This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Semi-trailer truck article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I hope to soon write some pages from my 20 year experience as a (US) truck owner/operator. Some subjects would include: - maintainence and safety of tractor-trailers. - specification of componets (engines, transmitions, axles) when setting up a rig. - operating procedures for fair weather and foul. - size and weight laws in different locations. - loading and freight securement considerations for flatbed trailers. - Trucking in the extreme North end of N.America, and slightly beyond (on the oilfield ice roads)! Feel free to comment: Tim Coahran, [email protected]
The above paragraph makes it sound like triple-trailers aren't actually in use. They are, and at one time were pretty common on I-84 in northern Oregon. This has decreased over time — and additional permits are required for it — due to safety concerns (I've also heard it suggested that trucking companies may have found it to not be as economical as they'd hoped, but I can't speak to the veracity of those claims; insurance costs, perhaps?). Anyone traveling through the Columbia River Gorge still stands a decent chance of seeing one, though. -- nknight 10:17, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
I think triple trailers are common in Austrailia (I understand that these "road trains" have the right of way over smaller vehicles). Also, the picture seems not as clear as would be that of a typical 18 wheeler, especially with a full on side profile. Leonard G. 00:03, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
I am confused by this description of the European trailer. If I read the description right, in Europe, the tractor only has two axles, and the cargo end has 3 axles. That means the cargo container is sitting on 12 wheels on the rear end and 4 wheels (rear of the tractor) on the front end.
The weight of the tractor itself is distributed over the two front wheel and its own 4 wheels. ie. the middle 4 wheels are carrying both the load of the cargo and the engine. How does the weight distribution work? Assuming the weight of the cargo is distribute evenly on both ends, then the tire pressure on the road surface is quite lopsided. Since pressure = weight/area of road contact, the pressure these 4 wheels on the road surface is extremely high, theoretically 3 times those on the rear 12 wheels (1 axle supports the front end and 3 axles support the rear end of the cargo???). Probably strong enough to create a pot hole every couple of round trips. In the US, there are 8 wheels on each side of the cargo, hence the pressure and wear on the road surface is evenly distributed. Can someone in Europe explain the design philosophy behind such wheels arrangement? Does Europe trailers cause more road damage then their US counterpart?
______\____USA_____ o oo oo
______\____EU______ o o ooo
In Sweden the axle weight limits are 10 metric tons (11.5 for a driving axle) for single axles, 19 for twin axles, and 24 for tripple axles. Vehicles with 2 axles are allowed to gross 18 metric tons, 3 axles 26 tons, and 4 or more axles 32 tons. The exception is trailers which are allowed to gross 36 metric tons if the axle distance is more than 7.2 meters. The most common combination here is truck-trailers, the truck with three axles and the trailer with four, grossing 60 metric tons with a length of 24 meters. There are also a fair number of trucks with two trailers in a B-train configuration usually carrying shipping containers, one 20 ft and one 40 ft, which are allowed to be 25.25 meters. The same is true with trailers pulled by trucks using a dolly.
This is a typical (north)european tractor-semi combination, if you forget about the mid-axle trailer at the end. I assume 1. and 3. axle on the truck are steering axles, and this would be the only steering on the entire vehicle. G®iffen 20:04, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
G®iffen 16:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should be named "Tractor-trailer". A semitrailer is a unit towed by a tractor and requies the fifth-wheel of the tractor to support the front. A full trailer, of course, is completely self-supporting, like a semitrailer/dolly combination. Rsduhamel 19:29, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think some or all of the information in the Construction section should be moved to the similar and more comprehensive Anatomy of a Truck section in Truck. Sticki 17:58, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Article should definitely be renamed. As stated in the first paragraph, "a semi-trailer is a trailer without a front axle". The article then goes onto describe trailers (including front axles) and trailer (semi or otherwise) and locomotive combinations called variously articulated lorries, road-trains or otherwise. The semi-trailer is therefore a component of an articulated lorry - so either separate articles are required, or the article should be renamed. It makes more sense to name the article for the whole and then talk about the components, rather than - as at present - name the article for a component and then go onto to talk about other components and the whole. Anon.
:Since it is apparent from this thread and below's that both "semi-trailer truck" and "semi-trailer" have separate and specific meanings, and that the bulk of the current article should be under
Semi-trailer truck, I have
requested such a move. "Semi-trailer" specific text can then be extracted and returned to the freed-up
Semi-trailer article space.
ENeville
05:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I would prefer an article name like Tractor-trailer truck (as a full name) over simply Tractor-trailer so as to make it clear we are talking about a type of truck, even though I understand most people in the business are too lazy to mention "truck" because the listeners in the business implicitly understand the talk is about trucks. Tractor-trailer could redirect to this this full name. Part of this problem is because there are many kinds of tractors and trailers, and tractor is hard to define exactly. I have no objection to the article staying at Semi-trailer truck. I do find the moniker "18-wheeler" to be an inaccurate name for all such trucks, because some do not have exactly 18 tires. I think 18-wheeler should be used for those that have 18 tires. H Padleckas 16:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
This article didnt have a proper definition of a semi-trailer (apart from a vague etymology near the end) so I've replaced the etymology with a precise definition right at the begining where it aught to be so that anyone reading this article knows exactly what a semi-trailer is. It's worded as follows;-
"A semi-trailer is a trailer without a front axle. A large proportion of its weight is supported either by a tractor or by a detachable front axle assembly known as a dolly. A semi-trailer is equipped with legs to support it when it is uncoupled."
Apgeraint
19:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I believe that the title of this article is absolutely correct This article is needed to define exactly what a semi-trailer is.
What is wrong with this article is that there are some elements in it not pertaining to semi-trailers. It would be better to put these in seperate articles.
There also seems to be a general lack of knowledge of the jargon (and of the exact meaning of some of the jargon). Since this is an encyclopedia, the correct terminology should be used and need to be defined as to their precise meaning. Maybe I'll sort this out when I get round to it. In the past 35 years I have trucked all round Europe and also travelled several times to the USA, Canada and Australia taking Photos of trucks and talking to truck drivers. One thing I have learned is that the jargon is exactly the same all over the English speaking world. It's only those unaquainted with the industry that use different words in different parts of the world since they don't know the correct terminology.
Apgeraint
19:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Some ananymous user removed all about local differences. Is it vandalism, or did s/he put it somewhere else? I didn't like to rebuild it if there's a good explanation. G®iffen 14:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
In danish, this is a blokvogn, but what do you call it? Is there an article about it, or is it just another semi? In da: I've started an article about it, and de: has one more or less about the heavy goods itself here - well, at least that's what my rusty german tells me. G®iffen 17:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Whenever larger than this, they usually have a lowered "middle" section and either
on the semi. But yes, technically this is a 5-axle tractor and 11 axle semi. Notice semiaxles 1,2,3,4 and 6 are airlifted. I believe that the driver can configure which semiaxle is "the not steering" and the others will track according to their position compared to the tractor and the locked axle. I don't remember if this had split axles (I assume that is "one axle in each side" instead of the same axle connecting both sides?)
The unit loads 240 metric tonnes plus the vehicle itself... Usually the total weight of any vehicle+trailer can never (legally) be more than 48 tonnes in DK.
