From: MV (MV@dc9.tzo.com)
Date: Wed Dec 28 2005 - 13:47:53 PST
Hi Tim,
A lot of good info here.
One more question - since the license laws vary by state - ie Indiana
does not have a non-commercial Class A, or B license, and CDLs are not
required to drive mega motor homes/RVs in Indiana probably because we
make most of them. I would not expect to have a problem driving a mega
motor home in Indiana without a CDL due to the Federal requirement that
states must accept other states license and registration requirements.
Do you agree with this?
Thanks,
Dave
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
timothy.smith1@att.net wrote:
> Sonny,
> I'm at home, waiting a bit to ensure the kidlets are asleep before going into
> Santa-mode. So here goes.
>
>
>>Three years ago I turned my 1996 Freightliner Condo in to a recreational
>>vehicle by stretching the frame slightly to accept an eight foot by fourteen
>>foot aluminum box that I had on an old GMC cube van. My state, Florida, did
>>a new title and etched a new vin number on the windshield and door glasses
>>plus they put a data plate on the driver door post and gave me a title for a
>>2003 ASPT, which means, they say, that its assembled from parts.
>
>
> So far, so good. But what is the nature of this box on the back? By this, I
> mean externally does it look like a cargo container(?) because an officer might
> reasonably assume it's there to haul cargo, like a dromedary. (For those of you
> who do not know what a "dromedary" is, it is a cargo box behind the cab of the
> tractor. The SIZE of the box is not limited. They are often used to segregate
> some types of explosives on a single truck's load...like having a load of 1.4
> explosives in the van, while hauling the blasting caps in the dromedary.) Or,
> does it have a finished look more like the huge sleeper (apartment, actually!)
> one occasionally sees on the super moving van trucks?
>
>
>>I somehow got lucky enough to turn out an RV Toter which makes the ones
>>manufactured up around Elkhart, In. and some other places including Texas
>>look less than finished, IMHO.
>
>
> Ok, by "RV toter" you mean a truck-tractor tricked-out to haul an RV? I ask you
> this, because if we are talking the same language here, an RV toter is designed
> PRIMARILY to "tote" or haul an RV. If the box you put on the same chassis
> behind the cab has been finished out to provide for overnight accomodation (i.e.
> beds, plumbing..all the stuff a traditionally manufactured "RV" has-) then your
> truck IS an RV as a stand-alone vehicle. (For the moment, I'm presuming the box
> you converted into an RV has no space in it designated for hauling cargo.)
>
> For example, let's say a guy has one of those big tour-the-universe RV motor
> home buses that are all set up like the Taj Majal, but he has a receiver hitch
> on it that he uses to pull a pop-up camper (for his mother-in-law). His RV
> ain't no RV-toter, brother...it qualifies as an RV as a stand-alone vehicle.
>
> So for the moment, let's stop calling your truck an RV-toter and let's just call
> it an RV and, so we can get to some answers, let's also say, for the moment,
> that you aren't pulling anything.
>
> So, if Sonny is driving to San Antonio for a vacation in his RV (a truck tractor
> modified into an RV) and he isn't pulling anything, and he qualifies for the RV
> exemption to CDL -BUT- (at least by Texas law) he's going to need at least a
> Class B non-CDL license, because the tractor has a GVWR over 26,001#.
>
> Under the circumstances, he's engaging in NO commercial enterprise so his
> vehicle is not subject to the FMCSR's, so he's not subject to roadside
> inspection -BUT- given the nature of his truck (in that it doesn't look like a
> traditional RV and it looks more like a cargo truck, converted or otherwise)
> Sonny might be getting pulled over for (1) passing by a scales, or (2) because a
> DOT inspector wants to find out what purpose Sonny's truck is being driven FOR.
>
>
>>I have a two and five sixteenth inch ball for my gooseneck trailer under a
>>closed plate when not in use. I also have a class three hitch mounted under
>>the rear of it.
>>
>>I'm strictly a collector of motorscooters, motorcycles, old farm tractors,
>>and military vehicles among other things too numerous to go in to. I do not
>>sell anything at the shows I attend, I only exibit for free. I do not ask
>>for nor would I accept donations just to make myself clear on that.
>
>
> OK, WHAT do you exhibit and WHY do you exhibit them? This endeavor sounds very
> expensive for a hobby, so a fair question roadside would be a question
> formulated to determine if the movement of the vehicles you collect, to and
> from, is for the purpose of (1) receiving some form of payment or benefit
> immediately or at a later date or (2) for promoting some other type of business
> endeavor.
>
> This is not to say that one cannot legitimately have expensive hobbies, but
> realistically, those folks are really few and far between. I just read about
> some guy who flies his personal P-51 Mustang to and from work every day (the
> bastard!), so guys with expensive hobbies ARE out there.
>
>
>>My RV is thirty eight foot long from bumper to bumper and my longest trailer
>>is a thirty two foot gooseneck. Sometimes I drag a sixteen foot closed in
>>trailer if I go to a scooter meet for example, but usually I have either no
>>trailer or I have the gooseneck with maybe a deuce and a half or a HMMWV and
>>a tractor.
>>
>>My trailer is rated at 25000 pound with two axles and eight tires, four on
>>each axle.
>
>
> STOP! Ok, now we'll add your gooseneck to the RV. The RV nature of your truck
> has not changed but, now it's hauling a vehicle (trailer) whose purpose is for
> hauling cargo. (Stand-alone RV vehicles are NOT cargo haulers and this is one
> of the BIG reasons why they can breeze by scales and are usually ignored by DOT
> guys. Unless of course, as in your case, it's not readily identifiable as
> having been converted to an RV).
