Rb44

[chrisgilltreesurgery]

I'm wanting an old daf flatbed with crane long term too.....

 

Always a plan in the pipeline

[rovers90]

I go passed Jacksons at Morpeth every Monday Chris and they have recently taken delivery of a new batch of about 8 by the look of it so good choice.

 

Problem with the DAFs is it costs quite a bit to make them road legal and they do not have a great load capacity so by the time you stick a decent crane and stabilisers on you will prob be down to 2 to 3 ton.

[fen01]

I thought about a RB but decided that for the relatively limited extra capacity and o licence etc I'd go for something a bit bigger, but if it suit your model then I don't really see any dramas. Otherwise I really like them. I liked them when I drove them in the Army.

[Billy]

No payload, poor towing capacity surely a mog would do everything an RB44 can do better?

[aspenarb]

No payload, poor towing capacity surely a mog would do everything an RB44 can do better?

 

Billy the ex army RB`s are the same vehicle with the exception of the twin wheel rear axle as the civvy ones. I have a couple of the twin wheeled ones and they are 7.5 ton gross with a 11 ton train weight. So really any RB will tow and carry the same as a 7.5 tonner but the plated weights would need to be uprated to those of the civillian ones. Note the max permissible weight of the rear axle at 5.6 tons, I dont think that will break with an arb type tipper body full of chip and they tow heavy trailers really well , so well in fact you need to keep checking your mirrors to see if its still on there. Spares are no problem at all, the brake parts are all available but not cheap so when I get time I will be looking at upgrading to discs all round.

 

Bob

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168131&stc=1&d=1414830526

Edited November 1, 2014 by aspenarb

[Billy]

Billy the ex army RB`s are the same vehicle with the exception of the twin wheel rear axle as the civvy ones. I have a couple of the twin wheeled ones and they are 7.5 ton gross with a 11 ton train weight. So really any RB will tow and carry the same as a 7.5 tonner but the plated weights would need to be uprated to those of the civillian ones.

 

 

 

http://arbtalk.co.uk/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=168131&stc=1&d=1414830526

 

 

I stand corrected, I thought they were mostly or all 5.5t 7.5t makes sense.

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

I spent a bit of time looking at RB44.

 

Spoke to lots of people and got some really useful 'pluses' and 'minuses.'

 

Final straw for me was reading the reviews on the Army Rumour Service ARRSE:

 

Search | Army Rumour Service

[fen01]

Thr arrse forum is really damming,, but the RBs lost their name over the brakes which were then modified. But as the vehicle had lost its name it never recovered it. I think they were ok at the end, I don't think the payload is enough for me at the moment.

[Dr.Green]

I visited the Morpeth place , plenty choice but Personally if I didn't have my landrover I'd have one as a second vehicle. The payload wasn't best I my view as a main vehicle but each to there own. Now back on the ideal 3t payload search which is now in place

[Jonny Burch]

I've got one and I love it! Yes it's not rhe perfect vehicle but is there such a thing??