Notices

a bad truck

Old 12-13-2008, 08:26 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Da' Mills
Posts: 1,393
Default a bad truck

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnPgd4vrHA4

what is this compared to a dually?
aloop is offline  
Old 12-13-2008, 08:28 AM
  #2  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Jax Fla,Horseshoe Beach Fla
Posts: 13,398
Default RE: a bad truck

better ? would be why?
tommyr904 is offline  
Old 12-13-2008, 06:00 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northern Lower Michigan
Posts: 2,543
Default RE: a bad truck

tommyr904 - 12/13/2008 8:28 AM

better ? would be why?
It's the number of drive axles that they are all in a lather about (3 instead of 2) not the number or arrangement of the tires.
s_ebels is offline  
Old 12-16-2008, 11:37 PM
  #4  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGERPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Maui and SoCal
Posts: 7,103
Default RE: a bad truck

My favorite thing is the jerry can tied to the back of the cab because there's no room for the fuel tank..................
kerno is offline  
Old 12-17-2008, 07:00 AM
  #5  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA/NJ
Posts: 945
Default RE: a bad truck

s_ebels - 12/13/2008 9:00 PM

tommyr904 - 12/13/2008 8:28 AM

better ? would be why?
It's the number of drive axles that they are all in a lather about (3 instead of 2) not the number or arrangement of the tires.
I wiould think the load carrying capacity would only be slightly higher since the frame is the same but the lateral pulling power/traction is increased due to the additional set of wheels putting power to the ground. Neat idea but more of a novelty I would think. Dodge did this years ago as an engineering project truck.
One4Water is offline  
Old 12-17-2008, 07:08 AM
  #6  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: PA/NJ
Posts: 945
Default RE: a bad truck

Here is the Dodge version from way back

http://www.geocities.com/volvov90/trex6x6.jpg

One4Water is offline  
Old 12-17-2008, 03:38 PM
  #7  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
ScarabChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Dania Beach, FL
Posts: 28,075
Default Re: a bad truck

That truck is done right. I have seen some done in the past where the added axle is just a tandem and has no power or brakes......just for looks. That thing would cirtainly make low tide boat hauling a non issue.
ScarabChris is offline  
Old 12-19-2008, 05:22 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Da' Mills
Posts: 1,393
Default Re: a bad truck

Well... here is something different...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD5CRn-oMEI
aloop is offline  
Old 12-19-2008, 07:11 AM
  #9  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGERPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Struggleville
Posts: 7,525
Default Re: a bad truck

Some people really love to waste money. The more more surface "patch" a vehicle covers the ground with the less traction it has. It's get stuck on wet grass. But it looks like a really cool redneck project truck. As far as carrying more load, I'm sure that has been lessened because of all the holes drilled in the existing frame.
Bugbuster is offline  
Old 12-19-2008, 03:55 PM
  #10  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
ScarabChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Dania Beach, FL
Posts: 28,075
Default Re: a bad truck

I highly doubt that was done to carry or tow more load, for that it would have been cheaper to get a brand new F350 crew cab dually diesel 4X4. That 6X6 is a novelty......a functional novelty but still a novelty.
ScarabChris is offline  
Old 12-20-2008, 04:57 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trussville, AL
Posts: 811
Default Re: a bad truck

If it was engineered correctly is one issue and the law and concept is another. Under the federal law a tandem axle 6x6 would have an allowable GVW of up to 34,000 pounds and a single rear axle dually is limited by law to a GVW of 20,000 pounds. So if it is engineered correctly it would significantly increase the capacity of the truck. This truck was made by a company called USA 6x6 who is now out of business. The bulk of their business was from wheels in the offroad market. They had quality and production problems on some of their wheels and that ultimately put them out of business.

As far as a novelty you may be correct for this particular truck as I think it was built primarily as a PR deal for this company. The concept however is not.......just look at military trucks from all over the world and the number of "single tire" 6x6's there are (also the number of "industrial trucks" that are going to single tire 6x6's).

It offers advantages:
1)Larger legal GVW. The extra axle distributes the load more effectively.
2) The frame does not have to be as strong because the extra axle provides additional support and reduces the unsupprted length in the frame.
3)Single rear wheels do not collect mud and rock like duals.
4)Better Traction....by spreading out the contact point for the wheels you get better traction in poor conditions...loose sand.....mud....ice and snow.

I'm sure there are more I just can't think of any right now.

If engineered correctly this would be "much more truck" than a 4x4 dually.
xl883lo is offline  
Old 12-20-2008, 09:15 AM
  #12  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ormond Beach, FL
Posts: 258
Default Re: a bad truck

Bugbuster - 12/19/2008 10:11 AM

The more more surface "patch" a vehicle covers the ground with the less traction it has.


Ken
Red Neck 25 is offline  
Old 12-20-2008, 09:50 AM
  #13  
Senior MemberCaptains Club MemberPLEDGERPLEDGER
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Struggleville
Posts: 7,525
Default Re: a bad truck

Red Neck 25 - 12/20/2008 12:15 PM

Bugbuster - 12/19/2008 10:11 AM

The more more surface "patch" a vehicle covers the ground with the less traction it has.


