PDA

View Full Version : Should I be looking at another machine?


tthomass
01-10-2010, 11:01 PM
Some of you know I'm looking at getting a new machine to go along side my T190. I am familiar with Bobcat and know the brand pretty well. If a Bobcat, I'm looking at a T300, T250 or S300 w/VTS.

I'm considering a CAT 262b as I know of a handful of contractors running them. I don't know CAT. My impression, and without anything to back this up, is that they are more expensive to maintain/repair. I don't know why, just an impression. I see lots of different CAT's on the market and don't know what year was good/bad, what models to avoid, which to buy etc etc etc.

So, you see what I'm looking at with Bobcats.......how well does the CAT 262b compare? Are there other CAT's I should be considering? If 262, the idea is to equip with VTS.

AEL
01-10-2010, 11:41 PM
What are you using the machine for?

tthomass
01-11-2010, 12:04 AM
Not so important as it is to have a machine that is equal to a Bobcat T250/300 or S300 w/ VTS.

I do a lot of masonry work primarily and landscape construction. Excavation, grading, land clearing.......

I know what suites me with the Bobcat brand, but not the CAT brand. Therefore, if it is as good or better than the above listed Bobcats, it will service my company just fine.

AEL
01-11-2010, 01:07 AM
Not sure what your budget is but any of the cat c series mtl/ctl are great machines, and it seems like everyone on here likes there takeuchis. From what ive herd they are solid machines. I believe you would want a tl 140 size machine.

I have ran the t300's, s300's(not with vts), t320, S330 and they all (in my opinion) are great machines. Everyone on here has there own opinion , so your best bet might be to narrow down some machines spec wise and book some demo's. Good luck and let us know what you choose.

tthomass
01-11-2010, 08:08 AM
The Takeuchis are nice machines. I've run the TL130 and TL150. The pilot controls were smooth.

Thats why I posted up, to narrow down a selection. I don't know the CAT brand very well. I see lots of different CAT's on the market and don't know what year was good/bad, what models to avoid, which to buy etc etc etc. No, I'm not looking to buy new. I know if a '05 T250 with 530hrs on it locally, asking $27k and know I can get for less.

From what I've seen, I can get a Bobcat/CAT and equip it with VTS for $25k. That seems to also be the price, or a little less, for a T250/T300.

aloha
01-11-2010, 12:03 PM
not to change course but tthomass what do you think of your t-190 i'm looking at one for 12K and I need it to unload sod, pavers, palms from a flatbed. Will it do that work? Or should I be looking for a old new holland 885?

tthomass
01-11-2010, 12:49 PM
I don't know anything about the 885. The T190 will unload those materials but it will NOT load them (sod/pavers).

mrsops
01-11-2010, 01:47 PM
I don't know anything about the 885. The T190 will unload those materials but it will NOT load them (sod/pavers).

I have to disagree 100% with you on that. I have a t190 and i have no problem what so ever LOADING pallets of sod or pavers.

tthomass
01-11-2010, 02:50 PM
The machine will not put 3,000 pounds into the back of my International. It will try really hard, but won't quite lift it. I can tell you it will unload 4,000 pound but you better know what you're doing! haha

mrsops
01-11-2010, 02:53 PM
The machine will not put 3,000 pounds into the back of my International.

sod and pavers dont weigh 3,000lbs over here. Sod and pavers weigh anywhere from 2200-2500 lbs ive never had a problem with the t190 putting them on my flatbed or dump truck

tthomass
01-11-2010, 05:20 PM
2200-2500, not a problem. 3,000 = problem.

I would say that 2,700 is probably max.

tthomass
01-11-2010, 05:22 PM
Nobody familar with CAT's? I'm not saying tell me what to buy but asking are their particular machines I should avoid or certain machines I should pay particular attention too. What I'm listening for is experience vs a gloating brochure.

mrsops
01-11-2010, 05:28 PM
2200-2500, not a problem. 3,000 = problem.

