Hydro Gooseneck VS. Mechanical Detach Gooseneck

[Chaz Murray]

Here on the west cost a Mechanical Type gooseneck trailer is the norm...and I seem to notice the farther east in the country ya go, more fall toward a Hydro neck. Why is this? :beatsme

I do see a couple benefits for the hydro neck:

1. No modification to the truck required to use the detach neck.
2. Deck height is adjustable if needed.

Down sides that I see.

1. Complex and a lot more things that can go wrong if something fails.
2. Adds a bunch of extra weight to the trailer. Figure an average of 1500-3k lbs
3. Have to have a pony motor or a wet kit on the truck (again adding weight)
4. More Maintenance
5. No big savings in time when detaching the neck.

I am sure there are more but ya get the idea.

Now the good and bad about Mechanical the way I see it.

Good

1. Lighter weight over all thus giving you more payload cap.
2. No pony motor or PTO needed
3. As fast if not faster to use than a Hydro neck to detach...(I am going to have to set up a race one day on that just to satisfy my own curiosity haha)
4. Reliable...nothing major to go wrong

The Bad

1. Truck modification required to install ramps on the truck
2. Deck height not adjustable


Is there something I am missing here?:beatsme


I would like to hear reason why you use a mechanical neck vs. a Hydro or vice versa.

We currently don’t built a Hydro neck but not against it either...but would just like to have some real world info so we can decide if we want to even try to enter that part of the market and design a hydro neck.

 

[dumptrucker]

One of the things I don't like about a mech. goosneck is that it puts a lot of stress on the driveline of the tractor if you have a real heavy load to get under. With the hyd you just back up and hook up and the hyd do the work. Plus with all the steep humped up railroad crossing's it's nice to raise the deck up another 8-10 inches. And as far as speed I don't believe you will beat a hyd. I can unhook ours in about 30 sec.

 

[joedirt]

Mechanical Trailers

Dumptrucker, what kind of trailer do you have? We have had a Murray 9 axel for many years and love it. Like both you and Chaz have said there are both pros and cons.

One thing I have noticed on extreme cold days, the hydro trucks struggle. It can get below zero around here (like most all of last week) and some of our compettitors trucks were blowing off their Hydro oil filters. Have you ever experienced that in you neck of the woods?

I do agree with you that if your truck ramps are steep or just getting under a heavy load can be stressfull. We try to back all equipment to the back of the trailer when loading just to avoid this.: my2c

 

[Chaz Murray]

I do agree with you that if your truck ramps are steep or just getting under a heavy load can be stressfull. We try to back all equipment to the back of the trailer when loading just to avoid this.: my2c

exactly right on the ramp thing...its all in how they are built on the truck...we try to build them with the smallest angle possible to try to minimize the effort to get under the trailer.

 

[dumptrucker]

We have a talbert 35 ton detachable. Never had problems with the hyd blowing off cause we run a light weight oil in it year round.
That makes sense with the ramps and keeping load all the way to back when hooking up.

 

[DirtHauler]

Here in the NW I have not seen any mechanical goosenecks us close. Aspen seems to have a handle on the market here. Can you post some of photos of the modifications required to the tractor? Also can the tractor be used for pulling side dump trailers, end dumps, or belly dumps without having to unmodify them?

 

[Chaz Murray]

Here in the NW I have not seen any mechanical goosenecks us close. Aspen seems to have a handle on the market here. Can you post some of photos of the modifications required to the tractor? Also can the tractor be used for pulling side dump trailers, end dumps, or belly dumps without having to unmodify them?

ill post some pics up in the morning when I get into the office...

Yes you can use the tractor for pulling other trailers without a problem. we can even build end dump locks into the ramps on the truck so not an issue there. The only thing you have to watch out for is if on a trailer with landing gear if you slide the 5th wheel too far forward the tips of the ramps can get into the landing gear.

 

[ror76a]

My vote is for the Hyd detatchable. We recently upgraded to a non ground bearing Fontane trailer and I love it. I was suprised at how much quicker it is to hook and unhook than my old ground bearing hyd lowboy. I would bet that it would be faster than a mechanical too, as you only have to only have to uhhook the neck and pull away, load the trailer, and back up (hopefully on the first try ), rehook and away you go. Looks to me like there would be a couple more hook up/un hooks and an extra drive ahead/back up with the mechanical. I have never used one, but my money would be on the NGB Hyd for speed.
We pull end dumps with our tractors, so they all have wet lines anyway, never had a problem with them in the cold.
Weight is not that big of an issue for me, as the extra 2-3000lbs has never been the decideing factor of needing a permit or not (im usually under, or way over).
I have never had any major problems with either lowboy, and as far as additional maintance it is just a few more grease fittings. The cylinders on the trailers are well protected and out of the dirt, tend to last a long time in these applications.
I mostly just move my own equipment and most of the moves are under 25 miles, but in other applications I think the mechanical would have some advantages - I see a lot of long distance freight/equipment haulers have them.

