PDA

View Full Version : Bobcat T380, any info?


Ozz
10-28-2009, 04:40 PM
Anybody know anything about a T380? I've heard rumors about it being 110-120 hp, having around 4k lift, anyone think it'll happen? I doubt it.... They've gon into the random number systen again. :cry: I'll probably be numbered T900 or something like that...

tbi
10-28-2009, 04:52 PM
Anybody know anything about a T380? I've heard rumors about it being 110-120 hp, having around 4k lift, anyone think it'll happen? I doubt it.... They've gon into the random number systen again. :cry: I'll probably be numbered T900 or something like that...

The race for the first $100,000 skid steer is on.

riverwalklandscaping
10-28-2009, 08:52 PM
why not just get a dozer or an articulated loader.. less money and pushes/lifts more.. there is no need for that much HP/size to run a harley rake or whatever most people do with them..

SiteSolutions
10-28-2009, 09:14 PM
why not just get a dozer or an articulated loader.. less money and pushes/lifts more.. there is no need for that much HP/size to run a harley rake or whatever most people do with them..

I bet it'd run a 120" harley rake!:laugh:

bobcat_ron
10-28-2009, 09:33 PM
Bring back the 963 Bobcat!!!!!!

That was a fun machine!

ksss
10-28-2009, 09:41 PM
Bring back the 963 Bobcat!!!!!!

That was a fun machine!


The 963 was a pig. Big power, not a lot of lift for a machine that size. Considering how big it was its abilities were not inline with its size. Thats why they did not sell.


I doubt you will see a skid steer over 100 hp for emission reasons (Gehl backed down their large machines for this reason). I dare say you wont see a machine that big. Especially now. The largest machines of any OEM are not the best sellers. Factor in the manufacturing costs of these machines verse the numbers they would sell and it wont pencil out. I think Gehl is the ceiling for skid steers. The compact loader market is increasing and I agree would be a better option for lift and carry jobs.

SellingIron
10-28-2009, 10:09 PM
I have a fertilizer customer that love's the 963's. He wishes he could get his hands on some more of them....You sit up higher in them which some operators like...

ksss
10-28-2009, 10:56 PM
I have a fertilizer customer that love's the 963's. He wishes he could get his hands on some more of them....You sit up higher in them which some operators like...


They did sit up high.

J. Peterson Grading
10-28-2009, 11:13 PM
Theres an old 943 at the dealer here in town. Its one big machine. Its funny though, out of all the real big bobcat machines (943, 963) I have ever seen, I have only seen them in fertilizer plants, concrete plants, or at locations where they don't leave the site. I have also never seen one on a job site as well.

Maybe they were just to big and heavy for their own good.

What would be the point of a Skid that size? it would be such a waste of time for Bobcat to develop, and market. I just don't see a market for something like that.

J.

Bleed Green
10-28-2009, 11:14 PM
is there supposed to be plans for a T380? I mean when you start to get up over 100 horse power wouldn't you just be better off getting a dozer. LOL

Stick Pro
10-29-2009, 12:05 AM
I would love for bobcat to bring back the 963. We use ours every day of the week. This machine is a beast it just keeps pushing and digging, it does have its break downs but what does not. Out of all the bobcats we own i still like the 963 the best that thing will move some dirt in a hurry.

SellingIron
10-29-2009, 12:25 AM
There won't be a T380 since the model numbers have changed. But yes, a bigger CTL is in the works....

SiteSolutions
10-29-2009, 01:33 AM
They've gon into the random number systen again. :cry: I'll probably be numbered T900 or something like that...

I think I've got this figured out... maybe. The new numbers seem to be based on the tipping load of the machine, i.e. The T630 has a tipping load of about 6300 lbs.

So if the old number was 380, that would have been it's 35% of tip, so the new number would be...

3800 / 35 * 100 = 10,857

Maybe the "T1080"? T1000? T1100?

DeereMan85
10-29-2009, 06:42 AM
T1000 would be cool - nickname it "The Terminator." Bobcat marketing department, I expect a royalty check for that one.

SiteSolutions
10-29-2009, 06:55 AM
Dunno... when I hear "T-1000" I remember this horror GM unleashed on us back in the day. I had to drive one for driver's ed. What a P.O.S.

Tigerotor77W
10-29-2009, 10:37 AM
I think I've got this figured out... maybe. The new numbers seem to be based on the tipping load of the machine, i.e. The T630 has a tipping load of about 6300 lbs.

No, since the S630 shares the same number as its tracked brother. (And the T650 has more than 200 pounds more tipping load than the T630!)

This machine will likely be called with the T750 or T850... 50 signifying (as Bobcat has stated) a vertical-lift machine, and the 7- or 8- signifying large-frame.

Think of it this way: Cat's vertical-lift SSLs end in 7, radial in 6, and the second digit (1-7: e.g. 216B, 256C, 272C) signifies the relative "size" of the machine. (Note that this is true only for SSLs, CTLs, and MTLs in their own machine type, as a 257B is no more powerful than a 256C.) Bobcat has a similar thing going on, but the first digit after the letter indicates frame size; the second digit represents radial vs. vertical.

