Snow Plowing Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

So this is a question to the professionals: Traction, Weight to Power Ratio, Mobility

14K views 90 replies 23 participants last post by  Mike_PS 
#1 ·
So here is my question what do you feel is the most important balance of features in a commercial plow truck? Are you more into the idea of maximizing your truck's traction with say locking differentials or other traction control systems? Or, does power to weight ratio concern you more so you look for a truck with the biggest engine for a specific GVW? And how does mobility factor into your decision?
 
#77 ·
TatraFan;1403350 said:
BUFF;1403343 said:
That will never happen, you're full of wind.[/QUOTE

Are you sure? I mean having a t-shirt made up is cheap.
Well let's see, there's been several threads you've started and have indicated you're importing a Mog or a Tatra and yet it never happens.......uhmmmm yeah I'm sure.

TatraFan;1403356 said:
It depends on how much capital you have and your strategy. If you're strategy is to make profit right away you might have problem with this scheme. However, if you have the ability to operate at breaking even or even incurring a loss for the first two to three years you could develop a long term strategy of market domination. This would be they way in which China grew so rapidly.
China has become dominate for 2 reasons, NAFTA and they have a unlimited supply of cheap labor and no age or safety regulations for the labor force either. Think about that if you ever get around to having your cheap T-Shirts made.
 
#78 ·
BUFF;1403379 said:
TatraFan;1403350 said:
Well let's see, there's been several threads you've started and have indicated you're importing a Mog or a Tatra and yet it never happens.......uhmmmm yeah I'm sure.

China has become dominate for 2 reasons, NAFTA and they have a unlimited supply of cheap labor and no age or safety regulations for the labor force either. Think about that if you ever get around to having your cheap T-Shirts made.
I did buy a Tatra T-815-- and now it is getting upgraded... It should be here in Feb or March area if everything goes right with the upgrades. When I get it I may or may not put pictures of it up here-- It depends if I still find this amusing to me.

First of all NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement it covers only nations in the continent of North America: Canda, US and Mexico basically but you could throw in the alphabet soup of small nations below it as well up to Panama. Secondly, you're correct that cheap labor is a by product of the way the centralized government of China controls monetary police to keep their currency artificially lower than the US dollar-- thereby taking a loss to create market domination like I said. So you want to try again on this
 
#79 ·
TatraFan;1403356 said:
It depends on how much capital you have and your strategy. If you're strategy is to make profit right away you might have problem with this scheme. However, if you have the ability to operate at breaking even or even incurring a loss for the first two to three years you could develop a long term strategy of market domination. This would be they way in which China grew so rapidly.
Sure, like I said, I would welcome competition such as you allege in my market.
 
#80 ·
dfd9;1403397 said:
Sure, like I said, I would welcome competition such as you allege in my market.
You know if you're doing job site x for $150.00 per time; then I come along, and, say I'll do it for $100.00 per time with greater services-- who do you think the customer goes with? Especially, if I throw in a free demo-plowing on the first storm to prove my quality...
 
#82 ·
TatraFan;1403416 said:
You know if you're doing job site x for $150.00 per time; then I come along, and, say I'll do it for $100.00 per time with greater services-- who do you think the customer goes with? Especially, if I throw in a free demo-plowing on the first storm to prove my quality...
Greater services? The snow is removed or it isn't. The job is done on time or it isn't. Customer couldn't care less if you use a lowly American made Ford or Chevy, or an overweight underpowered imported behemoth.

Demo plow? Are you serious? Do you really think the average property manager has time for that crap? Besides, how can you do a demo plow? The job is under contract before the snow removal season starts.

Once again, out of touch with the commercial snow removal scene.

TatraFan;1403421 said:
Is it just me or is the fact the Unimog is so ugly the reason why it is one sexy beast of a truck?
Well, that's an ugly sentence. I'm guessing you are self medicating this evening?
 
#83 ·
TatraFan;1403385 said:
BUFF;1403379 said:
I did buy a Tatra T-815-- and now it is getting upgraded... It should be here in Feb or March area if everything goes right with the upgrades. When I get it I may or may not put pictures of it up here-- It depends if I still find this amusing to me.

First of all NAFTA is the North American Free Trade Agreement it covers only nations in the continent of North America: Canda, US and Mexico basically but you could throw in the alphabet soup of small nations below it as well up to Panama. Secondly, you're correct that cheap labor is a by product of the way the centralized government of China controls monetary police to keep their currency artificially lower than the US dollar-- thereby taking a loss to create market domination like I said. So you want to try again on this
Technically your are correct about NAFTA, however it was the head-gate that opened our boarders that allowed China and others to gain traction in the world market.
It's just another fine example with what continues to be wrong with our government.
 
#84 ·
BUFF;1403470 said:
TatraFan;1403385 said:
Technically your are correct about NAFTA, however it was the head-gate that opened our boarders that allowed China and others to gain traction in the world market.
It's just another fine example with what continues to be wrong with our government.
What opened China up was well the first visit to it by Nixon -- it was during the 1972-73 part of his presidency that we started to trade again with China. NAFTA (as we know it) wasn't even considered at the time. The Chinese policy has been for more than 30 years to exploit the large population base as you correctly stated. However, it is more complex. we have lots of issues with China. But biggest issue is the lack of proper valuation process on their currency.
 