Not to be commercial, but the company that owns the truck has an english homepage [2] with quite a few pics, showing their extremes. I didn't see any dolly-combinations. They like to use one brand of module trailers, that can be put together long, wide or in "blocks" of 2,3 or 4 axles extra according to the job.
I guess the banner in the bottom of this site illustrates "your" dolly combination?
Well, I find wisdom every day ;) Eh... Actually I just still need to know if there's a general term for overload vehicles in english? Above the shown one is called a class 10 or maybe class 13. I assume it is a (something) class 10 or 13, where "something" could be like heavy carriage, oversize vehicle or some other term covering all or most types of vehicles built for transporting items larger/heavier than the standard? As example the danish term blokvogn also includes mobile (wheeled) cranes over 32 tonnes and some other heavy or wide special vehic's. I did notice the term "permitted vehicle", but one can permit a lot of things for different occasions, right? G®iffen 14:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Blok is more or less the same as the english block (like a block of stone). Vogn is any unmotorized vehicle pulled by external engine or animal. It probably refers to carrying large rocks for building purposes (?) G®iffen 16:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I came here looking for statistics on vehicle weight, cargo weight, and fuel efficiency. I was trying to calculate the cost and fuel efficiency of shipping goods via truck versus people in passenger vehicles driving to pick things up. Rummaging on Google I couldn't find anything with enough authority for me to add the numbers here, but if somebody finds those stats, they'd make a great addition to the article. Thanks, William Pietri 03:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I found this article: http://www.mountain-plains.org/pubs/html/mpc-03-152/pg8.php which has some of the details requested by Billy above. You're welcome, Captain Milktoast 00:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Captain Milktoast
Is this article about semi-trailer trucks (as titled)? Maybe I am reading this wrong, because I don't know this US English term first hand, but the title suggests that the article is about trucks insofar as they relate to semi-trailers. OK - I'm labouring this a little, but the article is (to my mind) titled about the truck itself (i.e. the prime mover or whatever else you want to call it). So what's all the stuff about trailers doing this article ? Trailer info is related useful info, but needs moving to somewhere else, no? Unless the article is retitled, that is. My preference is 'articulated lorry', but then, no doubt, others would say 'huh?' to that, just as I'm scratching my head about the current title. --!!!!
I was wondering if this link is OK or too commercial. Personally I would prefer to see it replaced by a video clip or photostring showing how a sideloader works? Besides it's uploaded by a user of the same name as the company... G®iffen 15:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
there are 3 different trials in Germany, one with only 40 metric tons, an other with 44tons and one with 60 tons maximum weight [Ecocombi#Deutschland] german wiki—The preceding [] unsigned comment was added by 82.82.134.218 ( talk) 21:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
I used to drive a truck in Alaska, and in the winter it could get extremly dangerous. I would like to know if anyone else ever had the promblem of the suspension freezing completely while parked overnight. This made my truck incredibly unsafe. Please let me know if you has this problem. =]
Thankyou, kind regards,
Zesty Prospect
17:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Why are they called "semi" trailers? Are they not full-sized trailers? —Ben FrantzDale ( talk) 12:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
In the United States: how come back in the 1970s and 1980s nearly all tractor-trailer trucks were built with the cab over the engine and steer wheels... yet during the 1990s and 2000s those disappeared, replaced by the engine and steer wheels being placed ahead of the cab? This seems to be a rather major change and I'm surprised it's not mentioned in the article. - Rolypolyman ( talk) 12:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
The statement "Contrary to the former article written on this topic, tandem setups are not restricted to certain roads anymore than a single setup. The exception are the units listed above. They are also not restricted because of weather or "difficulty" of operation.", sounds like an arguement that made it into the main article. At the minimum it does not sound encyclopedic nor up to wikipedia's standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.221.111.43 ( talk) 21:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
The fifth picture in the article shows a truck with a full and partial trailer, calling it a 'Rocky Mountain Double.' This is an incorrect description as Rocky Mountain Doubles are trucks that haul 2 full trailers. This truck does have a double trailer, but if I am not mistaken, the term 'Rocky Mountain' refers to the fact that trucks with 2 full trailers are limited to operating in the Rocky Mountain states, whereas trucks like this one are allowed in most parts of the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.241.55.204 ( talk) 11:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
should it be mentioned that in some versions of the PowerRangers frnachise they use semis, in some cases for transport and such, and I think in other, the semi is actually one of the transforming giant robots? -- TiagoTiago ( talk) 21:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
In this section there are two subsections "Used in the United States:" and "Used elsewhere:". What's so special about the USA? -- Sigmundg ( talk) 17:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Would it be worth mentioning here about Shunt trucks seeing as they dont have their own Article? Exit2DOS2000• T• C• 09:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's pretty hard to get around the transport industry and never see a yard dog, especially in intermodal rail-yards and around sea-shipping ports. A lot of larger terminals have the 'shunt trucks' Exit described, strictly for the purpose of switching -- it's a lot faster and usually they'll have a tighter turn radius than even a single-drive axle tractor.
Yard jockey, mule, dog, mutt, etc. are common names -- a lot of times, however, the same term is applied to a simple small tractor for dragging trailers around the lot and in/out of a shop.
The yard dogs I've seen and worked on also had a good deal of ballast on the rear drive axles for extra traction, and usually axle locks of some sort. Cheers 184.153.196.39 ( talk) 05:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Nowhere in Wikipedia can I locate any reference to 'Rearward Amplification'. Suggest senior editors add this section. If you would like me to prepare this section, please let me know. Jeffrey Meade. -- Sponsion ( talk) 15:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Here are four references: (1) Stability and Highway Damage Rearward amplification — a tendency of additional trailers to magnify even small amounts of sway, such as that caused by a blustery crosswind, even when driven by experienced drivers.
Rearward amplification is caused by the tendency of dual wheeled vehicles to resist turning.
http://www.truckingvideo.com/safetytruck/stability/index.html
(2) ...automatic brake control system that could intervene -- only when needed -- to help suppress unwanted trailer oscillations (commonly referred to as rearward amplification) in large combination vehicles (typically double and triple trailer combination). ...development and demonstration of a so-called "trailer-only" RAMS (Rearward Amplification Suppression) system.
http://ntlsearch.bts.gov/tris/record/tris/00810959.html
(3) Sensitivity of rearward amplification control of a truck/full trailer to tyre (tire) cornering stiffness variations. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers -- Part D -- Journal of Automobile Engineering; 2001, Vol.
215 Issue 5, p579-588, 10p
Must use a library to access: http://connection.ebscohost.com/content/article/1019940654.html%3Bjsessionid=6EE34057EB01BAA8E36DF5523FC06BE7.ehctc1
(4) Highway/heavy vehicle interaction
By Douglas W. Harwood, Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis
...factors that contribute to increased lateral accelerations of the trailing units, the phenomenon known as rearward amplification, include the following:
http://books.google.com/books?
id=mi9Sny62Qj0C&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=Rearward+Amplificatio n&source=bl&ots=XNrXvbPEW_&sig=dm_qcNQ-atHhbGfLU4P- Cqvx6QM&hl=en&ei=kRQQSvrBBYjMM6vd9FI&sa=X&oi=book_result& ct=result&resnum=2
-- Sponsion ( talk) 15:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
In the transmission section of the page it is explicitly implied that constant mesh non-synchro gear boxes (like those from Eaton-Fuller) must be double clutched to shift. This is completely untrue as you can easily shift them without using the clutch. Pretty much any gear box with no syncros can be "float" shifted. You need the clutch to stop and start but you float the gerars up and down (although flot down shifting takes some practice). This misinformation has been spread out for a long time, I mainly hear it from European truck drivers. Synchro gear boxes cannot be floated as the gears simply cannot be pulled out of mesh while under any torque, I know because I have tried it on a synchro fuller gear box, GMC 4 speed synchro and a 6 speed synchro ZF gear box in a Dodge Ram.
