question Low Loader/Plant Truck/Transport Question

[madrat]

HI All,

As you may already have gathered I have a passion for large rusty mv's and living in the middle of nowhere! I also have a habit of buying slow 'not great on the road' type stuff.

 

I would dearly love to get to more shows and the only way that is going to happen is if I sort out transport for my toys. All the big shows are an 900 mile round trip for me :cry:

 

I am completely ignorant of anything truck related but have come to the conclusion that I have two options!

 

1) Tractor unit and low loader trailer

2) Plant type rigid truck

 

 

I would appreciate information from anyone on the following:

 

 

 

• Recommendations, what do you use and why?
  
• What to avoid
  
• Tax, testing and insurance advice
  
• Suitability to carry a tracked vehicle of 14 tons, a stolly and a Scammell
  

 

 

I will have a limited budget too! I've spent all my money saving mv's from the international Olympic committee :-D

Edited September 11, 2008 by madrat
blithering imcompetance

[Grumpy]

Yep here we go again....I have not got a lot more to say on the Stollie, it has all been said before.

 

Quite so, this thread was not started to discuss Stolly’s being over width, so the issue should never have been raised.

 

If it needs to be debated more it should be on a different thread.

[Stormin]

wont you run out of weight capacity?

 

If say you have 12 ton Scammell and 12 ton 432, you are at 24 tons. Add to this a rigid flat and drag what will your gross be?

 

AFAIR a Pioneer SV2S is just under 10 tons. I think a 432 may be just over your 12 tons.

 

Surely even at 24 tons load that still leaves 16 tons for Wagon and Trailer to get under 40 ton limit which should be acheivable.

 

Not an expert on heavy haulage by any means so would bow to greater knowledge.

[Degsy]

wont you run out of weight capacity?

 

If say you have 12 ton Scammell and 12 ton 432, you are at 24 tons. Add to this a rigid flat and drag what will your gross be?

 

Good point Mike, if you were operating with 6 axles the maximum gross would I think be 41 tonnes but this would be subject to axle spacings and if you were using a 6x2 or 6x4 truck G Wt 26tonnes this would only leave you with 15 tonnes for a tri axle drag plus load. Not really feasible.

[ArtistsRifles]

Leaving aside the type of vehicle then (but bear in mind it's not only Stollies but 432's, Radio bodied Zils etc - anything over 2.55m wide) how are we, as the everyday public, supposed to be able to intepret the convoluted mysteries of the Construction and Use regs when even VOSA's own people cant get it right???

And I've currently got an £11K bill to prove the <censoreds> at VOSA definitely can't get it right!!

 

I've been talking to a friend who's one of the few remaining traffic police officers left about this - even he wouldn't know what the right class was for a vehicle that was already registered and whether or not it should be running under it's own power - provided it wasn't overly obvious by, say, taking up 1.5 lanes. He reckoned as far as he and his colleagues were concerned provided the vehicle wasn't a danger to other road users (dodgy brakes, no lights etc) and wasn't being used for Hire & Reward they wouldn't be interested in it.

Consider also the example of the OT that IS registered and taxed - when refuelling on the way home from RM a local copper spoke to them and expressed concern about it being driven on the road, 30 minutes of calls back to his station and onwards he turned back to the guys in the OT, apologising for detaining them as apparently it WAS legal for it to be driven. I've no idea what it's registered as (wish I did) but if the law enforcement people say it's OK.......

[Degsy]

But they would be interested in it if you were involved in a RTA and you might also find yourself without insurance if subsequent investigations proved you to be running illegally.

[ArtistsRifles]

But they would be interested in it if you were involved in a RTA and you might also find yourself without insurance if subsequent investigations proved you to be running illegally.

 

Treading carefully here so as not to upset the mods - but - think back to last Oct Degsy - I was involved in one, the police weren't interested in this aspect of it at all and neither were the insurers.....

