PDA

View Full Version : Deere D-Series SSL's and CTL's are on the website now!


Boss Exc.
12-19-2009, 06:56 PM
http://www.deere.com/en_US/cfd/construction/deere_const/skidsteers/deere_skidsteer_selection.html

http://www.deere.com/en_US/cfd/construction/deere_const/compact_track_loaders/deere_compact_track_loader_selection.html

Digdeep
12-20-2009, 03:53 PM
Haven't really had too much of a chance to look over them, but the first thing that comes to mind is that the 333D is over 11,000lbs, and squeezes 89 net hp out of a 3.1L engine. That engine is 6% smaller than CAT's 299C and puts out 1hp less and weighs about 500lbs more. I wonder what the engine toque is since Deere does not publish it? CAT's 299C puts out 217ft lbs out of their 3.3L engine.

Tigerotor77W
12-20-2009, 04:36 PM
Someone want to explain tractive effort? I wish there were a better way to quantify how much a machine is able to push. There's no standard here!

(Anyone from SAE or ISO reading this?)

More questions...

On the SSL brochure, the tipping load is listed as being 6,400 lbs with counterweight for the 332D. That means that the ROC should be 3200 with counterweights, yet this is not stated (there is no asterisk).

Why does the 318D have more tractive effort than the 320D (smaller tires? Maybe?)?

Why does the 332D have less ground clearance than the 328D?

They look nice. Wonder how Cat will respond.

johndeereguy
12-20-2009, 06:25 PM
The reason the 328 has more ground clearance than a 332 is cause the 332 has the extra weight of the machine in its belly, hence the ground clearance differance, other the that they are the same machine, with just more HP

93turbo
12-20-2009, 07:10 PM
I beleive tractive effort is the measure of how much weight something can move while still being efficient. On tractors it was how much weight you could pull with out excessive wheel slip on a skid I have no idea how they would measuer that

Tigerotor77W
12-20-2009, 09:02 PM
The reason the 328 has more ground clearance than a 332 is cause the 332 has the extra weight of the machine in its belly, hence the ground clearance differance, other the that they are the same machine, with just more HP

Er, I hate to say it, but this isn't too likely... the 332D weighs only 160 pounds more (8560 vs 8400) than the 328D. If this were the case, then Bobcat's S220 would have 8"; the S250, 7"; and the S300, 6". (It was a good idea, so I went to check to see if the numbers seemed to work.)

I suspect the difference is that the 332D uses a larger motor and perhaps heavier chains, which requires lowering the belly pan to fit it all in. But I just wanted to verify (I think the 332 had less ground clearance than the 328, too).

I beleive tractive effort is the measure of how much weight something can move while still being efficient. On tractors it was how much weight you could pull with out excessive wheel slip on a skid I have no idea how they would measuer that

That's drawpar pull, yeah. I suppose they could do this but don't because SSLs aren't used for pulling implements; it'd just make reading specs a whole lot more meaningful if all manufacturers reported the same test procedure. :rolleyes:

Digdeep
12-20-2009, 09:30 PM
Someone want to explain tractive effort? I wish there were a better way to quantify how much a machine is able to push. There's no standard here!

(Anyone from SAE or ISO reading this?)

Excellent question. Both the 329 and the 333 both show 11,500lbs of "tractive effort". Based on this I have to assume that it can't be too closely tied to hp since the 329 has about 10% less hp than the 333. They are very close in operating weight and basically appear to be the same machine with the exception of the engine hp, hyd. flows (slight diff.) and ROCs.

Bleed Green
12-20-2009, 09:30 PM
The reason the 328 has more ground clearance than a 332 is cause the 332 has the extra weight of the machine in its belly, hence the ground clearance differance, other the that they are the same machine, with just more HP

Would that be the same for the 329D and the 333D too?

