around 85k lb. Seems slightly sufficient for a what, 30k lb machine. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/cargo-securement/cargo-securement-rules It's a good guess that a low bed driver for Hertz probably knows what he is doing. Corporate safety training out the wazoo and it being his full time job and all. Most drivers use ratchet binders now because we all have a snap binder story but there is nothing wrong with them at all. Opps, didn't realize I was comment on the original post of a thread that was 16 pages deep. Shouldn't it be illegal for truck drivers to be in a heavy equipment forum anyway?
If you look closely you can see the chains on the front right behind the bucket (assuming the other side is done too). It looks like the rear chains are secured to his engine guard, don't know if that's valid tie down point or if there are tie down pad eyes right behind it. We stopped using shovel dozers around here in the early 80s.
I saw this guy on the side of 285 in heavy traffic on the way home. I thought to myself when I saw him on the side of the highway I thought that just does not look right. It wasn't five minutes later and he was passing me on the right. As soon as he passes me he again pulls into the emergency lane and stops. I personally would not haul this. Seems like a job for a trailer.
Yes Sir , There is a turntable on the lowboy . An 18" I beam on a well greased steel plate and center pin
OK then, yeah, I'd haul it....forward. I wouldn't make any promises about backing it onto the mark in only one day.
An of extra set of eyes helps a bunch
I admire this creativity ]155443[/ATTACH] Have any of you ever done this?
Before I say this, I hope it's not you doing it. If it is, please don't be offended, unless you just want to be. Ok, No, I've never done that, and I can't imagine a situation where I would. That first picture is stupid and dangerous. why? Let me count the ways. 1. There is no way that pickup is going to stop that at any speed above a walk. 2. There is no way that pickup is going to steer that at any speed above a creep. 3. If he owns the crane doing the work, I'm sure he has or can borrow, rent, or hire a truck to haul it. 4. If he has hired the crane to split it, then he's just paid 4 to 10 times what it would cost to hire a heavy wrecker to handle the whole thing safely. 5. If he thinks 4 little tires are going to haul this far or fast, he's got another think coming. This whole mess looks like somebody who's using the truck just because he wants to prove to himself just how big his and his truck's spherical appendages are. The second picture might be ok if all the working parts are stripped out, if not, see 1 through 5 above.
We used to " sling shot " the old K 12 Insley if moving very far . Put a 3/4 ton pickup or road tractor in front with 30 foot tow strap to help maintain speed on hills . Just a little pulling help made a big difference . Of course we had two drivers & air brakes on the crane for stopping . It worked . I miss those day's
Komatsu 114ton Bulldozer
Really, really big 365ton transformer gross combination mass 1,150ton @ 160m with 5,000hp on board.. View attachment 15 5872[/ATTACH] Next photos Pacific P12W3 with various loads.
Wow! That is some really heavy hauling. Are the "houses" on the back of the trucks living quarters for the crews? They appear to be much more than our "sleepers". Great pics Dennis, Thanks.
I can think of a golf course I'd like to run that Komatsu through:avid Truck Shop
Great pictures Dennis. Love the company name. It sure fits.
I think that is the South African word for "oversize" or something like that. I've seen it before, sometimes spelled ABNORMAAL
Birken, you're correct. In Afrikaans the word Abnormal is spelt Abnormaal. A word about that Komatsu. TBH I didn't recognize it as a dozer at first with all the scaffolding hanging off the outside of it. I wonder how long they expect that lot to last..?
Yair . . . I was going to ask about that tractor Nige. What's the structure out the back . . . I suppose the red ladder swings down for access, but what is the purpose of the yellow and black rails, Observers standing out there or summut? Beats me. Cheers.
