buying used dry van trailer 48 or 53
Hi I am starting out next year on my own been pulling container in California for a year, and applied for my own authority and i need to know if i buy a 48 dry van will i be able to stay busy or should i spend more and get a 53 foot or should i wait buy reefer so that i can do both ? what i would like to is start out slow before the season begins any advise would greatly appreciated
thanks Bob C |
If you plan on buying a trailer, I would suggest buying a 53' if you want a dry van. Some shippers want a 53' whether they need it or not. If you are presently running a reefer and want to stick with it, you may also want to consider a 53', but a 48' would probably do all right to start. I just depends on what you want to pull. There is a lot of produce in California. Most of it will probably require a reefer.
|
thanks, Gman i have followed alot of your advise that you have given the other drivers and respect opinion, you seem to have a good business sense on trucking and look forward to your post
thanks Bob |
I appreciate it. Good luck with the new venture.
|
53' refer would be the best choice ..
|
yea if you had a 53' refeer you could pull both refrig and dry
|
Re: buying used dry van trailer 48 or 53
Quote:
With a 53' they're just going to load you back to the 48' Mark anyway. Even with dry van they're still only going to load back to the 48' running California a 48' with a spread is your best bet |
Most shippers ask for a 53'
|
Quote:
To be honest, the whole time I drove for Stevens I don't recall ever running into problems where a shipper demanded a 53' trailer and wouldn't load a 48'. |
thanks to all the replies, I was just wanting to do dry van work starting out less problems and it seem to be alot of 48 102 available, and in my price range. I was thinking that i might start out with LTL ? any thoughts
thanks Bob |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:47 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.