Best classic conventional Pete for tandem dump?

I'm going to be the voice of dissention/ reason here. He's in texas. I know he could get a 60" spread shipped in from logging country, but I doubt that he is ever going to see conditions that need that, and chains. He also can safely have a double frame, because he isn't going to see the salt/ snow/ ice freezing conditions that ruin a double frame with rust, like in alberta, illinois, upstate NY or the snowy mountains out west.

If he's running back and forth to a quarry for some stone, hauling dirt off his jobsite, or just pulling a pintle and a backhoe, the super heavy duty stuff is overkill. Are 46,000 rears better than 40,000, yep, sure are, but there just aren't very many of them around. Is a walking beam rear more robust than air ride, oh yeah, but I kinda doubt he is going to be in a quarry loaded with 30 tons up and down a hill all day.

In fact, if he's like most guys by me, it will spend more time on pavement, than off pavement.

I think we are talking about more of a "standard" use rig, he's getting by with only a pickup right now. Could he get something that would be the terminator of dump trucks? Sure, but I don't think his use is near what a lot of you guys see in the severe applications.

So- since we're all giving free advice, I'll throw mine in ,

Anything late 80's to early 2000's. Any earlier than late 80's and your into antique/ restoration guys parts prices, and more difficult availability, and past early 2000's the emissions get worse.

Double frame would be nice, heavy single frame is good too. Spring suspension is more durable in bad conditions, but ride much worse empty. I would bet that in my area there are more dump trucks that are converted road tractors, than dumps that were ordered from the factory with specs for severe dump duty use. Do they hold up as well, no, but they get a lot of use. Air ride is not nice on a slope, but I don't know where you're at in texas, but a lot of it is pretty flat. Only you know what your local conditions are. I personally like spring over walking beam vs four leaf in a spring ride.

Anything from 3.90 to 4.60's for rears. If you find the perfect truck for you and its got 3.55 rears, you're only $2,500 from a set of junkyard gears at 4.10. I'd be more interested in a heavy front axle than super heavy rears. I'd prefer 40,000 rears to 38's, but a 20,000k front is really nice if you are going off road, and it makes it much easier to scale than only a 12,000lbs front end.

The 15 is nice, a 8LL is nice offroad also for the low hole, especially spreading while unloading. Really, a 9 or 10 speed is fine for most use, the 9 vs 13 only gets you splits of the top gears, which is nice if you are running hours on end out west and need a split on a long grade, but for short around town work, you won't need all the splits. I think a 18 is also overkill for tandem dump use.

As far as cab's go. I'm also on the taller side, but not super thick. (6'6"- 220's). I own a western star, peterbilt, international, freightliner, two fords, and a mack, and fit in all of them. The western star is probably the nicest of the trucks as far as build quality/ interior noise/ not rattling, but its also the newest one I own. The old fords I really like on jobsites for visibility, and the mack is really nice too in that regard. I think the older ford 9000's and the mack r are more durable jobsite use cabs with their steel doors and heavier built interiors. The western star needs its window down a crack to shut the door.

My pete is a 379 short hood, and its had some miles, but they hold their value, and peterbilt is great for parts. Visibility and room are good.

I've never driven a w900 kw, but the t-800's the bottom of the dash hits my shins in the daycabs.

My international is a 8100, and its really cheap inside, my shin rides on the side of the engine cowl. I much prefer the more square style cab internationals, (9100-9300) they have a lot more room inside, and are better built than the 8000 series internationals.

I absolutely despise all cabovers, both for getting in and out of the cab, and room once your in there. I've driven both KW and international cabovers, the KW's are impossible for me on the road, I just can't get behind the wheel and my foot up on the clutch, the internationals are better, but I wouldn't buy a cabover.

I dislike that style of freightliner cab, (that you posted pictures of), I think the visibility is terrible for a jobsite truck. It seems like all I can see is 30' ahead of the truck and the hood. But I'm not a supertrucker either.