I would say that 2,700 is probably max.

Gotta remember its only a 1900 roc machine.. why dont you check out a t250 or the new 630 m series

BrandonV
01-11-2010, 06:19 PM
i have a 287b it has been the best machine we've ever owned, dependable powerful easy to use. It has had a much better track record than out previous track machine a bobcat 857 but things have evolved. I had used a 257b cat once, I was pleasantly surprised by its power but I'm not sure if it'll swing in the 3k weight class. One problem I know you understand is some machines will pick up 3k on flat ground or pavement but that's not what we're usually working on is it? Our 287b has drug big loads over some of the craziest terrain here in the Uwharrie mountains, I would recommend it to you strongly.

Ozz
01-11-2010, 07:08 PM
I have some seat time in a 277c. It wasn't a bad machine, but the pilots were not up to tak in my opinion. On par with a bobcat of the same size. (T250?) But not in pushing power. would a 279 do better and be on par? I think so.

MOREDIRT
01-11-2010, 07:59 PM
I have a 262c it is a good machine very comfortable it will lift about 3000lbs on flat ground. But I like deere better they lift more and visibility is better. I know a guy trying to sell a 08 262c 300hrs with new steel tracks and pallet forks it has a cab he is asking 32k but i bet he would come down

ksss
01-11-2010, 08:10 PM
I have some seat time in a 277c. It wasn't a bad machine, but the pilots were not up to tak in my opinion. On par with a bobcat of the same size. (T250?) But not in pushing power. would a 279 do better and be on par? I think so.

While at a CASE prototype testing session, I ran a 277B verse a TK 140 verse a BC 250, verse a Case 440 CT. The 277 was the weakest of the bunch in its excavating ability. If you put a load on the machine from a standstill and tried to push forward it really struggled. I am actually being kind. It simply would not move, just went over relief. Demoing different models and find what suits your operation is always the best answer. Realizing that some people have had good luck with the MTL undercarriage, I think overall they are way to complicated, delicate and thus expensive for many applications. Some day the suspension will need to be rebuilt and that will be a painful day for the bank account.

If you want a CAT then I think the CTL version or VTS is much better. You can do about everything with the CTL or VTS with less cost all the way around verse an MTL.

Tigerotor77W
01-11-2010, 08:40 PM
Here's my two cents. The A-series 252 and 262 were pretty decent, but I don't know how many low-hour machines you'll find. The early Bs weren't that great -- now we're talking the 2004-2006 timeframe -- but most used machines will probably have their bugs worked out by now. The Cs are reliable and are good machines.

SSLs should cost about the same to maintain. There's nothing in particular that would make a Cat more expensive. If you're looking at MTLs and CTLs, chances are you won't find a cheap CTL yet because they just came out. If you operate a MTL smoothly and in the right conditions, it can be cheaper to maintain, but then again, you could also operate a CTL smoothly and get the same O&O cost out of it. (The moral of this story is that in certain ground conditions, the CTL makes a heckuva lot more sense; in some ground conditions, and admittedly fewer, the MTL makes more sense.) You wrote that you're looking at SSL+VTS, but then people starting bringing in CTLs to the suggestion box. If you're looking at SSL+VTS, then ignore this last part about MTLs and CTLs.

If you want a T190-sized MTL, that's the 257B. The SSL that's the size of a S185 or S205 is the 242B2. The S220 and now the S630 compete with the Cat 236B2, 246C, and 256C; the S250 is roughly equivalent to a 252B2, but the 262C will have more power, more comfort, and importantly, more cost. The 262C also competes extremely favorably against the S300.