Tigerotor77W
12-20-2009, 11:40 PM
The reason the 328 has more ground clearance than a 332 is cause the 332 has the extra weight of the machine in its belly, hence the ground clearance differance

I misread your response -- I thought you just meant that the 332D weighed more and thus would squash the tires. I didn't realize you meant the belly was physically lower to accommodate the extra weight [panels].

Skidsteerman
12-21-2009, 11:34 AM
On the SSL brochure, the tipping load is listed as being 6,400 lbs with counterweight for the 332D. That means that the ROC should be 3200 with counterweights, yet this is not stated (there is no asterisk).

Why does the 318D have more tractive effort than the 320D (smaller tires? Maybe?)?

Why does the 332D have less ground clearance than the 328D?

They look nice. Wonder how Cat will respond.

Some units a set of rear weights are STD. Then additional optional bolt on stackable weights can be added. The new rear weights are bolt on units Vs the old design which were suit case weights. Another change is now Deere is offering rear weights for their CTLs.

10x16.5 on the 318D and 12X16.5 on the 320D. You can order the 320D in 10X16.5 but this will slow the ground speed down some.

326D, 328D are probably the same chassis were as the 332D is it's own chassis like before.

This is the first Electronic fuel injection diesel engine in the compact construction equipment line up offered. Not aware of anyone else offering this yet. This will control performance much different the the mechanical fuel system can. Governor response will be immediate Vs. lag time mechanical systems. This is one of the reasons Deere can offer the auto idle feature. This will allow the fuel injectors to respond quicker when the engine is put under load. My though is this should also help with the fuel economy as well.

Skidsteerman
12-21-2009, 11:39 AM
The 329D is actually the CT332 derated to get closer to the missing link - 2,500lb class. It comes std with 15" tracks and you can upsize to 18"... all of ours will be 18" on stock units. The 333D is a different unit... with almost 14K bucket break out force, it's going to be a bad sumbich for sure.

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 12:31 PM
The 329D is actually the CT332 derated to get closer to the missing link - 2,500lb class. It comes std with 15" tracks and you can upsize to 18"... all of ours will be 18" on stock units. The 333D is a different unit... with almost 14K bucket break out force, it's going to be a bad sumbich for sure.

Just strange that they are only 170lbs different in machine operating weight due to the "standard counterweight", have the same reach, pin height, ground clearance, same engine, and differ in ROC @ 50% by only 575lbs. Doesn't really seen like two different machines. BTW..why doesn't Deere publish engine torques?

Never mind...I looked the 5030H engine up on the engine side of the Deere site- 329D puts out a peak torque of 209ft lbs @2000rpm and the 333D puts out a peak engine torque of 252ft lbs @1800rpm.

Skidsteerman
12-21-2009, 12:48 PM
Just strange that they are only 170lbs different in machine operating weight due to the "standard counterweight", have the same reach, pin height, ground clearance, same engine, and differ in ROC @ 50% by only 575lbs. Doesn't really seen like two different machines. BTW..why doesn't Deere publish engine torques?

Never mind...I looked the 5030H engine up on the engine side of the Deere site- 329D puts out a peak torque of 209ft lbs @2000rpm and the 333D puts out a peak engine torque of 252ft lbs @1800rpm.

They use the same chassis and same engine, the 333D is a larger class for Deere with more HP's then offered before. this is what I meant by new unit. Like I said, the 329D is really the old CT332 class unit just derated, no one complains (pending what it is) about derated, just over rated.

DeereMan85
12-21-2009, 12:54 PM
Just strange that they are only 170lbs different in machine operating weight due to the "standard counterweight", have the same reach, pin height, ground clearance, same engine, and differ in ROC @ 50% by only 575lbs. Doesn't really seen like two different machines. BTW..why doesn't Deere publish engine torques?

Never mind...I looked the 5030H engine up on the engine side of the Deere site- 329D puts out a peak torque of 209ft lbs @2000rpm and the 333D puts out a peak engine torque of 252ft lbs @1800rpm.

