trailer question.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

trailer question.

parklane · St THOMAS, ONT

The biggest advantage of a beaver tail is that it will be lower at the rear. That way you can use shorter ramps, and the car/truck will not have such a steep incline. Also if the loading unit is low, there is less chance of it bottoming out going over the hump.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

that's what i thought, but the guy at the trailer lot was telling me the opposite ! it would make sense that you would have a gentler transition with the beaver tail especially with the 5 ft ramps. i think the same would hold true in getting the 14" wheels as opposed to the optional 15's. to me, the opinions here are much more valid than those of a salesman.

shag766 · FOXBORO, ONT

parklane wrote:
The biggest advantage of a beaver tail is that it will be lower at the rear. That way you can use shorter ramps, and the car/truck will not have such a steep incline. Also if the loading unit is low, there is less chance of it bottoming out going over the hump.

pretty much what he says. the biggest variable would be how high is the flat one off the ground. my flat one is about 16-18" max off the ground and i have no problems on and off with 5 ft ramps. the beaver tail one is to big of a trailer for cars with headers and stuff hung low. i have damaged header collectors and electric dumps getting over the hump. ouch.

Seeker1056 · DOURO, ONT

unless the beaver tail is ridiculously steep it is the way to go in most cases as it is less of an incline than a flat trailer

toomuchjunk · S/W ONTARIO

I had a flat trailer,it was a pain in the rear.
A few times I got hung up with the front wheels of the loaded car on the trailer and the back wheels on the ramps.
Then you end up using a jack under the front of the trailer to lower the rear of the trailer.
Then what happens is you have taken weight off the rear of the pickup you are using to pull the trailer.
Without the required weight on the truck rear axle the whole thing (truck, trailer and loaded car)will take off on you.
I think there is a vid about this happening to someone
TMJ

RWW · PICTON, ONT

I personally like the look of a flat trailer. Mine has 5 foot ramps and I have no problems. But mine drags the ground enough as it is on some driveways and I think a beaver tail would be worse. What it all boils down to is what your hauling (your car and ride height), where your hauling it (ground clearance at gas stations etc). Sometimes the beavertail is used to overcome a high trailer ? I like to keep the load low to the ground with just enough height to open the doors over the fenders. There are always pros and cons. Pic the trailer that best fits "your needs".

Here's mine.

-- Edited by RWW on Wednesday 8th of April 2015 11:44:05 AM

teejay99 · BELLE RIVER, ONT

I'm retired from Leisure Trailers ( Windsor ) now , but I would suggest a free phone call to JIM RAYMOND , one of the owners and a racer/ car guy . Get free advice 1-800-363-8925 . Leave a message if he isn't there or ask for his email if you get someone else on the line . Another guy , J T Raymond is very knowlegeable too . Good Luck .

T

-- Edited by teejay99 on Wednesday 8th of April 2015 12:04:43 PM

henry · CORNWALL, ONT

A flat hydraulic tilt & load with ramps...... allows low front bumpers to clear and adjustable angles to clear headers when pulled up with the winch. Slow, accurate and painless one man operation.

427CARL · CLINTON, ONT

I like a air ride trailer don't need no stinking ramps biggrin

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Mines an all aluminium R&R with a beaver tail. low centre of gravity, can open the doors, torsion [twist] axels, & tows like a dream empty or loaded, no banging & crashing while empty!!!! 5' ramps & has support jacks at back to stop "lifting" the tow vehicle wheels off the ground when loading!!! Not balanced out in this photo

Cat in the Hat · BRANTFORD, ONT

Here is one i built with surge disc brakes

it must have been nice. It was stolen

parklane · St THOMAS, ONT

My car hauler is a 20' with a 4' beaver tail. Also have a tilt bed for something really low, but it's a 7 ton unit we haul a skid steer with.

RWW · PICTON, ONT

427CARL wrote:
I like a air ride trailer don't need no stinking ramps

And you also don't open the car doors. Nice to load , but …………………………..