You may demo a Cat and feel it is underpowered -- won't spin the tires or goes over relief, as ksss pointed out. I can't say what happened at the Case demo he was at, but I do know -- for a fact -- that it's possible to adjust the hystat system so that if you want, you can stall the engine. When I worked at Cat a few summers ago, I would go operate a 287B for about thirty minutes each morning (just to wake myself up and see what it is like to operate a machine), and let me tell you, I could spin either track or stall it out whenever I wanted to. It's a matter of setting the right pressures, and I wouldn't worry too much if you think the machine isn't immediately aggressive. Something can usually be done about that.

treemover
01-11-2010, 10:13 PM
have some hours in cats, renting and demos, in all the ones I have run I found the tilt cylinders to be weak. couple years back at a garden show cat dealer had machines for us to run while we were setting up. Had a tree in a 54" ball and a 262 could not curl it up. Had a scat track 1700c at that time and it curled it no prob. Other than that they seem like a okay machine

AEL
01-11-2010, 10:18 PM
Ran a 297c and it was a nice machine, but i felt a t300 might have a little bit more power/push.

Hollowellreid
01-11-2010, 10:20 PM
Maybe this is just me but it seems absurd that there are machines out there that will run out of hydraulic power or go into relief before they start to tip. If Cat and bobcat won't do this, I would think to look right past them.

Seems from my experience that Case, TK, Many ASV and I would assume Deere (others I'm sure as well) will hydraulically "outwork" the weight or traction of the machine. You would think that would lead to productivity in tough working conditions.

Although tippy, I can get 3,000+ Lb pallets of pavers on and off of standard truck beds with a 1845c with stock counterweights. I can't imagine how lame that Case machine would be if the hydraulic system wasn't powerful enough to use the machine 100%.

Ozz
01-12-2010, 05:18 PM
While at a CASE prototype testing session, I ran a 277B verse a TK 140 verse a BC 250, verse a Case 440 CT. The 277 was the weakest of the bunch in its excavating ability. If you put a load on the machine from a standstill and tried to push forward it really struggled. I am actually being kind. It simply would not move, just went over relief. Demoing different models and find what suits your operation is always the best answer. Realizing that some people have had good luck with the MTL undercarriage, I think overall they are way to complicated, delicate and thus expensive for many applications. Some day the suspension will need to be rebuilt and that will be a painful day for the bank account.

If you want a CAT then I think the CTL version or VTS is much better. You can do about everything with the CTL or VTS with less cost all the way around verse an MTL.

I wasn't running digging gravel or anything. I was loading 3K bales of hay into a barn... I don't dobt a CTL UC will outperform a MTL for pushing and digging.

Tigerotor77W
01-13-2010, 02:49 PM
have some hours in cats, renting and demos, in all the ones I have run I found the tilt cylinders to be weak. couple years back at a garden show cat dealer had machines for us to run while we were setting up. Had a tree in a 54" ball and a 262 could not curl it up. Had a scat track 1700c at that time and it curled it no prob. Other than that they seem like a okay machine

C-series are improved, though lift breakout can still be weak.

Ran a 297c and it was a nice machine, but i felt a t300 might have a little bit more power/push.

I think the 297C has more tractive effort than the T300. I can't say that for certain regarding other makes, and this is hearsay to all of you, but by the numbers, the 297C can push harder than the T300.

Maybe this is just me but it seems absurd that there are machines out there that will run out of hydraulic power or go into relief before they start to tip. If Cat and bobcat won't do this, I would think to look right past them.

Seems from my experience that Case, TK, Many ASV and I would assume Deere (others I'm sure as well) will hydraulically "outwork" the weight or traction of the machine. You would think that would lead to productivity in tough working conditions.

Although tippy, I can get 3,000+ Lb pallets of pavers on and off of standard truck beds with a 1845c with stock counterweights. I can't imagine how lame that Case machine would be if the hydraulic system wasn't powerful enough to use the machine 100%.

There are different reasonings behind why manufacturers design their machines the way they do. You'd think that Cat, who makes one of the largest wheel loaders in the world, would have the same commitment to productivity that Deere would, so if this isn't the case, why not?