There should be a greater difference than 170 lbs. in standard configuration - The track sizes are different, counterweight vs. none, larger lift and tilt cylinders on the 333D. The counterweight alone adds 170 lbs. to ROC.

They're not really different machines. Think of the 329D as a "de-tuned" 333D with narrower tracks. It's there to meet a price point for those who don't need the extra power of the 333D. I heard from our Deere rep (I know, not exactly a neutral source) that a 329D with wide tracks will outpush a T320, so the 333D must be a monster. I can't wait to run one.

Skidsteerman
12-21-2009, 02:51 PM
There should be a greater difference than 170 lbs. in standard configuration - The track sizes are different, counterweight vs. none, larger lift and tilt cylinders on the 333D. The counterweight alone adds 170 lbs. to ROC.

They're not really different machines. Think of the 329D as a "de-tuned" 333D with narrower tracks. It's there to meet a price point for those who don't need the extra power of the 333D. I heard from our Deere rep (I know, not exactly a neutral source) that a 329D with wide tracks will outpush a T320, so the 333D must be a monster. I can't wait to run one.

Meh, the CT332 would out push the BC T320... down here anyway.

Tigerotor77W
12-21-2009, 03:06 PM
Meh, the CT332 would out push the BC T320... down here anyway.

I think most CTLs would outpush the T320.

DeereMan85
12-21-2009, 03:32 PM
I think most CTLs would outpush the T320.

What I'm getting at is that the 329D is a full size class smaller (should be compared to T300) and will supposedly outpush it. Makes it look like a hell of a value compared to the T320. Just saying that the 333D should kick the T320's ass up one side and down the other if the 329 will outdo it. I understand that this is not as impressive as if we were talking about a TL250.

Tigerotor77W
12-21-2009, 04:32 PM
What I'm getting at is that the 329D is a full size class smaller (should be compared to T300) and will supposedly outpush it. Makes it look like a hell of a value compared to the T320. Just saying that the 333D should kick the T320's ass up one side and down the other if the 329 will outdo it. I understand that this is not as impressive as if we were talking about a TL250.

It's a good point. That being said, I hate to think of the next SSSD (Skid-steer smackdown)... Deere will probably end up comparing the lift capacity of a 329D with the T320. And the 329D will probably win. *sigh*

I'll just continue rooting for Cat's cab and suspension. *trucewhiteflag*

:p

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 04:38 PM
There should be a greater difference than 170 lbs. in standard configuration - The track sizes are different, counterweight vs. none, larger lift and tilt cylinders on the 333D. The counterweight alone adds 170 lbs. to ROC.

They're not really different machines. Think of the 329D as a "de-tuned" 333D with narrower tracks. It's there to meet a price point for those who don't need the extra power of the 333D. I heard from our Deere rep (I know, not exactly a neutral source) that a 329D with wide tracks will outpush a T320, so the 333D must be a monster. I can't wait to run one.

There is only a 170lb difference if you equip the 329D with the 17.7" tracks- 329D- 10,930lbs
333D- 11,100lbs

Not that I'm really sticking up for the Bobcat T320, but the argument about the 329D outpushing the T320 is silly. Both the machines have virtually the same track footprint of 2255sq. in. and that surface area is going to be the limiting factor since both machines can spin the tracks without problem. Take into account that the 329D outweighs the non-suspended (as close to apples to apples) T320 by 1,228lbs (11%) and I would hope that it would outpush the T320 given that engine hp for both machines is plenty sufficient to once again spin the tracks. I would say that the 329D has a 11% advantage in pushing given that track surface area is equal.

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 04:41 PM
What I'm getting at is that the 329D is a full size class smaller (should be compared to T300) and will supposedly outpush it. Makes it look like a hell of a value compared to the T320. Just saying that the 333D should kick the T320's ass up one side and down the other if the 329 will outdo it. I understand that this is not as impressive as if we were talking about a TL250.