In neither case is there logic in how machines are rated vs. how they are named.

SiteSolutions
10-29-2009, 10:49 AM
No, since the S630 shares the same number as its tracked brother. (And the T650 has more than 200 pounds more tipping load than the T630!)

This machine will likely be called with the T750 or T850... 50 signifying (as Bobcat has stated) a vertical-lift machine, and the 7- or 8- signifying large-frame.

Think of it this way: Cat's vertical-lift SSLs end in 7, radial in 6, and the second digit (1-7: e.g. 216B, 256C, 272C) signifies the relative "size" of the machine. (Note that this is true only for SSLs, CTLs, and MTLs in their own machine type, as a 257B is no more powerful than a 256C.) Bobcat has a similar thing going on, but the first digit after the letter indicates frame size; the second digit represents radial vs. vertical.

In neither case is there logic in how machines are rated vs. how they are named.

:rolleyes:

Oh well

At least the mini ex line will have some relation to the machine capacity.

Skidsteerman
10-29-2009, 12:29 PM
Dunno... when I hear "T-1000" I remember this horror GM unleashed on us back in the day. I had to drive one for driver's ed. What a P.O.S.

Yea, they'll promote it as the T1000 Terminator, but performance will equal that GM horrormobile. :laugh:

I'd say that up until things slowed down, our large frame CT332 was one of the better sellers over the smaller stuff. There is a good market for them, it's the resale on large frames that hurt.

Deere is coming out with the 333D and it is a larger class unit then the CT332 was. Any larger then that you might consider jumping up to the Deere 605 crawler loader.

These things need to stay somewhat compact for transport and fitting into tight areas on job sites. Any bigger then they are now and you may as well look at other type of equipment to fill those needs - i.e. a small articulated wheel loader would run circles around a bobcat 963 sslder moving fertilizer.

mrsops
10-29-2009, 12:32 PM
I would love for bobcat to bring back the 963. We use ours every day of the week. This machine is a beast it just keeps pushing and digging, it does have its break downs but what does not. Out of all the bobcats we own i still like the 963 the best that thing will move some dirt in a hurry.

Stick pro couple of asphalt guys near me had the 963's and acutally one of them still has it they said it was a real powerhouse... Stick pro what ever happened with the t320??

Tigerotor77W
10-29-2009, 02:00 PM
:rolleyes:

Oh well

At least the mini ex line will have some relation to the machine capacity.

I agree with you... didn't mean to be a smart ass there.

SiteSolutions
10-29-2009, 05:03 PM
I agree with you... didn't mean to be a smart ass there.

Not at all. If there is one guy on here I trust to humiliate me in the most non malicious manner, it would be you. :laugh: I'm glad you got to me before Junior or Ron.:dancing:

Seriously, I'd rather be corrected than go on spouting incorrect information.

Junior M
10-29-2009, 05:08 PM
Not at all. If there is one guy on here I trust to humiliate me in the most non malicious manner, it would be you. :laugh: I'm glad you got to me before Junior or Ron.:dancing:

Seriously, I'd rather be corrected than go on spouting incorrect information.
:wall :cry: :realmad:



:laugh:

SellingIron
10-29-2009, 05:35 PM
i.e. a small articulated wheel loader would run circles around a bobcat 963 sslder moving fertilizer.

I would like to here how.....

Digdeep
10-29-2009, 06:08 PM
I would like to here how.....

I think you meant "hear", not "here" :drinkup:

SellingIron
10-29-2009, 07:27 PM
oops!!! Time for a beer..:drinkup:Here Hear.......

mrsops
10-29-2009, 07:28 PM
oops!!! Time for a beer..:drinkup:Here Hear.......

How about a grey goose and redbull :laugh:

Hanau
10-29-2009, 07:32 PM
Hornsby's Apple Cider.:drinkup::waving:

Skidsteerman
10-29-2009, 07:46 PM
I would like to here how.....

Take the JD 244J wheel loader with stereo steering for example. Can handle over 7K lbs at full turn - 963 couldn't lift more then 4K off the ground. You set up higher to see over the loader and bucket and the ground speed smokes the 963. Seriously, what would be the advantage in using a slow moving big turd bobcat 963 ssdler just to move fertilizer? After all, there is a reason Bobcat discontinued it.

ksss
10-29-2009, 09:04 PM
The drunk chick peeing on the concrete is hot!:clapping: No class, but hot!

Stick Pro
10-29-2009, 09:08 PM
Stick pro couple of asphalt guys near me had the 963's and acutally one of them still has it they said it was a real powerhouse... Stick pro what ever happened with the t320??

The cat guy found a 279c up north so he brought it down for me to demo. I picked it up tuesday, i really like the undercarage on the cat. Our bobcat salesman has been at the job every morning bringing doughnuts for us, they are really trying to sale the 320 to us. I got to take the cat back tomorrow, and then make up my mind what machine we want. Sould have my decision by sunday.

ioilyouin
10-29-2009, 09:24 PM
There must be some margin left in the Cal. market. I barely get a handshake when I buy something.