Engines, I'm with everyone else, 3406, big cam/ n-14 cummins, detroit 60 series. Fuel Mileage isn't much different than the smaller engines, and you won't regret it. The only "smaller" engine that I would recommend, is in a mack (10l) , the torque curve is really nice in a city/ offroad application, under 60-70,000lbs.

Expect $5,000 worth of repairs on whatever you buy. Have $10,000 available because you might need it. I don't care who inspects it, anything used with age, is going to have something come apart. I prefer something that's been being used vs something that's sat in the weeds for 2 years.

As far as pricing, dump trucks have gone up by me, I don't think his 12k asking price is out of line for the older freightliner, it gives you some $ for repairs. I'd expect to pay between 15-25,000 for something late 80's to late 90's, that is in fairly decent shape. If its much under $10,000, its going to have serious things wrong with it. I personally wouldn't give over 20k, because I don't know that you really get that much better of a truck when buying, at 30,000 than at 20,000. But I would fix the problems myself, so for someone with limited mechanical skills/ or a shop to work on it, a $30,000 really nice truck, could make sense for you.

DMiller said:

Chicago is far from MX as well yet the largest population of Hispanics in the US reside there, makes little difference as to where trucks are built these days as parts come from everywhere. I prefer KW Construction designed trucks, even the Older IHC/Navistar's as yes, they are a lot easier as are or tend to be simpler to work on and cheaper on the wallet as parts seem to be everywhere. S series IH/Navistar trucks were all too popular with State Maintenance departments and are VERY prevalent as to repair parts used or new.
If looking for a initial beater to develop a working use and not too concerned of scrapes and dents even the old LN/LT/LTL Ford series are not bad yet parts are beginning to thin. BIGGEST Mistake most newbies to dump trucks will make, buying a Recon of a old Highway design Road Tractor into a Cheap Dump chassis. Most are single frame(Flex too much and crack a LOT) accept four spring suspensions as good, try changing one under a dump bed, or buy a air ride as they Ride Nicer(they too tend to side roll with the bed up and are lay over bait unless equipped with a dump valve and that does not eliminate the problem). Better suspension, Beam rides. Hendrickson rubber ride or spring ride will transport the weight better less downtime to repairs and less apt to lean over too far without added intentional configuration adjustments during a dumping. Also generally are under heavier frames if not double frame chassis.

Click to expand...

(Moved in from another thread so I don't hijack his thread, which is morphing into dishonesty by a local repair shop now)

Great info, thanks.

"accept four spring suspensions as good" is that just simple leaf pack for each axle, shackles on the end, rocker in between, and eye on the front? The FLC 120 I saw nearby has that.

I did drive a Ford but found it cramped and rough ride unladen. After reading up on Navistar, I developed a skin rash seeing what jerks they are as a company. I love the 444 in our pickups, but jeez IHC sued everybody even Cummins and never played nice. Maxxforce...ugh.

Which model KW are the Construction designed trucks?

Confused about your double frames comment because elsewhere folks warn that double frames rust and split, I should go for single heavy frame. Does that tie back into a truck that was initially built for dirt instead of OTR?

I'm already rather informed already about air ride and air dumps. I won't consider air ride without an air dump setup. Hendrickson walking beam is better (but I don't know how to spot it yet). I suppose the wider the spread, the more stable the truck on uneven terrain and while dumping. But doesn't frame rail width dictate how wide the spread can be? Does that tie back into a truck that was initially built for dirt instead of OTR? Again??

I live in the Hill Country and we do get hills here. Rocky soil, limestone the size of cars, black soil on top in places.

crane operator said:

I'm going to be the voice of dissention/ reason here. He's in texas. I know he could get a 60" spread shipped in from logging country, but I doubt that he is ever going to see conditions that need that, and chains. He also can safely have a double frame, because he isn't going to see the salt/ snow/ ice freezing conditions that ruin a double frame with rust, like in alberta, illinois, upstate NY or the snowy mountains out west.