Also of note is a clutch brake is also not necessary but it helps allot when starting from a dead stop (its only use). Since there are no synchros to match the speed of the counter shaft to the main shaft, a special brake is installed on the input shaft behind the clutch. When the clutch pedal is fully depressed, it stops the input and counter shafts from turning allowing one to shift into their take-off gear of choice. The brake is a pain to replace so when it wears out most don't bother to replace it until clutch work is necessary (that could be upward of a half-million miles or more depending on the driver). So the best way to cope with a worn out clutch brake is to fully disengage the clutch, wait a few seconds and gently ease the stick into gear. Sometimes this produces a grinding sound, most likely because the driver didn't wait for the shafts to slow and is shifting into gear too fast (those are sloppy drivers IMHO). And on a side note: There is/was a clutch brake on some Fuller's that operated by a switch on the stick. It used an air cylinder to press a brake pad like device onto the side of an input shaft gear. So again a clutch brake is technically not necessary at all and many have out well over a half million miles on their gear boxes without one.
I began driving in a GMC 6000 with a 350 Chevy gas engine and 4 speed gear box. It was tough to learn shifting the first few minutes but I quickly got used to it. It was easy to shift without the clutch: you bring up the RPM's to the shift point, wind it up a bit more, let off the accelerator and the stick easily slid out of gear and into the next gear. Years later the top plate cracked and the transmission needed to be rebuilt. It was discovered that the synchronizers were all burnt out (By a previous driver). They rebuilt the gear box and it was terrible to drive. Constantly needing to hit the clutch pedal for each shift is annoying (that truck was gutless so you were constantly going between 3rd and 4th.)
I feel bad for the European drivers who are stuck with those awful synchro gear boxes. Why they think they are superior to constant mesh is beyond me, maybe they are jealous ;-). Thaddeusw ( talk) 01:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps a little rewording on the use of the term 'tandem' is in order. Describing a trailer as having two tandem axles would mean it has 8 wheels...not such a common occurrence in my experience. Seems like the article has a lot of that ambiguity and poor terminology going on, however. 184.153.196.39 ( talk) 05:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph of this section looks very un-Wiki-like. Dkril ( talk) 18:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Licensing is one part of safety. Engineering a system so it stops unless it's operating is another. I came to this article looking for information about spiffy safety devices like radar, eye cameras, or whatever might be out there. What about GPS? Surely there are truck versions of GPS that take into account restrictions on various routes. -- ke4roh ( talk) 02:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm wondering where the use of the word "tractor" in this case, comes from.
69.171.160.90 ( talk) 19:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
The rear wheels on this truck has independent steering, otherwise it wouldn't be able turn corners. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone really needs to decide on one way to refer to the tractor/artic/prime mover/what have you--and then use it consistantly throughout the article. While hopping between them may feel inclusive, it is also somewhat annoying to read through and potentially very confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.68.160 ( talk) 13:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The Lithuanian interwiki points to lt:Automobilvežis, apparently an article about car transporters (trucks that transport cars). I don't think this link is such a great idea. But I'll refrain from attempting to remove the link, since helpful robots and humans would return it anyway. -- Jmk ( talk) 11:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
This article could stand some proofreading, preferably from someone who has gone beyond Pidgin English. DCDuring ( talk) 18:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
A "truck and trailer" would be a strait truck pulling a trailer, not a semi. Where in the US is a semi called a "transfer truck"? "Mack" is a company name, not specific to semis, they make lots of strait trucks.
There is one wheel on each end of each axle, notes added.
Fraction implies a small part, doesn't it? With a "tandem" tractor and a two axle trailer, the tractor would carry close to half the weight, with a tandem tractor and single axle trailer the tractor could carry more than half the weight, with a single (rear) axle tractor and a two axle trailer the tractor could carry less than half the weight.
"with a strong internal beam connecting them to the cab" doesn't really make sense, does it?
Tires, eighteen wheels would be 9 axles.
Where do the feds restrict steer axle weight to less than 20,000#? 34,000# on the tractor tandem + 34,000# on the trailer tandem = 68,000#, leaving only 12,000# to the max gross of 80,000#, but you could still get there with 33,000# + 33,000# + 14,000#. If someone can find a federal (not state) law restricting steers to 12,000#, please put the second table back in.
Sammy D III ( talk) 18:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have removed the deletion tag because a) I couldn't find any link to a discussion of the proposed deletion and b) because I sense the article is probably notable, but needs a cleanup rather than outright deletion. Views? -- Bermicourt ( talk) 11:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually, “double bottom” is in common use around here (Chicago). No idea where the “bottom” comes from, but it’s used. I have never heard of “a set” or “joints”, but I have never talked to a driver who drove one (only UPS uses them around here). I have never heard of a “dolly” called “con-gear”, but again, same qualification. This is all personal knowledge with no sources used now, but if someone can ref “joints” then I should be able to ref “bottoms”.
Transmissions are a mess. Macks come (came?) with 5 speeds standard. Where does “18 speeds” come from, a 5x4 has 20 total. I can think of no 18 speed combinations. (It is: 4 gears X 2 ranges = 8 speeds all split X 2 = 16 + low gear split X 2 = 18. Sorry Sammy D III ( talk) 03:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)). Transmission numbers often refer to useful ratios instead of total possible. A 9 speed is a 5 speed with 2 ranges, for 10 gears. 1st is Low and not used in road work, the rest are numbered 1-4 (low range) and 5-8 (in the high range Low is not used). 8 + Low make 9 useful gears. Similarly, a 13 speed (once the standard of road tractors) has 5 speeds with two ranges and a “splitter” (used in high range only), total 20 gears, 12 + Low makes 13 useful gears. A “Super-10” sounds like a 5 speed/2 speed, sometimes the splitter is in the transmission, but more often you have a “two speed rear end” axle split the gears. I can source many transmissions from a Mack Operator’s Handbook.
If anyone cares, I can help some, but do not intend to rewrite it myself. Sammy D III ( talk) 15:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
In Transmission the word "constant mesh" is misused, it should be non synchronized. Constant mesh is an entirely different thing. Sammy D III ( talk) 17:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
In addition to "underride guards" at the rear, I have occasionally seen what appear to be "side guards" on some high-quality trailers, presumably to help protect against fatalities in side collisions and jackknifing accidents. The lack of such guards in a collision is particularly dangerous, because the bed of the trailer is at a height where the first contact with a passenger car may be at windshield level. This completely bypasses the bumper and engine compartment crush zones, and may fail to activate protective air bags in any effective manner. I have seen some chilling photos of the aftermath of such a collision, and think that a less-gory photo of this would still be very instructive to readers.
