We pulled a motor grader...Champion I think it was a few years back. For some reason I can't find the file on it, but I want to say we put it on a 48' tandem combo step with a 10'-1" spread. It was under 50,000 lbs.

the rim diameter is matched to the trailer drop. The smaller the tires, the bigger the drop. The trailer is horizontal.

I don't think the 17.5" rims spin 10 x faster than 22.5's. That's a slight exaggeration. The tire size should be ~245/75R 17.5, which has a circumference of ~100". By comparison, a 255/70R22.5 will have a circumference of ~114". According to my calcs, the small tires would spin 14% faster.

Take a look in the Truck Paper, Truck and Trailer and Truck Trader. How many small rim small rim combo steps do you see for sale? Not many. I have offered to buy several of them from different people and the answer is always the same; "No way, I wish I had more."

The bigger issue to me...and it is a big one, is braking. Those small drums and shoes are bound to fade alot more than the big ones. I *think* a tridem would be a big advantage in the braking department.

Also of concern, primarily with heavier loads in hot conditions might be blowouts. Those small tires aren't as likely to take the heat as well.

Finally, I was talking to a driver who pulled a 17.5" tandem on a regular basis about this and he'd had no problems with blowouts or brake fade. He *did* however, have an issue with parts availability. He once had to layover 3 days waiting for shoes or drums or something like that.

With all of the above in mind, I opted for the best compromise I could find, which was a 2008 Wilson CFD900 Road Brute with a 27" drop and 22.5" rims.

Click here RoadBrute Photo Gallery CFD-900 with Lowered Deck.

I love this trailer. I spec'd it new. It is a 11' + 42' = 53', with a 24" kingpin setback and 41' from KP to center of tandems. It weighs 10,700 lbs + tool boxes. No sliding axles because I don't run out west so it's just a waste of weight and money. It has been a money maker, but I am always looking for more (sigh). There have been a few loads that I have missed because the loads required a full 42' of 36" deck height, and alas, my wheel wells get in the way.

Wilson didn't quote me any more for smaller tires.

For me, it would be a 17.5" rim. But only because I already have that Wilson with the wheel wells.

 

Yeah. When I spec'd mine I had Al on the inside and steel on the outside because 53' spreads like curbs so the Al rims don't last anyway. In our case, using the 50 lbs per rim, saves 1/10th of a ton but costs $1,000. I get paid ~180/ton so they save me $18/load. 55 loads and they are paid for.


Not necessarily. I went through this exact thing. Ever notice how tall the main beams are on a flat with a 60" deck height? They must be almost 2 feet tall. But as you lower that deck height as you do on a step, you have less room for those tall main beams. A shorter beam...(shorter webs actually), means that the beam won't be as strong and it will deflect or sag more under a load. So they need to beef up the beam in order to get the strength back. More steel in the beam = more weight.

I'm not saying this is where the weight is coming from, but that's what I found in my case. I hope I explained this in a way that makes sense.

 

Works for me. "Sorry, but that extra 5 feet of trailer is reserved for 2 skids in Binghamton".

I must have missed the part about a closed spread. All my trailers are fixed spread so I wouldn't know.

 

wow, that means the grader was less than 38 ft long? i want to focus on hauling equipment and machinery later on, so maybe i don't need a 53 ft trailer?

that's what our maintenance VP said too - a lot of people have fears about braking problems with 17.5" wheels, but all wheels are designed with safety in mind; they must be able to stop the vehicle; otherwise they wouldn't be selling them.

I bet my sliding axle on the Wilson spec I wrote about in another thread adds a lot of weight I wish I could get a light trailer like that but our bosses say "slider is essential". Talked to our load planner and he said as long as I can take 47k to 48k lbs of freight he's happy. He also suggested I order the steel coil option because occasionally "you might need to pick up a coil". When I mentioned the 43 ft lower deck on my will-be trailer, he said it was "nice". Somehow I get the impression weight capacity is much more important for them than the longer deck on my step

 

Speaking of hauling machinery and equipment, I checked Caterpillar site, the equipment rental section, and one of their bigger "motor graders" listed (model 160M) weighs roughly 35,000 lbs; is 129" tall and 400" long. Which means - surprisingly - I don't need a 53 ft trailer to haul something like this. 400" is about 33 ft, right?, and 129 or 130" is just over 10 feet.. So, any standard 48 ft stepdeck (11 top, 37 ft lower deck) would be able to take this, right? What's more important than the total length of the trailer - I'm beginning to think - is the ability to haul lots of weight and ability to haul tall loads (thanks to the 17.5" tires and 34" height of the deck). What do you guys think?

 

No doubt that a 48' will handle almost everything a 53' will. In my case, it was a question of why not get a 53? The extra weight of the 53' was a non issue. We can still scale 49,000. I have never turned down a load due to weight. The only 2 reasons I can think of not to get a 53'
1. the laws in certain states prohibit them, or at least make them impractica. Again, not an issue for me.
2. It'a alot easier (cheaper) to find a used 48'.

Off the top of my head, here are some legal, no permit loads that I've moved in the last few years that would not have worked on a 48'. I'm sure there's more than this, but these are the ones that come to mind. Keep in mind I don't do LTL. If you do LTL, that extra 5' can be a godsend.

2 loads of 60' steel beams
1 load of 60' long steel roofing
1 load of 60' long steel plate.
1 composter ~42' long
1 load of light standards, including a 59" long pole.
75+ loads of plastic tanks (we got our first load becasue they needed a 53' and they just kept calling us).
2+ loads of 4 tractors. 48's can only take 3 tractors.

For me, a carrier, in this world of cookie cutter trucking companies, a small guy has to separate himself from the pack and offer something that other guys can't. That's my opinion anyway.