Only one peice of equipment.

[Mack]

We have always been able to haul more than one peice of equipment. But the other day we get stoped and are told that because we have a wide load permit that we are only alowed one piece of equipment.

 

[thehose]

Were you in North Carolina? Who stopped you?

Check page 8 here and bullet #2
www.ncdot.org/doh/operations/dp_chief_eng/maintenance/permits/pdf/OverSize_Weight_PermitHB.pdf

Overwidth
One item/commodity or multiple items
loaded in line qualifies for overwidth;
multiple items cannot be loaded side by side
creating width exceeding 8 feet 6 inches.

 

[Countryboy]

Welcome to HEF thehose! :drinkup

 

[Mack]

Were you in North Carolina? Who stopped you?

Check page 8 here and bullet #2
www.ncdot.org/doh/operations/dp_chief_eng/maintenance/permits/pdf/OverSize_Weight_PermitHB.pdf

Overwidth
One item/commodity or multiple items
loaded in line qualifies for overwidth;
multiple items cannot be loaded side by side
creating width exceeding 8 feet 6 inches.

We are located in Greenville and it was the Highway Patrol that stoped us.

The line in red is the only thing that makes me wonder. Our truck and trailer does take a over length permit to run but I see guys around here with the same trailer and long nosed Pete's hauling more than one thing and we only have a Mack hooked to ours.

 

[thehose]

What did you have loaded? and how was it positioned?

They are saying that you can't make yourself over-width just to carry more. The item itself must be over width all by itself. Then you can carry multiple 'front to back' on the the trailer as weight and length permit.

 

[MKTEF]

May not be same over by u, but:

Here in Norway the regulation is like this:
A truck and trailer combination that in its construction is wider than normal, must have a yearly special permit to move on the roads.
Normal is to have a 3m wide trailer,(9 feet) instead of the max that is 2,5m/7 feet apr.
Then u are not allowed to have more than one piece of equipment aboard the trailer.

You can apply to move as big/long/heavy as u want, but only one piece.(inside max limmits of the road)

If u got a normal trailer, thats 2,5m/apr 7 feet u can load a number of pieces aboard it and the widest decides the with to aply for the permits.
May be unfair but thats the rule.:Banghead

Means one wheel barrow aboard the 3m and 50 on the 2,5m.
Ore one smal loader on the big and 2 or 3 on the 2,5m.

 

[Mack]

What did you have loaded? and how was it positioned?

They are saying that you can't make yourself over-width just to carry more. The item itself must be over width all by itself. Then you can carry multiple 'front to back' on the the trailer as weight and length permit.

We had a small roller and a broom tractor loaded and they were one behind another.

 

[thehose]

Are you able to take photo's of the equipment loaded. Do so if possible.

Print their document and fight it. It is pretty clear in their wording.

Overwidth
One item/commodity or multiple items loaded in line qualifies for overwidth;
This should be read as one sentence^^^

multiple items cannot be loaded side by side creating width exceeding 8 feet 6 inches.
Then this is another sentence^^^

It does not say 1 item period as in the overweight:
Overweight
One item/commodity qualifies for overweight; multiple items do not qualify for an overweight permit.

But then FMCSA overrules NC rules too.
This is FMCSA and it looks like they leave it to the State sort of: www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.asp?section=658.15

 

[thehose]

What resolution have you come to on this MACK?

 

[surfer-joe]

Easy answer -- CAN the Mack -- buy a long-nosed Pete.

 

[Mack]

Easy answer -- CAN the Mack -- buy a long-nosed Pete.

Well I wouldn't mind a 379 Pete with a big Cat motor, but the check book would.

As for a solution we will just move one thing at time for now.

 

[RollOver Pete]

Nothing wrong with a Mack. :thumbsup
In fact, my first marriage (to the bosses daughter) came with 5 Mack's.
I figured, hey....guaranteed work...:badidea

Started on a DMM model Mack, 237 maxodyne, engine brake, 5sp, 2sp xfer case, Fabco 23k front, huge bogies in the rear, disk brakes , 10" Demming pump, 4000 gal tank.
These trucks were awesome, great on fuel and would haul a load of water @ 65mph easily. Not a bit of problems in 4 years.

Moved into a new 86 Superliner, E9@500HP, 12sp, camel back suspension, Reliance Tubs.... and by far one of the best riding, quietest dirt trucks I've ever been into. A bit heavy at 31.000lbs thanks to the V8 and the all steel cab, still the only way to go if you travel off road. :IMO

As with all things in life, they seldom last for ever.
But hey, it was a hell of a ride.
:cool2

 

[Steve Frazier]

I drove a Mack dump that looked like the water truck here but it had two steering axles. The thing handled a bit like a performance car as far as holding the curves. It had a real long body on it and the rear axles had a long gap between them to distribute the weight.

 

[RonG]

That V8 Superliner was one sweet sounding truck!!I more or less grew up with Mack and have admired and respected what they stood for and depended on them for a living for many years.Even today the old ones are much sought after for site trucks etc. but I can't say that I feel the same way about their products of the last ten years or so.It looks like the parent companies are trying to run them into the ground but Mack was very innovative in the past with such things as the steerable bogies and the high torque rise diesel engine to name just a couple of things.
I don't know what Mack is marketing today as I am away from the game but from what I hear they leave a lot to be desired in the reliability area.It saddens me to have to admit that if I was in the market for a truck these days I am afraid that it would be a Pete or KW which were great trucks themselves over the years but just not in the same league as the Macks that I knew and loved.Ron G

 

[Greg]

HERE HERE RonG, I agree with you totally.