Does anybody have information on US requirements for rear or side guards, "grandfathering" rules for older equipment, or NAFTA free trade rules? Also, my understanding is that EU and Japanese rules have been much stricter than the US rules for decades. Additional information on standards (or lack thereof) in the rest of the world would be much appreciated. Also, any statistics on the number and rate of underride collisions and fatalities would be useful. Thank you, in behalf of inquiring minds. Reify-tech ( talk) 19:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Federal vehicle standards are here: [3]. 224 is rear impact, but 214 side impact applies to under 10,000# GVW. Heil [4], HilBilt [5], and Utility [6] all sell new trailers with no apparent side impact equipment (Fruehauf's site is "under construction"). Are you sure standards exist? Sammy D III ( talk) 21:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Trucks are commonly measured by wheels, 4x2, 4x4, etc. This system has two wheels per axle, single or dual tires do not matter. Combinations are often counted by axles. Laws appear to always count axles.
Some US west coast over the road truckers said “eighteen-wheeler” for their 5 axle combinations, referring to the number of tires. Local slang, sort of. Movies have made this nickname common, but other than that, tires are not often counted. This can be confusing.
Crismon(01) explains the wheel system in detail, I think pretty much everyone uses it. It is (number of wheels) x (number of powered wheels). RSA shows single and dual tires are the same. US laws use axle, with no mention of single or dual tires. Duals are prohibited on steer axles. Sammy D III ( talk) 03:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Since there is some debate, I looked back through the logs, and sure enough: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Semi-trailer_truck&direction=next&oldid=926680 License, not licence, and the whole article was flushed out without using the word "lorry". It's in AmE, not BrE, please refrain from changing it back. Cheers, ~~ipuser 90.194.62.161 ( talk) 22:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
It's not just a paragraph, it's a whole (quite substantial) section. Reading the UK section with American English jars significantly in a way that having it in the rest of the article does not. It would make sense to reiterate the terminology at the start of the section and use that within the section. I think it is appropriate (and educational) to include the regional terms in a larger section like this.~~Jonnyboy5
In the US "Gross Vehicle Weight Rating" (GVWR) is for a single vehicle. "Gross Combination Weight Rating" (GCWR) is for a truck or tractor with all trailers. The USDOT and these states use "combination" for vehicles and not "combined" for weight. [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28](defines GCW and GCWR) [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] (defines GCW and GCWR) [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47]. [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] These three states [57] [58] [59] use "combined" describing weight, but refers to vehicles as "combination". Sammy D III ( talk) 03:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I changed the article to US English, it is tagged that way and I think “truck” implies US or Australia. It seemed a mixture of US English, UK English, and English As A Second Language. (EDIT: It was only tagged 22 April 2015)
I changed dimensions to US converted to metric. If source was US, I used that. If it wasn't I converted it to US, rounded that, then posted as US convert to metric. Many of these numbers are close, but not exact. I did meters to 1 past the decimal, maybe some should be two. Someone from a metric place might know.
I deleted a lot of stuff, but I think it was largely just words, not info. I re-arranged, then combined duplicate stuff. Mostly cut and paste, then smooth. I only added a little. I corrected and/or tried to make clear some individual facts.
I think that "Europe" should go into "Scandavia, Finland and the Netherlands" and "the Netherlands" should go into "Contental Europe", which could become only "Europe", or maybe EU.
For what it's worth. Sammy D III ( talk) 03:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
I think I have the dimention source problem solved, forest through the trees. Just do them manually, using the "&.nbsp;" thing. There aren't all that many. If the source is English the first digit is correct. If the source is metric, enter that in back and round the first digit. Or can you footnote each European section about units? I don't know how to make that look good, but it certainly is a thought. Opinion? Thank you very much. Sammy D III ( talk) 14:37, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
171,000 on 17 axles with only two trailers. Wow.
I am thinking of sorting and condensing Europe into UK, Continental, and Scandinavia. Each seems to have it's own conditions, and the article sort of breaks that way already.
North America has a sub-section Trucks, Europe has the same type of info in the front, it just isn't called Trucks. Shouldn't they be the same, and what should they be called?
Objections? Comments? If I do something I will try to do it in big pieces so it will be easy to revert.
I am almost sixty years old, and I have never heard a semi-trailer truck called a "semi-truck." It can be a "semi" a "tractor," a "big rig," or a "truck." Where is the support or citation for "more commonly called a semi truck"? 40.134.106.218 ( talk) 16:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
On a similar note, I am Canadian, lived variously in four provinces, and I have absolutely never heard a semi-trailer called a "Transport", usually it is just a "semi", but also "semi-trailer", or occasionally a "big rig". 100.12.115.78 ( talk) 13:26, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Conventional 18-wheeler truck diagram.svg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 16, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-07-16. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 04:11, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
The numbered parts are:
Anybody know what the intended meaning of the 4th sentence is? "The reauires is that both the tractor and semi-trailer will have a design distinctly different..." I can't make heads-or-tails of it. 117.110.113.183 ( talk) 02:10, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
The article should explicitly state that semi trucks use diesel, not gasoline, if that's the case. It currently only implies it. Benjamin ( talk) 08:22, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
@ Motorracer: You'll need to scroll through each one of the three references to find the diagram the shows the maximum 23 m (75 ft 5+1⁄2 in) legal length of semi-trailer trucks allowed in three Canadian provinces and likely true in all of Canada because these rigs travel all over N. America and Mexico. In the US the equivalents in feet an inches are the rule.
Peter Horn
User talk 21:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Peter Horn
User talk 21:34, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Peter Horn
User talk
21:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Peter Horn: The references should be in relation to something in the body, otherwise what's stopping this from becoming a mammoth list that includes dimensions from every country? Wikipedia isn't an America-centric website and semitrailers are used globally. Wikipedia isn't a list, nor is it a list of links.
Motorracer (
talk)
22:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
A certain semiliterate User:Oliver Gunn introdced this attrocety KG, 44,000KG (97,003 pound), in the Semi-trailer truck Revision as of 2020-05-08T09:18:05 Peter Horn User talk 03:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I came to this article hoping to find information about the origins of the Tractor-trailer as a significant cargo hauler and was disappointed. I guess if I want to know more about the earliest days of trucking I'll need to look elsewhere -- but I fear it'll turn out the subject is not well documented anywhere. This was my experience when I wanted to learn more about the Red Ball Express.
I'm not complaining -- Wikipedia is what we make it -- but I wanted to put out there that I think information about this part of this subject is lacking in the hope of fomenting some interest. jhf ( talk) 00:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Some of the measures seem inefficient. Is there a reason why some parts reference thousands of kilograms instead of tonnes? 44,000kg is much easier written as 44t ~~Jonnyboy5
Hello! So at the top of the page, it basically says "any term you could think of that means semi-trailer truck redirects here, you might be looking for this instead". I think we should reduce the amount of terms listed at the top of the page. Any ideas? ― Blaze The Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
I've lived all my six decades in Canada, the US, and the Carribean, and never used "semi", always 18 wheeler, and barely heard semi.
The word should at a minimum be present in the article. In a Google search, there's 5+ million entries for 18 wheeler and 9+ million entries for semi trailer.
