Mr. Anton Jansen wanted something special to mark the 40th anniversary of his hauling company and a history of driving DAFs: a brand new conventional DAF tractor. Too bad though, the truck maker doesn’t offer a conventional model. Neither does any other European manufacturer for that matter, apart from the off-road Mercedes-Benz Zetros.
Well then, in that case -if you really want something special- the only solution is a custom-built one-off product. Jansen teamed up with DAF dealership De Burgh and the business partners developed the conventional DAF XT105. Strictly speaking the end result wasn’t a one-off, as Jansen had another one built shortly after.
Jansen’s XT105 tractors are also a tribute to their 1982 DAF NTT 2800 (NTT is DAF-language for a conventional 6×4 tractor). The company bought it in 1990 and after its retirement -more than 20 years of hard work later- it was restored.
DAF’s N2800-series (with a Magirus-Deutz Eckhauber cab) from the early eighties was the truck maker’s last conventional truck and tractor model. A simple, hardcore 6×4 chassis, developed for the African market. These were always powered by DAF’s 11.6 liter engine.
As an aside, it says 3300 on the grille of Jansen’s tractor, but there never was a factory N3300-series. The tractor was retrofitted with a more powerful engine as used in the DAF 3300 cabover from the eighties.
One can say it’s a custom-built tractor just as well; such a fancy US-West Coast-style N2800 was never exported to Africa, as far as I know.
The XT’s starting point was a factory DAF FTT XF105 (FTT as in a COE 6×4 tractor) with a 460 hp 12.9 liter engine.
What the dealership did, in short, was moving the whole cab 1.50 m (59”) backwards while leaving the rolling chassis completely intact. As a result the tractor can only tow a semi-trailer with a short kingpin setback, which is obviously the case here.
For comparison reasons here’s a factory DAF XF105, with the same top model cab, called the Super Space Cab.
Dump semi-trailers have a short wheelbase and short rear overhang, no problem here meeting the length restrictions for a tractor and semi-trailer combination.
The 2008 semi-trailer was built by ATM from Maaseik, Belgium. It’s rated at a maximum GVM of 44,000 kg (97,000 lbs). Belgium had and still has an excellent reputation for manufacturing high-quality buses, coaches, trailers and semi-trailers.
OK-05-TL is the semi-trailer’s license plate number; 29.1 cubic meters equals 38 cubic yards.
Three BPW axles with six Fulda Ecotonn super singles. BPW stands for Bergische Patentachsenfabrik Wiehl, a German manufacturer of trailer and semi-trailer axles, founded in 1898.
An indispensable tool comes with the semi-trailer.
The rig has six axles, which means it has a legal maximum GVM of 50,000 kg (110,231 lbs), regardless the overall length or axle spacings. The same applies to a truck and trailer combination.
All in all, mission accomplished, and a special ordered anniversary present for sure.
That’s a nice truck. The hard cover on the bed seems like a particularly good idea; around us we either get a flimsy fabric setup or nothing. I like the thought of something substantial to keep the gravel from pinging off my windshield.
A cover, either soft or hard, is legally required for dump trucks/rigs and bulk haulers (agricultural products).
Hard covers have become standard on dump trucks and (semi-) trailers like this one. The ones that haul sand, soil, gravel, debris etc. These often have many loads a day, and hard covers work fast and easy.
In the us we not only don’t have such requirements, but the insurance companies choose to hold truckers that drop debris on bodywork and windshields basically harmless. My insurer was unwilling to go after a truck I had a photo and plates of. Took away my no claims bonus, too.
An unsecured load is not legal in my state, and for bulk items that means a cover. While I’ve never done it I have friends who called the trucking company an they paid for the windshield w/o much hassle.
The unsecured load thing applies to anyone, not just big trucks and at the local transfer stations they can add an uncovered load charge if the operator doesn’t like the looks of your handiwork of tying down/covering your load.
Here is the page with what to do if you have been the victim of an unsecured load. http://www.wsp.wa.gov/traveler/loadloss.htm
I just remembered a couple of days ago I was on the freeway behind a dump truck and the owner had the guts to put in large letters across the tail gate. “NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BROKEN WINDSHIELDS STAY BACK 200 FT” which of course is contrary to the law and will not hold up in court. But I’m sure it cuts down on their claims as the person who’s windshield was broken is scared to pursue restitution.
Here is the page that states that you can be charged $25 for showing up at a transfer station or landfill with an unsecured load in my county. http://kingcounty.gov/depts/dnrp/solid-waste/facilities/secure-your-load.aspx
The simple rule here is this: a load, any load, may not fall/come off a truck under normal driving conditions; which includes, for example, hard braking, sudden maneuvers, and bad pavement.
“Not falling/coming off” also applies to (grains of) sand and such. Just think of motorcyclists not getting sandblasted…
Yeah grains of sand are covered in my state too, though “nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the use of dropping sand for traction purposes”. Nor does it prevent road crews from sanding the streets for traction purposes, and with that it is the law to stay back, I believe 500ft.
Yeah all loads are tarped here a $600 fine for insecure load awaits the driver if the CVIU spot him losing sand or any other product , fresh machine picked grapes are carted in Tarped bathtub tippers during the season very tricky to drive you literally cannot brake or do any sudden turns, not my favourite job but knowing how and experience at that helped me into a milk tanker job
Won’t someone think of the bridges? I can’t believe that much load is allowed on that short of axle spacing and number of axles. The dumps set up for the really heavy loads around here often have a stinger axle in addition to the 2 or sometimes 3 pushers. The stinger when deployed adds another 10ft or more of wheel base and a lot to the max allowable weight. https://www.superdumps.com/trailing_axles/
Thanks for that link, never heard of a stinger axle. Never saw it anywhere in Europe.
About the weight / length / number of axles. Even straight trucks with 5 axles -in which case correct axle spacing is an issue indeed- are allowed to have a 50 metric ton GVM. They’re even shorter, and with one axle less. Dutch only, BTW. Not allowed in surrounding countries.
Dump- or concrete mixer rigs and brick haulers (all with five or six axles) are prone to go beyond the legal 50 metric ton weight limit. In real life often close to 55-60 metric ton. Technically not a problem at all, they’re designed and built to handle that kind of weights.
Bridges, which are numerous here, are strong enough. If not, there’s a sign with a weight limit. And no driver will ever cross a typical Amsterdam canal-bridge with this article’s baby…
Here you go, believe it or not: a 10×4 straight truck, legal maximum GVM 50 metric ton. Maximum axle loads from front to back in kg: 10,000-10,000-7,500-11,500-11,500.
Source: http://www.transport-online.nl/site/53894/nieuwe-ginaf-10×4-voor-otte-uit-lisse/
So the rear most axle is driven? Seems like a lot of up-front and on-going costs do make a steering driven rear axle. It also looks like axles 2 and 3 are fixed, no way to lift them to save on wear or to gain traction in off road situations.
Axles 4 and 5 are the drive axles.
Axles 1,2,3 and 5 are steering axles.
Axle 3 is liftable.
Maximum maneuverability (hence the 4 steering axles) is an absolute necessity. Lots of narrow roads with tight corners, you know.
Here is how we get big loads to a tight job site in one trip, the transfer dump. Here trucky, trucky. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fofSuQhuvY
I read about those in a Dutch trucking magazine, about 30 to 35 years ago. Geez, we’re getting old…
Of course that long ago you couldn’t back up your truck with a switch on the back, at least on the ones used in the US. You can tell the person in this video was running transfers w/o it by the glove drop. That is the guide on where to position the truck w/o the fancy back up switch.
Israel… You really don’t want to know what the max weight on this combo is (pic: Alex Zaro):)
Lots of axles, so road pressures are low and spread out and all those axles mean lots of brakes too.
This too is from Israel.
Road surfaces and bridges are designed to withstand higher forces in Europe. Between permitting far less weight on commercial vehicles (also comes with more traffic and pollution), sacrificing crucial manouverability for longer wheelbases, or building sturdier roads, the roads are the smallest price to pay. I can see why the US would go a different route, they need to cover large distances cost effectively, but the priorities are different here.
That’s one big present to yourself!
Using a COE cab to create a convectional normal control truck is an old – amongst many others BMC and Leyland used to do it frequently.
Looking at DAF’s website, there at no normal control (not COE) trucks of any size, so where did Mr Jansen source the forward part of the unit?
The complete front bumper with the lower (black) part of the grille are still factory. Compare the picture of the factory XF with the custom-built XT.
The rest was simply designed and built for these two special ordered conventional tractors…yet not by DAF.
They did do a good job incorporating the original bumper and grille assembly. Little surprised they didn’t fill in the step portion, though it probably aids in access.
On many US conventionals the bumper is 3 pieces with the ends held on by 4 bolts. They are designed so you remove 2 bolts, one top and one bottom, loosen the other two and swing that section out of the way so you can walk right up to the frame.
I like that the step behind the bumper has been kept, which would make accessing the engine easier – for some things at least.
Other than topping up the oil as I did on mine tonight theres nothing a non DAF ttech can do, This is whay pays my wages at present not that fleet number any more but an identical truck,all I have to do is a 730km round trip through the very scenic inland highway running between Christchurch and Blenheim in New Zealand’s south island, a twisting piece of narrow two lane blacktop alive with trucks since the Kaikoura earthquake took out the main trunk rail line and hwy one, google the Lewis pass highway the scenery is beautiful. Shot at a roadside lunch break north of St Arnaud
Very nice! And indeed, great scenery too.
“Other than topping up the oil as I did on mine tonight theres nothing a non DAF ttech can do”
That is one of the most absurd things I’ve heard. You know the driver should check and fill the coolant too, and I’m certain there are lots of independent shops that will fix anything on pretty much any big truck you bring them.
Scoutdude you obviously know little about trucks and warranties other than fluids nothing is serviceable by some muppet at an independant shop, if the truck is losing coolant it goes to the Daf dealer for them to find out why, correct service intervals must be kept correct fluids must be used independant shops dont stock these. The trucks I’m driving are all less than 12 months old mine has done 72,000kms it is the second highest of the six four have less than 40,000 kms the one in the picture had under 1000kms on it in that photo I know I filled in my logbook at that break
I suppose part of the brief was that it had to *look* like a DAF, which would rule out working their PACCAR connections for a Pete/KW conventional cab and nose, since that would just look like an American semi with DAF badges.
There was such a thing when DAF and International cooperated during the 70s…
Now TT, the XT105 is only slightly rarer than the NAT 2500. About 20 of them have been built. It had a DAF engine and most likely also DAF drive axles, although I have to look that up to be sure.
Johannes, it is rare but there were even stranger things like 2600s and 3300s badged as International for the African market as well as Western Stars with DAF cabs in Australia… As well as this (pic by M. Grots):
Stupid question, but is there a status thing in the big-rig world where someone would take a cabover model and do this? Like, I always understand that there are people that are going to build something just because they can–and that’s great, I would never criticize someone for building for themselves what they want–but what’s the reasoning behind the conversion? Other than “why not?”
Johaness, did mention that this was built as a tribute to their 1982 that they restored, and certainly some of it was because they could, ie they could afford it, as this certainly added a good chunk of money to the cost of this truck.
Some would certainly consider this a status symbol, not because it is a conventional, but because of the money spent just because they could.
It’s doubly interesting in that nobody that isn’t into trucks would have any idea that it’s not factory or in any way special. The public has no idea, neither do the customers.
You’re both right- it is quite impressive!
Status among your peers is often the most important type of status.
Never knew that the snout DAF was a custom build, always thought it was a rare and limited factory offering like the Scania T-Series or Iveco Strator (which apparently was pretty easy to create because Iveco were already building snout trucks with European cabs for the Australian market). Interesting read. Although I would’ve preferred to gift myself another classic DAF in his position. Then again at least this one can be put to commercial use. Dump combinations rarely have to bother with overall length laws due to the short trailers. Apparently there are a few dump combinations and tanker combinations operating in Germany with American tractors, as well as a couple of promotional trucks with shortened box trailers.
The Iveco Strator is custom-built by a Dutch Iveco dealership, the Charles Feijts Groep, using an Australian snout as you say:
https://www.strator.nl/home-en
And Scania hasn’t been building conventionals for quite some time now. Call Vlastuin from the Netherlands if you want one, even the latest Scania model can get a nose job, see picture below.
http://www.vlastuin-truckopbouw.nl/en/scania-torpedo/
Here is the Iveco Powerstar 7800, rated up to 140 tonne GCM
Theres a few Powerstars here but most operators now buy European cabovers, they need to attract and keep drivers, and the interisland ferries book them on by length and weight and charge accordingly
Is that a “real” Iveco or did it sprout from a former Aussie-International model?
Good question our Ivecos are sourced from Aussie, it never occurred to me they arent European models, I drove one for a while on a bullet run towing a short-long B train hauling courier post slightly modified to suit the job it went and handled brilliantly.
Cab is most certainly the European IVECO Stralis one, modified.
I think the only former International truck is the Acco – which is still using the same cab structure as from 1972. Most of these are 6×4 now with rubbish compactor bodies fitted, but going back 20+ years they had a big range.
Fascinating – thanks Johannes.
Nice find Johannes. It’s a really well done rig. I wonder how you can shot so many cool trucks there, anyway, keep them coming!