If he's running back and forth to a quarry for some stone, hauling dirt off his jobsite, or just pulling a pintle and a backhoe, the super heavy duty stuff is overkill. Are 46,000 rears better than 40,000, yep, sure are, but there just aren't very many of them around. Is a walking beam rear more robust than air ride, oh yeah, but I kinda doubt he is going to be in a quarry loaded with 30 tons up and down a hill all day.

In fact, if he's like most guys by me, it will spend more time on pavement, than off pavement.

I think we are talking about more of a "standard" use rig, he's getting by with only a pickup right now. Could he get something that would be the terminator of dump trucks? Sure, but I don't think his use is near what a lot of you guys see in the severe applications.

So- since we're all giving free advice, I'll throw mine in ,

Anything late 80's to early 2000's. Any earlier than late 80's and your into antique/ restoration guys parts prices, and more difficult availability, and past early 2000's the emissions get worse.

Double frame would be nice, heavy single frame is good too. Spring suspension is more durable in bad conditions, but ride much worse empty. I would bet that in my area there are more dump trucks that are converted road tractors, than dumps that were ordered from the factory with specs for severe dump duty use. Do they hold up as well, no, but they get a lot of use. Air ride is not nice on a slope, but I don't know where you're at in texas, but a lot of it is pretty flat. Only you know what your local conditions are. I personally like spring over walking beam vs four leaf in a spring ride.

Anything from 3.90 to 4.60's for rears. If you find the perfect truck for you and its got 3.55 rears, you're only $2,500 from a set of junkyard gears at 4.10. I'd be more interested in a heavy front axle than super heavy rears. I'd prefer 40,000 rears to 38's, but a 20,000k front is really nice if you are going off road, and it makes it much easier to scale than only a 12,000lbs front end.

The 15 is nice, a 8LL is nice offroad also for the low hole, especially spreading while unloading. Really, a 9 or 10 speed is fine for most use, the 9 vs 13 only gets you splits of the top gears, which is nice if you are running hours on end out west and need a split on a long grade, but for short around town work, you won't need all the splits. I think a 18 is also overkill for tandem dump use.

As far as cab's go. I'm also on the taller side, but not super thick. (6'6"- 220's). I own a western star, peterbilt, international, freightliner, two fords, and a mack, and fit in all of them. The western star is probably the nicest of the trucks as far as build quality/ interior noise/ not rattling, but its also the newest one I own. The old fords I really like on jobsites for visibility, and the mack is really nice too in that regard. I think the older ford 9000's and the mack r are more durable jobsite use cabs with their steel doors and heavier built interiors. The western star needs its window down a crack to shut the door.

My pete is a 379 short hood, and its had some miles, but they hold their value, and peterbilt is great for parts. Visibility and room are good.

I've never driven a w900 kw, but the t-800's the bottom of the dash hits my shins in the daycabs.

My international is a 8100, and its really cheap inside, my shin rides on the side of the engine cowl. I much prefer the more square style cab internationals, (9100-9300) they have a lot more room inside, and are better built than the 8000 series internationals.

I absolutely despise all cabovers, both for getting in and out of the cab, and room once your in there. I've driven both KW and international cabovers, the KW's are impossible for me on the road, I just can't get behind the wheel and my foot up on the clutch, the internationals are better, but I wouldn't buy a cabover.

I dislike that style of freightliner cab, (that you posted pictures of), I think the visibility is terrible for a jobsite truck. It seems like all I can see is 30' ahead of the truck and the hood. But I'm not a supertrucker either.

Engines, I'm with everyone else, 3406, big cam/ n-14 cummins, detroit 60 series. Fuel Mileage isn't much different than the smaller engines, and you won't regret it. The only "smaller" engine that I would recommend, is in a mack (10l) , the torque curve is really nice in a city/ offroad application, under 60-70,000lbs.

Expect $5,000 worth of repairs on whatever you buy. Have $10,000 available because you might need it. I don't care who inspects it, anything used with age, is going to have something come apart. I prefer something that's been being used vs something that's sat in the weeds for 2 years.

As far as pricing, dump trucks have gone up by me, I don't think his 12k asking price is out of line for the older freightliner, it gives you some $ for repairs. I'd expect to pay between 15-25,000 for something late 80's to late 90's, that is in fairly decent shape. If its much under $10,000, its going to have serious things wrong with it. I personally wouldn't give over 20k, because I don't know that you really get that much better of a truck when buying, at 30,000 than at 20,000. But I would fix the problems myself, so for someone with limited mechanical skills/ or a shop to work on it, a $30,000 really nice truck, could make sense for you.

Click to expand...

I appreciate the dissent. That FLC 120 seller says he's had it on Fakebook Marketplacedumpsterfire for 3 months and lowered the priced a lot already. It's ensconced in his back yard, back street, TX tag only good for another month, so I can wait. I'm going back these evening to take pics.

We do have rough terrain here in Central Texas aka Hill Country. Lots of caliche limestone, naturally-occuring granite/limestone gravel, and black soil that will swallow you when wet but hard as rock when dry. This particular FLC has no left/right lockers and that's a worry. Locking only F/R you still only have two certain drive wheels. I'm a 4x4 nut, did trials competition, and I love lockers. As you note, most driving will be on pavement, however my job sites are never pavement because I build/repair gravel driveways.

I owned a cabover MBZ 2031 rolloff tipper and yes I despised it too, but that was in France where conventionals are rare as hen teeth. I will buy a conventional this time but visibility is an issue as you say. I had a little upchuck when I read that Renault bought Mack. I hate Renault, state-owned crap. Mack cabs do have good visibility at the quarry.

We're all in perfect violent agreement on engines, it seems. My rank is Cummins/Cat/Detroit in that order with Detroit way behind because the patriarchy, man. Seriously, it's unfamiliarity that ranks Detroit low for me.

As for IHC/Navistar I recently read up on their bad faith business dealings over years and years and that made an impression. I will climb into a 9100-9300 though and see what I can see. I tried a Ford but ride was terrible empty and cabin cramped. Seller said parts are getting scarcer all the time.

Most guys I see at the quarry run older single-frame tractors converted to dumps. Some even still have a sleeper on them. Could be OK for that short siesta after sandwich but before coffee thermos.

Saw this one today, tags expired in April 2018, pics show N14 but text says Cat and Detroit, who is he trying to kid? Might be a scam.
https://www.commercialtrucktrader.com/listing/1997-FREIGHTLINER-FLD120-5009154283

The Navistar company of yesteryear was hardly any relation to the one of today so if you find the right gear and it happens to be an International truck, don't count it out.

I liked Fords back in the day but they are orphaned since 1997 so unless it is a screaming deal and real good shape approach a Ford carefully.

Detroits 4 cycle engines were never real popular around here, but all I ever read about the old Series 60 is how great it was, just makes the owners money, and Truck Shop said as much some posts back, he is not the only one saying that, but don't get all hung up looking for the perfect engine, just post it on here and they'll tell you good or bad.

I’ll chime in....lol

Unless it’s a site truck being used almost like an off road dump a converted road tractor will be fine. 90% of the trucks around be are that and do just fine. Most issues I see are rear suspension bushings and air bags from FOD. The majority of air ride trucks will have a dump valve. Don’t pass on one that doesn’t, it’s easy to add.

Double frame isn’t bad, just look for rust jacking. The age you’re looking at if it’s going to do it, it’ll be doing it already. Stay away from trucks that ran in salt/chemicals and you’ll be ok. I’ve run a lot of older double frame heavy haul trucks, restored several heavy spec trucks and it’s not necessarily as bad as it seems.

Full lockers would be great, 40k rears are fine. Earlier 38 and 40k tears aren’t as stout as later model. Get into the 90’s and they tend to be a little tougher.