I wasn't running digging gravel or anything. I was loading 3K bales of hay into a barn... I don't dobt a CTL UC will outperform a MTL for pushing and digging.

In certain underfoot, yes, a CTL has better performance than an MTL. That being said, the MTL's track is far more pliable, and certainly in snow an MTL will fare better than a CTL -- and I'd wager that in loose, sloppy mud, it'll be better, too.

ksss
01-13-2010, 03:15 PM
C-series are improved, though lift breakout can still be weak.



I think the 297C has more tractive effort than the T300. I can't say that for certain regarding other makes, and this is hearsay to all of you, but by the numbers, the 297C can push harder than the T300.



There are different reasonings behind why manufacturers design their machines the way they do. You'd think that Cat, who makes one of the largest wheel loaders in the world, would have the same commitment to productivity that Deere would, so if this isn't the case, why not?



In certain underfoot, yes, a CTL has better performance than an MTL. That being said, the MTL's track is far more pliable, and certainly in snow an MTL will fare better than a CTL -- and I'd wager that in loose, sloppy mud, it'll be better, too.


The 277B that was used in at the Az proving grounds came from a Cat rental store. I doubt it had been adjusted. It was used how it was delivered. I think that starts to cloud the issue. The only thing saving a CAT machine from falling flat on its face every time they are worked hard is the Antistall mode. If you negate that, you start exposing the 217 foot pounds of torque problem. So while they certainly can be adjusted for different results, it is especially in these machines at the cost of something else.

Ozz
01-13-2010, 06:41 PM
In certain underfoot, yes, a CTL has better performance than an MTL. That being said, the MTL's track is far more pliable, and certainly in snow an MTL will fare better than a CTL -- and I'd wager that in loose, sloppy mud, it'll be better, too.

True. BUT,if i had to own one machine it would be a CTL, not an MTL.

Tigerotor77W
01-13-2010, 09:12 PM
The 277B that was used in at the Az proving grounds came from a Cat rental store. I doubt it had been adjusted. It was used how it was delivered. I think that starts to cloud the issue. The only thing saving a CAT machine from falling flat on its face every time they are worked hard is the Antistall mode. If you negate that, you start exposing the 217 foot pounds of torque problem. So while they certainly can be adjusted for different results, it is especially in these machines at the cost of something else.

True. I never did get to operate a machine [edit: correction, a CTL] with more than, well, 217 ft-lb of torque. :p

Money was tight then. Can't imagine how things would be going now.

True. BUT,if i had to own one machine it would be a CTL, not an MTL.

Interesting... there are a lot of thoughts going through my head right now. That really is an interesting statement.

Digdeep
01-13-2010, 10:18 PM
The 277B that was used in at the Az proving grounds came from a Cat rental store. I doubt it had been adjusted. It was used how it was delivered. I think that starts to cloud the issue. The only thing saving a CAT machine from falling flat on its face every time they are worked hard is the Antistall mode. If you negate that, you start exposing the 217 foot pounds of torque problem. So while they certainly can be adjusted for different results, it is especially in these machines at the cost of something else.

I think it is important to note that the 277B never saw 217ft lbs on it's best day. It was only 82hp if I remember correctly. It was probably closer to the 186ft lbs that ASV's PT80 puts out with the same 3.3L Mitsubishi engine. It may not have made much of a difference at the time anyway.

I'm of the opinion that "all things being equal", the biggest influence on traction is the amount of track surface on the ground and the number of contacts within that track that distribute the weight over as much of the track as possible. I haven't seen any rubber track machine that couldn't spin tracks. I don't think that is necessarily a product of power, but more an inefficient transfer of weight over usable track that doesn't really bear any weight of the machine.

