1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Olive Branch, MS
    Posts
    78

    Default high side storage on a pumper-tanker

    We are in the process of purchasing a new truck. We are getting a two door commercial chassis with a 1250 gpm pump and 3,000 gallon tank. We want the truck to have high side storage on the drivers side and low side storage on the passenger side, just like most traditional pumpers. We have specified that this is what we want to all bidders. The problem that we have ran into is that two of the three bids that we have received is pretty much what seems like to me a body that has two low sides and they will install four compartments with roll up doors on the drivers side railing. I asked about this and was told that a truck that carries this much weight needs to have space in between lower and high side compartments so that the compartments are able to flex and shift whenever the body moves to prevent damage to the doors as well as the body.
    This makes no sense to me. I might be wrong but what it seems like to me is that these companies build alot of double low side tankers and have plenty of these bodies laying around already built. So in turn what they are gonna do is take that body go to their local tractor supply, buy a four door storage bin and diamond plate it then throw it on the side of my truck and sell it to me for double what they sell regular 3,000 gallon tankers for.
    Has anyone ran into this issue when trying to spec out a pumper-tanker?

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Who are your bidders on this project?

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    Tim1118's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    126

    Default

    I've never heard of this. Space between the body/pumphouse/cab I can understand, but I'm a little leary about their reasoning. I would get some other opinions from other builders if you can.
    TruckCommittee.com

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mississippi
    Posts
    102

    Default

    Off the top of my head, I would say the tank is a T-Style, which would be attached separate from the lower compartments. I could see leaving some space to prevent the tank from flexing on the lower compartments. Really at 3000 gallons your building a tanker and upfitting it to become a pumper. I also assume this is a tandem axle chassis as well. If you look at the UPF website, you can see what the tank looks like, and get a better idea what I'm talking about.

  5. #5
    Let's talk fire trucks!
    BoxAlarm187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,312

    Default

    I am a little suspicious also. While a majority of the high-capacity tankers are built with lower compartments only, it's not that unusual to see them with highsides also.

    Are these local/regional builders, or national builders that are telling you this?

    For what it's worth, here's one I found with highsides, but it is carrying "only" 2500 gallons. I'm not sure if Brand P is one of your bidders or not...

    Career Fire Captain
    Volunteer Chief Officer


    Never taking for granted that I'm privileged enough to have the greatest job in the world!

  6. #6
    ...
    ... is offline
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    420

    Default

    Could it be brand "F"?

  7. #7
    ...
    ... is offline
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    420
    Last edited by FireRescue61; 07-17-2010 at 04:40 PM.

  8. #8
    Savage / Hyneman 08'

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    450

    Default

    I have not seen this from the numerous builders we had talked to about our pumper / tanker specs. High sides on both sides and the body was one piece from top to bottom, no low sides with bolt ons.

    Looked exactly like the body on the above pictured Christiansburg pumper / tanker.
    We do not rise to the occasion. We fall back to our level of training.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    306

    Default

    This one is from 4 Guys but is on a custom chassis with a 2000 gallon tank but the body style may work for what you want.

    http://www.4guysfire.com/bigbeaver.htm
    Last edited by ejfeicht; 07-17-2010 at 08:59 PM.

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber
    npfd801's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Somewhere in Illinois
    Posts
    2,220

    Default

    I'm posting this one because I'm familar with it, not to push the brand. Any number of reputable builders can do integrated, "single" piece high sides on an apparatus with that much water.

    The custom cab and enclosed panel is irrelevant, but the high sides with the 3000 gallons doesn't appear to be impossible.

    http://www.toyne.com/delivery.asp?na...veries&did=287
    "Share your knowledge - it's a way to achieve immortality." - Stolen from Chase Sargent's Buddy to Boss program

  11. #11
    ...
    ... is offline
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    420

    Default

    Here is a Toyne commercial pumper/tanker. It has a 2,500 gallon tank, but they build some with 3,000 gallon tanks on commercial chassis.

    http://www.toyne.com/delivery.asp?na...iveries&did=93
    Last edited by FireRescue61; 07-17-2010 at 11:19 PM.