Any trans will work with the right rear gear and most will not work with the wrong rear gear. 8LL, 9LL or 15 speed is hard to beat in a dump.

I’d look at the overall package vs a spec or two not meeting your standards. Focus on the harder to change specs first and worst case you can fix the piddly stuff to your liking.

Anything that has a integrated sleeper been converted to a dump truck will likely be light framed, especially a freightliner, that will twist and distort as well bust crossmember and gussets. I changed four spring packs and replaced leaves in them almost WEEKLY back in the day when dump truckers here preferred cheap to functional, hard to make money when sitting awaiting repairs to keep TX Dept of Safety(TDOT)off your butt. Broken cross members will park you where they find them as will busted spring leaves if to an excess, freightliners have been known for busted frame rails as well. This becomes pick your poison, choose wisely and do well, choose cheap and usually spend money faster than can earn. Old Mack with a duplex or even a Eaton 9,10 or Deep Reduction 15 you won't go wrong, Sterling is more orphaned than Ford and is the run out of the Ford line.
KW W900 is going to have a LOT of hood in view ALL the time, T800 is the commercial or industrial version. Pete 379, 359 are Old School conventional Small cabs aluminum hoods, 375,376, 377 glass hoods similar small cabs basically same truck. What ever suspension you get if Air Ride will want a Vocational Type otherwise will side roll pretty severe loaded as in corners, those Air Leak suspensions were designed for dragging trailers down long stretches of well constructed roadways. 24.5 rubber will get you a LITTLE extra clearance but check the tire suppliers on prices, most common is still 22.5 centers. As others call them on here Minnesota Mags are Dayton Cast Spoke wheels, if not acquainted on Squaring those up when installing or the tire shop just drives them on with a 1" rattle gun you will get to enjoy wheel wobble, Budds make life easier for ride but if have to pull a wheel yourself may not have tooling to get that done. I will likely always have a soft spot for L series Fords and S Series IH trucks, were my mainstay alongside Macks back in years gone by. Aluminum cabs do not seem to hold up as well to the flexing(Newer are doing better) steel seems to manage a lot longer and Spartan a lot less to deal with as to crap just falling apart.

Thanks for all that advise, guys. I'm digesting it. Lots of FLs dumps for sale in auctions, I'm noting. That's consistent with them not holding up well to heavy use. Could be the reason. The guy selling the white rig I posted above, who claimed N14 then Cat then DD all in the same ad, has not answered my email. Imagine my shock.

You don't want a sleeper truck for a dump truck. Losing frame rail space and not gaining bed length.

These pics might help you identify some suspensions. 1st is 4 bag air ride. 2nd is 4 spring reyco. Third is spring over walking beam. Fourth is camelback spring mack. You may run across some rubber block suspensions if you find a converted a old concrete truck. There's quite a few 8 bag kw air suspensions around also, they will have 4 bags per axle.

This last picture is a hendrikson rubber bushed walking beam. No springs at all, just pivot up and down and the rubber bushings. Mack has their own version of a walking beam that you see on some old concrete trucks also. Super tough, but not known for a smooth ride.

CO, Texas has nothing to do with it. He either wants a dump truck or a pseudo dump truck. Every two months someone comes on here want info on buying a dump truck and some of the it will
get by for this much for this price is bad info in my book. Now I posted 48,000 lb rears as an example of what a real dump truck would have for rear suspension, spec-ed that way from the factory.
80% of what is for sale in used dump trucks are pretty much garbage. They buy whats available close by for the cheapest. Then in a few months their pouring money down it's throat. The reason
Freightliners are so prevalent is there cheap and have lousy resale value. Air ride will work but it was not originally built for construction rigs and dose not hold up under heavy use.