Fordy Acres Car Farm · DORCHESTER, ONT

You can air that trailer up with a remote key fob, once loaded and therefore open the car door. I like the concept, but would be concerned about the capacity the one shown is capable of - not that you couldn't double up on the structure and add another set of brakes.
Also the trailer is laid flat out but not hooked up to a tow vehicle - any time you think you'd save on setting up a pair of ramps would be negated having to unhook each time .... Hmmmm....

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

OK , what happens if you loose air pressure while towing???? Big spark show I would think!!!! + you'd need to take a compressor, & generator with you, more weight to carry on top of load??? Kool idea though.

shag766 · FOXBORO, ONT

studeshaker wrote:
what are the pros and cons of a beaver tail vs a flat rear on an open car hauler ?

if you have a choice i would go torsion suspension over springs

parklane · St THOMAS, ONT

shag766 wrote:
studeshaker wrote:
what are the pros and cons of a beaver tail vs a flat rear on an open car hauler ?
if you have a choice i would go torsion suspension over springs

But then it rides like a POS when empty.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

NOT SO!!!! my trailer has Torsion suspension & you can't tell it's behind you when "empty" as compared to old one with springs, banging a crashing on every bump "empty" difference is unbelievable, had to keep checking mirrors when I brought it home to make sure it was still there!!!!

Smokin Joe · ONTARIO

Go to General Axle in Brampton and they will make you what ever type of axle you may need. For a car trailer get a drop axle no muss no fuss. They are cheaper than Princess Autos big sale price and you should also get slipper springs then no more bushing and shackle problems.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

pulled the trigger and bought a new 18 ft with 2 ft beavertail. gettin' ready for the first armdrop may 23. might bring the chevelle home on it too.

Ragtop · BELLE RIVER, ONT

427CARL wrote:
I like a air ride trailer don't need no stinking ramps Now that's a trailer I could get my coupe on.

IR Mechanik · INGERSOLL, ONT

The flat deck is a bit of a pain due to the longer ramps but I like mine. It has stake pockets on the side so I built 3' lift off sides so I can load it up with junk for my yearly scrap run. Mine gets used for hauling just about everything but cars.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

got a winch coming for it this week - cuz believe it or not sometimes racecars do break. lol.

Ranch71460 · CALGARY, AB

Here is my home built trailer with the Ranchero loaded for the Calgary World of Wheels in February 2011.

I drew it up and had my welders build it in late 2003. The frame is 2"x6"x1/4" HSS around the perimeter and 2"x4"x1/4" HSS inside the wood surface.

The wood is 2"x4" tongue and groove pine. It has a 20' deck including the beaver tail, 6,000 lb drop axles on springs. Since this pic was taken I've added

heavy duty steel casters under the rear on the frame corners to help it into driveways without dragging.

The ramps are formed of 1/4" aluminum checker plate and store between the decks behind the rear axle.

First job it did was bring my Ranchero home to Calgary from Saskatchewan in January 2004 to begin the restoration.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

nice job.

dualquadpete · BLACKSTOCK, ONT

Agree with Doug, Nice Job!!! Here in Onterrible, you'd get "dinged" on the rear strap set up, they have to be 'crossed" same as your safety chains, or your "open" for a ticket if they feel deemed to do so!!! Cash grab if nothing else!!!!

Ranch71460 · CALGARY, AB

dualquadpete wrote:
Agree with Doug, Nice Job!!! Here in Onterrible, you'd get "dinged" on the rear strap set up, they have to be 'crossed" same as your safety chains, or your "open" for a ticket if they feel deemed to do so!!! Cash grab if nothing else!!!!

Wow. I've trailered the Ranchero different times from Calgary to Winnipeg Man., Swift Current Sask., Edmonton, Medicine Hat, Red Deer Ab., Vancouver, Mission B.C., Spokane Washington, Billings, Great Falls, Missoula, Montana.

