Kaufman Trailers:

[1693TA]

I'm not going to say I'm in favor of partnerships in any shape or form. I've done most of my professional life in a "sole proprietor" type atmosphere citing this belief. This venture however is not to be operated with the motivation of being a "for profit" type arena and I hope the responding parties are not thinking this is to be operated as a profitable entity. It is to be an "as needed" service that is not profit based.

I look at things a bit different as I know the parties involved but each are willing to expend a small amount now to lessen their burdens into the future. The purchase of a new trailer fitting the needs and upkeep spread up to four ways looks inviting if it can be made to work.

Lots still to hammer out and I enjoy reading other perspectives. I'm of the position if someone wanted out, they would be cashed out and involvement terminated without delay. At that time the LLC would be purchasing the outstanding 1/4, (instance) of a used trailer.

 

[1693TA]

You say you don't want to start a trucking business, but that's exactly what you are doing. With three other partners. I have no idea why any of those three would want to partner with you, and assume the liabilities of wiping out a school bus with a old mack truck. When right now they just call someone else and its X $'s per mile from one place to the other and the trucking firm takes the liabilities, and break downs and risk.

Who buys the tires?, who buys the insurance? who buys the engine or rear end?

Instead of one guy going into trucking, now we're talking about 4 guys going into trucking together. No one wants to invest that kind of money into a trailer without it working and making $$$. And I don't see the other investors, wanting their half million dollar combines delivered by a 1976 Mack. Because they are partners now, and your truck becomes the face of their company, vs just contract hiring.

Get a newer daycab and your new trailer if you want. With what the insurance is going to cost, I think you will need to truck all the time to make it work.

But I still can't see why the dealerships would ever want to invest in a new trailer and a new trucking company and all that risk, for your hobby retirement job. When right now, they can just pass that cost right on to the customers, hiring it done.

Opposing views are both expected, and welcomed; thank you.

I don't do anything with debt and haven't in over 30 years. Not going to change and/or deviate that course at all. This is a way to ensure all involved have an interest in making it work. Expenses will be borne by each involved party and split accordingly through accurate accounting.

 

[Truck Shop]

My air tag is a Witzco, new in 2020. Aside from the ramp assist springs that don't last more than a couple months, I haven't had issues, but I probably only run a couple thousand miles a year.

What should I be keeping an eye on?

I'm referring to RNG type-those have to be watched for cracking on super structure and around
suspension.

 

[Acoals]

This venture however is not to be operated with the motivation of being a "for profit" type arena and I hope the responding parties are not thinking this is to be operated as a profitable entity.

That's an expensive hobby . . .

 

[1693TA]

That's an expensive hobby . . .

My hobby has been heavy trucks, (Mack) for a lot of years, but sometimes shelter from the storm is beneficial.

 

[crane operator]

That's an expensive hobby . . .

Amen brother, preach. I've got no interest in doing investing, and exposure to risk, that we're not making money on. I sure don't need the practice.

Every football game has ads from 3 different lawyers, looking for people involved in accidents with trucking companies.

I can see a trailer for hauling around show trucks or antique tractors, if that's your hobby. But I don't see any way shape or form that this makes sense. I must be missing something.

Why would any or all of them want to expose themselves to the risk of a trucking company, and not make any money doing it? i.e. support your hobby.

 

[crane operator]

Maybe I should state this a different way. I think if you want to have a trailer, and haul combines and equipment, that's a great opportunity, and might be a nice semi retirement job.

I just think the whole partnership/LLC/ 4 different investors and splitting costs 4 ways, is dumb, and a recipe for disaster.

 

[Oxbow]

Maybe I should state this a different way. I think if you want to have a trailer, and haul combines and equipment, that's a great opportunity, and might be a nice semi retirement job.

I just think the whole partnership/LLC/ 4 different investors and splitting costs 4 ways, is dumb, and a recipe for disaster.

About the only advantage that I can see versus just buying the trailer and hauling for them is that they are somewhat captive and "should" use him exclusively as long as rates didn't get out of hand.

Were I in the dealership's position though I would prefer to just hire outside trucking and pass it on to the customer if I thought there was too much overhead in owning their own. Kind of like our business; we really don't make anything to speak of off our trucks relative to the hassle of owning one, but the cost savings in support of our business in convenience alone is worth a lot, just hard to put a number on it.

 

[Truck Shop]

With my years of experience in the trucking business covering most types of hauling, IMO.
It's bad enough running OTR with all late equipment, it's bad enough with construction rigs,
but hauling/moving oversized over width with the types of a$$hole drivers on the roads these
days--the lability is much higher than just 5 to 8 years ago. Only takes one.

 

[Acoals]

we really don't make anything to speak of off our trucks

I make my money with my excavator, for the most part the truck is an expense associated with hauling it around . . .

 

[BoatTrash]

Anyone on here buy a NEW 50/55 Kaufman in the last few years ? I'm not heavy hauling, not going far, hard to justify a new high end trailer but don't want junk. Have a 35 Roger's now but well length and being long enough for a bigger buncher / forwarder is an issue.

 

[cfherrman]

I was just at Kaufman of NE and looked at their smaller pickup sizes trailers. They looked really good and built on the heavy side.

Has 17.5 tires been in common use for the last 5-10 years? They had a lot of trailers with them on there, looks like the tire might actually last rather than the 7k axle tires

 

[Acoals]

17.5's are the only way to go; they last a lot longer than 16's, and don't go flat every time you run over a nail. Vastly superior in every respect. The only time I have ever changed a 17.5 except for being worn out was putting a piece of metal through the sidewall on a job.

 

[Steve Frazier]

I opted for the 17.5 wheels on both the equipment trailers I bought over dual 16s. Less weight and total cost and easier to change if necessary. I agree with Acoals, they're the way to go.

 

[materthegreater]

I opted for the 17.5 wheels on both the equipment trailers I bought over dual 16s. Less weight and total cost and easier to change if necessary. I agree with Acoals, they're the way to go.

Single 17.5 vs dual 16?

 

[Steve Frazier]

Yes. Standard was dual 16s on two axles for a total of 8 wheel/tire combos. Four 17.5s offers the same weight capacity.

 

[materthegreater]

I've often thought about that but I think I prefer the extra flotation of having 8 tires. I don't always stay on firm ground with mine.