  12. #12
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    165

    Default

    My guess is that the unit proposed to the dept was poly wet side tank, or someones stock unit that had low sides both of which they would "add" a section of compartments on top of. I've seem pics of that kind of unit from some of the low cost tanker builders (didnt wanna say cheap).

    The explanation of "weight" issue seems odd to me.

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    4,249

    Default

    This thread (Show us what you got w/your grant!) has a few pumper-tankers with high sides in it, including ours on the page that's linked.

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Spartan/ Saulsbury 8 man cab 3000 gal tank 2000 gpm , class A & B foam tanks 50 gal each
    Attached Images Attached Images    

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    SFD_E73_RET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    KC area
    Posts
    302

    Default

    Here is a Toyne close to me.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    441

    Default

    Biggest single vehicle safety issue for fire service and FF is tankers rollover. In particular, commercial cab.

    On a big tanker get the roll stability control system. They work and a huge safety improvement. On commercial cab IH has out now and not that expensive. Frtliner says will have coming soon (whatever that means).

    And get 1901 tilt table certification. The 1901 math/calculation method apparently is already becoming meaningless BS by those who can't afford to buy a tilt table and won't spend a few $ testing to prove their designs are safe. By “coincidence” the mfg that don’t tilt table are the same ones that have draftsmen “designing” trucks not REAL engineers doing REAL R&D. Stack the two factors and what do you get?

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    165

    Default

    youd have to specify the tilt test. just 'cuz a manufacturer has access to one doesnt mean they use it. Dont think they tilt every unit that rolls out the door, they DONT. Damn few get tilted. When on an inspection visit i witnessed a tilt test. The pumper was one of a multiple unit order that required tilt test. They tested one and said the others will be the same, so doing the one was enough.

    More and more are getting stability control systems anyway and the manufactures arent going to spend bucks tilting a unit the has esc.

  18. #18
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    165

    Default

    (By “coincidence” the mfg that don’t tilt table are the same ones that have draftsmen “designing” trucks not REAL engineers doing REAL R&D. Stack the two factors and what do you get? )

    Seagrave doesnt have real engineers?

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fireinfo10 View Post
    Biggest single vehicle safety issue for fire service and FF is tankers rollover. In particular, commercial cab.

    On a big tanker get the roll stability control system. They work and a huge safety improvement. On commercial cab IH has out now and not that expensive. Frtliner says will have coming soon (whatever that means).

    And get 1901 tilt table certification. The 1901 math/calculation method apparently is already becoming meaningless BS by those who can't afford to buy a tilt table and won't spend a few $ testing to prove their designs are safe. By “coincidence” the mfg that don’t tilt table are the same ones that have draftsmen “designing” trucks not REAL engineers doing REAL R&D. Stack the two factors and what do you get?
    Here's another idea. KEEP THE RIG IN THE ROAD. Most of 'em DO NOT roll until they hit the shoulder. No amount of Electronics will save your azz once that RF hooks the edge. Bend down and kiss it goodbye. T.C.

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    31

    Default

    I will be going in the middle of september to pick up exactly what you are looking for from southern apparatus. We ordered a four door freightliner chassi, with a 1250 gpm pump, and a 3000 gal. tank. wanted highside dry side. When we bid the truck out it was between them and deep south which does just a good of truck.

  21. #21
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Here is a two door commercial Chassis with a 3000 tank and a 750gpm hale pump.. http://www.bluegrassfireapparatus.com/display.asp?ID=87

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 05-25-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-26-2005, 10:30 PM
  2. 05 Grant Pumper Tanker for Rural VFD
    By SamsonFCDES in forum Federal FIRE ACT Grants & Funding
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-26-2005, 09:40 PM
  3. Top Mount or Side mount pumper?????
    By CVFD26 in forum Volunteer Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-13-2000, 10:32 PM
  4. 1500 gallon pumper tanker
    By tmr91 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-10-2000, 11:08 AM
  5. Pumper, Tanker, Pumper/Tanker, or what?
    By phyrngn in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-23-1999, 10:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register