 

[joedirt]

Talbert Trailers

We have a talbert 35 ton detachable. Never had problems with the hyd blowing off cause we run a light weight oil in it year round.
That makes sense with the ramps and keeping load all the way to back when hooking up.

Dumptrucker, Sorry it took so long for the reply. I got a little side tracked. Talbert makes a darn good trailer as well. We had one for a few years and it worked well. As it has been said before, there are both pro's and con's for each style of trailer. For us 2 minutes or 3 minutes if thats what it takes extra to hook and unhook wouldn't make or break our day. We also will make about 6 moves in a busy day and we seem to get through it. I will say,some times at the end of the day fatigue will set in and a hyd. neck would sure be nice.
If I were to place a vote it would be for mechanical necks. It is often for us to be hauling a 310 JD backhoe on Monday, and then haul a D10n DOZER ON Tuesday. Our mechanical trailer allows us to build (add Jeep and Booster) as we need. I don,t know enough about hyd. trailers to know if they have the same capabilities. Just my 2 cents.. So Long Joe

 

[INSTRUCTOR WAR]

I Also prefer a NON ground bearing hydraulic gooseneck over mechanical. i give mechanical extra points for practicality but you wear the driver door out on yer truck getting in and out unlocking and relocking the thing. we bought a NGB 50 pitts and got rid of our GB 35 ton witzco. the ground bearing trailers are a nightmare if you are loading on soft ground. Ive noticed though that if u end up with a GB trailer that there is usually enough space to make the foot much larger for less pounds per square inch. we used to always haul 6x6 wood block around top throw under the foot so it could smash them in the ground. most of the time u couldnt dig the wood blocks back out and u just left them in the ground everywhere u went lol. the first thing we did with our new trailer was to plumb it over for the P.T.O so u always have two ways to unhook. believe me sitting on the side of a county road unhooked and out of gas for the pony motor and no way to rehook is a nightmare. its not like u can leave the trailer and drive into town with the neck swinging around behind u..

 

[Chaz Murray]

Here in the NW I have not seen any mechanical goosenecks us close. Aspen seems to have a handle on the market here. Can you post some of photos of the modifications required to the tractor? Also can the tractor be used for pulling side dump trailers, end dumps, or belly dumps without having to unmodify them?

sorry I took so long to post this up for you...but better late than never eh.

the upper part of the ramp slides with the 5th wheel and if you wanted end dump locks they would be built into the upper slider part of the ramp. This picture is just a standard type truck ramp and have a few different options for the crossmember like a Pintal hitch, receiver, or drop pin type hitch.

 

[fhansen]

I've heard that mechanicals aren't so good in snow country but I'm not sure why-maybe traction when connecting. I'd like to know what a good all-around lowboy would be for general purpose hauling in CA. A 40-44 ton 2 rail sounds like it has the most payload/wt ratio but some like the 4 rail for strength. We're just getting into it and have a 35t hydraulic tail trailer now but will probably need the heavier capacity at some point.

 

[Countryboy]

Welcome to Heavy Equipment Forums fhansen! :drinkup

 

[Chaz Murray]

I've heard that mechanicals aren't so good in snow country but I'm not sure why-maybe traction when connecting. I'd like to know what a good all-around lowboy would be for general purpose hauling in CA. A 40-44 ton 2 rail sounds like it has the most payload/wt ratio but some like the 4 rail for strength. We're just getting into it and have a 35t hydraulic tail trailer now but will probably need the heavier capacity at some point.

Traction would be the only issue when getting back under the trailer on a mechanical.. but you have to keep in mind the majority of the equipment that would be hauled on a 16tire lowbed would be able to load over the back of the trailer without the need to detach the neck. I have heard a lot of people say it is not good for the trailer and that may well be the case for that specific brand of trailer but the Murray is guaranteed to hold up to over the back loading. any givin week out of the 4 drivers we currently have they have to break down to load maybe 1 or 2 times if that per week.