>
> So, back to the driver's license question. In this scenario, Sonny is still
> going on vacation. His RV is now pulling a vehicle designed to haul cargo.
> He's a vehicle in combination; his trailer is over 10,000# GVWR so we get to add
> it to the total GCVWR -BUT- he's STILL an RV, right? Right! Nothing says a guy
> with an RV with no cargo carrying ability has to leave his toys at home...so an
> RV CAN pull a trailer and STILL be an RV. So, Sonny still qualifies for his RV
> exemption from CDL but NOW he needs a Class A non-CDL because of the trailer.
>
> I have never hauled, to my knowledge, more than 25000 pound
>
>>including the trailer weight. The trailer has electric, 12 volt DC, brakes
>>activated by a Techonsha (sp) brake controller operated through the cold
>>side of the brake light switch on the RV. Both trailers are 2003 as well as
>>the truck.
>>
>>Now TJ, am I mandated to stop at weigh stations in your state of Texas and
>>if not, would you if this was your set up?
>
>
> YES, particularly if you are pulling the big gooseneck. For this part of the
> question, let me explain in this way...
> (1) Your truck is converted into a legitimate RV. But it might be mistaken for
> a straight truck because it has what looks like a dry van on the back.
> Therefore at a glance one might assume it's primary role is to haul cargo. Your
> RV is going to attract the attention of every open weigh station you drive by
> because it LOOKS like a cargo hauler...and can you blame them?
>
> (2) With the big trailer you are now WELL within the realm of big cargo haulers
> and you (even as a legitimate RV) are now equipped to HAUL cargo...so your
> combination vehicle equipped to haul cargo (and remember, the topic at this
> moment has nothing to do with driver's license law) has the comoplete and
> undivided attention of the guys at the weigh station.
>
> I have nothing to hide, consider
>
>>myself to be totally safe and hold a class A CDL. I do not get an annual
>>DOT medical check, and my health is good, so far anyway. I have stenciled on
>>the side of the original sleeper "Recreational Vehicle, Not for Hire" on
>>both sides.
>
>
> OK, let's talk about "Recreational Vehicle" and "Not for Hire" for a moment.
>
> To a DOT inspector, the phrase "Not for Hire" don't mean diddly-damned squat.
> For example, if Sonny was hauling his own stuff in a business enterprise (and
> wasn't interested in hauling other people's stuff for money) in the rig we have
> discussed up to this point, he WOULD be subject to the FMCSR's but he wouldn't
> be "for hire". So the phrase "Not for Hire" is a waste if it is displayed in
> the hopes of throwing some DOT guy off the scent. I daresay, when I see "Not
> for Hire" on the side of a truck, I suddenly become terribly interested in
> finding out why that big truck is on the road.
>
> Pretty much the same thing applies with the term "Recreational Vehicle." I'll
> give you an example of an RV that might fall under the FMCSR's. Remember the
> dude with the Taj Majal RV? Well let's keep it simple and say his RV has a GVWR
> of 26,001# -BUT- he drives it all over the place for the purpose of
> demonstrating and taking orders for RONCO Turnip Twaddlers and THAT IS A
> BUSINESS ENDEAVOR. My friends, he drives the Taj Majal primarily because he
> doesn't like sleeping at Motel 6 and THAT makes the Taj Majal an RV and that is
> an exemption from CDL -BUT- the Taj Majal is being USED IN COMMERCE and that
> makes it subject to the FMCSR's and therefore subject to roadside inspection.
> (and, for the paranoids in this group, NO I don't chase down and stop Taj Majal
> RV's. With so many traditional commercial motor vehicles on the road, why would
> I bother?)
>
> I do keep my truck in "ready for the road" condition since I've
>
>>been in that field basically all my life. I retired from the Army in 1982
>>as a Chief Warrant Officer, Automotive Maintenance Technician so I just
>>don't trust my maintenance to anyone and will not as long as I'm physically
>>able to do it myself, although I'll admit that some things are cheaper to
>>have hired as I did last week getting an inner wheel seal put in but I was
>>right there helping the mechanic as he is a good friend. I also let him do
>>my brakes simply because it makes me feel better but some things I do the
>>second time after I get my OJT from him. I never had full air brakes when I
>>was in the "machine". They were always air over hydralic so I don't have
>>much experience with full air. My truck has the newer, so I'm told, brake
>>chambers that adjust automatically but when I replaced the shoes and springs
>>last week he adjusted them initially or else it would take the automatic
>>adjusters too long to get them adjusted. Is this normal?
>
>
> Yes they must be adjusted initially after new brake linings are installed. And
> as for use after that, well, we have a saying about automatic slack adjusters
> and it goes like this..
> "Automatic slack adjusters ain't." Meaning, they aren't taking up the slack
> "automatically" about 50 percent of the time. "Slack" is created as the brake
> linings are worn away through use and it is the job of the slack adjusters to
> bring the shoes back into close proximity to the face of the drum. They need to
> be greased regularly as they are in a harsh environment and if they aren't kept
> clean and lubed (on the inside), they bind up.
>
>
>>TJ, tell me if I need to change anything I'm doing please.
>
>
> Well, without being too bold, I'd like to know if your travels with this rig
> earn you some kind of income, either directly or indirectly. It has been my
> experience that many guys asking for advice have a tendency to offer only the
> information they feel will get them the answer they desire. So, of course, I am
> cautious and curious.
>
> Merry Christmas all!
> TJ
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ackyle@gmail.com>
> Visit the searchable archives at http://www.mil-veh.org/archives/
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 18 2006 - 21:37:26 PDT