PDA

View Full Version : Anyone using "non-zero" tailswing mini's?


thepawnshop
03-15-2006, 11:23 PM
Well, word has gotten around town that the fat man (that's me) is shopping for a larger mini. Thankfully, I haven't pulled the trigger on anything yet and quite honestly, I am enjoying the attention AND the free lunches.

The Gehl dealer is coming at me hard with their 603 model (12,500 lbs and a digging depth of 13' 7") and I am really impressed with all of the numbers both financially and performance wise...but it has an 18" overhang. Kicks a$$ in every aspect but I am having a tough time getting by the tailswing. Now Gehl also has a 753Z which IS zero tailswing, but it may come in 15-20k more, but the machine also weighs in at 17,000 lbs and a dig depth of 14'2". Do I need anything that big, not really, but it sure would be nice to have in a zero tailswing package, all at 2.9% financing for 60 months...after letting me rent it for 6 months with 100% of rent going to the purchase price if I buy it. If I don't, I simply turn it in.

How many of you guys, if any, use machines that have a traditional tailswing?

Gravel Rat
03-16-2006, 12:10 AM
Unless you are doing alot of work where your working in very tight spaces the zero tailswing is needed. Personally I would rather have a conventional swing machine I don't want to need to be getting that close to a sidewall of a house or trees.

tylermckee
03-16-2006, 12:15 AM
The company i work for has an older i think k030 or something like that kubota mini and it hangs over a ways. If you just watch what you are doing and use the boom swing you can really get anywhere and do just about anything a ZTS machine can.

ksss
03-16-2006, 01:12 AM
I disagree. If you can say that a conv. machine will do anything a zero tail will than you don't do much tight excavation. After going to a zero tail on this last machine I will never go back to conv. machine. There is no reason to. You don't lose lifting performance going zero tail why would anyone want to limit themselves with a conv. machine. The whole purpose behind a mini ex is working in confined areas. The other issue would be resale. The fact is that the market is moving away from conv. machines or at least moving toward zero tail and zero swing. Takeuchi will soon be releasing a side to side boom for their 7500 pound (TB135) class machine. If it were me I would go with a zero tail but thats me.

tylermckee
03-16-2006, 01:20 AM
I wasnt saying that ZTS isnt necessary just that you can get by without it most of the time. I spent a lot of time on a zero tail yanmar before this kubota and i prefer the zero tail.

Squizzy246B
03-16-2006, 06:09 AM
Anyone using "non-zero" tailswing mini's?

Yes I am:laugh:

badranman
03-16-2006, 06:26 PM
I have a Bobcat 430 zero house swing 4 ton and a 328 conventional 3 ton. The 430 is easier to work in tight spaces than the 328 bacause of the zero swing. I totally agree with ksss. Market is going zero tailswing. Take a look at all the larger machines adopting this feature. We are getting rid of the 3 ton and getting another 4 ton zhs.
Pawnshop-have you looked at a Bobcat 442? 16000 lb, dig depth 13'11", true zero tailswing with articulating boom. A guy by me bought one and he loves it.

Yard Solutions
03-16-2006, 07:32 PM
I looked at a 331 and 430 (bobcat), and was told that I will loss some lift strength when reached out when using the 430 (ZHS). Is this true, because I like the zero tail swing and larger blade it has up front.

Planet Landscaping
03-16-2006, 09:37 PM
U do give up a little with a zt. Some times shorter arm length, Over the side power in some cases, Added counter weight too (They make u think otherwise):dizzy:

badranman
03-16-2006, 09:54 PM
I looked at a 331 and 430 (bobcat), and was told that I will loss some lift strength when reached out when using the 430 (ZHS). Is this true, because I like the zero tail swing and larger blade it has up front.
Did they say this would happen over the blade or over the side? Of course you're not going to lift the same over the side as over the blade, no machine does. I even have the extra long arm option and a thumb which adds some weight (there is an additional counterweight added with the long arm). Take it for a spin and check out it's abilities for yourself, then you'll see.

thepawnshop
03-16-2006, 10:28 PM
If I can't make a decision on which machine to buy, at least I have been able to decide on "zero tail-swing". I am leaning now towards the Gehl 753Z, partially becasue the finance package is so attractive....actually that is the main reason!

