1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194 
Converted without our input
Page 26
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
HAVING SEEN your news item headed "Rail wagons find it's a bridge to jar" (CM 24 June) 1 felt I should contact you with regard to the Scania vehicle shown and allay any fears that operators may feel after reading your comment about the chassis seeming to have snapped.
This vehicle started life as a 4x2 tractor and has now obviously been stretched and had a third axle fitted.
From the picture it would appear that,contrary to our standard recommendations for vehicle mounted cranes, a full-length subframe has not been fitted.
It should also be noted that a 4x2 Scania would have an fimmthick frame whereas a 6x2 would have 9.5mm. Having checked our records this vehicle was sold as a 4x2 tractor in January this year and neither Scania or any of our agents were involved with the conversion and therefore cannot comment on what, if any, frame reinforcement was carried out when the wheelbase was increased and the third axle fitted.
Clive Burnet Technical manager (trucks) Scania GB