How is the 329D a full class size smaller than the T320 since it outweighs the T320 by over 1,200lbs and even more if you add the modular rear weight package.?

mrsops
12-21-2009, 05:50 PM
It's a good point. That being said, I hate to think of the next SSSD (Skid-steer smackdown)... Deere will probably end up comparing the lift capacity of a 329D with the T320. And the 329D will probably win. *sigh*

I'll just continue rooting for Cat's cab and suspension. *trucewhiteflag*

:p

Once you sit in a bobcat m series you will say different :usflag:

DeereMan85
12-21-2009, 06:35 PM
How is the 329D a full class size smaller than the T320 since it outweighs the T320 by over 1,200lbs and even more if you add the modular rear weight package.?

Talking ROC here. I understand that the weight, hp, etc., may match up differently, but classes are determined by ROC. This is how market share is calculated and what most people see as an objective way to "rate" the size of a skid/CTL. It's also a benchmark for certain price points. The 329D has similar ROC and a similar price to a T300. I understand what you're saying and agree that it's not impressive from an engineering standpoint. Simply pointing out that it looks like a good value to potential customers.

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 08:26 PM
Talking ROC here. I understand that the weight, hp, etc., may match up differently, but classes are determined by ROC. This is how market share is calculated and what most people see as an objective way to "rate" the size of a skid/CTL. It's also a benchmark for certain price points. The 329D has similar ROC and a similar price to a T300. I understand what you're saying and agree that it's not impressive from an engineering standpoint. Simply pointing out that it looks like a good value to potential customers.

I understand all that, and they're all good points, but the line is definitely fuzzy anymore regarding justROCs even though that is how UCC filings and AEM data are calculated (especially with some of these CTLs pushing or exceeding 11,000lbs (The Takeuchi is pushing 12,000lbs with a cab and bucket). I think it is important to look at the ROC, engine hp, operating weight, and hydraulic performance not to mention others. As an end user, your argument about the "price point" of the 329D against a T320 makes a whole lot more sense to me.

In any case, I'm excited for all of the John Deere fans even though they're not my preferred brand.

ksss
12-21-2009, 08:43 PM
I understand all that, and they're all good points, but the line is definitely fuzzy anymore regarding justROCs even though that is how UCC filings and AEM data are calculated (especially with some of these CTLs pushing or exceeding 11,000lbs (The Takeuchi is pushing 12,000lbs with a cab and bucket). I think it is important to look at the ROC, engine hp, operating weight, and hydraulic performance not to mention others. As an end user, your argument about the "price point" of the 329D against a T320 makes a whole lot more sense to me.

In any case, I'm excited for all of the John Deere fans even though they're not my preferred brand.


I think the market is a lot more complex than to compare strictly on ROC. For the customer who just needs a 4x4 wheel borrow, going strictly off of ROC and maybe loader design (radial, vertical lift). If the machine plays a more critical role in the business than you'd do better to look at all specs

DeereMan85
12-21-2009, 09:16 PM
I think the market is a lot more complex than to compare strictly on ROC. For the customer who just needs a 4x4 wheel borrow, going strictly off of ROC and maybe loader design (radial, vertical lift). If the machine plays a more critical role in the business than you'd do better to look at all specs

I agree, but not every customer is as knowledgeable as you and the others on here. ROC is just an easy benchmark to use. Your average Joe Blow contractor many times doesn't know anything about a machine other than whether it does what he wants it to do.

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 09:16 PM
I think the market is a lot more complex than to compare strictly on ROC. For the customer who just needs a 4x4 wheel borrow, going strictly off of ROC and maybe loader design (radial, vertical lift). If the machine plays a more critical role in the business than you'd do better to look at all specs

Exactly my point. Especially with all of the improvements to hydraulic systems and the increased numbers of attachments.