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

Technically any insurance company can refuse to pay out if any rd traffic act regulation is breached,this includes no mot,no insurance is a criminal offence as explained to me last night by a traffic cop who was pulling people into our rd ,which is private.to check details,he had keys to cars awaiting tow trucks.i explained i didnt object to what he was doing just where he was doing it.He was away from his car with the engine running,when i joking said thats an offence,he replied not in his case because the car had lock and run,which meant it couldnt be put in gear till it had been switched off and restarted.i have just fitted this to all my vehicles,along with the phrase,i think you will find its pre regulation,i should be ok.I since found out my car was just out of MOT,

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

Treading carefully here so as not to upset the mods - but - think back to last Oct Degsy - I was involved in one, the police weren't interested in this aspect of it at all and neither were the insurers.....

May of been different mate if you had run Degsy over,while he was on his way to get his pension.

[Degsy]

May of been different mate if you had run Degsy over,while he was on his way to get his pension.

 

 

OOOooh... I feel compo coming on.

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

OOOooh... I feel compo coming on.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:Not used to all this laughing better get down the boat i can be assured that will give me the hump.

[Stormin]

Construction and use. Now there's a minefield.

I was informed by an ex copper some time ago that there isn't a single vehicle on the road that would fully comply with construction and use regulations. They are so complex that even the big manufactuers can't or don't comply with new cars. So what chance has an older vehicle got.

On the plus side is that most coppers at the side of the road will not know the full regulations and unless you give him any other reason to look into them he probably won't be bothered.

I think it's more probable an insurer would look to failure to comply with C&U to worm out of a payout than the police would to prosecute anyone.

[antarmike]

I think it's more probable an insurer would look to failure to comply with C&U to worm out of a payout than the police would to prosecute anyone.

 

I agree but could this happen if the vehicle was involved in an accident at a show?

[Guest catweazle (Banned Member)]

I agree but could this happen if the vehicle was involved in an accident at a show?

If the rd traffic act is in force,and we are told it is then yes,even military reg plates could be a nick.:argh:

[Stormin]

If the rd traffic act is in force,and we are told it is then yes,even military reg plates could be a nick.:argh:

 

So if the full road traffic act is in force at shows that would mean overwidth vehicles can't be driven around there either!

Don't tell Neil.

[Grumpy]

So if the full road traffic act is in force at shows that would mean overwidth vehicles can't be driven around there either!

Don't tell Neil.

 

Including Antar's parading around under Special Types with loads that could easily be divisible or carried by more conventional vehicles and thus being driven illegally. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[antarmike]

but is driving around with a Cent ARV legal? If it is, how in practice do you notify the route, seeing as the police reguire road numbers? But this is a side issue, the topic is about the best way to get an overwidth vehicle to a show.

 

And I still don't see what category of STGO fits a Stalwart.....The Antar and Dyson were designed and built as a heavy Loco/ trailer combination, for the movement of abnormal loads.

 

The Stalwart was built as a load carrier...

Edited September 13, 2008 by antarmike

[ArtistsRifles]

Thought we agreed to not concentrate on the poor old Stalwart???

 

For me - until some one in authority stands up and say that overwidth vehcles that have already been registered and taxed catergorically can no longer no used on the roads I'll continue using mine.

I'm not an expert on the matter (I know enough to know it's a minefield I don't want to walk in) and I pay large amounts of hard-earned wonga in taxes, as do we all, each month to ensure the Gov't employs such "experts" on my behalf. We'll pause now for a bout of hysterical laughter after the events of the last few months. Anyways - when one of them sticks his head above the parapet to dictate what can and can't be used I will both listen - and watch with amusement as the combined vehicle clubs endeavour to make his career as short as possible - then observe the outcome.

 

Until that day though I hope to see many more Stollies, Zils, f32/434's, Pioneers, Centurions, Cheiftains, T24;s etc (and even the odd OT) rumbling around the roads of Britain!!

[AndyFowler]

Until that day though I hope to see many more Stollies, Zils, f32/434's, Pioneers, Centurions, Cheiftains, T24;s etc (and even the odd OT) rumbling around the roads of Britain!!

 

Here Here :clap::clap: ! I thought this forum was born to encourage MV preservation not end it ! :nono: At this rate we might as well all stay home and be bored like everyone else ! :coffee:

[Poptopshed]

Well said Neil and Andy.

 

As long as what we do is sensible, doing our best to stay with in the law as you personally interprete it and above all safe we should carry on rather than argue about the technicalities. It seems that even those who enforce them cannot understand the mine field.

