100k lbs gvw M818

[jwaller]

103k lbs gvw M818

Ya, it's not even close to legal or sane but I did it.

All off road for those that care. It was so heavy I was picking the front end of the truck off the ground when trying to move forward(5th wheel was all the way back). had to back up to make turns with it. Would never even think of taking this one on the road, waaay too much for the old girl to handle but off road is where she shines.

TG 7000 Vermeer tub grinder.

 

[EMD567]

 

[m16ty]

 

[jwaller]

you people are GD impatient. if this site wasn't so slow when it's busy I'd been done 10 min ago.

 

[gimpyrobb]

Ha! Thats tittys.

 

[srodocker]

dang!

 

[Blythewoodjoe]

WOW, I didn't know those tube grinders were that heavy. My brothers "beast" grinder is only 40,000 or so. I pulled it onto and off of a barge one time with the deuce Clinto has now. I have pictures somewhere. That was 2003.

 

[docfarmall]

probley coulda turn easyer if you dollied it up they dont let you turn very good.

 

[bulldog_mack13]

The Military way under rates stuff as we know. Ive seen some crazy pictures all over the internet of what M818's can really haul. Your tractor looks like its behind the grinder , its early and my eyes arent right I guess,

 

[Westech]

if the plate was all the way forward it would have helped.

 

[Hammer]

Not to be a smart arse, but why IS the 5th wheel so far back?

 

[73m819]

In Vietnam, Id pull our crushers with our m52s, the primary was ready to operate with feed hopper, conveyors, ect. heavvvvvvvvvvvvvvy. the m52 had to work but it did the job, this was on very rough roughed in roads for both rig up/down. they were so heavy that we would have to reinforce some bridges before we could cross if we had to move to a remote location away from base. I have seen loads on lowbed so heavy that the trailer and goose neck saged bad and still the 52s pulled it. thes trucks were made to work , not fast but WORK

 

[zout]

W - I was thinking the same thing after seeing the trailer slid all the way back and speaking of the steer nearly off the ground. Tried to see if there was any reason like something protruding off the gladhand area to keep it from getting moved forward - could not tell.

If there was not maybe it was a turning issue through the terrain ???? Otherwise (as you already know) having it slid forward would have distributed the weight more on to your steer and 1st set of axles.

Cool pics by the way.

 

[bratpackdad]

I thought the TG 7000 Vermeer maxed out at 84500 lbs.

 

[Josh]

I thought the TG 7000 Vermeer maxed out at 84500 lbs.

Well if ya count the 20kish from the tractor also

 

[bratpackdad]

DOH! I shouldn't cook and post I wasn't paying attention.

 

[KsM715]

Bratpackdad thats just mean. Im so hungry now. Guess Ill have to settle for a tunafish sandwich.

 

[Squirt-Truck]

Moving the coupler forward will help the steering, but has no effect on the rear axle balance. The total rear weight will be a little less due to weight transfer but both rear axles will always see the same load due to the rear spring support design.

 

[Josh]

When the plate is behind the pivot point of the axles, it turns it into a fulcrum. Just getting the weight in front of that point should make a pretty significate differance on the front axle.

 

[jwaller]

I thought the TG 7000 Vermeer maxed out at 84500 lbs.

the one with the attached loader is, but the one without self attached loader is 74.

my 818 weights 28k by itself.



the plate was all the way back because I used it there last and didn't want to move it back.