I even picked up a parts car near Des Moines Iowa and brought it to Calgary when I was building my car.

I've never had an issue.

The front tie offs are safety hooked lengths of 3/8 load chain, and the rear straps do angle in opposing directions and are shackled to welded tie down rings on the bumper brackets.

henry · CORNWALL, ONT

what trailer?
Can't see the trailer for the awesome Ford !

Fordy Acres Car Farm · DORCHESTER, ONT

dualquadpete wrote:
Agree with Doug, Nice Job!!! Here in Onterrible, you'd get "dinged" on the rear strap set up, they have to be 'crossed" same as your safety chains, or your "open" for a ticket if they feel deemed to do so!!! Cash grab if nothing else!!!!

Are you sure? I've heard both crossed and uncrossed are correct procedures many times and have hooked up my tie downs each way too, but I've never been able to find a document that demonstrates exactly which way is correct. Here's what I found:

Print Download Browse laws

Highway Traffic Act
Code de la route

ONTARIO REGULATION 363/04

SECURITY OF LOADS

Consolidation Period: From July 1, 2012 to the e-Laws currency date.

Last amendment: O. Reg. 165/12.

This Regulation is made in English only.

PART 1
GENERAL

Interpretation

1. (1) In this Regulation,

“commercial motor vehicle” includes a combination of a commercial motor vehicle and a trailer or trailers;

“gross combination weight rating”, in respect of a combination of a commercial motor vehicle and a trailer or trailers means the greatest of,

(a) the total of the gross vehicle weight of the commercial motor vehicle and the greater of the manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating and the gross vehicle weight of each trailer and trailer converter dolly in the combination,

(b) the total of the manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating of the commercial motor vehicle and the greater of the manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating and the gross vehicle weight of each trailer and trailer converter dolly in the combination, and

(c) the total of the registered gross weight of the commercial motor vehicle and the greater of the manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating and the gross vehicle weight of each trailer and trailer converter dolly included in the combination;

“gross vehicle weight” means the total weight in kilograms transmitted to the highway by a vehicle, or combination of vehicles, and load;

“National Standard” means the National Safety Code Standard 10 entitled “Cargo Securement”, published by the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators and dated September 2010, as amended from time to time and available on the Ministry’s website. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 1 (1); O. Reg. 165/12, s. 1.

(2) For the purposes of this Regulation,

(a) terms used in this Regulation and defined in the National Standard have the same meaning as in the National Standard;

(b) except in the term “working load limit”, the term “load” has the same meaning as “cargo” in the National Standard. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 1 (2).

Compliance with National Standard

2. (1) Every commercial motor vehicle carrying a load on a highway must be in compliance with Division 3 (Requirements for Cargo Securement System) and Division 4 (Tiedowns) of Part 1 of the National Standard. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 2 (1).

(2) A tiedown or securing device that is marked by its manufacturer shall be deemed to have a working load limit equal to the working load limit determined in accordance with the National Standard. O. Reg. 165/12, s. 2.

(3) A tiedown or securing device that is not marked by its manufacturer shall be deemed to have a working load limit equal to zero. O. Reg. 165/12, s. 2.

Permit load securement conditions prevail

3. A vehicle carrying a load on a highway under the authority of a permit issued under section 110 of the Act that contains load securement requirements that conflict with any requirements of this Regulation must be in compliance with the permit requirements and not with the conflicting requirements of this Regulation. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 3.

PART 2
COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OF 4,500 KILOGRAMS OR LESS

Application of Part

4. This Part applies to commercial motor vehicles for which each of the gross vehicle weight, registered gross weight, manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating and gross combination weight rating is 4,500 kilograms or less. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 4.