If a person only went by the ROCs, the Takeuchi TL250 would be one of the worst due to it's almost 12,000lb operating weight and an ROC @ 50% tip of only 3528lbs.

Personally, the extra 1,200lbs of the machine would mean the potential sacrifice of an extra attachment on a trailer, or the type of trailer I would have to buy due to the width of the machine, etc.

Digdeep
12-21-2009, 09:18 PM
I agree, but not every customer is as knowledgeable as you and the others on here. ROC is just an easy benchmark to use. Your average Joe Blow contractor many times doesn't know anything about a machine other than whether it does what he wants it to do.

Correct, but if I was still a salesman I'd be damn sure to educate them about the other features and benefits beyond ROC.

Skidsteerman
12-22-2009, 10:42 AM
Correct, but if I was still a salesman I'd be damn sure to educate them about the other features and benefits beyond ROC.

You do what you can, depending on the customer and his buying points this may or may not work. All of this becomes a moot point to the individual that only looks at the lowest $$$.

Most of the time you need to find out what needs the customer/user has in mind for the usage of the unit. lbs. they need to lift, how high they need to reach for dumping, fitting into walk out basements, etc. Match up a class unit for his needs and go from there. Offering a 329D and a 333D will hopefully meet to different purchaser types for the large chassis CTL class. 329D for the big chassis need but wanting to keep the cost down. 333D for the Tim Allen's of the construction world agh agh agh. But more HP's cost more and usually the Tim Allen's are willing to pay for that upgrade.

Besides. it would be just plain silly for Deere not to offer a new unit that'll out preform anything else in the largest class. :p

ksss
12-22-2009, 11:29 AM
You do what you can, depending on the customer and his buying points this may or may not work. All of this becomes a moot point to the individual that only looks at the lowest $$$.

Most of the time you need to find out what needs the customer/user has in mind for the usage of the unit. lbs. they need to lift, how high they need to reach for dumping, fitting into walk out basements, etc. Match up a class unit for his needs and go from there. Offering a 329D and a 333D will hopefully meet to different purchaser types for the large chassis CTL class. 329D for the big chassis need but wanting to keep the cost down. 333D for the Tim Allen's of the construction world agh agh agh. But more HP's cost more and usually the Tim Allen's are willing to pay for that upgrade.

Besides. it would be just plain silly for Deere not to offer a new unit that'll out preform anything else in the largest class. :p


That makes sense. Trying to educate every customer, would be time consuming and likely not a great use of time (especially for concrete guys:hammerhead: I am joking concrete guys:laugh:). As a salesman, find out what they want and steer them toward the machine that would be best for them. That requires the salesman to be on top of his game and really know his product line, which can be a roll of the dice sometimes. I am sure selling skid steers is more complex than most think. Many salesman complain that selling skid steers takes just as long if not longer than selling large excavators for a fraction of the return. I am sure that is true.

Skidsteerman
12-22-2009, 11:41 AM
That makes sense. Trying to educate every customer, would be time consuming and likely not a great use of time (especially for concrete guys:hammerhead: I am joking concrete guys:laugh:). As a salesman, find out what they want and steer them toward the machine that would be best for them. That requires the salesman to be on top of his game and really know his product line, which can be a roll of the dice sometimes. I am sure selling skid steers is more complex than most think. Many salesman complain that selling skid steers takes just as long if not longer than selling large excavators for a fraction of the return. I am sure that is true.

Product knowledge is very important thing to have when calling on customers, their time is important and they don't want the feeling like they know more then the sales guy does about his own product line. They have questions and would like them answered without the "ummm well... I'll have to find that out" - with in reason anyway. They don't expect you to know everything, but surely don't want to be talking to a novice wasting their time. I'm sure most of them can read literature to find the spec's that interest them as well and do allot of information gathering homework before hand and during a deal.

This product is just as challenging to sell as full size iron but in many different ways. One thing is this product rotates much faster through most companies fleets then larger iron does.