Furthermore, there exists a disambiguation page for 18 wheeler, which speaks of Semi trailers, but does not link to this article?! Tallard ( talk) 04:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Semi-trailer truck article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I hope to soon write some pages from my 20 year experience as a (US) truck owner/operator. Some subjects would include: - maintainence and safety of tractor-trailers. - specification of componets (engines, transmitions, axles) when setting up a rig. - operating procedures for fair weather and foul. - size and weight laws in different locations. - loading and freight securement considerations for flatbed trailers. - Trucking in the extreme North end of N.America, and slightly beyond (on the oilfield ice roads)! Feel free to comment: Tim Coahran, [email protected]
The above paragraph makes it sound like triple-trailers aren't actually in use. They are, and at one time were pretty common on I-84 in northern Oregon. This has decreased over time — and additional permits are required for it — due to safety concerns (I've also heard it suggested that trucking companies may have found it to not be as economical as they'd hoped, but I can't speak to the veracity of those claims; insurance costs, perhaps?). Anyone traveling through the Columbia River Gorge still stands a decent chance of seeing one, though. -- nknight 10:17, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
I think triple trailers are common in Austrailia (I understand that these "road trains" have the right of way over smaller vehicles). Also, the picture seems not as clear as would be that of a typical 18 wheeler, especially with a full on side profile. Leonard G. 00:03, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
I am confused by this description of the European trailer. If I read the description right, in Europe, the tractor only has two axles, and the cargo end has 3 axles. That means the cargo container is sitting on 12 wheels on the rear end and 4 wheels (rear of the tractor) on the front end.
The weight of the tractor itself is distributed over the two front wheel and its own 4 wheels. ie. the middle 4 wheels are carrying both the load of the cargo and the engine. How does the weight distribution work? Assuming the weight of the cargo is distribute evenly on both ends, then the tire pressure on the road surface is quite lopsided. Since pressure = weight/area of road contact, the pressure these 4 wheels on the road surface is extremely high, theoretically 3 times those on the rear 12 wheels (1 axle supports the front end and 3 axles support the rear end of the cargo???). Probably strong enough to create a pot hole every couple of round trips. In the US, there are 8 wheels on each side of the cargo, hence the pressure and wear on the road surface is evenly distributed. Can someone in Europe explain the design philosophy behind such wheels arrangement? Does Europe trailers cause more road damage then their US counterpart?
______\____USA_____ o oo oo
______\____EU______ o o ooo
In Sweden the axle weight limits are 10 metric tons (11.5 for a driving axle) for single axles, 19 for twin axles, and 24 for tripple axles. Vehicles with 2 axles are allowed to gross 18 metric tons, 3 axles 26 tons, and 4 or more axles 32 tons. The exception is trailers which are allowed to gross 36 metric tons if the axle distance is more than 7.2 meters. The most common combination here is truck-trailers, the truck with three axles and the trailer with four, grossing 60 metric tons with a length of 24 meters. There are also a fair number of trucks with two trailers in a B-train configuration usually carrying shipping containers, one 20 ft and one 40 ft, which are allowed to be 25.25 meters. The same is true with trailers pulled by trucks using a dolly.
This is a typical (north)european tractor-semi combination, if you forget about the mid-axle trailer at the end. I assume 1. and 3. axle on the truck are steering axles, and this would be the only steering on the entire vehicle. G®iffen 20:04, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
G®iffen 16:57, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
I think this article should be named "Tractor-trailer". A semitrailer is a unit towed by a tractor and requies the fifth-wheel of the tractor to support the front. A full trailer, of course, is completely self-supporting, like a semitrailer/dolly combination. Rsduhamel 19:29, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I think some or all of the information in the Construction section should be moved to the similar and more comprehensive Anatomy of a Truck section in Truck. Sticki 17:58, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Article should definitely be renamed. As stated in the first paragraph, "a semi-trailer is a trailer without a front axle". The article then goes onto describe trailers (including front axles) and trailer (semi or otherwise) and locomotive combinations called variously articulated lorries, road-trains or otherwise. The semi-trailer is therefore a component of an articulated lorry - so either separate articles are required, or the article should be renamed. It makes more sense to name the article for the whole and then talk about the components, rather than - as at present - name the article for a component and then go onto to talk about other components and the whole. Anon.
:Since it is apparent from this thread and below's that both "semi-trailer truck" and "semi-trailer" have separate and specific meanings, and that the bulk of the current article should be under
Semi-trailer truck, I have
requested such a move. "Semi-trailer" specific text can then be extracted and returned to the freed-up
Semi-trailer article space.
ENeville
05:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I would prefer an article name like Tractor-trailer truck (as a full name) over simply Tractor-trailer so as to make it clear we are talking about a type of truck, even though I understand most people in the business are too lazy to mention "truck" because the listeners in the business implicitly understand the talk is about trucks. Tractor-trailer could redirect to this this full name. Part of this problem is because there are many kinds of tractors and trailers, and tractor is hard to define exactly. I have no objection to the article staying at Semi-trailer truck. I do find the moniker "18-wheeler" to be an inaccurate name for all such trucks, because some do not have exactly 18 tires. I think 18-wheeler should be used for those that have 18 tires. H Padleckas 16:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
This article didnt have a proper definition of a semi-trailer (apart from a vague etymology near the end) so I've replaced the etymology with a precise definition right at the begining where it aught to be so that anyone reading this article knows exactly what a semi-trailer is. It's worded as follows;-
"A semi-trailer is a trailer without a front axle. A large proportion of its weight is supported either by a tractor or by a detachable front axle assembly known as a dolly. A semi-trailer is equipped with legs to support it when it is uncoupled."
Apgeraint
19:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
I believe that the title of this article is absolutely correct This article is needed to define exactly what a semi-trailer is.
What is wrong with this article is that there are some elements in it not pertaining to semi-trailers. It would be better to put these in seperate articles.
There also seems to be a general lack of knowledge of the jargon (and of the exact meaning of some of the jargon). Since this is an encyclopedia, the correct terminology should be used and need to be defined as to their precise meaning. Maybe I'll sort this out when I get round to it. In the past 35 years I have trucked all round Europe and also travelled several times to the USA, Canada and Australia taking Photos of trucks and talking to truck drivers. One thing I have learned is that the jargon is exactly the same all over the English speaking world. It's only those unaquainted with the industry that use different words in different parts of the world since they don't know the correct terminology.
Apgeraint
19:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Some ananymous user removed all about local differences. Is it vandalism, or did s/he put it somewhere else? I didn't like to rebuild it if there's a good explanation. G®iffen 14:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
In danish, this is a blokvogn, but what do you call it? Is there an article about it, or is it just another semi? In da: I've started an article about it, and de: has one more or less about the heavy goods itself here - well, at least that's what my rusty german tells me. G®iffen 17:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Whenever larger than this, they usually have a lowered "middle" section and either
on the semi. But yes, technically this is a 5-axle tractor and 11 axle semi. Notice semiaxles 1,2,3,4 and 6 are airlifted. I believe that the driver can configure which semiaxle is "the not steering" and the others will track according to their position compared to the tractor and the locked axle. I don't remember if this had split axles (I assume that is "one axle in each side" instead of the same axle connecting both sides?)
The unit loads 240 metric tonnes plus the vehicle itself... Usually the total weight of any vehicle+trailer can never (legally) be more than 48 tonnes in DK.
Not to be commercial, but the company that owns the truck has an english homepage [2] with quite a few pics, showing their extremes. I didn't see any dolly-combinations. They like to use one brand of module trailers, that can be put together long, wide or in "blocks" of 2,3 or 4 axles extra according to the job.
I guess the banner in the bottom of this site illustrates "your" dolly combination?
Well, I find wisdom every day ;) Eh... Actually I just still need to know if there's a general term for overload vehicles in english? Above the shown one is called a class 10 or maybe class 13. I assume it is a (something) class 10 or 13, where "something" could be like heavy carriage, oversize vehicle or some other term covering all or most types of vehicles built for transporting items larger/heavier than the standard? As example the danish term blokvogn also includes mobile (wheeled) cranes over 32 tonnes and some other heavy or wide special vehic's. I did notice the term "permitted vehicle", but one can permit a lot of things for different occasions, right? G®iffen 14:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Blok is more or less the same as the english block (like a block of stone). Vogn is any unmotorized vehicle pulled by external engine or animal. It probably refers to carrying large rocks for building purposes (?) G®iffen 16:13, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi! I came here looking for statistics on vehicle weight, cargo weight, and fuel efficiency. I was trying to calculate the cost and fuel efficiency of shipping goods via truck versus people in passenger vehicles driving to pick things up. Rummaging on Google I couldn't find anything with enough authority for me to add the numbers here, but if somebody finds those stats, they'd make a great addition to the article. Thanks, William Pietri 03:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I found this article: http://www.mountain-plains.org/pubs/html/mpc-03-152/pg8.php which has some of the details requested by Billy above. You're welcome, Captain Milktoast 00:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Captain Milktoast
Is this article about semi-trailer trucks (as titled)? Maybe I am reading this wrong, because I don't know this US English term first hand, but the title suggests that the article is about trucks insofar as they relate to semi-trailers. OK - I'm labouring this a little, but the article is (to my mind) titled about the truck itself (i.e. the prime mover or whatever else you want to call it). So what's all the stuff about trailers doing this article ? Trailer info is related useful info, but needs moving to somewhere else, no? Unless the article is retitled, that is. My preference is 'articulated lorry', but then, no doubt, others would say 'huh?' to that, just as I'm scratching my head about the current title. --!!!!
I was wondering if this link is OK or too commercial. Personally I would prefer to see it replaced by a video clip or photostring showing how a sideloader works? Besides it's uploaded by a user of the same name as the company... G®iffen 15:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
there are 3 different trials in Germany, one with only 40 metric tons, an other with 44tons and one with 60 tons maximum weight [Ecocombi#Deutschland] german wiki—The preceding [] unsigned comment was added by 82.82.134.218 ( talk) 21:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC).
I used to drive a truck in Alaska, and in the winter it could get extremly dangerous. I would like to know if anyone else ever had the promblem of the suspension freezing completely while parked overnight. This made my truck incredibly unsafe. Please let me know if you has this problem. =]
Thankyou, kind regards,
Zesty Prospect
17:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Why are they called "semi" trailers? Are they not full-sized trailers? —Ben FrantzDale ( talk) 12:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
In the United States: how come back in the 1970s and 1980s nearly all tractor-trailer trucks were built with the cab over the engine and steer wheels... yet during the 1990s and 2000s those disappeared, replaced by the engine and steer wheels being placed ahead of the cab? This seems to be a rather major change and I'm surprised it's not mentioned in the article. - Rolypolyman ( talk) 12:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
The statement "Contrary to the former article written on this topic, tandem setups are not restricted to certain roads anymore than a single setup. The exception are the units listed above. They are also not restricted because of weather or "difficulty" of operation.", sounds like an arguement that made it into the main article. At the minimum it does not sound encyclopedic nor up to wikipedia's standards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.221.111.43 ( talk) 21:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
The fifth picture in the article shows a truck with a full and partial trailer, calling it a 'Rocky Mountain Double.' This is an incorrect description as Rocky Mountain Doubles are trucks that haul 2 full trailers. This truck does have a double trailer, but if I am not mistaken, the term 'Rocky Mountain' refers to the fact that trucks with 2 full trailers are limited to operating in the Rocky Mountain states, whereas trucks like this one are allowed in most parts of the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.241.55.204 ( talk) 11:59, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
should it be mentioned that in some versions of the PowerRangers frnachise they use semis, in some cases for transport and such, and I think in other, the semi is actually one of the transforming giant robots? -- TiagoTiago ( talk) 21:01, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
In this section there are two subsections "Used in the United States:" and "Used elsewhere:". What's so special about the USA? -- Sigmundg ( talk) 17:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Would it be worth mentioning here about Shunt trucks seeing as they dont have their own Article? Exit2DOS2000• T• C• 09:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
It's pretty hard to get around the transport industry and never see a yard dog, especially in intermodal rail-yards and around sea-shipping ports. A lot of larger terminals have the 'shunt trucks' Exit described, strictly for the purpose of switching -- it's a lot faster and usually they'll have a tighter turn radius than even a single-drive axle tractor.
Yard jockey, mule, dog, mutt, etc. are common names -- a lot of times, however, the same term is applied to a simple small tractor for dragging trailers around the lot and in/out of a shop.
The yard dogs I've seen and worked on also had a good deal of ballast on the rear drive axles for extra traction, and usually axle locks of some sort. Cheers 184.153.196.39 ( talk) 05:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Nowhere in Wikipedia can I locate any reference to 'Rearward Amplification'. Suggest senior editors add this section. If you would like me to prepare this section, please let me know. Jeffrey Meade. -- Sponsion ( talk) 15:12, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Here are four references: (1) Stability and Highway Damage Rearward amplification — a tendency of additional trailers to magnify even small amounts of sway, such as that caused by a blustery crosswind, even when driven by experienced drivers.
Rearward amplification is caused by the tendency of dual wheeled vehicles to resist turning.
http://www.truckingvideo.com/safetytruck/stability/index.html
(2) ...automatic brake control system that could intervene -- only when needed -- to help suppress unwanted trailer oscillations (commonly referred to as rearward amplification) in large combination vehicles (typically double and triple trailer combination). ...development and demonstration of a so-called "trailer-only" RAMS (Rearward Amplification Suppression) system.
http://ntlsearch.bts.gov/tris/record/tris/00810959.html
(3) Sensitivity of rearward amplification control of a truck/full trailer to tyre (tire) cornering stiffness variations. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers -- Part D -- Journal of Automobile Engineering; 2001, Vol.
215 Issue 5, p579-588, 10p
Must use a library to access: http://connection.ebscohost.com/content/article/1019940654.html%3Bjsessionid=6EE34057EB01BAA8E36DF5523FC06BE7.ehctc1
(4) Highway/heavy vehicle interaction
By Douglas W. Harwood, Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis
...factors that contribute to increased lateral accelerations of the trailing units, the phenomenon known as rearward amplification, include the following:
http://books.google.com/books?
id=mi9Sny62Qj0C&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=Rearward+Amplificatio n&source=bl&ots=XNrXvbPEW_&sig=dm_qcNQ-atHhbGfLU4P- Cqvx6QM&hl=en&ei=kRQQSvrBBYjMM6vd9FI&sa=X&oi=book_result& ct=result&resnum=2
-- Sponsion ( talk) 15:00, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
In the transmission section of the page it is explicitly implied that constant mesh non-synchro gear boxes (like those from Eaton-Fuller) must be double clutched to shift. This is completely untrue as you can easily shift them without using the clutch. Pretty much any gear box with no syncros can be "float" shifted. You need the clutch to stop and start but you float the gerars up and down (although flot down shifting takes some practice). This misinformation has been spread out for a long time, I mainly hear it from European truck drivers. Synchro gear boxes cannot be floated as the gears simply cannot be pulled out of mesh while under any torque, I know because I have tried it on a synchro fuller gear box, GMC 4 speed synchro and a 6 speed synchro ZF gear box in a Dodge Ram.
