Takkie vs. Johnny

[swanny]

Any guesses as to which one was dominant? TL126 vs. 240 series II. Takkie probably has 100 lbs. on Johnny boy, but Johnny has traction traks.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v85/barndwellers_md/0718091213a.jpg

[WillieWonka1850]

Takkie all the way

[crab]

well who won?

[BIGBEN2004]

I don't know what one will win their but I do know don't mess with a Gehl when it comes to pulling power, check out this one.........http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uT5sjvR5MGM

[bobcat_ron]

They will both be on their rear ends, you need to put the chain under the machines and hook it to the cutting edges, this way the front ends will stay down.
Deere did the same in the 313 vs. S130 pull off competition.

What year is the TL126?
2003?

[swanny]

No one got it right. Both pulled straight and level...no fronts up in the air.

It was close, but Johnny pulled Takkie back about a foot through the struggle. And Takkie has about 90% track tread too.

Can't discount those traction traks for economical traction. We've had a couple sets on different machines and really like them....costs about .75 cents an hour...average of 1000 hours life expectancy.

Both machines could pull the other's dead weight.

ps. Johnny is for sale...can see it on e...b...a...y

[bobcat_ron]

I love how far Takeuchi put the loader out front on the TL126's, lots of reach, but they were tippy.

[coopers]

Why is it so interesting to chain two machines up and play tug-o-war? I see this all the time now on youtube and here. Not trying to be rude but this dead horse is getting a little mushy now.

[Junior M]

Why is it so interesting to chain two machines up and play tug-o-war? I see this all the time now on youtube and here. Not trying to be rude but this dead horse is getting a little mushy now.
I've got the same opinion on it. I mean really, whats the point? What does it really prove? Really, who buys a skid based on what it can pull?

But anyways, not trying to start an argument or anything, I just dont get it..

[swanny]

I've got the same opinion on it. I mean really, whats the point? What does it really prove? Really, who buys a skid based on what it can pull?

But anyways, not trying to start an argument or anything, I just dont get it..


It's minor or moot for sure, but I assumed the rubber tracks would do better for traction in dry dirt. I wasn't familiar with the over-abundance of these experiments posted here and abroad.

I'm still a kid at heart....even at 41. :)

[Junior M]

It's minor or moot for sure, but I assumed the rubber tracks would do better for traction in dry dirt. I wasn't familiar with the over-abundance of these experiments posted here and abroad.

I'm still a kid at heart....even at 41. :)
Oh I understand, everyone wants to experiment with there equipment and push it to the limits to see what its really got.

And I also assumed the takkie would drag it all over the freakin place with no problem. But apparently, I was wrong. things with some reasoning and purpose like the original post of this thread are all good, its the hundreds of useless videos of skids hooked up to each just pulling balls to the walls on Youtube for no reason that are aggravating..

[Digdeep]

No one got it right. Both pulled straight and level...no fronts up in the air.

It was close, but Johnny pulled Takkie back about a foot through the struggle. And Takkie has about 90% track tread too.

Can't discount those traction traks for economical traction. We've had a couple sets on different machines and really like them....costs about .75 cents an hour...average of 1000 hours life expectancy.

Both machines could pull the other's dead weight.

ps. Johnny is for sale...can see it on e...b...a...y

Impossible....Takeuchi claims 8,066lbs of tractive force:weightlifter: on their spec sheet and the 240 only weighs just over 6,100lbs.

I would never suspect any OEM of publishing numbers that don't apply to the real world:nono: I wonder if its really possible that the Takeuchi TL250 really has a "real world" tractive effort of 13,770lbs or the JD CT332 11,500lbs:confused:

[Tigerotor77W]

I would never suspect any OEM of publishing numbers that don't apply to the real world:nono: I wonder if its really possible that the Takeuchi TL250 really has a "real world" tractive effort of 13,770lbs or the JD CT332 11,500lbs:confused:

It depends on what they call "tractive effort." There doesn't appear to be a definition of this anywhere, or if there is, manufacturers don't seem to use the same terminology.

One brand uses "push force," another "drawbar pull," another "tractive effort." Drawbar pull is pretty standard, but the other two...

[Digdeep]

It depends on what they call "tractive effort." There doesn't appear to be a definition of this anywhere, or if there is, manufacturers don't seem to use the same terminology.