Anyway, I'm STILL waiting for my D series machines to show up, where are they at Deere???

DeereMan85
12-22-2009, 03:35 PM
That makes sense. Trying to educate every customer, would be time consuming and likely not a great use of time (especially for concrete guys:hammerhead: I am joking concrete guys:laugh:). As a salesman, find out what they want and steer them toward the machine that would be best for them. That requires the salesman to be on top of his game and really know his product line, which can be a roll of the dice sometimes. I am sure selling skid steers is more complex than most think. Many salesman complain that selling skid steers takes just as long if not longer than selling large excavators for a fraction of the return. I am sure that is true.

Funny you should mention concrete guys. I actually wrote a post last night about how there are tons of concrete contractors around here (due to high livestock population) and some of them are, shall we say, a tad thickheaded and hard to work with. I didn't post it because I didn't want to rile anyone up. To be fair, there are also very smart guys doing concrete work, there just seem to be a few more slow ones than in some of the other trades.

I would say that I spend a lot more time per unit selling skid steers than my coworkers do selling tractors and combines. But I also make a larger margin on average.


Anyway, I'm STILL waiting for my D series machines to show up, where are they at Deere???

Didn't you get the bulletin? Don't say too much or you might get another nasty phone call. :rolleyes:

Skidsteerman
12-22-2009, 04:30 PM
Didn't you get the bulletin? Don't say too much or you might get another nasty phone call. :rolleyes:

I suppose I shouldn't get too excited and anxious wanting new D series iron in the yard to sell... ;)

DeereMan85
12-22-2009, 04:52 PM
I mean the bulletin that was sent out today about ship dates.

ksss
12-22-2009, 05:05 PM
Funny you should mention concrete guys. I actually wrote a post last night about how there are tons of concrete contractors around here (due to high livestock population) and some of them are, shall we say, a tad thickheaded and hard to work with. I didn't post it because I didn't want to rile anyone up. To be fair, there are also very smart guys doing concrete work, there just seem to be a few more slow ones than in some of the other trades.

I would say that I spend a lot more time per unit selling skid steers than my coworkers do selling tractors and combines. But I also make a larger margin on average.



Didn't you get the bulletin? Don't say too much or you might get another nasty phone call. :rolleyes:


I think even a concrete contractor would have to agree with you. There are worse though. Drywall guys take the crack err I mean CAKE when it comes to top prize for most dense.

DISCLAIMER: This does not apply to all drywallers or concrete guys, if your one the two, I am sure your not slow nor dense.:waving:


I am surprised that the margins for tractors and combines would be more slim than a skid steer. I would not have figured it that way.

bobcat_ron
12-22-2009, 09:11 PM
Takeuchi rates their 35% ROC a little lower and different, I think theirs is at the max. reach on the loader's path, I'm still shaking my head at the 3000+ pound dead lift on my TL130, it got tippy when it got to it's max. reach.

Tigerotor77W
12-22-2009, 10:08 PM
I think theirs is at the max. reach on the loader's path

That's how the SAE/ISO standard is defined. I think most manufacturers have a done a decent job with this, certainly +/- 100 pounds. Most machines are decent with a bucket of dirt; the difference is when you get into lifting 6,000 pound loads with forks.

stuvecorp
12-22-2009, 10:17 PM
I think there needs to be some sort of class or way to categorize the skids. It is getting harder to compare across brands to me at least. The lifting ratings seem bogus, almost all seem to lift way more?

DeereMan85
12-22-2009, 10:40 PM
I think there needs to be some sort of class or way to categorize the skids. It is getting harder to compare across brands to me at least. The lifting ratings seem bogus, almost all seem to lift way more?

ROC (rated operating capacity) has nothing to do with a machine's ability to lift. I think this misconception exists because many people incorrectly call it lift capacity.