Why do Bobcat and Deere recommend the narrower 12.6" track for more traction on their larger machines? Wouldn't the machine have more traction with the 18" tracks compared to the narrow tracks if they used more of the inside of the track by putting bogies or idlers over those areas? If not, what is the use of even selling a T250/300/320, Case 450, or other large frame track machine with 18" tracks unless the machine really needs the low ground pressure? Think of the money you could save on tracks ;)

Omran&Turbo
01-13-2010, 10:27 PM
Some of you know I'm looking at getting a new machine to go along side my T190. I am familiar with Bobcat and know the brand pretty well. If a Bobcat, I'm looking at a T300, T250 or S300 w/VTS.

I'm considering a CAT 262b as I know of a handful of contractors running them. I don't know CAT. My impression, and without anything to back this up, is that they are more expensive to maintain/repair. I don't know why, just an impression. I see lots of different CAT's on the market and don't know what year was good/bad, what models to avoid, which to buy etc etc etc.

So, you see what I'm looking at with Bobcats.......how well does the CAT 262b compare? Are there other CAT's I should be considering? If 262, the idea is to equip with VTS.
I really respect cat , but here is my two sence, if it is not broke why fix it, like if you have a very good friend why go and find a new one, Ok I am a bobcat fan and love bobcat, but I have friend who had new holland others had Johndeer/ one more with case, and trust me evry time bobcat wins .

AEL
01-13-2010, 11:27 PM
I really respect cat , but here is my two sence, if it is not broke why fix it, like if you have a very good friend why go and find a new one, Ok I am a bobcat fan and love bobcat, but I have friend who had new holland others had Johndeer/ one more with case, and trust me evry time bobcat wins .

Get ready for the flamming in 5..4..3..2..1..

Tigerotor77W
01-13-2010, 11:28 PM
I'm of the opinion that "all things being equal", the biggest influence on traction is the amount of track surface on the ground and the number of contacts within that track that distribute the weight over as much of the track as possible. I haven't seen any rubber track machine that couldn't spin tracks. I don't think that is necessarily a product of power, but more an inefficient transfer of weight over usable track that doesn't really bear any weight of the machine.

It's been a long day, so I apologize for seeming so slow right now... but assuming you have two identical machines (T250, say), you're saying that the narrower tracks will provide "more traction," yes?

I think this boils down to the same thing we've been pushing for a while now -- some quantifiable measure of how well a machine pushes. The narrower tracks will probably dig in more in loose dirt, so while both a 12" track and an 18" will spin with most machines in sloppy underfoot, the 12" track will seem more aggressive because it bites more. I don't think most people buy CTLs or MTLs to dig hard in loose, dry dirt; it's more so that they can stay "afloat" in wetter stuff -- in which case a wider track definitely makes sense. This is a hypothesis, but I'd bet that the 18" track sells better... after all, why not save some serious money and just get OTT if you're operating in clay or hardpack most of the time and just need more "bite?"

I think ksss' point is that extra engine torque (and hence usually power) comes into play when you're hogging dirt. Push a big pile, and yeah, sure, any machine will spin the tracks, but the Case or the Deere will eventually push through the pile without stalling the engine; the Cat or Bobcat will need either multiple passes or bucket-at-a-time technique. I think you could get a Cat to push through a large pile, sure, but it'd take longer.

My two cents.

Digdeep
01-14-2010, 07:21 AM
....Ok I am a bobcat fan and love bobcat, but I have friend who had new holland others had Johndeer/ one more with case, and trust me evry time bobcat wins .

Every time??:rolleyes::rolleyes: I'm assuming you're young based on your use of the Englinsh language and your spelling capability, and I really like your passion for Bobcat. However, I'm sure you know this deep down, but remember that each machine has it's good and bad points.

Digdeep
01-14-2010, 07:29 AM
It's been a long day, so I apologize for seeming so slow right now... but assuming you have two identical machines (T250, say), you're saying that the narrower tracks will provide "more traction," yes?