[antarmike]

I agree too, I believe the stuff needs to be out there, and if the authorities are happy to let it be out there I like to see it.

 

I am not suggesting that people don't use this stuff, I am merely pointing out it is "technically" illegal.

 

Most Conbined Harvesrters, beet havesters and the like are illegal (simply because the Farmer or Contractor doesn't notify the load) and whilst the police ignore these much wider vehicles, and let them go about their business, i am sure they aren't overly bothered by us.

 

So yes lets use it, but to do so is a personal choice, and it may , just may, have consequences for us...

[N.O.S.]

Here is a (maybe not so silly?) idea, which I looked at a few years back when contenmplating my own transport for a piece of engineering plant (which is itself overwidth, taxed as 'Special Vehicle' and so is exempt from C+U and runs on red diesel).

 

If you build an overwidth body onto a truck chassis in order to transport an overwidth load in the form of a specific vehicle, it then falls outside C+U regs. and thus supposedly does not require testing and can run on red diesel, and can be taxed under 'Special Vehicles' Note we're talking overwidth, not overweight.

 

You could build wheel pockets into the body to suit the vehicle being carried, to lower the centre of gravity - this will help to demonstrate that it is designed specifically for that load (perhaps the difficult part?)

 

The problem is that it can only be used to move this specific item.

 

I decided not to go down this route, but it just might be worth looking at for certain MVs?

 

I have no idea if this scenario applies to carrying historic vehicles around, nor whether it still applies to my situation - I'm just passing on what I found out at the time, so it's up to anyone interested to check it out for themselves.

[antarmike]

Here is a (maybe not so silly?) idea, which I looked at a few years back when contenmplating my own transport for a piece of engineering plant (which is itself overwidth, taxed as 'Special Vehicle' and so is exempt from C+U and runs on red diesel).

 

If you build an overwidth body onto a truck chassis in order to transport an overwidth load in the form of a specific vehicle, it then falls outside C+U regs. and thus supposedly does not require testing and can run on red diesel, and can be taxed under 'Special Vehicles' Note we're talking overwidth, not overweight.

 

You could build wheel pockets into the body to suit the vehicle being carried, to lower the centre of gravity - this will help to demonstrate that it is designed specifically for that load (perhaps the difficult part?)

 

The problem is that it can only be used to move this specific item.

 

I decided not to go down this route, but it just might be worth looking at for certain MVs?

 

I have no idea if this scenario applies to carrying historic vehicles around, nor whether it still applies to my situation - I'm just passing on what I found out at the time, so it's up to anyone interested to check it out for themselves.

 

 

But were do you get the info that "special vehicles" can run on red?

[Marmite!!]

Is "Special Vehicle" a Tax Class :confused: my Fox is down as "Special Vehicle" on the V5 but it's tax class is PHGV

[antarmike]

I must confess I hadn't heard of it as a tax class either

[N.O.S.]

It appears to be a taxation class into which a whole load of oddball stuff is now placed.

 

For example a loading shovel used to be taxed as a Digging Machine. The new registration documents come back with Special Vehicles.

 

In 2005 I registered a Bedford TM tipper as a dumptruck, the registration document came back Special Vehicles.

 

Also any engineering plant (a vehicle constructed primarily for use as a tool and not to carry any load) is so classified.

 

I'm just thinking it might be feasible to tax an amphibious vehicle as such, rather than historic vehicle. The width problem may then not apply. But a whole load of other stuff might!! :-D

 

Really, I'm not knowledgable enough to advise on any of this. The legislation changes fast (for example there was a rumour a while back that JCBs may be made to run on white diesel on the road, but nothing has happened yet - also remember when they stopped mobile cranes running on red?). I'm only passing on what little info I've come across which might possibly have a bearing on how to go about resolving these transportation issues.

 

I've always found that speaking to DVLA (ask to be put through to a member of the Vehicle Inspectorate, they are usually most helpful) is the best solution. After all, they are the people who would inspect any vehicle involved in an incident and determine what legislation applies to the vehicle and whether it complies.

Edited September 13, 2008 by N.O.S.