Author Topic: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers  (Read 14865 times)

Offline Carzee

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • THANKS 156
  • Perentie FFR 50-257
    • Perentie Wiki
  • Location: Canberra
  • REMLR No: 007
Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« on: August 25, 2017, 11:58:03 PM »
SINGLE AXLE PT1-1.2


Example unit at AFM auction, feb2014 http://www.graysonline.com/lot/0054-5009036/

This week I picked up a Haulmark PT1-1.2 750kg (3-quarter-tonne) Trailer at the Minto AFM auction. M T

I note that our REMLR.com page for these trailers is a little light on details.

So I'm setting this thread up to collect info.


"...designed primarily for towing behind the Truck, Light and Lightweight, MC2, (Land Rover) fleet of vehicles, however it may be towed by any other suitably equipped towing vehicle." (Operator Manual see att pdf via Diana A.)

 Firstly, some info from other threads with the links:

http://remlr.com/forum/index.php?topic=5050.0

Diana A. has some specifications from an Operator Manual:

"...the Operators Manual lists the following:

104. Axles
Manufacturer: Engineered Transport Equipment
Type:Tubular steel beam

105. Main Brakes
Manufacturer: Cebco
Type:Caliper Disc Brake with C500 Hydraulic Override Coupling

106. Park Brakes
Manufacturer: Cebco
Type:Internal expanding, single shoe drum type brakes on rear wheels only"


Additionally...

Tailights

Manuf: Hella
Price: varies $160 on ebay to $240 at a Autoelec or truckparts supplier.

Stoplight/Tailight: Red LED, Hella part 2330
Indicator: Amber LED, Hella part 2151





Tony had the info about PT-1-1.2 wheel bearings and seals:

"... they are what is known in the Trailer Industry as "Parallel" Bearings, rated at 1600Kg. The inner and outer bearings are the same items, being 68110/49 (2x per Hub). If you're in an out of the way location and not near a specialist bearing supplier, no probs, as these bearings are the inner bearing in Ford or "Slimline" sets and are available from Supercheap, Repco, etc and even many service stations. The grease seal is also the same one used in the Slimline set.

NB: L. McVarney has inspected his PT2-2.2 bearings: "The outer bearing is the same as a falcon /slimline inner... but the inner bearing is a lot bigger on the PT2-2.2."







« Last Edit: August 25, 2018, 05:59:44 PM by Carzee »

Offline Dervish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • THANKS 59
  • Location: Sunshine Coast
  • REMLR No: 403
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2017, 06:59:57 AM »
In regards to registration, I called Haulmark when I bought 205-108 as I had read that they can assist; however I spoke to their VIN guy - whose name I've forgotten but he was very helpful - who said that the loophole they used for that had closed. So in QLD, a TMR officer has to sight the trailer and send a photo of the VIN plate to the national VIN database people. They then need to verify the VIN and enter it into the database, which takes a few hours, then you can go back to the TMR (without the trailer) and do the registration.

I've also contacted Cebco in regards to some parts for another Haulmark project. I was expecting prices to be high but I was still shocked. Here's the quote I got:

Quote for the parts we spoke about are detailed below:
New Tow Ring Shaft    $352              http://www.cebcobrakes.com.au/product/ringshaft/
New Special Tow Ring Nut $55        http://www.cebcobrakes.com.au/product/square-nut/
Major Repair Kit for Master Cylinder $605          http://www.cebcobrakes.com.au/product/major-repair-kit/
New Disc Rotors $253 each                                    http://www.cebcobrakes.com.au/wp-content/uploads/DR58_11.png
 
Prices include GST but do not include freight.
Prices valid to 30.6.17
 
Let me know if you are interested.
Regards

Offline dodgeguy1942

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
  • THANKS 28
  • Location: bathurst
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2017, 08:05:01 AM »
When I got my haulmark the master cylinder was leaking. I also priced the kit and found it to expensive. On disassembly I found that they are only orings inside just matched up what I needed to. Rotors are au falcon rear I think.

Offline dugite

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 1076
  • THANKS 102
  • Location: Tamworth
  • REMLR No: 374
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2017, 09:22:55 AM »
This VIN problem has arisen before. It seems like the option of having Haulmark reinstate the VIN is no longer available.

I know that some owners have taken the course of obtaining a new VIN (similar to what is done with an unnumbered No.5) and applied that on a metal plate secured over the Haulmark VIN. The data plate with the orig VIN is removed and stored to save confusion.

It saves some mucking about.

2a 109 114-341,
No.5 173-589,
W/S Platform 178-000,
PT1 204-796

Offline 303Gunner

  • REMLR Inc
  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1127
  • THANKS 128
  • Location: Lithgow, NSW
  • REMLR No: 128
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #4 on: August 26, 2017, 04:37:08 PM »
Rotors are au falcon rear I think.
The handbrake components are AU Falcon, the brake pads and calipers are AU Falcon or VR/VS Commodore (same PBR part), but the brake rotors are a uniquely drilled item. They may be made on an AU or VR/VS blank casting, but are not the standard item. It may be possible to convert a Falcon or Commodore disc by drilling the 3 mounting holes yourself if you're keen, but cast rotors are murder on drill bits.

Offline Mick_Marsh

  • REMLR Inc
  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 2002
  • THANKS 105
  • Location: Western Victoria
  • REMLR No: 310
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2017, 09:52:41 AM »
This VIN problem has arisen before. It seems like the option of having Haulmark reinstate the VIN is no longer available.

I know that some owners have taken the course of obtaining a new VIN (similar to what is done with an unnumbered No.5) and applied that on a metal plate secured over the Haulmark VIN. The data plate with the orig VIN is removed and stored to save confusion.

It saves some mucking about.
That is really odd.
That is "rebirthing" which is frowned upon in a big way in Victoria. If there has been a change in policy, it has been changed in the last few weeks. I know of two Haulmark trailers that were registered a few weeks ago without these troubles. They just had to wait a few days for the VINs to be loaded.
REMLR # 310, MVCA # 364, 101 Club # 2188, MHG #101
29-417 101 GS, 30-248 101 Rapier Tractor. 30-238 101
34-597 Crump & Cornish 1 ton Cargo Trailer
RT21 RAAF Track Tactical Trailer, 234-671 RAAF Track Tactical Trailer

Offline juddy

  • REMLR Inc
  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 2515
  • THANKS 62
    • www.landybitz.com.au
  • Location: Queensland
  • REMLR No: 352
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2017, 12:13:03 PM »
I had the same issue when I went to register my PT1 with QLD transport.

The vin was not on the national database, and as such it had to be put on lucky they did it while I waited.  You also have to have the vin stamped on the trailer regardless of the vin on the data plate.

I was told that now the trailers on the system it should not cause too many problems in future, you can also call a head and they will add the vin to the system before you turn up.
1991 110 Truck Surveillance (RFSV), Winch MC2 *51-656*
2004 Truck, Carryall, Lightweight, Modified Military Special, With Winch, MC2/3 205-301, Haulmark PT1-1.2 *205090* No5 Trailer

Images 2008-2017 J Burton

Offline Carzee

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • THANKS 156
  • Perentie FFR 50-257
    • Perentie Wiki
  • Location: Canberra
  • REMLR No: 007
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2017, 12:50:30 PM »
While awaiting the VIN hassle to be sorted, some obs.

The mudguards are alloy. The bottom plate of the box trailer is alloy. But the sides and tailgate of the box are steel. Most of the rivets are steel so some mixed metal corrosion is underway.

The box sides and floor appear at first glance to be bolted to the chassis. The majority of these bolts are the load lash-ring baseplate bolts which appear to be M8. Is this non-welded box setup to facilitate easy smash repair perhaps? Anyone removed "the box"?

Also noted that the rear towing hitch is movable. The hitch bracket can be bolted facing the front to be out of harms way (this is how mine was supplied) or facing the rear to be ready for use.

The side lights at the rear of the mudguards are adjustable length (spring loaded setup) so the trailer can be used behind the wider 6x6 LR.

The park brake setup is very useful to someone used to having to chock the Number 5 trailer wheels a yard with a slope.

Offline juddy

  • REMLR Inc
  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 2515
  • THANKS 62
    • www.landybitz.com.au
  • Location: Queensland
  • REMLR No: 352
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2017, 01:42:07 PM »
Its like going from a ford to a Aston comparing the No 5 to the PT1
1991 110 Truck Surveillance (RFSV), Winch MC2 *51-656*
2004 Truck, Carryall, Lightweight, Modified Military Special, With Winch, MC2/3 205-301, Haulmark PT1-1.2 *205090* No5 Trailer

Images 2008-2017 J Burton

Offline Dervish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • THANKS 59
  • Location: Sunshine Coast
  • REMLR No: 403
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2017, 02:37:53 PM »
Anyone removed "the box"?

Yes, a few now. The glue they use on the tub floor to the chassis is a real b****.

Offline Carzee

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • THANKS 156
  • Perentie FFR 50-257
    • Perentie Wiki
  • Location: Canberra
  • REMLR No: 007
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #10 on: August 27, 2017, 05:26:35 PM »
I can see two black sikaflex looking strips on the chassis runners. Do you cut along/thru the bead with a thin blade?

Offline Dervish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • THANKS 59
  • Location: Sunshine Coast
  • REMLR No: 403
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #11 on: August 27, 2017, 06:29:07 PM »
I can see two black sikaflex looking strips on the chassis runners. Do you cut along/thru the bead with a thin blade?

The sikaflex is on both fore-aft and lateral chassis members. Yes, cut through with a long, bendy knife; you will struggle. Best to wedge something under the tub floor and move it along to follow the cut. All this is done in an isometric sit-up position, just to make it more difficult.

Offline Carzee

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • THANKS 156
  • Perentie FFR 50-257
    • Perentie Wiki
  • Location: Canberra
  • REMLR No: 007
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2017, 05:09:48 PM »
When you removed the "box" from the chassis...

1. why was it done? Repairs? Upgrade suspension? Parts sales?
2. would you estimate was the weight of the "box"?

Offline Dervish

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 522
  • THANKS 59
  • Location: Sunshine Coast
  • REMLR No: 403
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2017, 07:25:33 PM »
When you removed the "box" from the chassis...

1. why was it done? Repairs? Upgrade suspension? Parts sales?
2. would you estimate was the weight of the "box"?

It was always repairs. It's been a while but I don't think anything was particularly heavy, in fact the tub seems to have been built with weight as the primary concern. I have a tub in bits in my yard for another Haulmark project - an inherited one, 204-829, it's modified but the tub is still standard - so I could weigh if it's important.

Offline Carzee

  • REMLR Committee
  • Veteran
  • ***
  • Posts: 3370
  • THANKS 156
  • Perentie FFR 50-257
    • Perentie Wiki
  • Location: Canberra
  • REMLR No: 007
Re: Haulmark PT1-1.2 and PT2-2.2 Trailers
« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2017, 07:41:12 PM »
No need to weigh it, I was just fishing for your opinion and you provided that. I could see the tailgate was built stronger than the other three sides obviously but I wondered what about the weight of the rest and if it was very difficult to dismantle due to heaviness. Thhanks for the answer. cheers.