One brand uses "push force," another "drawbar pull," another "tractive effort." Drawbar pull is pretty standard, but the other two...

I'm willing to bet that a Takeuchi or JD rep wouldn't be able to tell you what criteria or testing model they used to come up with their published numbers. :confused:

The numbers would appear to be more believable if the machines had metal tracks with grousers that actually penetrated the ground, but I find it hard to beleive the numbers with tracks that don't "bite". I recall seeing a video somewhere that ASV made that showed all 80hp machines in different tests-speed, width, flotation and traction. I think the PT80 pulled exactly the same as the CT332 ( I think it was around 7,100lbs) and the CT332 outweighed the PT80 by about 1,700lbs. This 7,100lb pulling force is far less than the 11,500lb tractive effort that JD publishes on their spec sheet.

[swanny]

As far as weight - the 240 has 500#'s of counterweights on it...bringing it's total up to just under 6700#'s. It has a smaller bucket on it than the Takkie does, so the weight difference might be more like 250 to 300#'s between the machines.

[AWJ Services]

Draw bar pull is only relevant to tractors.

Tractive force can be calculated by how much torque the drive sprocket has at the point of contact with the track.

[Tigerotor77W]

Draw bar pull is only relevant to tractors.

Tractive force can be calculated by how much torque the drive sprocket has at the point of contact with the track.

Drawbar pull is not only relevant to tractors; why can't it be used in anything else? For one, bulldozers and excavators alike use those numbers. Don't get me wrong; I know you're well-versed in these things (and we've had these discussions before), but I'm not sure that the compact equipment industry has a good way to test this "how much I can push" hype. Just about every manufacturer has numbers that indicate their own machines' superiority.

The question here is how meaningful the number might be. The amount of torque at the sprocket isn't wholly relevant because it begs the question of how to compare SSL and CTL traction; it also doesn't take into account any track-to-ground losses. digdeep, I don't know if they wouldn't be able to state the criteria, but I doubt the criteria would match those used by other manufacturers.

Frankly, I think tractive numbers are a bunch of crap for the most part and even less believable than breakout force (and we all know the confusion that results from those...).

[AWJ Services]

When calculating tractive force that number is not reflective of traction.
It is the max possible force it can apply.
You can use the bucket to apply downward force when pushing.

Drawbar is just pulling .

[Mr. Rain]

Impossible....Takeuchi claims 8,066lbs of tractive force:weightlifter: on their spec sheet and the 240 only weighs just over 6,100lbs.

:

The problem is the Tak is not just pulling the 6100# load in a static condition. It's pulling that weight plus the counteracting tractive effort of the 240 plus the additional tractive component added by the steel tracks.

[Tigerotor77W]

It is the max possible force it can apply.

Sure, but is this calculated or measured? Will it depend on how the hydraulic system is "tuned?" How can you compare a CTL to an SSL (regardless of whether it has tracks), given that the ground-drive mechanisms are different and the amount of force at that interface is going to be different? For that matter, if you have two machines, identical in weight and tractive effort but one on rubber tracks and one on wheels, which one wins in what situation?

I'm just saying that there's very little to compare simply from that one number.

[AWJ Services]

CTL's can apply all of there tractive force so the number is beneficial in that respect.

[Tigerotor77W]

How can a CTL apply all of that force and an SSL not?

[AWJ Services]

If you can stop the tires from spinning you can.

Case lists there torque output on there wheel motors which taking into account tire diameter tractive force can be figured.
The taller the tire the less torque it will have at the ground.
A CTL's effective wheel diameter is very small so it is much easier to generate a higher torque from a smaller drive motor.
Tak uses a gear reduction as well which helps more.

So the tractive number can be figured mathematically since it is the theoretical max amount of forward force possible without bias to weight or rolling resistance which is used in figuring draw bar.

[Tigerotor77W]

That number (mathematically derived) might be a good indication of what would happen in unlimited traction, but just about all SSLs, CTLs, and MTLs will slip -- so even if the calculation shows a certain amount of "push force," there is no guarantee that the machine will be able use all of it. As a result, a machine with a tractive effort of 8,000 pounds may be able to outpush a machine that has a tractive effort of 12,000 pounds.

The "maximum" force is only good for assuming that there is zero slip, which is hardly the case when SSL/CTLs are being worked.

The other consideration is that there's no specific regulation that requires manufacturers to use the same figures. Again, there's a pretty large discrepancy in how brands measure these figures, which means that even if one mathematical calculation could be used to determine the maximum push force possible (assuming zero slip), manufacturers don't report this uniformly.

[Digdeep]

That number (mathematically derived) might be a good indication of what would happen in unlimited traction, but just about all SSLs, CTLs, and MTLs will slip -- so even if the calculation shows a certain amount of "push force," there is no guarantee that the machine will be able use all of it. As a result, a machine with a tractive effort of 8,000 pounds may be able to outpush a machine that has a tractive effort of 12,000 pounds.

The "maximum" force is only good for assuming that there is zero slip, which is hardly the case when SSL/CTLs are being worked.

The other consideration is that there's no specific regulation that requires manufacturers to use the same figures. Again, there's a pretty large discrepancy in how brands measure these figures, which means that even if one mathematical calculation could be used to determine the maximum push force possible (assuming zero slip), manufacturers don't report this uniformly.

I think they should use actual bonafide drawbar pull as per SAE guidelines. It's not calculated and has a closer relation to pushing power. The standards that everyone uses need to be consistent.

[AWJ Services]

Skid steers are not tractors.

So if you used drawbar ratings I guess everyone can use the same dirt?

Anytime I am digging or pushing my tracks are not spinning.There is a reason for this.
That is why for real operators the max available power to the ground is important.
Same reason people like to have all of the hyd power available to the lift arms and drive motors without.


The reality is if the tests are not able to be performed under CONTROLLED conditions they are meaningless.That is why Drawbar is irrelevant.


The good thing about max tractive force is just that.It is all the wheel motors can physically turn regardless of the conditions.
The number can not be fudged.The Wheel motor puts out x torque at specified flow, pressure and temp.

[Mr. Rain]

Exactly. The ratings are calculated, not measured. Should be an even playing field in that regard. What it means in practicality will be different for each machine design. That's why Tak and Deere put up such big #'s with their track units: Planetary reduction multiplies torque and thus tractive effort.

[Digdeep]

Skid steers are not tractors.

So if you used drawbar ratings I guess everyone can use the same dirt?

Anytime I am digging or pushing my tracks are not spinning.There is a reason for this.
That is why for real operators the max available power to the ground is important.
Same reason people like to have all of the hyd power available to the lift arms and drive motors without.


The reality is if the tests are not able to be performed under CONTROLLED conditions they are meaningless.That is why Drawbar is irrelevant.


The good thing about max tractive force is just that.It is all the wheel motors can physically turn regardless of the conditions.
The number can not be fudged.The Wheel motor puts out x torque at specified flow, pressure and temp.

I wouldn't say drawbar is irrelevant because the actual test takes into account any wheel or track slippage due to the testing surface.

However, those are good points, but once again they are just 'theoretical" numbers. It would be real nice if there was some form of standardized test that would actually convey real world performance.

[Digdeep]

Exactly. The ratings are calculated, not measured. Should be an even playing field in that regard. What it means in practicality will be different for each machine design. That's why Tak and Deere put up such big #'s with their track units: Planetary reduction multiplies torque and thus tractive effort.

My main point outside of really wishing for some form of testing that would translate into "real world" performance is that big numbers on a spec sheet are just that....numbers.

There is no doubt that the TL250 has some power, but it's limitation is 63" of track on the ground. All things being equal, there is simply no way that that machine can put 13,770lbs of traction to the ground in normal conditions with the tracks that are standard. I'm not disputing that the machine may have that much torque down at the planetaries to translate into that force, but it all can't get to the ground as useable traction.

It's much like Bobcat's highflow that advertises 37gpm at roughly 3500psi. There is absolutely no way that machine is puting out anywhere near 37gpm at 3500psi. They are just numbers that don't really translate into performance. Why not just say that our Bobcat model X puts out a max hydraulic hp of xx at xxpsi.

[AWJ Services]

There is no doubt that the TL250 has some power, but it's limitation is 63" of track on the ground. All things being equal, there is simply no way that that machine can put 13,770lbs of traction to the ground in normal conditions with the tracks that are standard. I'm not disputing that the machine may have that much torque down at the planetaries to translate into that force, but it all can't get to the ground as useable traction.

.

That is so not true.
You obviously have never operated a skid steer with a comment like that.
Have you actually ever pushed a tree down?
Have you ever graded material so tough that you could use the bucket to stall the machine?
Quit being a salesman with an agenda and get into the real world where we make money with our equipment.:)

[Tigerotor77W]

The standards that everyone uses need to be consistent.

Agreed.

Skid steers are not tractors.

So if you used drawbar ratings I guess everyone can use the same dirt?

The reality is if the tests are not able to be performed under CONTROLLED conditions they are meaningless.

The number can not be fudged.The Wheel motor puts out x torque at specified flow, pressure and temp.

1) Agreed that SSLs don't necessarily need a drawbar *pull*, per se, but
2) Just because every manufacturer would use a standard test doesn't say anything about users' conditions. If *all* machines were tested at Nebraska in the same manner, just because you know how to operate your machine and I don't doesn't change anything: a machine that was tested in the same way as another machine and has more power will still have more power in any terrain.
3) The number *can* be fudged because there are no standards. Other than Case, how many manufacturers specify the flow, pressure, and temperature at which the motor torque is created?

Exactly. The ratings are calculated, not measured. Should be an even playing field in that regard.

Agreed.

However, those are good points, but once again they are just 'theoretical" numbers. It would be real nice if there was some form of standardized test that would actually convey real world performance.

I think we're all agreeing here... there isn't standardization...

That is so not true.
You obviously have never operated a skid steer with a comment like that.
Have you actually ever pushed a tree down?
Have you ever graded material so tough that you could use the bucket to stall the machine?
Quit being a salesman with an agenda and get into the real world where we make money with our equipment.:)

He's definitely not a salesman anymore... come on, AWJ, you know this!

If you are pushing something HUGE in ground conditions where your tracks aren't spinning AND you're not moving, then you're not using getting the full tractive force out of the drive motors. You're getting the maximum force that the machine can exert before breaking traction, but this does NOT equal the force that the motors are exerting on the track. Spinning tracks is wasted energy, but for you to stop the tracks when the motors are producing the maximum torque, you'd have to load down the machine a lot.

[AWJ Services]

but for you to stop the tracks when the motors are producing the maximum torque, you'd have to load down the machine a lot.

My point exactly.:)

[Digdeep]

That is so not true.
You obviously have never operated a skid steer with a comment like that.
Have you actually ever pushed a tree down?
Have you ever graded material so tough that you could use the bucket to stall the machine?
Quit being a salesman with an agenda and get into the real world where we make money with our equipment.:)

:clapping: Nope, never been on the inside of a machine in my life. Give me a break, I think I've been around long enough to get the benefit of the doubt. I have no other agenda on here other than offering my opinion, just like you.

I have stalled machines before, and I think you're missing my point. If you think for a minute, that the 63" of rubber track on the ground allows a TL250 to utilize all 13,770lbs of it's tractive force (I don't doubt that the final drives produce this) we are way way apart on what we have seen in the field. I'm also not knocking either Tak or JD for having final drives that produce the torque to publish those numbers but as I said I don't think either of them get that capability on the ground. More times than not they will spin tracks. If you put steel tracks on them I would believe that they would get closer to realizing their potential.

[AWJ Services]

I run a Tak every day.
Sure in wet muddy conditions they will not but 90% of the time the tracks only spin if you are not operating the machine correctly.
I lug my machine all of the time because the tracks are not spinning.If they where the machine would not lug down.
Sorry just my opinion.

[Tigerotor77W]

My point exactly.:)

I mean add weight, not lug the engine.

My point is this: in most ground conditions, it's hard to apply the full torque at the motors to the tracks without spinning the tracks. You may think that you're getting the full force when you've lugged the engine, but if you're able to break traction and spin the tracks, then you haven't. The only way to not break traction in most CTLs is to add weight until the normal force of the machine multiplied by the coefficient of traction is equal to the maximum force the motor can exert.

[Digdeep]

I run a Tak every day.
Sure in wet muddy conditions they will not but 90% of the time the tracks only spin if you are not operating the machine correctly.
I lug my machine all of the time because the tracks are not spinning.If they where the machine would not lug down.
Sorry just my opinion.

Fair enough, and I'm sure you're an excellent operator.

My original point had nothing to do with the ability to feather a bucket so that the operator could maximize the traction (especially in that cohesive red Georgia clay). It had to do with the lack of any standardized testing methods for the comparing of machines side by side on paper...taking varying operator skills completely out of the picture.

