+- Rawze.com: Rawze's ISX Technical Discussion and more (http://rawze.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Big Truck Technical Discussion... (/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Ask Your question... (/forumdisplay.php?fid=45)
+--- Thread: What would you have done differently?? (/showthread.php?tid=5209)
RE: What would you have done differently?? - Lonestar10 - 12-17-2019
50% of cargo weight now that's just rediculous
RE: What would you have done differently?? - Lonestar10 - 12-17-2019
I'm always over strapped my goal is if this thing rolls over at 70 miles an hour nothing moves or at least the load stops before the truck stops
RE: What would you have done differently?? - Hammerhead - 12-18-2019
(12-17-2019 )LRT1549 Wrote: There's a little know fact that most people don't know. If in an accident your load comes off the trailer then with the exception of VERY few reasons the insurance won't pay for it or the damage it causes.
Just like if something falls off the truck going down the road and hits someone. Most the times they won't pay that either. which means you get sued.
Neither of these wives tales are true.
Yes, you will get sued, and insurance can duck the lawsuit to the insured by declaring negligence, but cargo and liability will be covered. It has to be, or the insurance companies would drop every client the instant the have an incident to avoid the cost of the claim. The law doesn't allow that.
RE: What would you have done differently?? - the missing link - 12-18-2019
Keep in mind I am a canuck and 99% of what I do is Canada/ U.S freight . so I have to follow the canuck rules which trump U.S rules because they are a higher standard .
RE: What would you have done differently?? - Lonestar10 - 12-18-2019
True forgot you gents were damn near Eskimos.
RE: What would you have done differently?? - Chamberpains - 12-18-2019
The missing link,
Can you or have you considered feeding a chain or 2 through the bottom lower back corner of the frame between the frame and the material spooled in the frame down to the trailer? That would give you multiple spots on the crappy framing that would have to come apart if it wanted to move. Putting all your chains on the eye of spool seems to be where the weakness is. I do this a lot, especially when I can't get more than 1 chain in the eye.
There is no argument here that Canada has, for the most part, a far better set of rules for securement. We discussed earlier in the post that the U.S. and Canada got along until 2006 now it's just chaos. Published unified standards again would resolve a lot of this stupid bickering of what the rules are.
RE: What would you have done differently?? - the missing link - 12-18-2019
There is not enough room , the only way is to chain to the c channel and pull across to the other side .
My last load I had two crossed chain on the front and back . I could not tighten the chains at all. If I got the chain almost snug ,a mile down the road it was loose .
I also had two on each side ,on the outside ( halfway up ,if this make sense ) pulling towards the center of the load . The chains were pretty much a " W ". With the middle of the W being the center of the eye . Anywho All 8 of those chains were completely useless . They looked pretty but could not stay tight or had any benefit.
I honestly think the only way is to run 1 or 2 right though the eye and back to one more rear lighting hole. With this the steel frame could completely come apart but the chains would hold the "roll" back . If that make sense .
If I was to do that ,I would use a "boomer " on each side . That way I could actually get the chain tight. These one of my biggest pet peeves about indirect chain down .
RE: What would you have done differently?? - the missing link - 12-18-2019
Holy crap , look me go.
Kinda liking this new phone . Anyway this is how I did the last one , the rear two cross chains were pulling back as well . Like I side the only chains in these pictures worth anything are going to the eye .[attachment=5955]
RE: What would you have done differently?? - the missing link - 12-18-2019
The black was not there on the top picture.
[attachment=5956]