Dump trucks are like fork lifts-used and abused, rode hard and put up wet. Lite specifications are just that lite, every component was designed for X amount of weight and flex. Go under some of
those OTR trucks converted to dump trucks and check the crossmembers, bolts and rivets, most are cracked all to hell in two years but no one notices because there covered in dirt and mud.
There isn't a OTR thats converted or has air ride that the center crossmember on the rear suspension that doesn't have issues in a short amount of time. Those rigs are a DOT mans dream-
get out the ticket book. 44, 46 and 48,000 lb Hendrickson was designed with extra long webs and flanges to cut down on the cracking. {Your last photo CO is called beam biscuit]

Plus there isn't a dump truck that isn't overloaded on a regular basis, last load of the day- well they really need 14 yards of pea gravel {I think I can carry that in my 12 yard box}.

I should have been a DOT inspector, I would be following dump trucks all day.

Talking suspensions, I don't know anyone that regretted a Hendrickson in a dump truck, but I certainly know a few that regretted getting a cheaper air ride. We have 3 Ford's, 2 Mack's, and 1 Volvo set up as dump trucks for hauling grain and forage. The Ford's are all Hendrickson and are very stable field, road, farm, everywhere. The Volvo has rubber block and is built like a brick outhouse. It's planted firmly to the ground. The Mack's were converted road tractors that are still on air ride and they absolutely have limitations off-road. We damn near tipped the first one we bought on its very first trip in the field. The Mack's do well, but you have to plan your route differently off road and they have limitations. We pretty much thought we made a mistake after that first incident about the air ride.

That aside, I don't see much love for Mack trucks in this discussion. Both of our Macks are mid-90s CH600 series with E7-350 engines. One has a 15 speed, the other a 9 speed and both trucks have way more power to haul a heavy load than necessary. The Ford's are all rated at 250hp and they get the job done well. The Mack's just get there a bit faster with the bigger engines. Our Volvo actually has a 7.6L Volvo engine with Allison automatic, California orphan that a broker towed back to Michigan. Not a powerhouse, but it moves 500+ bushel of corn quite effortlessly really. We also have an '89 Ford tri-axle with a 7.8L Ford engine and Allison with a 15 yard dump bed. Not a huge powerhouse, but it reliably starts every day of the year, hauls a full load easily and can tow our 16 ton excavator in our hilly region just fine. We aren't setting records climbing hills, but we get the job done safely and fairly inexpensively.

Lots of ways to make a dump truck, but I agree with Junkyard. Figure out the most critical, hard to change parts, then adapt the rest of the truck to your ideal.

A platform you are comfortable in is where you start. Then shop those models for the specs you want/need.

The outfit I work for owns 10 trucks, they all spend a majority of their life building logging roads off highway year round. They are all Kenworth W900s, mostly converted log trucks so are heavy spec. 6 are long hoods. 1 has extended leaf Hendrickson, 2 have AG 100 Kenworth 8 bag, 2 have Chalmers and the rest have AG 460 Kenworth 8 bag. Having driven them and maintained them all my choice hands down is AG 460 8 bag. By design they articulate well, the bags don't wear and blow from mud and rock building up around them and they are easy to rebush the top arms when they need it. The lower sway bars are a bit of a job but they don't give many problems. They are also stable. 460 means they are 46,000 lb rears, AG 400 is 40,000.either are fine. The AG 100 is less stable and the lower bars wear out the center bushings faster, also the bars wear and are expensive to replace. Chalmers is good but rides rough empty. If you go Peterbuilt air ride I would look for Air track and stay away from air leaf. Reyco springs aren't very good in my opinion but will work. Hendrickson walking beams are kind of the standard in the industry but are big and heavy when it is time to replace broke springs or rebush them. Truck Shop has an awesome write up on how to do that by the way! They generally are probably the lowest maintenance out of everything. Don't know if that helps but don't rule out air ride if it is in a heavy spec truck.

RTE 480/48,000 lb Hendrickson suspension.

crane operator said:

You don't want a sleeper truck for a dump truck. Losing frame rail space and not gaining bed length.

These pics might help you identify some suspensions. 1st is 4 bag air ride. 2nd is 4 spring reyco. Third is spring over walking beam. Fourth is camelback spring mack. You may run across some rubber block suspensions if you find a converted a old concrete truck. There's quite a few 8 bag kw air suspensions around also, they will have 4 bags per axle.

View attachment 202537 View attachment 202538 View attachment 202539 View attachment 202540

Click to expand...

Thanks, those pics help a lot. You're right about a sleeper. It seems silly, as if the dump conversion ran out of time or money.

I had a close look at a 4 bag today, and if "spread" is what I think it is, I see how moving the bag perches ourboard of the frame rails, as in this photo, can increase spread.

I also had a close look at a 4 spring Reyco, or something just like it. A mexican mechanic nearby, who happens to have wrenched with my son a couple years back. has an FLC 120 on his lot in much better shape than the one I posted above for about the same price. 4 spring Reyco on it. I'm beginning to notice a lot of FLs for sale.

I don't know who named the 3rd one springover Walking Beam cuz for me it's a rocking beam. Very easy to see how it works. Lateral and longitudinal location is done by those huge leaf packs. Or is there a torque arm in there as well, off camera?

The last one looks like quarry truck stuff. Robust as heck, but must ride like the dickens on the empty trips to the quarry.

A 60" spread means the drive axles are further from each other. The air bags stay under the frame rails. The drive axles being further apart, allows more up and down movement of the separate axles, to maintain traction in bad environments. You won't see very many. They mostly appear out west, or from up in canada.

RenoHuskerDu said:

The last one looks like quarry truck stuff.

Click to expand...

The last one is what several of my cranes have, some I have are bronze bushed, some rubber. I don't get any empty trips to the quarry. Thanks to truckshop, I now know they are beam biscuit, I learn something from him everytime he posts.

RenoHuskerDu said:

Thanks, those pics help a lot. You're right about a sleeper. It seems silly, as if the dump conversion ran out of time or money.

I had a close look at a 4 bag today, and if "spread" is what I think it is, I see how moving the bag perches ourboard of the frame rails, as in this photo, can increase spread.

I also had a close look at a 4 spring Reyco, or something just like it. A mexican mechanic nearby, who happens to have wrenched with my son a couple years back. has an FLC 120 on his lot in much better shape than the one I posted above for about the same price. 4 spring Reyco on it. I'm beginning to notice a lot of FLs for sale.

I don't know who named the 3rd one springover Walking Beam cuz for me it's a rocking beam. Very easy to see how it works. Lateral and longitudinal location is done by those huge leaf packs. Or is there a torque arm in there as well, off camera?

The last one looks like quarry truck stuff. Robust as heck, but must ride like the dickens on the empty trips to the quarry.

Click to expand...

"Spread" is the distance from the center of the axles front to rear. Has nothing to do with component location.
"Walking beam" is what the old timers have called it forever. One tough setup, the only torque rods locate the top of the housings against... Torque.
"Robust" usually means "rides like Chit". Cant have it all.

I disagree with air ride being inadequate for heavy, off road use. Every single modern tridrive built uses air ride. Almost every heavy haul truck I see in the patch and the bush has air ride. Its more than durable enough for 98% of trucking operations, provided its the heavy duty version and not the wimpy 40k lb setup.

crane operator said:

This last picture is a hendrikson rubber bushed walking beam. No springs at all, just pivot up and down and the rubber bushings. Mack has their own version of a walking beam that you see on some old concrete trucks also. Super tough, but not known for a smooth ride. View attachment 202541

Click to expand...

I've seen this setup on Mixers and crane trucks where the pivot brackets for the beams are bolted solid to the frame and there is no pads other than the bushings in the beams, very harsh ride empty, but tough as nails with huge loads.

Ahah! I had spread the other way in my head. Now it makes sense. The longer the spread, the longer and beefier the Walking beams need to be.