Ken
Not sure what is meant here but from experience in wet pastures a 4x4 dually will get stuck much much easier that a single rear wheel 4x4. Something to do with ground pressure per square inch. Pavement traction the dually would win hands down but off road the single will beat it every time.
Bugbuster is offline  
Old 12-20-2008, 10:25 AM
  #14  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: CT
Posts: 18,350
Default Re: a bad truck

Bugbuster - 12/20/2008 12:50 PM

Red Neck 25 - 12/20/2008 12:15 PM

Bugbuster - 12/19/2008 10:11 AM

The more more surface "patch" a vehicle covers the ground with the less traction it has.


Ken
Not sure what is meant here but from experience in wet pastures a 4x4 dually will get stuck much much easier that a single rear wheel 4x4. Something to do with ground pressure per square inch. Pavement traction the dually would win hands down but off road the single will beat it every time.
Bugbuster is right as anyone driving in snow or even heavy rain for that matter with different width tires knows. The thinner profile in general the better traction. More weight per sq. in. the tire gets down to the road and the rain and snow get pushed better away into the thread spacing. However, on a dry hard road the wide tire wins because the added area grabs the road better. In mud I don't know, maybe you want to float on it and NOT sink in too far?

LI Sound Grunt is offline  
Old 12-21-2008, 06:47 AM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Trussville, AL
Posts: 811
Default Re: a bad truck

LI Sound Grunt - 12/20/2008 9:25 AM

Bugbuster - 12/20/2008 12:50 PM

Red Neck 25 - 12/20/2008 12:15 PM

Bugbuster - 12/19/2008 10:11 AM

The more more surface "patch" a vehicle covers the ground with the less traction it has.


Ken
Not sure what is meant here but from experience in wet pastures a 4x4 dually will get stuck much much easier that a single rear wheel 4x4. Something to do with ground pressure per square inch. Pavement traction the dually would win hands down but off road the single will beat it every time.
Bugbuster is right as anyone driving in snow or even heavy rain for that matter with different width tires knows. The thinner profile in general the better traction. More weight per sq. in. the tire gets down to the road and the rain and snow get pushed better away into the thread spacing. However, on a dry hard road the wide tire wins because the added area grabs the road better. In mud I don't know, maybe you want to float on it and NOT sink in too far?
Grunt,

You guys are getting there but the issue is much more complicated than that( an even more so than I will try to explain) and involves both "friction" and "mechanical traction". The primary thing that makes the wider tire perform poorly in rain and snow (as you pointed out) is that it "traps" the water or snow under the tire and this "physically" lifts the car off the road. Air pressure also has a big effect on traction. Although the design of the tire can be a factor, the size of the contact patch will be mostly a function of air pressure. A wide tire and a skinny tire of the same design at the same air pressure will have a contact patch that is approximately the same size. The wide tire's contact patch will be wide and short and the skinny tire's will be long and skinny. This is because the tire is flexible and as you load the tire it squashes as it transfers the force to the ground. The primary factor in how much the tire deflects is air pressure not tire size and it will keep deflecting until the forces are equal.

Redneck,

Question, if a bigger contact patch means less traction, why do they put wide tires on racecars and off road vehicles and "air down" the wide tire to get an even bigger contact patch??? Answer: Wider tires offer more handling stability and can also provide more "mechanical traction". On high horsepower racecars if the are exerting enough pressure to shear rubber from a tire the wider tire provides more resistance because it takes more force to remove more material. The other factor and probably the best example are "Offroad Rockcrawlers". These guys will "airdown" their tires to some times 2 or 3 psi this way the tire will actually wrap around the rocks and physically "grab on" to them just like a man climbing a rock wall.

As far as dually's in the barnyard you again are mostly correct but from someone who has had many years of dealing with trucks in barnyards here are some observations and comments. The "balance" of an unloaded truck is usually terrible,particullarly the heavy duty ones. They are designed to be loaded. Just like a racecar driver wants more downforce for more traction so do you (you just dont want way too much).
Many dually's are more prone to getting stuck for a variety of reasons, just one being less ground pressure due to dual wheels. Many dually's have big block gas motors or deisels which puts more weight on the front end and this is an issue as the extra weight sinks the front end and removes downforce from the drive wheels. Some DRW's are balanced (suspension etc...)more nose heavy than a SRW.
If you are in really soft ground, as you sink, if you steer it will cause resistance and increase your chance of getting stuck. If you are in four wheel drive it will often dig you deeper and increase your chance of getting stuck even more. An unladen 4x4 in a wet barn yard often does better in 2wd mode.
Whenever I take a truck into a wet barnyard I always put weight in the back, 200 or 300 pounds makes a great big differance. I think once you get to 600-700 pounds it becomes a disadvantage. If you will load the rear wheels a little the DRW will begin to out perform the SRW because it will "dig" better.
xl883lo is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread