Ignoramus6391 wrote:
On 2010-07-06, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 06:15:18 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 5 Jul 2010 19:08:47 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote the following:

On Jul 5, 6:14?pm, Ignoramus12110 ignoramus12...@NOSPAM.
12110.invalid wrote:
On 2010-07-05, Gunner Asch wrote:

http://inlandempire.craigslist.org/tls/1824967856.html
No relation etc etc
Hm, this is a 10x50 mill?

``Can load in the back of your large pickup''

???
Iggy, if you lived further out west, you would know there are some
VERY large pickup trucks around here.
Happy happy joy joy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Unimog_U400.jpg
http://truck-photos.net.s3.amazonaws.com/581.jpg

Hell...its not uncommon around here to see a F350 with a diesel and
duelies hauling big ****..like small BOPs and whatnot. Sticking a small
lathe like that one in the back isnt any big deal.

Small lathe like that mill???

Sure. I have a '96 F350 (gas), single rear wheels. I loaded some
landscaping pavestones in it, bed-high, 2/3 of the length of the bed.
Drove home, stopped at several yard sales etc, no sweat. Later weighed
a stone, did the math, realized I was hauling over 3700 lbs. Made two
trips like that.

Now, a mill that weight would be a different load distribution, so some
work would need to be done to lower the CG. Probably would at least
break down the turret and head, lower or remove the knee. But the weight
is not a problem unless it's too high.
I've hauled a few lathes and mills, never knew they were back there.