2.9% for 60 months...booyah!

thepawnshop
03-16-2006, 10:50 PM
442 does look like a hoss, spec wise! I may go check one out tomorrow!

gammon landscaping
03-16-2006, 11:17 PM
i have ran both the reason i don't like the zts is they are not as balanced and the operator's station is so cramped in most of them. if they have the side boom you can dig next to walls no problem (just can't swing all the way around but how often do you need to put the dirt in you way ?

i really like the gehls because the have the self leveling house option. i came from a case back hoe background and the fact that you have to build a level place to sit to dig level is kind of a pain. with the gehls this is not a problem

Scag48
03-17-2006, 02:21 AM
I don't understand why people don't think a ZTS machine is balanced. More of the weight is over the center of the machine, how is that NOT balanced?

After having a ZTS, we'll never consider a convential tail machine again. There's no advantage of having one vs. a ZTS. BTW, cab size is the same. I ran a 304.5 and the cab dimensions are almost identical.

Gravel Rat
03-18-2006, 06:02 PM
You actually want the counter weight farther rear ward to counter act the see saw motion. When I ran 158 Komatsu thats the first thing I noticed man this machine is bouncy especially when your digging on the side.

If you have ran conventional tailswing machines alot you get used to watching where you turn.

Dirty Water
03-18-2006, 06:21 PM
I don't understand why people don't think a ZTS machine is balanced. More of the weight is over the center of the machine, how is that NOT balanced?

Reach the boom out and pick up something heavy. Now think about where you want the counterweight to be.

I've found running machines with short tracks and ZTS makes me a little nervious on slopes where a regular machine would be fine.

tylermckee
03-18-2006, 06:43 PM
I don't understand why people don't think a ZTS machine is balanced. More of the weight is over the center of the machine, how is that NOT balanced?


what happens when you put a lot of weight in the center of a see saw? Nothing. i dont see how having more weight over the center of the machine would be beneficial at all opposed to having it hanging out opposite the boom.

ksss
03-18-2006, 09:23 PM
I realize that it may seem like it defies logic, but if you check the specs of larger excavators that have a similiar machine in zero tail like a CASE CX130 and 135 (zero tail) Look at the lift capacities. The CX225 I rent often is far more stable than a 210 because of the location of the weight. By putting all the weight in the tail like a conv. machine it tends to make the machine more unstable especially with an empty bucket. Look into and you'll see what I mean.

Dirty Water
03-18-2006, 10:00 PM
I realize that it may seem like it defies logic, but if you check the specs of larger excavators that have a similiar machine in zero tail like a CASE CX130 and 135 (zero tail) Look at the lift capacities. The CX225 I rent often is far more stable than a 210 because of the location of the weight. By putting all the weight in the tail like a conv. machine it tends to make the machine more unstable especially with an empty bucket. Look into and you'll see what I mean.

How much longer are the tracks on the 225?

Scag48
03-19-2006, 02:20 AM
KSSS nailed it, you guys are missing the fact that the undercarriages on the ZTS machines are longer than those of convential style.

Climbing a slope is alot more tolerable with a ZTS machine, there isn't a huge ass on the machine making the front end reach for the sky. I find the convential tail machines to be very unstable with an empty bucket, especially if you're using the bucket to rake material toward you. Of course, it all takes some getting used to, you can get things smooth after about 15 minutes, but I'm used to a ZTS machine that is actually better balanced than a convential machine.

Gravel Rat
03-19-2006, 02:32 AM
It doesn't make a difference the 158 Komatsu I ran was a long carriage and the 150 Hitachi which is a conventional machine with long carriage was way more stable and less bouncy.

Take a excavator used for forestry road building applications they mount a fuel tank over the counter weight to add more weight to it to make the machine more stable.

A long carriage doesn't help when your working off the side of the tracks. You figure the farther out the tailswing more leverage with gravity keeps the machine from rolling.

You take a full clean up bucket full of wet heavy clay with a zero tailswing machine and see how far you can reach out before it starts to roll.

The 158 you almost needed a neck brace running that machine man the rotex bearing must take a **** kicking.