Securement of load

5. (1) A load carried on a commercial motor vehicle on a highway must be secured by means of,

(a) sides, sideboards or stakes and rear stakes, endgate or endboard that,

(i) are securely attached to the vehicle,

(ii) are strong enough and high enough to ensure that the load will not shift on or fall from the vehicle, and

(iii) have no opening large enough to permit any of the load to pass through;

(b) at least one tiedown that meets the requirements of subsection 2 (1) for each 3.04 linear metres of lading or fraction thereof, and as many additional tiedowns that meet the requirements of subsection 2 (1) as are necessary to secure each part of the load, either by direct contact between the load and the tiedown or by contact between the load and dunnage; or

(c) any other means that prevents a load from shifting or falling that is similar to and at least as effective as the means specified in clause (a) or (b). O. Reg. 363/04, s. 5 (1).

(2) A tiedown or dunnage in contact with exterior, topmost items of a load and securely holding each interior and lower item shall be deemed to comply with the requirements for contact in clause (1) (b). O. Reg. 363/04, s. 5 (2).

(3) If the load may shift in transit, the load must be blocked, restrained or contained in such a manner that it will not shift in a forward direction when the vehicle decelerates at a rate of six metres per second per second or more and must be,

(a) securely blocked or braced against the sides, sideboards or stakes of the vehicle; or

(b) secured by devices that conform to the requirements set out in clause (1) (b) or (c). O. Reg. 363/04, s. 5 (3).

(4) This section does not apply to,

(a) a vehicle carrying a load that, because of its size, shape or weight, must be carried on a special-purpose vehicle or must be fastened by special methods, if the load is securely and adequately fastened to the vehicle; or

(b) a motor vehicle or road-building machine operated by or on behalf of an authority having jurisdiction and control of a highway while the vehicle or machine is engaged in construction, maintenance or marking activities. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 5 (4).

Tiedowns

6. (1) The working load limit of a tiedown shall be deemed to be the working load limit of its weakest component. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 6 (1).

(2) Revoked: O. Reg. 165/12, s. 3.

(3) The strength of anchor points must be at least as strong as the tiedown when the connector is loaded in any direction in which the tiedown may load it. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 6 (3).

(4) A tiedown shall not be used if,

(a) the active portion has knots in it;

(b) any component of it exhibits stretch, deformation, wear or damage beyond the limits specified by the manufacturer; or

(c) it has been repaired or shortened other than in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 6 (4).

(5) Where an “over-the-centre” type of tiedown tensioner is used, the handle must be locked in place and secured by an adequate secondary means to prevent its inadvertent release. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 6 (5).

(6) Except in the case of steel, fibre or synthetic strapping that is permanently crimped, tiedowns used on a commercial motor vehicle to secure the load against movement in any direction must be designed, constructed and maintained in such a manner that the driver of the vehicle can tighten the tiedown in transit. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 6 (6).

Material used for load securement

7. Material used on or in a vehicle as dunnage, chocks or cradles or for blocking or bracing must be strong enough that it will not be split or crushed by the load or the tiedowns. O. Reg. 165/12, s. 4.

PART 3
COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OVER 4,500 KILOGRAMS

Application of Part

8. This Part applies to commercial motor vehicles having a gross vehicle weight, registered gross weight, manufacturer’s gross vehicle weight rating or gross combination weight rating exceeding 4,500 kilograms. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 8.

Compliance with National Standard

9. (1) Every commercial motor vehicle carrying a load on a highway must be in compliance with Part 1 of the National Standard. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 9 (1).

(2) Every commercial motor vehicle on a highway carrying a load that is described in Division 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 of Part 2 of the National Standard must be in compliance with that Part. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 9 (2).

Inspection

10. Every driver of a commercial motor vehicle operating on a highway shall inspect the vehicle as prescribed by Part 1 of the National Standard. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 10.

