Our Charity shops send their rags away for recycling and we get money for them. I am trying to put into layman's language how much we actually send for recycling with visual examples.
Weight wise it is 160 tons per year - how many Sains/tesc/ Morr lorries would that be? I seem to remember in my Safeway days a pallet of sugar was a tonne, you could fit 23 pallets on a trailer but I think a driver once told me he wouldn't carry 23 pallets of sugar?
Although I guess the sugar lorry must do so??
|
The average artic has a max gross weight of 44t, the unit will weigh between 7 and 8t, so say 8t to be on the safe side. A trailer will depend on what type it is, obviously a fridge trailer will weigh more then a curtainsider. But the average trailer weight would be another 10t.
So all up unladen weight of 18ish tons. 44-18= 26 ton load.
160/26= 6.15
So just over 6 artic loads per year!
|
|
Cheers for the quick calculations and answer!!
|
|
|
So all up unladen weight of 18ish tons. 44-18= 26 ton load.
Back in the 70's i had a Leyland Buffalo artic tractor with a York 40ft flat trailer, that weighed just over 10.5 tons complete with ropes, sheets and not so overweight driver..;)
With the max GVW at the time of 32.5 tons gave a load capacity of just under 22 tons, makes you think.
The truck i drive now weighs 22.5 tons unladen by comparison.
|
>>Back in the 70's i had a Leyland Buffalo
We had a few of those. We got rid of the one with the nasty 500 engine in it fairly quickly though!
|
They didn't last very long agreed, but whilst running they went very well, as a driver the Fuller ranger box particularly suiting the power characteristics (and swift rev drop between gears) of the engine making for rapid progress.
Purely out of interest was this the engine that Daf used very successfully in their 2800 range in the 80's?
I've never quite understood the idea of running much heavier and much more expensive trucks on general haulage, especially supermarket/distribution work when many chassis were extremely light and could manage very well, as well as being smaller and very manoeuvrable into the bargain.
The above being Leyland one example, but i seem to remember the Ford Cargo tractor with Cummins L10 290 engine being remarkably light, capable of 22.5 ton payload at 32.5 tons with a suitable trailer.
|
>>Purely out of interest was this the engine that Daf used very successfully in their 2800 range in the 80's?
I'm not sure - I know absolutely nowt about Dafs.
>>I've never quite understood the idea of running much heavier and much more expensive trucks on general haulage,
Yes, I tend to agree. It's also nice to have windows in the back of the cab.
The 70's Leyland drivetrain which worked best for us was the L12 engine and the very simple six speed box. It worked well in the six wheeler Bisons, but was a little challenged running at nearer full weight in the Octopuses and Buffalos. The TL11 and Fuller was a better performer, but much more tempramental, and the TL12 plus Fuller in the Marathon was a bit of a flying machine by comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