Also of note is a clutch brake is also not necessary but it helps allot when starting from a dead stop (its only use). Since there are no synchros to match the speed of the counter shaft to the main shaft, a special brake is installed on the input shaft behind the clutch. When the clutch pedal is fully depressed, it stops the input and counter shafts from turning allowing one to shift into their take-off gear of choice. The brake is a pain to replace so when it wears out most don't bother to replace it until clutch work is necessary (that could be upward of a half-million miles or more depending on the driver). So the best way to cope with a worn out clutch brake is to fully disengage the clutch, wait a few seconds and gently ease the stick into gear. Sometimes this produces a grinding sound, most likely because the driver didn't wait for the shafts to slow and is shifting into gear too fast (those are sloppy drivers IMHO). And on a side note: There is/was a clutch brake on some Fuller's that operated by a switch on the stick. It used an air cylinder to press a brake pad like device onto the side of an input shaft gear. So again a clutch brake is technically not necessary at all and many have out well over a half million miles on their gear boxes without one.
I began driving in a GMC 6000 with a 350 Chevy gas engine and 4 speed gear box. It was tough to learn shifting the first few minutes but I quickly got used to it. It was easy to shift without the clutch: you bring up the RPM's to the shift point, wind it up a bit more, let off the accelerator and the stick easily slid out of gear and into the next gear. Years later the top plate cracked and the transmission needed to be rebuilt. It was discovered that the synchronizers were all burnt out (By a previous driver). They rebuilt the gear box and it was terrible to drive. Constantly needing to hit the clutch pedal for each shift is annoying (that truck was gutless so you were constantly going between 3rd and 4th.)
I feel bad for the European drivers who are stuck with those awful synchro gear boxes. Why they think they are superior to constant mesh is beyond me, maybe they are jealous ;-). Thaddeusw ( talk) 01:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps a little rewording on the use of the term 'tandem' is in order. Describing a trailer as having two tandem axles would mean it has 8 wheels...not such a common occurrence in my experience. Seems like the article has a lot of that ambiguity and poor terminology going on, however. 184.153.196.39 ( talk) 05:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
The second paragraph of this section looks very un-Wiki-like. Dkril ( talk) 18:24, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Licensing is one part of safety. Engineering a system so it stops unless it's operating is another. I came to this article looking for information about spiffy safety devices like radar, eye cameras, or whatever might be out there. What about GPS? Surely there are truck versions of GPS that take into account restrictions on various routes. -- ke4roh ( talk) 02:56, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm wondering where the use of the word "tractor" in this case, comes from.
69.171.160.90 ( talk) 19:06, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
The rear wheels on this truck has independent steering, otherwise it wouldn't be able turn corners. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 21:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Someone really needs to decide on one way to refer to the tractor/artic/prime mover/what have you--and then use it consistantly throughout the article. While hopping between them may feel inclusive, it is also somewhat annoying to read through and potentially very confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.68.160 ( talk) 13:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
The Lithuanian interwiki points to lt:Automobilvežis, apparently an article about car transporters (trucks that transport cars). I don't think this link is such a great idea. But I'll refrain from attempting to remove the link, since helpful robots and humans would return it anyway. -- Jmk ( talk) 11:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
This article could stand some proofreading, preferably from someone who has gone beyond Pidgin English. DCDuring ( talk) 18:13, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
A "truck and trailer" would be a strait truck pulling a trailer, not a semi. Where in the US is a semi called a "transfer truck"? "Mack" is a company name, not specific to semis, they make lots of strait trucks.
There is one wheel on each end of each axle, notes added.
Fraction implies a small part, doesn't it? With a "tandem" tractor and a two axle trailer, the tractor would carry close to half the weight, with a tandem tractor and single axle trailer the tractor could carry more than half the weight, with a single (rear) axle tractor and a two axle trailer the tractor could carry less than half the weight.
"with a strong internal beam connecting them to the cab" doesn't really make sense, does it?
Tires, eighteen wheels would be 9 axles.
Where do the feds restrict steer axle weight to less than 20,000#? 34,000# on the tractor tandem + 34,000# on the trailer tandem = 68,000#, leaving only 12,000# to the max gross of 80,000#, but you could still get there with 33,000# + 33,000# + 14,000#. If someone can find a federal (not state) law restricting steers to 12,000#, please put the second table back in.
Sammy D III ( talk) 18:52, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi. I have removed the deletion tag because a) I couldn't find any link to a discussion of the proposed deletion and b) because I sense the article is probably notable, but needs a cleanup rather than outright deletion. Views? -- Bermicourt ( talk) 11:47, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Actually, “double bottom” is in common use around here (Chicago). No idea where the “bottom” comes from, but it’s used. I have never heard of “a set” or “joints”, but I have never talked to a driver who drove one (only UPS uses them around here). I have never heard of a “dolly” called “con-gear”, but again, same qualification. This is all personal knowledge with no sources used now, but if someone can ref “joints” then I should be able to ref “bottoms”.
Transmissions are a mess. Macks come (came?) with 5 speeds standard. Where does “18 speeds” come from, a 5x4 has 20 total. I can think of no 18 speed combinations. (It is: 4 gears X 2 ranges = 8 speeds all split X 2 = 16 + low gear split X 2 = 18. Sorry Sammy D III ( talk) 03:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC)). Transmission numbers often refer to useful ratios instead of total possible. A 9 speed is a 5 speed with 2 ranges, for 10 gears. 1st is Low and not used in road work, the rest are numbered 1-4 (low range) and 5-8 (in the high range Low is not used). 8 + Low make 9 useful gears. Similarly, a 13 speed (once the standard of road tractors) has 5 speeds with two ranges and a “splitter” (used in high range only), total 20 gears, 12 + Low makes 13 useful gears. A “Super-10” sounds like a 5 speed/2 speed, sometimes the splitter is in the transmission, but more often you have a “two speed rear end” axle split the gears. I can source many transmissions from a Mack Operator’s Handbook.
If anyone cares, I can help some, but do not intend to rewrite it myself. Sammy D III ( talk) 15:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
In Transmission the word "constant mesh" is misused, it should be non synchronized. Constant mesh is an entirely different thing. Sammy D III ( talk) 17:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
In addition to "underride guards" at the rear, I have occasionally seen what appear to be "side guards" on some high-quality trailers, presumably to help protect against fatalities in side collisions and jackknifing accidents. The lack of such guards in a collision is particularly dangerous, because the bed of the trailer is at a height where the first contact with a passenger car may be at windshield level. This completely bypasses the bumper and engine compartment crush zones, and may fail to activate protective air bags in any effective manner. I have seen some chilling photos of the aftermath of such a collision, and think that a less-gory photo of this would still be very instructive to readers.