Exemption

11. Subsections 5 (1) and (2) and section 9 of the National Standard do not apply to,

(a) a vehicle carrying a load that, because of its size, shape or weight, must be carried on a special-purpose vehicle or must be fastened by special methods, if the load is securely and adequately fastened to the vehicle; or

(b) a motor vehicle or road-building machine operated by or on behalf of an authority having jurisdiction and control of a highway while the vehicle or machine is engaged in construction, maintenance or marking activities. O. Reg. 363/04, s. 11.

12. Omitted (revokes other Regulations). O. Reg. 363/04, s. 12.

13. Omitted (provides for coming into force of provisions of this Regulation). O. Reg. 363/04, s. 13.

studeshaker · BUCKHORN, ONT

i'm pretty sure pete is correct. the guys where i bought the trailer stressed that to me.

RWW · PICTON, ONT

I don't know who is right or wrong about the placement of the straps. I've been told that if the straps are crossed they will not hold as much because they are designed for a straight pull, also you have a chance of them rubbing each other causing wear and failure.

I have been told the MTO wants them crossed but I thought I read on am MTO site a while ago there was a weight involved and above the posted weight the load had to be secured sideways . When they are delivering new cars on a carrier the transport company doesn't have them cross tied.

Another thing I was told by a guy that got pulled over was the MTO wanted a side rail to stop the load from sliding over the side. I should stop and see the MTO and get the facts straight so I know for sure who's right and who's wrong.

When it's all said and done the guy that pulls you over seems t have the final say.

Barchetta · TORONTO, ONT

There is clearly some confusion regarding whether or not to cross the straps when hauling cars. I don't have the correct answer as I don't have or use a car trailer. However, the way I would handle this potential issue would be to email this question directly to the MTO (specifically an email, so the emailed answer is documented and printable). Then it's simply a matter of printing out the emailed answer and keeping it in your glove box. If you get pulled over, show the copy of the answer and the laws interpretation won't be left to the person who pulled you over.

I printed out an emailed answer from the MOE regarding an upcoming engine swap, this way I know exactly what is required as far as emission controls, specific to the engine and chassis I am using. i now have the document to prove the correct interpretation of the law, in the event that I am ever pulled over and the person hoping to write a ticket has a different opinion. Nothing like having a letter handy that came directly from his boss, if you need to correct him biggrin

-- Edited by Barchetta on Thursday 4th of June 2015 08:19:42 AM

RacerRick · TORONTO, ONT

When I had a ramp truck, I always used 5000lb straps designed for hauling cars and crossed them because that was how the hold downs on my truck were designed. MTO stopped me several times during their blitz's and never gave me a minutes trouble about the straps.

When I had a trailer, I didn't cross the straps because the hold downs were designed for a straight pull out from the corners. Never had a minutes trouble with the MTO on that one either.

I think the trick is to have the proper automotive straps, and the straps are clean and in good shape. I always had goods straps and never had a problem.

RWW · PICTON, ONT

RacerRick wrote:
When I had a ramp truck, I always used 5000lb straps designed for hauling cars and crossed them because that was how the hold downs on my truck were designed. MTO stopped me several times during their blitz's and never gave me a minutes trouble about the straps.

When I had a trailer, I didn't cross the straps because the hold downs were designed for a straight pull out from the corners. Never had a minutes trouble with the MTO on that one either.

I think the trick is to have the proper automotive straps, and the straps are clean and in good shape. I always had goods straps and never had a problem.

The above sounds right too me. I really think what it boils down to is the straps or chains are of the correct strength and the load is secure.

PART 1 GENERAL

Interpretation

Compliance with National Standard

Permit load securement conditions prevail

PART 2 COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OF 4,500 KILOGRAMS OR LESS

Application of Part

Securement of load

Tiedowns

Material used for load securement

PART 3 COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OVER 4,500 KILOGRAMS

Application of Part

Compliance with National Standard

Inspection

Exemption

PART 1
GENERAL

PART 2
COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OF 4,500 KILOGRAMS OR LESS

PART 3
COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES OVER 4,500 KILOGRAMS