DUSTYCEDAR
10-29-2009, 09:24 PM
I THOUGHT {my first mistake} that skid steers were supposed to be ablt to fit where we need them
they r getting so big i can take a full size backho into the holes need to fit them.
it used to be you could tow it with a pickup now you need a cdl to move a 12k machine.
bigger is not always better

YellowDogSVC
10-29-2009, 11:16 PM
The drunk chick peeing on the concrete is hot!:clapping: No class, but hot!

You and I must have been thinking the same thing.. Bet that pig gets the swine flu.

Tigerotor77W
10-29-2009, 11:50 PM
Not at all. If there is one guy on here I trust to humiliate me in the most non malicious manner, it would be you. :laugh:

Uhoh... I better work on my bark. :drinkup:

Hanau
10-30-2009, 12:03 AM
The drunk chick peeing on the concrete is hot!:clapping: No class, but hot!

You and I must have been thinking the same thing.. Bet that pig gets the swine flu.

She's probably a student at UofI. :laugh:

ksss
10-30-2009, 12:26 AM
She's probably a student at UofI. :laugh:


That would make her Validictorian at ISU!

Hanau
10-30-2009, 12:30 AM
Tell ya what bro, Vandals is an apt name for that school.

Saw a completely destroyed portable restroom allover the soccer field in September. Nasty.

Those kids are always tearing something up at UofI. Mommy and Daddy must be so proud of their little Vandals.

ksss
10-30-2009, 12:31 AM
There must be some margin left in the Cal. market. I barely get a handshake when I buy something.


The donut thing kills me.:rolleyes:

SellingIron
10-30-2009, 08:38 AM
Take the JD 244J wheel loader with stereo steering for example. Can handle over 7K lbs at full turn - 963 couldn't lift more then 4K off the ground. You set up higher to see over the loader and bucket and the ground speed smokes the 963. Seriously, what would be the advantage in using a slow moving big turd bobcat 963 ssdler just to move fertilizer? After all, there is a reason Bobcat discontinued it.


The fertilizer customers that I sell to only use skids. The reasons for this is there work areas are tight. Most of the time its wide enough for two bobcats to run side by side. Some have height restrictions to work around. The 963 is two speed (12MPH). The operators run in 2 speed most of the time sliding sideways while driving into the bins to get product. With all my customers that deal with fertilizer, and FL. has alot of them. A wheelloader is just to big for them.

Tigerotor77W
10-30-2009, 08:57 AM
Take the JD 244J wheel loader with stereo steering for example. Can handle over 7K lbs at full turn - 963 couldn't lift more then 4K off the ground. You set up higher to see over the loader and bucket and the ground speed smokes the 963. Seriously, what would be the advantage in using a slow moving big turd bobcat 963 ssdler just to move fertilizer? After all, there is a reason Bobcat discontinued it.

I can't argue with how much lift capacity the 963 had in actual use (i.e. not going off its spec sheet), but I'm going to challenge you on the second part. I doubt that a 244J will be able to handle 7,000 lbs straight, let alone at full turn. Care to share a video, à la SS Smack Down?

If you're implying that the 244J had something to do with the 963's demise, when exactly did the 244J arrive? There was no predecessor to it, IIRC. The 963 was discontinued in 2003.

SellingIron: to be fair, the 963 could only hit 9 MPH. That being said, I agree that in some areas a SSL will work better than a CWL. Sometimes a CWL will work; other times, salesmen need to realize that a SSL is best for an application for a reason and not try to pursue his or her own agenda.

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 09:44 AM
I haven't seen a video of it, but check out the specs - 7700 lbs. at full turn. You can use up to a 2.1 yard bucket. Looking at a material weight chart, you could actually run an even larger bucket depending on the type of fertilizer. The 244J will outmaneuver and work in a tighter space than any other CWL on the market. Will it outwork two 963s? Hard to say without running them side-by-side, but the visibility, the size of the bucket, and the ground speed would help to overcome the slight loss in maneuverability. It would definitely outperform a single 963. You would also save a lot of fuel running one 59 hp engine as opposed to two 105 hp engines.

SellingIron
10-30-2009, 09:48 AM
Tig, Correct 9mph is top speed for the 963. I had 12mph on my brain from the A300's. If a company has a enough room to handle a wheelloader. I could see how they would work. More capacity, less trips to the hopper... Most of my customers do not have the room and decide to go with skids..

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 10:10 AM
Also, as far as a salesman pursuing an agenda, we have new skid steers that perform better than a 963, so if a skid would work better we have that option. CWLs are typically much more productive for material handling, especially the 244J because of the stereo steering. Just because it happens to be a brand other than your preference doesn't mean we're being deceitful.

Mr. Rain
10-30-2009, 10:25 AM
If you're implying that the 244J had something to do with the 963's demise, when exactly did the 244J arrive? There was no predecessor to it, IIRC. The 963 was discontinued in 2003.



244 CWL's have been around a while. Wouldn't say they had anything to do with 900 series fading away necessarily, but they were around back then.

http://www.machinerytrader.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=5864613

Skidsteerman
10-30-2009, 11:54 AM
If you're implying that the 244J had something to do with the 963's demise, when exactly did the 244J arrive? There was no predecessor to it, IIRC. The 963 was discontinued in 2003.


not try to pursue his or her own agenda.