Yard Solutions
03-19-2006, 07:11 AM
Just looking at some of the spec sheets of the Bobcat 430 ZHS it seems the tracks are also wide as well as longer, I assume that is a stabilty issue. I understand that the reason they are "tippy" is th lack of counterbalance, if you figure that the fulcrum (sp?) for the "lever" is iether the ouside of the tracks or the blade, shouldn't this make the machine as stable as a conventional with the shorter narrower tracks?

Slong those same lines, can't they (or we) just add additional counterweight to balance the bucket? I know ideally you would add it outward, but on a zero tail can't they stack it up? Are their aftermarket counterweights for these zero turns? Did I just create a new product?

RockSet N' Grade
03-19-2006, 08:33 AM
I run a Gehl 802 which is an older model non-0 machine with a counter weight on the back with an extended boom....Ive got 19'6" reach. Not often do I get into bumping into stuff with the back end. I think the real question is: what is the job application? What is most of the work?

One of the options I would consider is the leveling platform that Gehl offers on a few models of small machine......

If I was to buy a new machine from anyone, make sure you get it plumbed from the get-go for a thumb....

RockSet N' Grade
03-19-2006, 09:31 AM
I love equipment and have waaaay too much, and then again, never enough!

I was talking/asking for feedback from a mentor yesterday and he continually steers me back to this question when it comes to equipment: What is the niche market you are competing in? What do your competators have and what will make you better compete? What is your business plan?

I personally get so caught up in machinery I sometimes forget to work backwards from my bottom line and production to the nuances and all the pluses/minuses of each piece of equipment. If it is yellow, its probably pretty good.....my question is: can I put this to work right now and tomorrow and make money?

Then the other part of me kicks in and I hope Santa doesn't forget me this next year and puts a brand new machine under my christmas tree.....all paid for by Santa of course......

ksss
03-19-2006, 10:16 PM
Gravel Rat: Part of the problem is its a Komatsu. My neighbor has two new 228 Komatsu (zero tails but I am sure you knew that) and a near new CASE 225 zero tail. The CASE is rock solid the Komatsu's are tippy. He has been trying to increase the counter weight of the 228's He has bought 2 tons of lead shot to dump in the counter weight. Like I said the concept is hard to understand for some guys. However the zero tails (large machines) have the same or more lift capacity of a conv. machine of the same class. running a machine that is properly engineered you will see that a zero tail is very solid.

On the equipment buying thing. It is easy to put the cart in front of the horse. I heard this several years ago and it rings true. " I excavate there for I need equipment". Rather then "I have equipment so I should excavate".

Gravel Rat
03-19-2006, 10:34 PM
I didn't like running the Komatsu sure it was a brandnew machine but the operator's cab is very cramped my knees would throb and as I said it bounced didn't matter how smooth you tried to be.

gammon landscaping
03-19-2006, 10:42 PM
ok guys with the larger machines a 320 cat normal tail swing and you compare it to the newer 320 zts there is a reason the stats say that it can handle more . does anyone here know how they take a machine that size and make it a zts??? well the start by putting it on a 325 undercarage wich is alot longer and wider . then they redesign the counterwight. so what you have is a maching that doesn't really fit any better but just has a bigger foot print so that an unexperanced operator can see how far out it will swing. i know this for a fact on the larger new excavators and i would asume it to be close to the same on smaller machines. what differance does it make if you have a 4 foot wide normal machine that can do it or a zts machine that is 5'6'' wide that fits in the same spot that can do it also? you may save 6 or 8 inches with them and you do sacrafice leg room

ksss
03-20-2006, 12:47 AM
The difference is not having to worry about your "tail" when swinging the machine. Your right a conv. machine is more narrow and typically lighter. However a zero tail machine can typically work anywhere that you physically fit the machine. That is not the case with a conv. machine. Add zero swing to the mix and you have a totally adaptable machine. The IHI 70Z comes to mind. My Takeuchi TB53 also has this ability (actually it over hangs about 2") . You can swing the machine within the width of its tracks.

Gravel Rat
03-20-2006, 12:52 AM
The Komatsu cab is horrible talk about small like I meantioned my knees would kill me because I couldn't stretch you pretty much have to keep your legs bent at a 90 degree or back at 45 degrees. Getting in and out of the cab is another biatch I darn near fell a few times getting in.