A 4 rail trailer for that weight is not needed at all.. You would not need a 4 frame unless you had plans of adding a jeep to turn it into a 7 axle later down the road, otherwise it is a waste of money and hurts your overall weight of the trailer. If you would want a heavier duty 2 frame trailer we do use 1" top and bottom flanges vs. the standard of 3/4" so that would stiffin up the trailer a little but once again unless you are loaded to the max on a daily basis that is also not a needed option. In our own fleet standard set up we use would be:

22' Deck
16" longer gooseneck with 2 king pin settings
3/4" flanges top and bottom on the neck and deck
Cut down pan in the deck (not on all but comes in handy if you move lots of excavators)
Disc Brakes
Alum. wheels

Other than that we try to keep our fleet trailers as basic as possible just to keep the weight down. We do have a few customers that seem to order ever option possible and their trailer ended up being 1500-2000lbs heavier than it really needs to be .. With our Heavy front axle trucks we can scale right around 93,000lb load on the trailer with out much of a problem with the axles weights ending up with 22k on the front axle, 46,725 on the drivers, and 60,000 on the trailer.

Dont know if this really answered your questions if not let me know

 

[fhansen]

Dont know if this really answered your questions if not let me know

Thanks for the info, Chaz. Does it mean that there would never be a need for a 4 frame trailer unless a jeep is used? Could the 4 frame be used for, say, some 5 axle permit loads where a 2 frame couldn't? Or is it just beefier and heavier and maybe a little better able to take abuse while sacrificing payload? I saw some Murray trailers command relatively high prices at the Sac. Ritchie Bros sale the other day. As there was quite a variety of trailers there, I was able to get a pretty good education on lowboy brake systems-and the various means employed to solve the space limitation problems. There was everything from wedge brakes, extended pushrod s-cams (which made the wedge brakes look good), rocker arm linkage (which looked like a decent approach), disc, and your walking beam with the opposed recessed pockets for chamber mounting (which appeared to be ingenious). I was trying to figure out the walking beam design, tho. It has a ball & socket joint at one end, I think, to control axle movement while allowing oscillation but I wasn't sure how the other end worked. A U-shaped channel gloved a round member that was lined with uhmw or something and allowed for oscillation, I guess. Anyway, they were very nice trailers.

 

[Chaz Murray]

Thanks for the info, Chaz. Does it mean that there would never be a need for a 4 frame trailer unless a jeep is used? Could the 4 frame be used for, say, some 5 axle permit loads where a 2 frame couldn't? Or is it just beefier and heavier and maybe a little better able to take abuse while sacrificing payload? I saw some Murray trailers command relatively high prices at the Sac. Ritchie Bros sale the other day. As there was quite a variety of trailers there, I was able to get a pretty good education on lowboy brake systems-and the various means employed to solve the space limitation problems. There was everything from wedge brakes, extended pushrod s-cams (which made the wedge brakes look good), rocker arm linkage (which looked like a decent approach), disc, and your walking beam with the opposed recessed pockets for chamber mounting (which appeared to be ingenious). I was trying to figure out the walking beam design, tho. It has a ball & socket joint at one end, I think, to control axle movement while allowing oscillation but I wasn't sure how the other end worked. A U-shaped channel gloved a round member that was lined with uhmw or something and allowed for oscillation, I guess. Anyway, they were very nice trailers.

That is correct...if you have a 4 frame trailer you will not be able to net anymore payload on the trailer to be able to haul leagaly down the road and get a permit just due to the extra weight of the trailer. So you would be able to haul more leagaly with a 2 frame. If you are in a off road situation then throw everything I said out the window beacause a 4 frame would be better for that.

The auction in Sac last week I was watching it online...found 2 of the items kinda funny.. the 2008 Brand new never used Cozad went for $65,000 and a 2 year old murray that was used went for $67,500 . From the looks of the Las Vegas ad I have in my office looks like there is goin to be around 30 lowbeds down there next week and 5-6 of them are Murrays so might be an interesting one to watch too since there will prob be a bigger crowd than normal due to the Con Expo.