ROC is a measure of stability and balance. To find ROC you must first determine tipping load. You do this by placing the loader at the point where reach is greatest and adding weight until the loader tips. That weight is your tipping load. ROC is 50% of tipping load for skid steers and 35% of tipping load for CTLs.

You can tell approximately how much a skid/CTL will lift by looking at tipping load and boom breakout force. Theoretically, a machine will lift the equivalent of its boom breakout if that number doesn't exceed tipping load. Of course this assumes a flat, level surface and the load center is based on whatever bucket the manufacturer chooses to test with. The numbers will decrease if you use a longer bucket or pallet forks because the load center will change.

Tigerotor77W
12-23-2009, 12:13 AM
ROC is a measure of stability and balance. To find ROC you must first determine tipping load. You do this by placing the loader at the point where reach is greatest and adding weight until the loader tips. That weight is your tipping load. ROC is 50% of tipping load for skid steers and 35% of tipping load for CTLs.

This is all true. The question, though, is whether the ROC really reflects how much the machine is able to lift and still remain stable. Case in point: the Cat 252B and 262B differed in operating weight by about 50 pounds (IIRC...), but yet had a 200 pound ROC difference. Really?! 50 pounds in the trunk will allow the heavier machine to not tip for another 200 pounds? (That's mathematically impossible given the machine CG, reach, and dimensions.) The only way it'd work is if, oh, the 252B had a tipping load of darned near 2700 already, and 50 pounds put it over.

Cat's not the only one guilty of the rebranding. The original Deere 240 became the Deere 317; the 240 II was 6,165 pounds and the 317, 6300 pounds. The 240 was rated at 1500 pounds. While it may seem like the 135 pound difference may make up for the 250 pound difference in ROC, keep in mind that the tipping load would have had to increase by 500 pounds. Imagine how far apart a 135 pound kid would have to sit from the hinge of a see-saw to balance a 500 pound bear...

So ultimately, I agree with stuvecorp. Not all "ROC" are truthful "ROC."

You can tell approximately how much a skid/CTL will lift by looking at tipping load and boom breakout force. Theoretically, a machine will lift the equivalent of its boom breakout if that number doesn't exceed tipping load. Of course this assumes a flat, level surface and the load center is based on whatever bucket the manufacturer chooses to test with. The numbers will decrease if you use a longer bucket or pallet forks because the load center will change.

Mmm... it depends. Breakout is measured with the boom arms down. You can have a machine that has 10,000 pounds of lift breakout, but if its reach is really long, by the time you get to where the tipping load is measured... you'll only have, say, 5,000 pounds of tipping load. (This is an exaggeration, but imagine a telehandler. If you rate its breakout with the boom retracted and down, it might be huge. Then you extend the boom and raise it: you won't be able to lift nearly as much before tipping.) I know that few SSLs have extending booms, but I'm trying to illustrate the point that a machine has more "tipping capacity" at ground level than at, say, truck-bed height. (This is less true for Deere and more true for Bobcat, Case, Cat, and Komatsu vertical lift machines.)

The lift breakout is a decent ball park -- I give you that -- but not always. There's a gazillion caveats here that vary mostly by manufacturer. :( Also, some manufacturers don't publish lift breakout on their public literature. (Well, I guess mainly Bobcat and Gehl.)

Tigerotor77W
12-23-2009, 12:25 AM
Ugh. I missed the 10 minute editing period, so the last two paragraphs should read:

