Drop Side, extra blocking?

That was very interesting. I like the concept of how you can take the sides off and use it as a beam. Very cool. I wonder if the capacity changes in the different configurations?

 

I have to believe it is so heavy as to not be practical

 

Reminds me of a swiss army knife.

 

I like it and it would be nice to have the versatility- but if the deck alone weighs an extra 10k - it would suck

 

I wouldn't think it would add 10,000# more, but possibly 4 to 5k maybe. Again smart person who came up with it, but with trying to have a niche setup these days its hard to give up a lot of weight unless you just want to run 8 axles on 7 axle freight or 11 axles with 10 axle freight. The other thing is how much money does this add to a setup? First thing I would look at doing to be as versatile as this is to look into a modular flat deck and an additional beam deck replacement to swap out with. It might not be all that much more in money for 2 complete decks.

 

Switching decks is a big challenge for small scale operators like myself. And you would be surprised how much additional decks cost.

The ability to go from an 8 6 wide deck that 10 or 11 wide is one I would love to have.

And being able to remove the sides to go to a rail configuration would be great if you could accomplish the task without wreckers or cranes.

However, having to deal with the added beam height built into the rail deck and therefore deck height would suck almost everyday. My deck height is already 26" and that is only when I have 100k on the deck.

So I would like it but not likely to get it.

 

I looked at that trailer last year when I went out to Nova Scotia.
It's an interesting concept, but not something I think I could recommend.
As an option for a single outfit like you @Rontonio it may work. You would require a significant yard space without the ability (a forklift etc) to move the side pieces out of the way when not in use. If you had the space you could detach them with the hydraulic neck and air ride of the transition, then detach the neck and pull the trailer out backwards to reconnect the neck in rail mode and carry on with the sides sitting in situ while you're gone. When putting them back on though it might be "fun" because you'd have to get the rail back into almost the exact spot you had it for removal, there's not a lot of play. It is still kind of equipment on hand required...
It would certainly save the cost of three separate frame rails (rail, deck, cantilever) but it adds some cost of hydraulic components, and I can't remember if the cantilever and deck components where the same with different "outrigger slide pieces"? They were transitioning something when I was there and I can't remember the specifics of that question.
But yes, the flush deck was IMHO too high because of the rail height. Once again, it was a case of "really good" as a cantilever, but not quite so much as a deck. However this one is good as a rail when you want it to be...except if you take a cantilever load out and want to bring a rail load home, you'd then need to ship the side pieces...

 

It might not work for some guys, but for me it would be good. I usually work out of the same yard where we have storage space and forklifts to remove the sides. Right now we have

1) 8' wide drop side tandem
1) 9' wide drop side quad
1) 10' wide quad
2) 8' wide flat floor tri
1) 8' wide flat floor quad
2) beams quad

If I had one of those I could eliminate 5 trailers. Heck I wouldn't even need the booster or the jeep.

 

I would be concerned with how it would work if something got bent.

 

Nothing ever gets bent or broken