b101uk

the standard 14tonne BIGAB the chassis may be only 2.5ton BUT that’s the low-speed one, to get it to fastrac speeds you need extras that add weight, also the same size Stronga and Krampe ones are near 4 tonnes just for the chassis.

Besides there weight as noted above you are also limited mostly to Bigab, Stronga and Krampe for off the self Hook loader trailers and with the weak pound vs. the euro are very costly new also the larger ones have quite a large oil drain capacity to tip fully vs. a normal tipper trailer.

actually quite a lot of grass verge is classed as part public highway and as such the laws that apply to road also apply to the verge, if its an old road hedges that marked the highways boundary could have been taken out so there is no definitive visual line.

unless the AFAG has compiled statistics for arb related UK crane accidents and reviewed statistics for UK crane accidents and there causal factors then the AFAG should keep there do-gooding nose out. Also I think any statistics gathered from arb related crane accidents in the USA or vast swaths of the EU have no relevance as to happenings hear in the UK given attitudes and work ethos are different not just for arb people but crane operators as well.

I would say your better off not being to harsh on her, she probably knew she was going to get into trouble being back at home at 3am drunk! but she must have shown some judgment even when impaired by not staying at the party for whatever reason.

true, but how many hundreds of hours would you need to run it on red with its own dedicated engine to recoup the cost of the dedicated engine in the first place vs. running it on DERV with a PTO just for chipping duties but excluding the cost of DERV on-road which you need anyway!

if you can put >110HP in one end of the gearbox and get out >110hp out the other end and pull big trailers using every bit of power which has to go threw the gearbox anyway then yes I do, or do you somehow think a small kabota engine and 3 v-belts to be stronger with more torque! the LR PTO goes on the rear of the transfer box and cost ~£250 for the drive flange type.

Utterly stupid and poorly thought out, Land Rovers do have PTO’s so there is no need for a dedicated chipper engine

I would have thought it fairly obvious how

Are there any fundamental changes in the design of the TW 190 rotor, rotor bearings, bearing cover plate and carrier shaft stub design on pre and post 2008 machines? And if so what are they?

True, front wheel ballasting with water would add ~190kg per tyre or ~380kg total which would be as affective as ~250kg of wafer weights on the front, the trouble with wheel, axel or belly ballasting is there is no weight transfer between axels as a result of the extra weight added, weight that is forward of the front axel effectively removes some weight from the rear axel and transfers it to the front axel in addition to what the weight imposes anyway. The above said any weight added to the tractor a percentage will be converted into traction in 4wd dependent on the percent adhesion the ground offers just as percent adhesion vs. mass will denote the tractive effort and the speed at which maximum HP can be used, but haling a trailer by road vs. haling the same trailer around woodland/terrain means there has to be a compromise I.e. for the road you need higher power and less weight in your tractor, for woodland/terrain you need more weight in your tractor and optionally less power.

err yes front weights are for keeping the front end down when carrying implements, BUT the Valmet/Valtra Valmet/Valtra have the front axel set back further than most to get back some turning circle by shortening the wheel base, this means the front wafer weights dig in on transitions from slopes to flat ground or in undulating terrain sooner than most others, they also restrict turning between vertical objects due to the way the front end is quite forward of the front axel, if you go for front lift arms and a weight block turning between vertical objects is even worse. Front weights, front lift arms and weight blocks &/or long front overhangs are fine in fields the native home of tractors but woodland, forest and undulating axel crossing ground is a little different.

My only real criticisms of Valmet/Valtra Valmet/Valtra is they don’t have a perticuly good turning circle, they are quite light on the front end and they are not as heavy as their size may suggest or for their power.

If a tree poses a great danger to the public or a building work could start the moment the relevant authority/person becomes aware thus mitigating the risk regardless of the time of day. Underground gas, water and electric etc mains along with sewers etc can cause trees to be needed to be taken down immediately, even a little 22mm water pipe can undermine a big tree if it leaks.

Lord Hereford's Knob

there is a "Sh!t Brook" under the town of Much Wenlock Shropshire (now a culvert), when the Time Team were in Much Wenlock doing a program Mick Aston had to say its name during the program! www.search.secretshropshire.org.uk - Sh!t Brook

if stopped by plod or VOSA, you would experience the full weight of the law

It’s a bit different to wind, wind blows and pushes the top of the tree sideways which is the main force trying to uplift one side of the root plate. i.e. in a wind the top of the tree moves yet to bottom stays stationery, in an earthquake the top of the tree stays more stationery and the bottom of the tree moves lots more. Also in wind there is a force trying to pull half the roots up, in an earthquake there is little force trying to pull up as the main force is trying to pull horizontally (it is easer to snap wood/roots by bending it rather than just pulling either end of it) also roots will pull an amount threw the soil horizontally without much damage due to very local ground movements and small shears/cracks As an e.g. Try holding a plant in a pot and shaking it vs. it in a strong wind

not all wire rope is the same, the best wire ropes are stronger than the best HMPE's etc.

you need XZL's in 235/85R16, but they are harder to find BFG MT's last well, Hancock tyres make a 235/85R16 with a MT type tread and they are 10 Ply and can take 80 psig so are good with loads

Duetz can be air, oil or water cooled Duetz Air and oil cooled are the most popular in industrial machines as neither are affected by freezing, though when oil cooled that system is totally separate from the machines hydraulic system.

235 70 R16 109 H 235 mm across the tread 70% of 235 is the wall height R = radial type ply construction ("B" = bias ply i.e. cross-ply or it can be missing which also denotes bias ply as in "235 70 B16 109 H" or "235 70 16 109 H") 16 is the wheel diameter in inches 109 is the weight restriction H is the top rated speed

If aspen was to the same standard as petrol at the pump then there would be NO need to retune anything, if it need retuning to use a “fuel” that supposed to be the same as petrol at the pump (with or without 2-stroke oil added) then there must be something amiss with the product or its description

If it stays at 20% for about the same time at it was at 15% then the net effect will be that it has effectively stayed at 17.5% The biggest bonus will be this should help strengthen the £ vs. the € effectively making saws and etc that are imported effectively cheaper if the retailers truly pass on savings instead of pocketing it i.e. the £ has gained way more than 2.5% since April 1st (>6%)

If you look at truck derived drawbar trailers then remember you will almost certainly need to modify the drawbar height as trucks now have gone to low long drawbars so the coupling is mounted beneath the chassis and forwards of the rear cross member so there is little space between the body of the truck and that of the trailer maximising load space vs. maximum legal length, about the only exception to this are the very few D & Dc type drawbar tippers about which still utilise the trucks rear cross member but even so there trailers drawbar will still be a bit lower than an MBU/SBU mogs rear cross member/hitch height but you can normally just get away with welding on a new flange-plate with extra height adjustment holes for the bolt on flanged towing eye. With respect to off-road use the NATO 76mm pintle system is far superior to 40mm/50mm or 57mm automatic pin hitch system due to the NATO pintle system having a much wider ark of movement horizontally and most importantly vertically, the disadvantages of the NATO 76mm pintle system is when using centre axel trailer is you have to raze/lower the drawbar to locate it in the pintle & you have to use the larger NATO pintle’s for 1000kg static loads from >9T centre axel trailer, if you don’t envisage exceeding +- 20deg from the horizontal in vertical movement then a 40mm or 50mm automatic pin hitch will be ok. Something else to consider is whatever vertical load (S) is placed via the drawbar on the back of the mog is subtracted from the mogs payload, this is why unbalanced farm type trailers aren’t used with mogs because they subtract to much payload which isn’t critical with “normal” tractors. Lastly just remember there are a multitude of computations used in the calculation of weights and forces translated threw the hitch system which denote the strength of hitch/towing eye that MUST be used I.e. S, V, D, Dc values