Of course, the best method is to demo each machine that the customer is interested in to find out personally which machine works best for the specific needs. Why even publish a spec sheet if everyone would just do this. Or, listen to everyone on this forum with their own agendas:drinkup:

[bobcat_ron]

Wow, a simple picture and test of 2 skid steers pulling each other for pure sh*ts and giggles turns into a 36 post debate over drawbar pull.

Thanks Lawnsite.com for making these debates possible!

[AWJ Services]

Wow, a simple picture and test of 2 skid steers pulling each other for pure sh*ts and giggles turns into a 36 post debate over drawbar pull.

Thanks Lawnsite.com for making these debates possible!

All you Northerners are so dang hard to get along with is the problem.:drinkup:

[Dirtman2007]

Wow, a simple picture and test of 2 skid steers pulling each other for pure sh*ts and giggles turns into a 36 post debate over drawbar pull.

Thanks Lawnsite.com for making these debates possible!

Makes me wanna hook the daewoo and the volvo together and have a tug of war

[Tigerotor77W]

Makes me wanna hook the daewoo and the volvo together and have a tug of war

Do it! And then we can argue about whether excavators follow SAE guidelines for drawbar pull. :P

[Scag48]

Makes me want to gouge my eyeballs out. You guys have too much time on your hands. :laugh:

[ksss]

All you Northerners are so dang hard to get along with is the problem.:drinkup:


We North/Westerners are even harder to get along with. I however, chose to sit this one out.:clapping:

Kinda fun watching as opposed to researching info for a clever response.


I will say that my VTS machine (close as I have to a CTL) continues to save my ass. If Peterson had by bedding box made already I would not have needed to climb over hills of pit run to bed trenches.

[AWJ Services]

We North/Westerners are even harder to get along with. I however, chose to sit this one out.:clapping:

Kinda fun watching as opposed to researching info for a clever response.


I will say that my VTS machine (close as I have to a CTL) continues to save my ass. If Peterson had by bedding box made already I would not have needed to climb over hills of pit run to bed trenches.

You to will be assimilated.
Resistance is Futile.

[Junior M]

You to will be assimilated.
Resistance is Futile.
definitions please? ;)

Freakin yankees wanna get all complicated and crap and make Awj use big words and then confuse the rest of use southerners.. :laugh:

[Tigerotor77W]

Makes me want to gouge my eyeballs out. You guys have too much time on your hands. :laugh:

You should see engineers discussing stuff. :hammerhead:

(saying nothing of my major in school!)

We North/Westerners are even harder to get along with. I however, chose to sit this one out.:clapping:

Kinda fun watching as opposed to researching info for a clever response.


I will say that my VTS machine (close as I have to a CTL) continues to save my ass. If Peterson had by bedding box made already I would not have needed to climb over hills of pit run to bed trenches.

Northwesterners are amazing polite and patient... though you seem to be a stubborn breed, Kaiser -- what with that Case juice all the time. :drinkup:

You to will be assimilated.
Resistance is Futile.

He'll go down kicking and fighting...

definitions please? ;)

Freakin yankees wanna get all complicated and crap and make Awj use big words and then confuse the rest of use southerners.. :laugh:

Assimilated means to be absorbed into. So he's going to become one of us. Futile means useless. Resistance is the feeling you need to have when you need to take a crap but really don't want to (well you want to, but you shouldn't).

[ksss]

You should see engineers discussing stuff. :hammerhead:

(saying nothing of my major in school!)



Northwesterners are amazing polite and patient... though you seem to be a stubborn breed, Kaiser -- what with that Case juice all the time. :drinkup:



He'll go down kicking and fighting...



Assimilated means to be absorbed into. So he's going to become one of us. Futile means useless. Resistance is the feeling you need to have when you need to take a crap but really don't want to (well you want to, but you shouldn't).

Well I am more Northerner than Westerner which may account for the stubborn streak. However I think when you got right you got it right. Power Tan Baby!!!!!!!!

As far as the CTL thing. Well it is certainly nice having one in the stable. Doubt I would go to a CTL exclusively, nice to have the capability though.

[AWJ Services]

Well I am more Northerner than Westerner which may account for the stubborn streak. However I think when you got right you got it right. Power Tan Baby!!!!!!!!



Hey never let the facts get in the way of a good story.......