I think this boils down to the same thing we've been pushing for a while now -- some quantifiable measure of how well a machine pushes. The narrower tracks will probably dig in more in loose dirt, so while both a 12" track and an 18" will spin with most machines in sloppy underfoot, the 12" track will seem more aggressive because it bites more. I don't think most people buy CTLs or MTLs to dig hard in loose, dry dirt; it's more so that they can stay "afloat" in wetter stuff -- in which case a wider track definitely makes sense. This is a hypothesis, but I'd bet that the 18" track sells better... after all, why not save some serious money and just get OTT if you're operating in clay or hardpack most of the time and just need more "bite?"

I think ksss' point is that extra engine torque (and hence usually power) comes into play when you're hogging dirt. Push a big pile, and yeah, sure, any machine will spin the tracks, but the Case or the Deere will eventually push through the pile without stalling the engine; the Cat or Bobcat will need either multiple passes or bucket-at-a-time technique. I think you could get a Cat to push through a large pile, sure, but it'd take longer.

My two cents.

I fully understand the point being made regarding the engine power and torque, and I'm not really arguing that, even though I think the 297C has more engine torque than the Deere 332. However, I think that a T250 with more of it's machine weight spread out within its undercarriage instead of right down the virtual center of the track would have better traction than the 12.6" in track. My poiint is that the majority of the machines weight is right over the middle of the track regardless of the track width...what would you have if you cut the sides of the 18" tracks off until you hit machine weight that was actually sitting on the Bobcat track? 15,14,12.6"?

I also think that most of the rubber track machines rarely see regular conditions where the low ground pressure is needed. You'll mostly see them utilizing the machines because of their increased traction, higher operating capacities, and ability to work on slopes or hills.

Tigerotor77W
01-14-2010, 09:47 AM
Maybe I'm victim to marketing propaganda -- I had always figured that CTLs were used often in wet underfoot (maybe not routinely, but bought so that the working season could be extended). Got no numbers to back that up, so you may well be right.

I see your point about track width.

Ozz
01-14-2010, 05:04 PM
Interesting... there are a lot of thoughts going through my head right now. That really is an interesting statement.
I'll explain. With the ground conditions I work in (clay,dirt,where I can get a decent grip) I don't need the floatation of an MTL. Where I live, we get 1-2 3 plus inch snows a year, snow's not an issue so I don't need an MTL. and The added traction on dirt really helps grading and popping stumps.

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 05:15 PM
I think ksss' point is that extra engine torque (and hence usually power) comes into play when you're hogging dirt. Push a big pile, and yeah, sure, any machine will spin the tracks, but the Case or the Deere will eventually push through the pile without stalling the engine; the Cat or Bobcat will need either multiple passes or bucket-at-a-time technique. I think you could get a Cat to push through a large pile, sure, but it'd take longer.

My two cents.

Whoa...Tiger!. Have you been in an S330? I can only imagine if I had OTT or VTS. I overflow my 74" Bobcat CI tooth bucket with crushed base and keep on going. The only thing that stops me is my tires spinning in the loose stuff. The torque numbers on the s330 is only 228 ftlbs, but I think those are low compared to how it feels. It feels MUCH stronger than my 272c did doing the exact same thing but with the CAT's smaller bucket. I'd really like to see the Big JD or CASE push next to a 330. It would have to be very, very close though CASE torque numbers are off the chart.


Maybe I'm victim to marketing propaganda -- I had always figured that CTLs were used often in wet underfoot (maybe not routinely, but bought so that the working season could be extended). Got no numbers to back that up, so you may well be right.
I see your point about track width.

That's exactly why I am pursuing a CTL. Working in the wet. Sure, I'm taking a HUGE gamble that the drought won't come right back but even if it does, the extra traction and stability for expanding my mulching business will come in handy with a CTL..right? If can work more days, I can grow my business even more. Isn't that the marketing propaganda? I'm buying it but heck, I expect that they are all telling me the truth! :)

Tigerotor77W
01-14-2010, 05:21 PM
I'll explain.