Never said or implied that the Bobcat 963 demise was due to any competitor other then lack of sales - you need to quit reading between the lines.

As for as the JD wheel loader, yes, there was a 244 out back then but it was not the J series and it was not marketed very well. It was a completely different animal then the J series that is offered today. It is the only small wheel loader with stereo steering, it can shoehorn into very tight locations for it's size.

What agenda would that be? Pointing out other solutions for jobs out there means someone has an agenda? Your talking about a has been sslder, what's to compete against there?:rolleyes:

Tigerotor77W
10-30-2009, 02:32 PM
I haven't seen a video of it, but check out the specs - 7700 lbs. at full turn.

I know what the spec sheet states; I'm claiming that it won't put up numbers as high as the spec sheet (and even if it could, that it's hydraulically limited and can't lift 7,700 pounds).

Just because it happens to be a brand other than your preference doesn't mean we're being deceitful.

I don't think you're been deceitful. I think you're keeping a level head here. I challenge sweeping statements that appear here.

244 CWL's have been around a while.

Certainly -- but I doubt if that 244 would be able to keep up with a skid-steer... CWLs didn't really start gaining ground until Volvo revamped their LxxB models and Deere came out with the H-series (304, 344) -- a family of which the 244 was not a part.

Never said or implied that the Bobcat 963 demise was due to any competitor other then lack of sales - you need to quit reading between the lines.

As for as the JD wheel loader, yes, there was a 244 out back then but it was not the J series and it was not marketed very well. It was a completely different animal then the J series that is offered today. It is the only small wheel loader with stereo steering, it can shoehorn into very tight locations for it's size.

What agenda would that be? Pointing out other solutions for jobs out there means someone has an agenda? Your talking about a has been sslder, what's to compete against there?:rolleyes:

I'll try to stop reading between your lines out of courtesy. My arguing with you on these forums publicly (which I did with my previous post) is useless and doesn't help the OP. I'll watch my mouth next time.

Skidsteerman
10-30-2009, 02:47 PM
I know what the spec sheet states; I'm claiming that it won't put up numbers as high as the spec sheet (and even if it could, that it's hydraulically limited and can't lift 7,700 pounds).




So, a conservative company like John Deere is going to over rate their product? You doubt it can handle over 7K at full turn based on what, your beliefs? Have you tried this on your own with a JD 244J? If anything, Deere will under rate things on the margin of safety.

ksss
10-30-2009, 02:53 PM
I know what the spec sheet states; I'm claiming that it won't put up numbers as high as the spec sheet (and even if it could, that it's hydraulically limited and can't lift 7,700 pounds).



I don't think you're been deceitful. I think you're keeping a level head here. I challenge sweeping statements that appear here.



Certainly -- but I doubt if that 244 would be able to keep up with a skid-steer... CWLs didn't really start gaining ground until Volvo revamped their LxxB models and Deere came out with the H-series (304, 344) -- a family of which the 244 was not a part.



I'll try to stop reading between your lines out of courtesy. My arguing with you on these forums publicly (which I did with my previous post) is useless and doesn't help the OP. I'll watch my mouth next time.


I think the application would dictate which would cycle faster. I have loaded my side dump trailer (23 yards) with a 95XT and a big bucket faster than the guy next to me could load his tandem truck with a 420D.

The conditions favored my fast cycle times. Change some factors in that event and the 420 would have been faster.

What I like about the compact wheel loaders is the visibility and comfort. The problem I personally have with them is my ROI on my skid steers is high. Don't think I would have the same with a C.wheel loader. Thats me. That and new they are unbelievably expensive. I called Wacker-Nueson the other day when I saw they had a free three day demo on any product they make. I am making arrangements for one of their bigger C. wheel loaders. I have checked the specs. and they are not that impressive but I am more less testing the idea and not necessarily the product, although I guess you never know. They are more popular here for snow removal than anything else

AWJ Services
10-30-2009, 03:08 PM
Bucket breakout is over 10k on the machine so it will not be hyd limited at 7k.

Digdeep
10-30-2009, 03:17 PM
So, a conservative company like John Deere is going to over rate their product? You doubt it can handle over 7K at full turn based on what, your beliefs? Have you tried this on your own with a JD 244J? If anything, Deere will under rate things on the margin of safety.

Tipping load (straight or articulated) is different than lifting capability, especially in wheel loaders. It isn't necessary to be able to lift and operate the machine in order to publish an SAE Tipping Load. Deere publishes a straight tipping load of 8,457lbs with a standard 1yd bucket and a max lift capacity at ground level of 9,892lbs (SAE allows OEMs to chain down the rear of the machines to establish max lift capacities). The max lift capacity at full height is 6,407lbs. These weighs will be less with forks due to the load centers.

I'm not saying that the 244J won't handle 7k lbs, but it will be somewhere in between the max lift at ground level and max lift at full height. Ground conditions, bucket, and operator will also play a role.