A digression: in theory (i.e. according to SAE), lift breakout is the amount of force the loader can apply lifting straight up to a point four inches behind a specified bucket before the rear wheels lift off the ground. (Of course the figure could be limited hydraulically...) *IF* a machine has infinite hydraulic capacity, the lift breakout is effectively the tipping load at ground level. (NOT all machines have infinite hydraulic capacity -- see Cat and Bobcat on the skidsteersmackdown site when they attempt to lift the pallet!) This is why deereman85 is comparing the lift breakout to the tipping load -- assuming the machine's hydraulics can handle the load, both are measures of the amount of weight it takes to tip the machine. Lift breakout measures tipping load at ground level; tipping load, at max reach. But again, not all machines can make infinite hydraulic force, so it doesn't really matter at that point. A 272C and 297C both share the same hydraulic lift breakout, but where the 272C may be stability limited (rear wheels come off ground), the 297C is hydraulically limited (it can't exert enough force to lift the rear off the ground). *most* SSLs are stability limited and CTLs, hydraulically limited. CTLs are supposed to be rated -- bo force and tipping load alike -- when the rearmost roller comes off the track.

The lift breakout is a sometimes-decent ball park -- I give you that -- but not always. There's a gazillion caveats here that vary mostly by manufacturer. :( Also, some manufacturers don't publish lift breakout on their public literature. (Well, I guess mainly Bobcat and Gehl.)

stuvecorp
12-23-2009, 01:20 AM
I get what DeereMan is trying to say but seriously let's just lump the machines into three classes - Baby Bear, Momma Bear and Papa Bear. Let me go on record I hate the 'price point' categories, for example NH 160 and NH 170 or the Case 430 and 440(that one may not work as well now with the different motors). What even further muddies the water is when we put the VTS or even OTT's.

93turbo
12-23-2009, 01:18 PM
Case in point: the Cat 252B and 262B differed in operating weight by about 50 pounds (IIRC...), but yet had a 200 pound ROC difference. Really?! 50 pounds in the trunk will allow the heavier machine to not tip for another 200 pounds? (That's mathematically impossible given the machine CG, reach, and dimensions.) The only way it'd work is if, oh, the 252B had a tipping load of darned near 2700 already, and 50 pounds put it over.


If both machines are exactly the same I wonder what made the weight difference?

bobcat_ron
12-23-2009, 02:02 PM
If both machines are exactly the same I wonder what made the weight difference?

The 252 is a B series frame, and the 262 is a C series, wheel base is the difference, that's if the correct Alpha numbers are specified.

Tigerotor77W
12-23-2009, 09:58 PM
If both machines are exactly the same I wonder what made the weight difference?

262B had weight stacks in the rear towers.

The 252 is a B series frame, and the 262 is a C series, wheel base is the difference, that's if the correct Alpha numbers are specified.

I was referring to both B-series machines (252B and 262B, not 252B2 and 262C).

93turbo
12-23-2009, 11:20 PM
262B had weight stacks in the rear towers.



I was referring to both B-series machines (252B and 262B, not 252B2 and 262C).

Then if it had the extra weight in the back the fifty pounds could make a 200lb lift difference since the rear of the machine would be farther from the tipping point then the bucket would be right?

Tigerotor77W
12-24-2009, 12:16 PM
Not likely. A 200 pound difference in ROC means a 400 pound difference in tipping load. For this to be the case, the distance from front axle to bucket center would have to be roughly 1/10 the distance from front axle to center of gravity of the added weights (I just checked; the 252B is 7832 pounds, and the 262B is 7861 pounds -- a 29 pound difference). So even if the maximum reach is just 1 foot (not the case, given that the bucket itself has a floor at least one foot long), the weights would have to be more than 10 feet behind the front axle... the machine (without bucket) isn't even ten feet long!

93turbo
12-25-2009, 10:42 PM
Is the weight ratio the same between the machines?

Vet934
12-27-2009, 11:03 PM
so do we have any prices on the d series yet?

Bleed Green
12-28-2009, 02:28 AM
so do we have any prices on the d series yet?

There is a thread on here for pricing on the d series somewhere.

Tigerotor77W
12-28-2009, 11:36 AM
Is the weight ratio the same between the machines?

Not sure I know what weight ratio is?

93turbo
12-28-2009, 10:23 PM
Not sure I know what weight ratio is?

The balance of the machine just wondering if the one is more rear end heavy even though its not much heavier overall