Does anybody have information on US requirements for rear or side guards, "grandfathering" rules for older equipment, or NAFTA free trade rules? Also, my understanding is that EU and Japanese rules have been much stricter than the US rules for decades. Additional information on standards (or lack thereof) in the rest of the world would be much appreciated. Also, any statistics on the number and rate of underride collisions and fatalities would be useful. Thank you, in behalf of inquiring minds. Reify-tech ( talk) 19:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Federal vehicle standards are here: [3]. 224 is rear impact, but 214 side impact applies to under 10,000# GVW. Heil [4], HilBilt [5], and Utility [6] all sell new trailers with no apparent side impact equipment (Fruehauf's site is "under construction"). Are you sure standards exist? Sammy D III ( talk) 21:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Trucks are commonly measured by wheels, 4x2, 4x4, etc. This system has two wheels per axle, single or dual tires do not matter. Combinations are often counted by axles. Laws appear to always count axles.
Some US west coast over the road truckers said “eighteen-wheeler” for their 5 axle combinations, referring to the number of tires. Local slang, sort of. Movies have made this nickname common, but other than that, tires are not often counted. This can be confusing.
Crismon(01) explains the wheel system in detail, I think pretty much everyone uses it. It is (number of wheels) x (number of powered wheels). RSA shows single and dual tires are the same. US laws use axle, with no mention of single or dual tires. Duals are prohibited on steer axles. Sammy D III ( talk) 03:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Since there is some debate, I looked back through the logs, and sure enough: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Semi-trailer_truck&direction=next&oldid=926680 License, not licence, and the whole article was flushed out without using the word "lorry". It's in AmE, not BrE, please refrain from changing it back. Cheers, ~~ipuser 90.194.62.161 ( talk) 22:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
It's not just a paragraph, it's a whole (quite substantial) section. Reading the UK section with American English jars significantly in a way that having it in the rest of the article does not. It would make sense to reiterate the terminology at the start of the section and use that within the section. I think it is appropriate (and educational) to include the regional terms in a larger section like this.~~Jonnyboy5
In the US "Gross Vehicle Weight Rating" (GVWR) is for a single vehicle. "Gross Combination Weight Rating" (GCWR) is for a truck or tractor with all trailers. The USDOT and these states use "combination" for vehicles and not "combined" for weight. [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28](defines GCW and GCWR) [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] (defines GCW and GCWR) [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47]. [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] These three states [57] [58] [59] use "combined" describing weight, but refers to vehicles as "combination". Sammy D III ( talk) 03:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I changed the article to US English, it is tagged that way and I think “truck” implies US or Australia. It seemed a mixture of US English, UK English, and English As A Second Language. (EDIT: It was only tagged 22 April 2015)
I changed dimensions to US converted to metric. If source was US, I used that. If it wasn't I converted it to US, rounded that, then posted as US convert to metric. Many of these numbers are close, but not exact. I did meters to 1 past the decimal, maybe some should be two. Someone from a metric place might know.
I deleted a lot of stuff, but I think it was largely just words, not info. I re-arranged, then combined duplicate stuff. Mostly cut and paste, then smooth. I only added a little. I corrected and/or tried to make clear some individual facts.
I think that "Europe" should go into "Scandavia, Finland and the Netherlands" and "the Netherlands" should go into "Contental Europe", which could become only "Europe", or maybe EU.
For what it's worth. Sammy D III ( talk) 03:42, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
I think I have the dimention source problem solved, forest through the trees. Just do them manually, using the "&.nbsp;" thing. There aren't all that many. If the source is English the first digit is correct. If the source is metric, enter that in back and round the first digit. Or can you footnote each European section about units? I don't know how to make that look good, but it certainly is a thought. Opinion? Thank you very much. Sammy D III ( talk) 14:37, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
171,000 on 17 axles with only two trailers. Wow.
I am thinking of sorting and condensing Europe into UK, Continental, and Scandinavia. Each seems to have it's own conditions, and the article sort of breaks that way already.
North America has a sub-section Trucks, Europe has the same type of info in the front, it just isn't called Trucks. Shouldn't they be the same, and what should they be called?
Objections? Comments? If I do something I will try to do it in big pieces so it will be easy to revert.
I am almost sixty years old, and I have never heard a semi-trailer truck called a "semi-truck." It can be a "semi" a "tractor," a "big rig," or a "truck." Where is the support or citation for "more commonly called a semi truck"? 40.134.106.218 ( talk) 16:13, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
On a similar note, I am Canadian, lived variously in four provinces, and I have absolutely never heard a semi-trailer called a "Transport", usually it is just a "semi", but also "semi-trailer", or occasionally a "big rig". 100.12.115.78 ( talk) 13:26, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Conventional 18-wheeler truck diagram.svg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 16, 2018. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2018-07-16. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 04:11, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
The numbered parts are:
Anybody know what the intended meaning of the 4th sentence is? "The reauires is that both the tractor and semi-trailer will have a design distinctly different..." I can't make heads-or-tails of it. 117.110.113.183 ( talk) 02:10, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
The article should explicitly state that semi trucks use diesel, not gasoline, if that's the case. It currently only implies it. Benjamin ( talk) 08:22, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
@ Motorracer: You'll need to scroll through each one of the three references to find the diagram the shows the maximum 23 m (75 ft 5+1⁄2 in) legal length of semi-trailer trucks allowed in three Canadian provinces and likely true in all of Canada because these rigs travel all over N. America and Mexico. In the US the equivalents in feet an inches are the rule.
Peter Horn
User talk 21:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Peter Horn
User talk 21:34, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
Peter Horn
User talk
21:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
@
Peter Horn: The references should be in relation to something in the body, otherwise what's stopping this from becoming a mammoth list that includes dimensions from every country? Wikipedia isn't an America-centric website and semitrailers are used globally. Wikipedia isn't a list, nor is it a list of links.
Motorracer (
talk)
22:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
A certain semiliterate User:Oliver Gunn introdced this attrocety KG, 44,000KG (97,003 pound), in the Semi-trailer truck Revision as of 2020-05-08T09:18:05 Peter Horn User talk 03:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
I came to this article hoping to find information about the origins of the Tractor-trailer as a significant cargo hauler and was disappointed. I guess if I want to know more about the earliest days of trucking I'll need to look elsewhere -- but I fear it'll turn out the subject is not well documented anywhere. This was my experience when I wanted to learn more about the Red Ball Express.
I'm not complaining -- Wikipedia is what we make it -- but I wanted to put out there that I think information about this part of this subject is lacking in the hope of fomenting some interest. jhf ( talk) 00:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Some of the measures seem inefficient. Is there a reason why some parts reference thousands of kilograms instead of tonnes? 44,000kg is much easier written as 44t ~~Jonnyboy5
Hello! So at the top of the page, it basically says "any term you could think of that means semi-trailer truck redirects here, you might be looking for this instead". I think we should reduce the amount of terms listed at the top of the page. Any ideas? ― Blaze The Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:23, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
I've lived all my six decades in Canada, the US, and the Carribean, and never used "semi", always 18 wheeler, and barely heard semi.
The word should at a minimum be present in the article. In a Google search, there's 5+ million entries for 18 wheeler and 9+ million entries for semi trailer.
Furthermore, there exists a disambiguation page for 18 wheeler, which speaks of Semi trailers, but does not link to this article?! Tallard ( talk) 04:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)