Logging Trucks?
- Thread starter rick1958
- Start date
You mean these two from me:
<kuid:439337:113866> SAP_Logging_Trailer_1_PBR
<kuid:439337:113869> SAP_Logging_Trailer_2_PBR
Bob
Yeah they're great. Got 'em both. Perfect for a small mill like Slugsmashers Clear Lake, but I'm looking for the semi's that used to haul Sugar Pine to the reload. Like an off road Tractor Trailer.
The West Side used them at the end of their operations. Logs were trucked to the Camp 45 reload where taken to the mill by rail. The railroad and mill closed 1961
Last edited:
It looks like from the photo that you are looking for the pole trailer style frequently found on the West coast, not the big "off high-way" trucks we have/had on the Golden Road here in Maine. An Autocar Constructor is a good stating place for the tractor.
So everyone has an idea of how oversized the Golden Road trucks are/were, for a time in the '80's the companies hauling on that road would run triple trailers (but now it's mostly doubles), 12' wide and 14'+ tall (3.65m by4.26m), with tree length spruce, buts to both ends, and would gross out between 275,000-300,000lbs (125,00kg-136,000kg); compared to the US interstate limit of 8.5' wide, 13.5' tall and 80,000lbs gross weight (2.59m by 4.11m and 36,287kg). As I recall the preferred tractors were Autocar and Mack with a "quad box" (or similar) transmission. They ran all year except during the spring thaw (when the roads wouldn't support a large truck), had the right of way and were a sight to see flying down a gravel road at 50+ mph (80kph).
So everyone has an idea of how oversized the Golden Road trucks are/were, for a time in the '80's the companies hauling on that road would run triple trailers (but now it's mostly doubles), 12' wide and 14'+ tall (3.65m by4.26m), with tree length spruce, buts to both ends, and would gross out between 275,000-300,000lbs (125,00kg-136,000kg); compared to the US interstate limit of 8.5' wide, 13.5' tall and 80,000lbs gross weight (2.59m by 4.11m and 36,287kg). As I recall the preferred tractors were Autocar and Mack with a "quad box" (or similar) transmission. They ran all year except during the spring thaw (when the roads wouldn't support a large truck), had the right of way and were a sight to see flying down a gravel road at 50+ mph (80kph).
Thanks for that. Very interesting. Apparently the rigs used on the West Side (as you say, west coast logging) were smaller then your Golden Road truck, but the only mention I've found was in a video where it's stated they were too large for road use and used strictly on the logging roads going to the reload. Now I'll have to do a google for the Autocar you mentioned. Thanks again.
So on the west coast I'd look for Kenworth, as well the eastern brands like Autocar, Brockway, Diamond T, Mack and REO. Freightliner was primarily a road truck so probably not. Western Star would probably be too late as it started in '67 and the early trucks would have looked like Autocars as White was the parent company of both Autocar and Western Star. Mack bought Brockway in '56 but the brand remained till '77. I'd google for "Autocar Construcktor" to find images of the kind of trucks you are looking for (Yes, I misspelled it in my previous post). Truck manufacturers are just as complex as railroads when it comes to subsidiaries and such, so a bit of digging at Wikipedia is recommended.
As for Eastern trucks being bigger, I'm not convinced; looking at the bunks on those trucks I'd guess a good 10' easy, and probably 11-12'. We sometimes forget these "off highway" (and by most definitions "off road") trucks don't play by the highway loading rules. On a 12' load/trailer the cab/tractor should be 2/3 of the width of the trailer, looking from the front it's 2' of load showing, 8' (ish) of truck, and 2' more of load. I don't remember what the practical width limit is for off road but I believe it is about 12-14', but that depends on the center of gravity.
For another rathole to run down, if you look up 'quadbox' one can find videos of those big manual transmissions being driven, and what a show of skill those are.
I chuckled watching the Mack quad box videos. Owners Manuals today tell you not to drink the battery acid lol.
Apparently the photos I posted are a company called Pacific and these are Pacific P16's and there's another very simular built by Hayes. I never heard of either but theres quite a few P16's for sale after doing a quick search. Now, to bribe someone talented enough yo model one.
Well, that's the catch isn't it... good luck.
I forgot about Oshkosh... well I guess you know what you need now.
If you are looking for a stand in, you might look at the Russian trucks, as some of them have that heavy "off road" styling.
Good idea!
Slugsmasher was the only person I know that was building the West Side Lumber route but I'm not aware of him building anything like these trucks. His site is still up but I haven't seen him in the forums since 2009 or so. He was a young fellow back then and I think he got married and drifted away from Trainz.
pretty sure there used to be something like this around, at least of the truck itself, I have a memory of this type, its the truck from the movie DUEL, its on the DLS in various guises but it doesn't have a logging trailer. have you checked the logging trucks created by ricomon, "RC 1900s log truck with trailer " , they are earlier than these trucks, but very similar.Here's what I'm talking about...
Thanks... Yeah, Rich and I have stayed in contact throughout the years. I have a copy of all his stuff but he was a long way from needing these. To do the WS justice, it would be a life long project for one man to do, and probably still never be done.
I have Rico's trucks, but no, they're not really even "close enough" to the time period or big enough to handle the WS timber. Oh well... maybe one will pop up one day.
Back to Rich... It's a shame, but Auran, now N3V ran out all that breed of Trainz'ers from a time gone by. Rich, Linda,Todd, Ben and others all got tired of their stuff being broken with every "upgrade." Trainz was a different world back then.