#85 ·
TatraFan;1403528 said:
BUFF;1403470 said:
What opened China up was well the first visit to it by Nixon -- it was during the 1972-73 part of his presidency that we started to trade again with China. NAFTA (as we know it) wasn't even considered at the time. The Chinese policy has been for more than 30 years to exploit the large population base as you correctly stated. However, it is more complex. we have lots of issues with China. But biggest issue is the lack of proper valuation process on their currency.
Sounds like he's drawing too much un-needed attention to himself, and not the thread.
 
#86 ·
TatraFan;1403528 said:
BUFF;1403470 said:
What opened China up was well the first visit to it by Nixon -- it was during the 1972-73 part of his presidency that we started to trade again with China. NAFTA (as we know it) wasn't even considered at the time. The Chinese policy has been for more than 30 years to exploit the large population base as you correctly stated. However, it is more complex. we have lots of issues with China. But biggest issue is the lack of proper valuation process on their currency.
Nixon was involved with implementing talks with China but for reasons other than full blown trade. The same guy who signed the NAFTA agreement also signed the Chinese Trade agreement at the end of his term as President. Oddly enough these two men has something in common, they both went through impeachment hearings. Unlike Nixon, Clinton was arrogant enough to see it all the way through to get acquitted.
 
#87 ·
2COR517;1403466 said:
Greater services? The snow is removed or it isn't. The job is done on time or it isn't. Customer couldn't care less if you use a lowly American made Ford or Chevy, or an overweight underpowered imported behemoth.
Funny, every time I asked people to sand my driveway at my farm- they said that was an extra cost. And thus one would concluded I think correctly a separate service from that of just snow removal. Perhaps it falls under the heading of ice removal/management. Because if it falls under snow removal I would think it would be factored into the total cost of the job? Unless people in New York State are just really trying to rip off the City-Folk and Former Locals (it is possible)? I going with the fact that if you figure out how to bundle a few other operations that usually cost extra into one low price-- people eat that up.

Marketing is the key-- If you sell your customer on the fact that your equipment is the type of equipment designed to handle all conditions. It is why all of our major fortune 500 companies love to tell us how they are using state of the art logistical systems and so on. So I figure

2Cor517 said:
Demo plow? Are you serious? Do you really think the average property manager has time for that crap? Besides, how can you do a demo plow? The job is under contract before the snow removal season starts.
You're right that wasn't as well thought out. However, let's not think of Demo as actual physical demo- but let us think of demo as a multimedia presentation. That will work in my favor. You know after 15 plus years doing analysis and giving presentations to CEO's and even a couple of major government officials-- I know the power of a good presentation. You show your vehicles in variety of conditions doing what they do. And you know people look at it and say well the price is right and they seem very capable and together-- what is my old guy doing to stay current? Nothing-- well maybe-- a new guy is in order.

2Cor517 said:
Once again, out of touch with the commercial snow removal scene.
2Cor517 said:
Well, that's an ugly sentence. I'm guessing you are self medicating this evening?
Nope, Mr. Wu is a terrible typer when he's had too many Shirley Temples with extra Gin! It is so hard to find a good man-servant these days.
 
#89 ·
BUFF;1403870 said:
TatraFan;1403528 said:
Nixon was involved with implementing talks with China but for reasons other than full blown trade. The same guy who signed the NAFTA agreement also signed the Chinese Trade agreement at the end of his term as President. Oddly enough these two men has something in common, they both went through impeachment hearings. Unlike Nixon, Clinton was arrogant enough to see it all the way through to get acquitted.
Well, that is true about the impeachment hearings. The only question is this what does that have to do with Sino-American economic policy? Are you talking about the 1999 Trade Agreement with China? Because if you are that trade agreement did attempt a few positive things: increase exportation of US goods into China and reduce tariffs on US goods. However, it hasn't worked out in the long for our favor. Again the currency issue is at the root of the problem. However, the problem of the Chinese trade deficit existed from the start of our trading. China has never had the disposable income for the most part to purchase US goods; and frankly if that was not bad enough they used to just flat out not trade with the US fairly. When it first started corporations felt they could use the Chinese like mercantile state-- where they would use the low cost of production and sell to the rich US market. They have but they forgot one thing China has grown immensely from it. And with their restrictive policies on exports they were able to turn tables on the economies of the Western world. The point is NAFTA didn't do anything. The trade issues were built into the system from the start of free trade in 1973.
 
#90 ·
TatraFan;1403895 said:
BUFF;1403870 said:
Well, that is true about the impeachment hearings. The only question is this what does that have to do with Sino-American economic policy? Are you talking about the 1999 Trade Agreement with China? Because if you are that trade agreement did attempt a few positive things: increase exportation of US goods into China and reduce tariffs on US goods. However, it hasn't worked out in the long for our favor. Again the currency issue is at the root of the problem. However, the problem of the Chinese trade deficit existed from the start of our trading. China has never had the disposable income for the most part to purchase US goods; and frankly if that was not bad enough they used to just flat out not trade with the US fairly. When it first started corporations felt they could use the Chinese like mercantile state-- where they would use the low cost of production and sell to the rich US market. They have but they forgot one thing China has grown immensely from it. And with their restrictive policies on exports they were able to turn tables on the economies of the Western world. The point is NAFTA didn't do anything. The trade issues were built into the system from the start of free trade in 1973.
Once again you've been able to conjor up a long winded post full of wind and fertilizer..... you should run for office.......
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top