Nige , You and Birken are both correct but sometimes its spelled abnormal/e, so it becomes abnormal or abnormale (which is another spelling for abnormaal)
Scrub All that cr*p is for safety. One thing which is not normal is the lack of a ripper
Yair . . . seatwarmer. I figured the gadget hanging on the back was some form of counterweight . . . those big suckers look strange with out a hook on the back hey? Without a ripper it would seem it is bound for a life of mine reclamation or some such class of bulk pushing . . . looks like just a standard blade. I reckon during its life the beancounters will be cursed for fitting a weight rather than hydraulic hooks . . . even just for diagnostics and walking gear maintenance it was a whole different world for me when I could get big tractors off the ground, quite apart from getting out of bogs. Gotta say though that to these old eyes they look like a "proper" tractor. (grins) Still don't understand the scaffolding though, safety when and for who? Cheers.
Scrub, believe it or not all the scaffolding is so the operator doesn't fall off when he's cleaning the side & rear cab windows. And don't think I'm joking ........ they now need CCTV cameras on all 4 corners of the top of the cab because you can't see jack schitt out of the windows any more. Bugger, double bugger even. Blame BHP, it was those fcukers who first started all the "safety" **** on machines....
yes you are correct front of the vehicle must be boarded ABNORMAL and the rear ABNORMAL/E
And then they need more scaffolding not to fall off when cleaning the CCTV camera lenses :beatsme
\ A dozer without a ripper tooth hanging off the backside is like walking down high street naked
And it's spreading everywhere and getting worse. Operators never want it, mechanics and welders don't want to install or maintain it. It is just some safety guy and an accountant at corporate hq who think both their numbers will be better if they eliminate every possible way somebody could possibly hurt themselves, no matter how unlikely. It's the nanny state and they are trying to "childproof" our workplaces. I am not against sensible safe guarding, footing and handrails but it's getting ridiculous.
Norite Its called common sense. And the world has lost common sense
somebody did not read that memo sorry cant get the pic clear enough but the front says ABNORMAL/E
Like the guys who said we had to install a guard on the alternator belt and pulley on our older 769C? I tried to tell them if someone was standing close enough to it to get hurt he'd better watch out because the front tire is going to run him over. At least the one I made was held on with one of these rubber hold-downs like they use on battery box covers so it was a simple no-tool remove and install when changing the oil filters. Unlike some of the "factory" guards that can take three different tools and a bunch of cussing!
I'm assuming those three cars/trucks behind that load is so some idiot doesn't try to pass and hit the load. Would be a shame to scratch that nice yellow paint!
one is an escort, the others are trying to pass. Most south africans can't do basic physics.
Well from my limited experience following large loads here in the US drivers here are no smarter!
What he said! rofessor
Missed the picture because I was driving. Passed a Dodge 1 ton broken down on the side of the highway the other day. Had a trailer mounted miller gas engine welder, and a job box, and one of these on the gooseneck trailer behind him: Just looked up the weight just under 36,000. That would be a load on my semi. Trailer was a dual tandem, with spread axles on the rear, no way would I have taken down the road with it. On our way back there was a road side service truck working on the passenger side of the trailer, guessing tires or brakes.
Here's one for you guys. We do this quite often around here
I would love to get that Nebraska DOT officer cornered and tell him why I was ticketed for the very same things he said were legal by a federal officer in Cheyene Wy. First the feds don't even recognize a 5/16 chain said it wasn't even legal for use even at its highest grade. Second a single chain is rated as a single length 6000 lbs for high grade 3/8 and 10000 lbs for 1/2 inch. The grade rating is stamped on the side of the links. It cost me $1000 to learn this. The chains as rated should equal or over the machine weight being hauled. Another words a machine weighing 52000 lbs you should have minimum 4 1/2 inch / with 2 3/8 inch 4@10000 2@6000 =52000 . They like to see if wrecked the machine still on and secured to the trailer.
Don’t like those angles! The sharper the angles the more that machine going to bounce, I don’t like to go farther then 2’ of a deck length from tie in point to anchoring point. Have been crisscrossing chains for 20 years - now cops want to see four separate tie in points! For me PITA is a asfalt pavers!