Got DOT inspected twice in one day. Have some concerns.

Except Linda looked much better then those tires.

 

whatever, but fact remains those are some ragged tires on that trailer. justify it however you want. those tires wouldnt be on my trailer.

and i aint a company driver either. and th auditor must have been a paperwork geek only, he dang sure dont know tires.

scalemaster gave it to you straight, dont rag on him.


could i ask what you avg per mile on your freight?

 

Well, you invited those comments by admitting to operating unsafe and non-compliant equipment without realizing that it was unsafe. It's one thing to lack experience, it's quite another to be operating equipment out on the road without knowledge of the basics.

 

First off, I apologize for the snide comment about Linda Lovelace and those tires being "virgins." It was a poor attempt at humor with a play on words about how much mileage each of them had seen. Comedy is not my strong suit.

At no time have I intended to give you "a bunch of crap" about your rig. I have only tried to explain and clarify the regulations and the inspection process, since you had some questions about them.

Here is what I am "absolutely sure about" with my training and experience of over 20 years in DOT enforcement and 10 more as a driver. If I saw the tires in your pictures come across my scale, I would surely grab my tire guage and measure the tread depth on at least a couple of them. Only if they measured less than the minimum would I put them on an inspection report. I can't do it by eyeball EXCEPT when the tread depth has gone to zero, if I cannot see or feel tread on either side of the groove, no guage needed to measure zero.

Again, I apologize if you were being "ridiculed and criticized." This is a great place to get help and information.

 

Based on what I saw in those pictures and scalemasters attempt at putting a little humor in your otherwise pitiful plight, there really was nothing snide about my remark.

As far as knowingly having that type of wore out equipement on the same highways as my family and myself, be thankful you weren't red flagged on the spot. At least that would be what I would have done if I had the badge/authority. Now, can we all get along?

 

The good news about them being virgins you can get them recapped cheaper than buying new ones.

Though you might be technically right about the proper tread depth measuring, any time a DOT authority has to use one instead of a quick glance, you're already too thin on treads.

 

I mentioned earlier that "fillets" were a design element of a tire. I apologize if it seemed that I left you hanging as to what fillets are. There are several types of fillets used during tire construction but I think this diagram shows the one referenced. I've never posted a pic here so it may appear inside out or upside down or something.



Best regards

 

If a spot is bald, a gauge is as useless as it is unnecessary.

Actually the normal way to check your auto or pickup is to measure tread depth every 15 inches around the tire, but in the case of a CMV, the regs state "when measured at any point on a major tread groove."

10 years or not, he isn't using any regulation I ever heard of. If this is what he stated, surely he can support it. But it never hurts to challenge and be certain.

He is correct

Well, I was an owner-op for many years and I know what it's like when funds are low, credit lines are maxed and there are still expenses to meet. From what I've seen on his thread, WYHP appears correct on the tires, but if they say a vert line is required they are as wrong as your DOT auditor is on the tire issue. My advice would be to stay in CO.

No, I told you they were a design element of the tire early in this thread. I've since given you a pic.

Scalemaster gave you the Gospel, live with it. He later threw a little funny in. Lighten up!

Best regards

 

Here it is again: