Appliances

Doug · October 24, 2006, 02:25:11 PM

I heard a romour on the radio this morning about CFS trucks not functioning properly and they had alot of problems. are these the new 34s?. i think heard the guy say Mclaren Flat had alot of troubles with theres and had been mentioned in the newspaper.

bajdas · October 24, 2006, 04:56:39 PM

This has been discussed elsewhere in this forum. I understand old 34's and very limited problem.

SA Firey · October 24, 2006, 09:18:17 PM

Quote from: bajdas on October 24, 2006, 04:56:39 PM
This has been discussed elsewhere in this forum. I understand old 34's and very limited problem.

Its to do with the weight over the front axle, and by mounting the pump on the rear of the appliance, puts the truck 650kg light on the front causing no traction when in 4WD on the front axle when negotiating steep inclines :-D

This has caused the appliances to raise off the ground therefore creating an unsafe situation for crews :wink:

CFS_Firey · October 25, 2006, 03:08:01 AM

Would a mid-mounted pump fix that? (Or rather, what would fix that?)

bittenyakka · October 25, 2006, 03:38:33 PM

Remove the crew deck or shift it to the back and put the water tank right against the cab?

TillerMan · October 26, 2006, 01:22:53 PM

As far as i am concerned this whole thing has been blown out the water and a few people need their butts kicked and as said i think this is in another section.

oz fire · October 26, 2006, 01:31:27 PM

Maybe if we printed all the forums this discussion has occured in, we could use the paper weight.... to fix the problem :evil:

Andrew · October 31, 2006, 06:05:21 PM

Trucks don't drive like cars.

The trucks manufactured meet the spec.

600 KG on the front axle will put it over the manufactures weight specifications. (full of people, full of water, full of stowage)

You can not put the tank any further forward as it will not meet spec for weight distribution.

The answer may be use a more suitable cab chassis than the Isuzu type.
Spec trucks more suitable to doing the job.
Be more realistic about what is to be carried on one truck, where it is to go and the task it is to perform.
A fundamental problem exists between the weight carring requirement, weight carry capacity, weight distribution requirements and axle loading. The government also dictates what may be carride per axle. It is a complex compromise to achieve the balance.

Andrew

SA Firey · December 07, 2006, 06:17:18 PM

McLaren Flat has got there 34 back and they stuck 300kg of lead in the front of it to fix the problem :wink:

Andrew · December 08, 2006, 04:55:22 PM

did 300 kg fix the problem? R they happy now?

SA Firey · December 08, 2006, 05:00:05 PM

Dont know if they are happy but the crew I spoke to the other day didnt mention anything bad about it now its back

Darius · December 08, 2006, 06:49:06 PM

Quote from: SA Firey on December 07, 2006, 06:17:18 PM
McLaren Flat has got there 34 back and they stuck 300kg of lead in the front of it to fix the problem :wink:

if true, that's absurd. so now they cart around a useless extra 300kg? how's the performance?

Camo · December 09, 2006, 06:46:28 AM

Andrew werent you saying that they were pretty much maxed out already on the front axle? and now they have just slapped another 300kg on the front?

What exactly were the complaints?

Alan (Big Al) · December 09, 2006, 08:02:32 AM

It didn't handle like a car......

5271rescue · December 09, 2006, 08:24:25 AM

Thats funny as its not a CAR......

Smallflame · December 09, 2006, 08:42:26 AM

Quote from: Mundcfs on December 09, 2006, 08:02:32 AM
It didn't handle like a car......

Strange that... An appliance that doesn't handle like something tonnes lighter with the wheels in a different spot...

Alan (Big Al) · December 09, 2006, 01:22:51 PM

Those 34's aren't the best handling of vehicles they bounce alot jump all over the road but all it takes is for people to adjust their driving style to suit the truck not adjust the truck to suit the driver.... if you can't do that then you don't deserve to have a lisence.