6368

Six Rod suspension is what I run on my daily driver Brockway. i don't see any torque rods in the picture and that is what looks so odd to me

I inquired about ordering a new KW with "Big Six" suspension last year and was told it was not available (at least in the states i guess).

Saw this on an A-car. wth is it? rears are double reduction rockwells (stdd).

Ok so the back of my RD's double frame is shot. The options i see are: graft new rails on behind the cab or buy a new rails from volvo. Prices for just the rails will be about $2500 for the pieces to graft or $9000 for the rails from volvo. I would prefer to put a whole new frame under but i think the difference is just too much. I would like to know if anybody has any other ideas. As far as i know P.G Adams will not build splayed rails ( even though i've seen the picture of them doing it on this forum). I will also continue to look for another truck with a good frame but they keep getting harder to find.

Many people would prefer to have the later style spiders as it makes having maxi brakes easier. Rotochambers are expensive. Plus you can get modern shoes anywhere and much cheaper.

Nice euclid dozer.

Yeah and a lot of confused looks when you try and get one at your local parts place.

Does your mic attach to the side or out the front of the cb ? I had mine mounted on top the dash ( covers part of the ash tray) and it worked ok, but if i were to do it again i would put it above, in front of the passenger.

it is supposed to be a 1976. It also has shutters when did they stop using those? I know my 79 doesn't have them.

pretty rough but pretty tough too

Saw this r773 on craigslist today https://nh.craigslist.org/hvo/d/mack-1970-model/6277925094.html

Why not go 12spd?

Please provide some reference for these numbers. I did a quick google and found this: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11134.pdf. It claims similar numbers ( .055) for "marginal social costs";however, a little further reading reveals that very little of that is for highway maintenance. I think if we are talking about damage trucks do to roads, the most relevant part of the report is on page 23. It says: " Marginal public infrastructure costs—the second cost item in table 3— relate to public highway spending attributable to miles driven by freight trucks (i.e., pavement preservation costs per million ton-miles). We estimate from recent FHWA data that trucks imposed an average marginal cost to pavement of $7,000 per million ton-miles.37 We also estimate from FHWA data that pavement preservation costs borne by all levels of government attributable to all single-unit and combination trucks (excluding pickup trucks) averaged about 6.1 cents per vehicle miles traveled (VMT).38 The cost per ton-mile would increase with truck weight and decrease with the number of axles. The costs also varied by location (urban or rural), type of road surface, temperature, and other factors. When we compared single-unit and combination trucks using DOT data, we found that marginal revenues exceeded the marginal infrastructure costs by 4.8 cents per VMT for single-unit trucks and by 3.5 cents per VMT for combination trucks, meaning that both types of trucks pay more than their share of pavement preservation costs." I added the bold. This of course does not talk about the cost of building the road in the first place just how much damage trucks do and what they pay.

It would help if you told us where you would like to do this because, most of the different specs are take advantage of different state rules. Also rates vary greatly from one region to another. 4.17 sounds good if you are on 22.5 rubber

did you fix the series parallel system or take the easy way out?

Took another look at that KW and it doesn't look like it would have much weight at all on the steer axle ( but it still has floats?). I thought you could do 20,000 lbs on the front of mixer in CA. I must have missed something.

About ten years ago I went up to Mass. to help my uncle work on one of his friends houses. We needed some concrete so we ordered some from a local yard and it arrives in a rear loader.... A b81 rear loader. Made my day.

What was the story with Mack front discharge mixers. I talked with some guys who thought they were the best and others who thought they were the worst (compared to Oshkosh and Advance). Main difference seemed to be the idea of putting the engine under the drum. Again some said this was a great advantage and others said it was like the dumbest idea ever (probably the guys who had to work on it).

Is this because of some silly bridge law ?

I think i understand what you are saying. but torque has no time/ distance (rpm) component and that is why we need horsepower. Yes, the dyno measures torque and rpm and computes horsepower from those two figures. An engine making 2000ft/lb at 500rpm will still do less work than another engine making 1000ft/lbs at 1500 rpm. I know i'am not explaining myself well but i still believe it.

I hear people often say this but it doesn't seem logical to me. Torque is simply a measure of force. i could generate 3000ftlbs by hanging a 300lb pound guy on the end of a ten foot pipe but i won't get that much work done. Horsepower is a way to measure the ability to get work done.

Why not replace them with aluminum ones that don't fly apart?

We need something like this here. Nothing i have heard of even come close to those specs.

been spending 10hrs a day on an old T-bar for long enough now. What will fit in the same space and is better option? Mines in the brockway but would also like to know for the B61.