Our suspension I feel is our biggest selling point. It is the main reason we guarantee over the back loading without having to block up the rear of the trailer. With other makes with a center mount walking beam the leverage point is about 5 feet from the back of the trailer and if you dont block the rear it seems to cause the trailer to pickup and put lots more stress on the rear end/deck connection area. On our 3 point walking beam our leverage point is only about 8-9" off the back of the trailer so while the trailer will still flex up a little, it will not but the amount of stress that a single point would.
The axle hangers for that type of suspension is a pain in the ass to design and build. The way it is now the air chambers are about 1/4" away from the brake drums on the s-cam so there is no room to spare. The disc brake hanger was even a bigger challenge. We spent about 3 months just drawing up different versions of that hanger and lots of trial and error. Finaly got one that would work and took it down and had it stress tested. Ended up causing the hanger to yeild in the press at 160,000lbs but it still did not fail. If you think about it that axle should never see anything above about 30,000lbs of weight per hanger.

The way that suspension works is rather simple..think of the axles as pivot points and on one end of the hanger you have the ball socket that keeps the axle located on the trailer and the other is a half round wear plate that is UHMW plastic, there is also a UHMW wear plate on top of the ball also. that goes into the equlizer/walking beam. Lets say you put weight on the rear of the trailer, say goin over the back. When the weight is over the rear ball that hanger would pivot on the "axle" and cause the other end of the hanger to transfer weight into the equlizer and cause the EQ to go up while the other end is forced down and then putting weight on the front axle.

 

[fhansen]

The way that suspension works is rather simple..think of the axles as pivot points and on one end of the hanger you have the ball socket that keeps the axle located on the trailer and the other is a half round wear plate that is UHMW plastic, there is also a UHMW wear plate on top of the ball also. that goes into the equlizer/walking beam. Lets say you put weight on the rear of the trailer, say goin over the back. When the weight is over the rear ball that hanger would pivot on the "axle" and cause the other end of the hanger to transfer weight into the equlizer and cause the EQ to go up while the other end is forced down and then putting weight on the front axle.

Thanks, again, Chaz. I think I understand the weight transfer concept now. I was having a hard time visualizing your set-up until you mentioned that it was a three-point system-then it sorta clicked and I remembered the basic differences. Another question while I've got you here since nobody else is answering a question I posted on a different thread. I don't think Murray makes these but at that same Sac auction I ran across a fifthwheel tiltbed trailer which would be handy for moving small to medium size equipment into tight areas. It was rated around 20 ton. However, it had a walking beam suspension with no air or spring ride and the axles were located close to midship as tiltbeds need to be. I'm wondering what kind of ride this trailer would tend to have. Some other manufacturers make these trailers with spring suspension and I'm thinking that would be a much better bet for this particular application. Any thoughts?

 

[Chaz Murray]

Thanks, again, Chaz. I think I understand the weight transfer concept now. I was having a hard time visualizing your set-up until you mentioned that it was a three-point system-then it sorta clicked and I remembered the basic differences. Another question while I've got you here since nobody else is answering a question I posted on a different thread. I don't think Murray makes these but at that same Sac auction I ran across a fifthwheel tiltbed trailer which would be handy for moving small to medium size equipment into tight areas. It was rated around 20 ton. However, it had a walking beam suspension with no air or spring ride and the axles were located close to midship as tiltbeds need to be. I'm wondering what kind of ride this trailer would tend to have. Some other manufacturers make these trailers with spring suspension and I'm thinking that would be a much better bet for this particular application. Any thoughts?

In the 60 years we have been building trailers I think we have built a total of 2 of the trailers you are talking about...and that was back in the 70's. I know one of them the orig. owner still has it and uses it everyday. We just had it in the yard a couple months ago rebuilding the cylinder for the tilt bed part. I am sure we could do it again but would take a bit of work to figure out a price for one since its been so long since one has been built by us. Suspension wise the ones we have built have both been spring suspension but with that light of a application air ride would be a bit over kill in my opinion.

 

[fhansen]

In the 60 years we have been building trailers I think we have built a total of 2 of the trailers you are talking about...and that was back in the 70's. I know one of them the orig. owner still has it and uses it everyday. We just had it in the yard a couple months ago rebuilding the cylinder for the tilt bed part. I am sure we could do it again but would take a bit of work to figure out a price for one since its been so long since one has been built by us. Suspension wise the ones we have built have both been spring suspension but with that light of a application air ride would be a bit over kill in my opinion.

OK, so do you think walking beam only would be underkill? It seems like a trailer with this configuration might bounce itself to death-or not necessarily?

 

[Chaz Murray]

OK, so do you think walking beam only would be underkill? It seems like a trailer with this configuration might bounce itself to death-or not necessarily?

I would radther have a spring suspension over a walking beam...walking beams will beat up the driver a bit