I think that in most cases stock piling applications on improved surfaces a wheel loader would be faster than a SSL due to operating capacities and ground speeds. However, depending on the scope of applications that I would want to accomplish and the variances in job site sizes I think I would choose the SSL due to more flexibility.

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 03:54 PM
As long as the max capacity at full height does not exceed the tipping load, it stands to reason that there would be no need to chain the machine down to achieve that number. The ground level carrying capacity may very well be accurate also, as the lift arm geometry would keep the load closer to the machine at that height. What the limit is between ground level and full height we cannot know from the published specs, but the machine can, according to the most objective means we have of measuring such things, lift and carry at least 6407 lbs at full turn. Its hydraulics are capable of lifting such loads, and they do not exceed the tipping load, so there is really no room for argument this claim. As has been stated, these numbers are in perfect conditions. Then again, they are for everyone else as well, including the Bobcat 963.

Hanau
10-30-2009, 04:11 PM
Will a 244J run skidsteer attachments?

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 04:16 PM
Yes, it will run skid steer attachments. You just have to buy a coupler from Deere ($1302 list price) that converts from the Euro-style to skid steer-style.

Hanau
10-30-2009, 04:34 PM
Wouldn't a 244J then be ideal for running a mulching head? Excellent visibility, good maneuverability, larger tires for more traction, etc.

I was thinking back to KSSS's incident with his Case. If he had a 244J (or equivelant) he wouldn't have been nearly trapped by the loading arms.

Digdeep
10-30-2009, 04:36 PM
As long as the max capacity at full height does not exceed the tipping load, it stands to reason that there would be no need to chain the machine down to achieve that number. The ground level carrying capacity may very well be accurate also, as the lift arm geometry would keep the load closer to the machine at that height. What the limit is between ground level and full height we cannot know from the published specs, but the machine can, according to the most objective means we have of measuring such things, lift and carry at least 6407 lbs at full turn. Its hydraulics are capable of lifting such loads, and they do not exceed the tipping load, so there is really no room for argument this claim. As has been stated, these numbers are in perfect conditions. Then again, they are for everyone else as well, including the Bobcat 963.

Correct. However, it is well known that virtually all OEMs do chain their rear axles down to determine max lift. Especially since it is well within SAE guidelines.

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 04:46 PM
Wouldn't a 244J then be ideal for running a mulching head? Excellent visibility, good maneuverability, larger tires for more traction, etc.

I was thinking back to KSSS's incident with his Case. If he had a 244J (or equivelant) he wouldn't have been nearly trapped by the loading arms.

It doesn't have enough hydraulic flow to run a mulching head.

Hanau
10-30-2009, 04:49 PM
So a 244J would need a larger pump to run a mulching head? Or is it entirely out of the realm of possibility?

DeereMan85
10-30-2009, 04:56 PM
I don't know have the technical knowledge to answer that question. A 304J (essentially the same machine with a bigger engine, but available only through construction/forestry dealers) would be just shy of the gpm required for a Fecon head in standard form. Maybe someone else can chime in to answer your question.

AWJ Services
10-30-2009, 05:06 PM
So a 244J would need a larger pump to run a mulching head? Or is it entirely out of the realm of possibility?

A mulching head needs a bunch of Hyd HP like 60+ hp.
If the engine only has 58 hp it cannot make more hyd hp than that,

Hanau
10-30-2009, 05:15 PM
Interesting, thanks.

So what CWL would run a mulching head and weighs under 10tons transport weight? I use a 24' tilt deck gooseneck to transport equipment with.

This is me thinking outside the box. I was planning on buying a big skidsteer next year. However this discussion has piqued my interest in CWL's. I never knew I could run skidsteer attachments on one.

Off the top of my head a CWL would be great for snow, easier to get in and out of, easier to service.

This has me curious enough that it warrants further investigation before I pull the trigger on the skidsteer. Especially if the machines are similarly priced.

SiteSolutions
10-30-2009, 06:01 PM
So a 244J would need a larger pump to run a mulching head? Or is it entirely out of the realm of possibility?

Check out Supertrak; they make all sorts of stuff for mulching, like a 140hp version of a Cat MTL... they take machines and put big engines, big pumps, and better cooling in them.

http://www.supertrak.com/

They have a Wheel loader or two in their line up

ksss
10-30-2009, 06:51 PM
Interesting, thanks.

So what CWL would run a mulching head and weighs under 10tons transport weight? I use a 24' tilt deck gooseneck to transport equipment with.

This is me thinking outside the box. I was planning on buying a big skidsteer next year. However this discussion has piqued my interest in CWL's. I never knew I could run skidsteer attachments on one.

Off the top of my head a CWL would be great for snow, easier to get in and out of, easier to service.

This has me curious enough that it warrants further investigation before I pull the trigger on the skidsteer. Especially if the machines are similarly priced.

I don't know that they are similiarly priced new paint to new paint. I priced a 321E verse a loaded 465 and the 321 was like 25K more. The other thing is I don't think a CWL will do everything as well as a skid steer even though the attachments interchange. The importance of this depend on what you what your wanting to do with the large skid steer and CWL. If your loading trucks and backfilling than the CWL will shine. If your doing a variety of things such as landscaping, rock raking and the like, I think you will find your trying to shove 10 pounds of sh!t in a 5 pound bag more often than not. I found that in order to match the specs of the largest skid steers, the CWL needs to be on the larger side of the product line (other than max. lift which favors the wheel loader).

Hanau
10-30-2009, 07:07 PM
I'd generally be doing landscaping stuff.

You post drove home one of the things I don't like about skidsteers. Access. Especially in a closed cab. Those loader arms can trap you. Especially if (like me) you're too big to get out the back window.

Of course the CWL is going to be a bigger machine.

For a skidsteer I was looking at a JD332.

As far as CWL's go the largest I'd want to drag behind my truck would be something like a JD344J. They weigh in at 18.5K. On the nose of the legal limit of my trailer. The weight of the chains and binders would throw me over. So it's doable provided I don't get pulled over. Legal if I get the next size up trailer and drag it behind the F-650.

The 344J is a large machine. Definetely too big for backyards, however I have a MT55 for that.

Depending on cost, what attachments I can run (will a 344J run skidsteer attachments?) and what kind of work i can do with it, the machine may be a viable option over a skidsteer.

Now if a 344J had the same capabilities to work in muddy fields like a tracked machine then it would be even better. For muddy conditions (site prep) I was looking at buying a CTL.

So here is where it gets interesting. Say I'm doing a big hardscape job. Currently I use a CTL (rented) to do the site prep, then I swap out for a wheeled machine to carry the material. A wheeled machine is less likely to pop out pavers when turning. What if instead of purchasing a wheeled machine and a tracked machine I saved money and bought a CWL w/ skidsteer attachments?

A CWL would be the cat's ass for tree removal. A machine like a 344J could pick up the whole log and chunk it on a trailer. I could remove the tree in larger sections, saving time, which saves money.

Then there's snow removal. Which favors a CWL as well.

Of course I have no time in a CWL, so most of my knowledge is theoretical. What do you think Shane?

ksss
10-30-2009, 09:26 PM
I'd generally be doing landscaping stuff.

You post drove home one of the things I don't like about skidsteers. Access. Especially in a closed cab. Those loader arms can trap you. Especially if (like me) you're too big to get out the back window.

Of course the CWL is going to be a bigger machine.

For a skidsteer I was looking at a JD332.

As far as CWL's go the largest I'd want to drag behind my truck would be something like a JD344J. They weigh in at 18.5K. On the nose of the legal limit of my trailer. The weight of the chains and binders would throw me over. So it's doable provided I don't get pulled over. Legal if I get the next size up trailer and drag it behind the F-650.

The 344J is a large machine. Definetely too big for backyards, however I have a MT55 for that.

Depending on cost, what attachments I can run (will a 344J run skidsteer attachments?) and what kind of work i can do with it, the machine may be a viable option over a skidsteer.

Now if a 344J had the same capabilities to work in muddy fields like a tracked machine then it would be even better. For muddy conditions (site prep) I was looking at buying a CTL.

So here is where it gets interesting. Say I'm doing a big hardscape job. Currently I use a CTL (rented) to do the site prep, then I swap out for a wheeled machine to carry the material. A wheeled machine is less likely to pop out pavers when turning. What if instead of purchasing a wheeled machine and a tracked machine I saved money and bought a CWL w/ skidsteer attachments?

A CWL would be the cat's ass for tree removal. A machine like a 344J could pick up the whole log and chunk it on a trailer. I could remove the tree in larger sections, saving time, which saves money.

Then there's snow removal. Which favors a CWL as well.

Of course I have no time in a CWL, so most of my knowledge is theoretical. What do you think Shane?


I demoed a 321E and I fell in love with it. It took about a half an hour to become familiar with the operation of the machine, but after you adjust your thinking its the bomb. That machine was smooth as silk and powerful, and very comfortable. Every bit as comfortable as the 6 or 721's that I rent.

Whether or not its practical for a given operation is a question only the owner can answer. I could not justify the new price but maybe a good used one I could pencil out. What makes it difficult is a large skid steer, which for me is a 465 will do most anything that a 321E can do and a lot of things it cant. It comes down to the ROI (Return on Investment). That is critical to and I am not sure its all there for me with the CWL.

The combination that I am really impressed with has been the combination of a midrange machine with VTS and a large capacity wheeled skid steer. This combination has really worked well for me. I can put the tracked machine in the jobs that it excels at and the wheeled machine for everything else. The 440 has been a great machine with the VTS, the high hp/torque gives it great productivity. The width at 80" has its moments but the 18" rubber tracks allow me to go anywhere I need to. I can also pull the VTS off for the Winter and use it for snow removal.

The debate on whether driving the tracks off of one axle and the added weight (3K on my machine) and the durability that goes with all that, is certainly outside of the design specs of anyones wheeled machine. However there is no doubt it is an effective system.

Hanau
10-30-2009, 09:47 PM
There's a ton of ways to skin a cat.

I just got Machinery Trader today, and there are a lot of sub 10 ton CWL's with low hours for reasonable prices. Most appear to be from large California cities, guess it was there time to trade up to a new model.

Another thing to keep in mind with a CWL is they run hours like an excavator. While 5,000 hours would be a lot on a skid, not so much on a CWL. That's part of your ROI there.

I'd still like to know just how big of a CWL you can run skidsteer attachments on. If they'll work on a 304J and a 344J then this would be worth investigating further. Running skidsteer attachments on a machine as wide as a CWL presents problems as well. With many attachments you want the attachment wider than the machine.

I'm assuming the 244J, 304J, and 344J are under 8'6".

Interestingly enough my Deere dealer told me under no circumstances to put over the tire tracks on a wheeled skid steer.

Digdeep
10-31-2009, 12:40 AM
There's a ton of ways to skin a cat.

I just got Machinery Trader today, and there are a lot of sub 10 ton CWL's with low hours for reasonable prices. Most appear to be from large California cities, guess it was there time to trade up to a new model.

Another thing to keep in mind with a CWL is they run hours like an excavator. While 5,000 hours would be a lot on a skid, not so much on a CWL. That's part of your ROI there.

I'd still like to know just how big of a CWL you can run skidsteer attachments on. If they'll work on a 304J and a 344J then this would be worth investigating further. Running skidsteer attachments on a machine as wide as a CWL presents problems as well. With many attachments you want the attachment wider than the machine.

I'm assuming the 244J, 304J, and 344J are under 8'6".

Interestingly enough my Deere dealer told me under no circumstances to put over the tire tracks on a wheeled skid steer.

The other question would be whether or not the skid steer attachments would hold up to the breakouts and power of the CWL. :weightlifter:

Mr. Rain
10-31-2009, 10:08 AM
I can't see where that would be an issue on the 244 size loaders. The primary attachment that sees those forces is a bucket, and if you're hogging material or digging, you'd be using the euro coupler payloader bucket. Most other common attachments would be lower impact without feeling the full breakout force. HP is no more than a skid.

Looking on Deere.com, looks like the 244 and 304 will take the ssl adapter, the 344 will not.

244 is 8'11" tall, 304 is 9'2", and 344 is 9'11" to the top of the cab.

Skidsteerman
10-31-2009, 10:10 AM
Will a 244J run skidsteer attachments?

Yes, as stated earlier, however; I'm not a big fan of the sslder interface adaptor plate. While it maybe fine for utilizing hydraulic attachments such as a broom or maybe a snow blower (pending GPM's) it's not a good idea for general purpose. Using attachments such as the pallet forks, heavy materials bucket, grapple bucket this adaptor plate will dramatically affect the units boom/bucket break out force and lift capacity capabilities. This will occur because the adaptor plate is about ~ 6" thick and will space the sslder attachment further away from the units hinge pins. Also, Euro style attachments tend to be built much stronger then sslder attachments as well.

Wouldn't a 244J then be ideal for running a mulching head? Excellent visibility, good maneuverability, larger tires for more traction, etc.


I see large articulated wheel loaders setup with a forestry package (screen cages and protective panels) running tire chains, using an extreme HD brush hog on the front used for clearing and maintaining power-line right of ways.



Interestingly enough my Deere dealer told me under no circumstances to put over the tire tracks on a wheeled skid steer.

:confused::confused::confused: Wut?

Tell your sales rep to put the crack pipe down and clear his head. For what reason would he tell you this?

I've sold over the tire steel grouser tracks like crazy from 93-94 up until the CTL hit the market. That's the only thing that slowed those sales down.

The best combo we sold was using Brawler solid flex tires and grouser tracks. turned a sslder into a small high lift.

Junior M
10-31-2009, 05:32 PM
I see large articulated wheel loaders setup with a forestry package (screen cages and protective panels) running tire chains, using an extreme HD brush hog on the front used for clearing and maintaining power-line right of ways.

http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr164/JLM88_bucket/fecon.jpg

Hanau
10-31-2009, 05:35 PM
Don't think I can drag that behind my 3500 Junior.

This whole line of discussion has me intrigued. Monday morning I'm calling my Deere salesman and setting up a demo or two.

Junior M
10-31-2009, 05:36 PM
Don't think I can drag that behind my 3500 Junior.

This whole line of discussion has me intrigued. Monday morning I'm calling my Deere salesman and setting up a demo or two.
It was worth a shot.. :laugh:

Hanau
10-31-2009, 05:56 PM
Yes it was. I think there is something to the CWL concept.

Have you seen this:

http://www.heavyequipmenttraining.com/

That looks like fun! It's not too far either. I think LCSC decided not to go through with their heavy equipment course, bummer. That was right down in Lewiston too.

Junior M
11-01-2009, 06:34 PM
Here's something just to arouse your love of CWL's. :laugh:
http://home-and-garden.webshots.com/photo/2303094840036233031NvUriV


I personally dont like those operating schools. when it comes to operating, there is nothing like operating on a real job under pressure to get it done. But for a big company, those schools are gold I guess.

Hanau
11-01-2009, 08:23 PM
I'd go to school because it would be fun!

I mean you get a huge pit of dirt, a bunch of equipment, and you get to run it! Without all the pressures of doing it on a paying basis. If you make a mistake it's not as big a deal.

Basically, a Bob style vacation.

Does that make me weird?

Sam_French
11-02-2009, 12:03 AM
Not anymore than anybody else Hanau. However if you want to catch up to
BC Ron. You got your work cut out for you.

I have to ask. Kicked out anymore tail lights lately? :drinkup:


Have a nice week.

Sam

Hanau
11-02-2009, 02:00 AM
No, I should. That ******* is still porking my ex-wife.

Junior M
11-02-2009, 06:42 AM
I'd go to school because it would be fun!

I mean you get a huge pit of dirt, a bunch of equipment, and you get to run it! Without all the pressures of doing it on a paying basis. If you make a mistake it's not as big a deal.

Basically, a Bob style vacation.

Does that make me weird?
well hell, I could go for that! As long as your paying I am all over it.. :cool2:

Hanau
11-02-2009, 05:21 PM
Call me when you're 18 Junior. I think that's the minimum age at the school.

Junior M
11-02-2009, 08:44 PM
Call me when you're 18 Junior. I think that's the minimum age at the school.
Ever heard of forging the paper work?

SellingIron
11-04-2009, 02:15 PM
Just caught wind of some models coming out soon...No T380 but a T**0 and S*50.. The new CTL/SSL models will be able to lift a house..It looks like BC will be the lifting leaders..

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 02:29 PM
Why block out the model numbers? They don't mean anything now anyway.

Skidsteerman
11-04-2009, 02:43 PM
The new CTL/SSL models will be able to lift a house..It looks like BC will be the lifting leaders..

Na, some other brand will still out lift them and make a video of it for the nay sayers:weightlifter:

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 02:52 PM
Yeah, but the tone will be offputting and will offend the delicate sensibilities of the folks on Lawnsite. "Why, they call it 'smackdown!?!?!?!' How crude! [Insert brand here] would have debated politely over tea and crumpets."

bobcat_ron
11-04-2009, 03:09 PM
Wow, lifting a house?

They must mean a sh*t house.

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 04:41 PM
Wow, lifting a house?

They must mean a sh*t house.

I'm thinking he means one like this.

http://blog.findaproperty.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/tumbleweed-tiny-house-2.jpg

Anyone know what a house like this weighs? Jr., does it pull hard behind your pickup?

Junior M
11-04-2009, 04:53 PM
I'm thinking he means one like this.

http://blog.findaproperty.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/tumbleweed-tiny-house-2.jpg

Anyone know what a house like this weighs? Jr., does it pull hard behind your pickup?
Where'd you get that pic of my house?! ;)

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 05:01 PM
Ya know, for a house on wheels it's not too bad. I would've sprung for some spinners, but I suppose you can always add those later.

Junior M
11-04-2009, 05:09 PM
Ya know, for a house on wheels it's not too bad. I would've sprung for some spinners, but I suppose you can always add those later.
Nah, I splurged and got a wire spool coffee table.. :cool2:

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 05:16 PM
Nice. I'm assuming you'll be adding on to the porch. Right now there's not enough room for an old washing machine and a couch, and from what I've seen those are pretty common outdoor design elements down south.

Junior M
11-04-2009, 05:19 PM
Nice. I'm assuming you'll be adding on to the porch. Right now there's not enough room for an old washing machine and a couch, and from what I've seen those are pretty common outdoor design elements down south.
I usually have the washing machine laying out in front of the house, it didnt like to follow, so I hooked a chain to it..

Then I got pulled over and the cop said he didnt mind me hauling a washing machine, but he prefered it on the truck..

Ozz
11-04-2009, 05:57 PM
Just caught wind of some models coming out soon...No T380 but a T**0 and S*50.. The new CTL/SSL models will be able to lift a house..It looks like BC will be the lifting leaders..

Cool. Remind me to demo one lol. I wonder if bobcat is trying to cut into CWL sales? I doubt it but, there's always that off chance...

SellingIron
11-04-2009, 06:08 PM
Na, some other brand will still out lift them and make a video of it for the nay sayers:weightlifter:


I watched the newer fake-down CTL video the other day. JD must have some stupied customers. The T320 had Roller suspension and they were a foot away from the weight while they try and lift it. JD, just make sure the new M-Sereis T**0 (which will be out soon) makes it in your videos..To bad your going to have to build a new class CTL to measure up.:weightlifter:

DeereMan85
11-04-2009, 06:14 PM
Right, because giant skids have been so successful in the past. That's why Gehl and Mustang have really taken the market by storm with their wannabe CWLs.

Ozz
11-06-2009, 04:54 PM
I watched the newer fake-down CTL video the other day. JD must have some stupied customers. The T320 had Roller suspension and they were a foot away from the weight while they try and lift it. JD, just make sure the new M-Sereis T**0 (which will be out soon) makes it in your videos..To bad your going to have to build a new class CTL to measure up.:weightlifter: I'm with that.. the Fake-ass vids deere puts up are b.s I know newholland can climb hills teeper that that, I've seen it done. on the case forks needed to be further in on the pallet, hell on all them they did... It's all B.S for marketing. Any decent op could pick that with any of those loaders.