Oh -- it's not so much that I disagreed with your analysis of your needs as much as it was I was wondering who will continue to buy MTLs from Cat. I know there are applications for MTLs, but what percentage of their track loader sales will be CTL and what will be MTL...

I guess we'll find out through Cat's response whenever its next generation of skids comes out.

mrsops
01-14-2010, 05:32 PM
Whoa...Tiger!. Have you been in an S330? I can only imagine if I had OTT or VTS. I overflow my 74" Bobcat CI tooth bucket with crushed base and keep on going. The only thing that stops me is my tires spinning in the loose stuff. The torque numbers on the s330 is only 228 ftlbs, but I think those are low compared to how it feels. It feels MUCH stronger than my 272c did doing the exact same thing but with the CAT's smaller bucket. I'd really like to see the Big JD or CASE push next to a 330. It would have to be very, very close though CASE torque numbers are off the chart.

That's exactly why I am pursuing a CTL. Working in the wet. Sure, I'm taking a HUGE gamble that the drought won't come right back but even if it does, the extra traction and stability for expanding my mulching business will come in handy with a CTL..right? If can work more days, I can grow my business even more. Isn't that the marketing propaganda? I'm buying it but heck, I expect that they are all telling me the truth! :)

Yellow thats because it is stronger then the 272. I agree with you on bobcat rating there torque numbers low. I even think there bucket break out forces on there small frame machines are off. Also i dont care what anyone says cat uses the smallest buckets i have ever seen, and john deere is right next to them. When i demoed the ct332 it had such a small bucket it on i couldn't imagine the thing not pushing through a pile of dirt, gravel, what ever. I was fitting more material in my s330 bucket then i was the ct322 bucket it was a joke.. I also think it would be close with a 330 pushing up against the jd and the case.

Also tiger dont take this the wrong way but your not an operator you have no idea what these machines can push or lift your going by numbers and things that guys are saying on this website. Ksss knows his numbers on machines but he knows better then anyone getting the machine into the field is where you really find out the limits on them.

Digdeep
01-14-2010, 05:48 PM
Yellow thats because it is stronger then the 272. I agree with you on bobcat rating there torque numbers low. I even think there bucket break out forces on there small frame machines are off. Also i dont care what anyone says cat uses the smallest buckets i have ever seen, and john deere is right next to them. When i demoed the ct332 it had such a small bucket it on i couldn't imagine the thing not pushing through a pile of dirt, gravel, what ever. I was fitting more material in my s330 bucket then i was the ct322 bucket it was a joke.. I also think it would be close with a 330 pushing up against the jd and the case.

Also tiger dont take this the wrong way but your not an operator you have no idea what these machines can push or lift your going by numbers and things that guys are saying on this website. Ksss knows his numbers on machines but he knows better then anyone getting the machine into the field is where you really find out the limits on them.

I can tell you from first hand knowledge that Bobcat, nor other OEMs rate their engine torque numbers low. These figures are derived from pure mechanical outputs on a dyno at set loads and rpms. All engine OEMs publish these specs. I am not an engine guru, but I can tell you that specs such as engine hp, and any spec related to SAE is not fudged.

The difference you feel in power may be related to bucket size as you pointed out (most likely scenario), wheel type, machine weight, hydraulic system efficiency/set-up (anti-stall), etc. There are all kinds of limitations and guidelines that OEMs must adhere to depending on the market regarding engines, exhaust sytems, noise, safety, etc. The liability that OEMs would expose themselves to by fudging industry standard/required specs is too great for the small gain on a spec sheet.

Omran&Turbo
01-14-2010, 06:48 PM
Every time??:rolleyes::rolleyes: I'm assuming you're young based on your use of the Englinsh language and your spelling capability, and I really like your passion for Bobcat. However, I'm sure you know this deep down, but remember that each machine has it's good and bad points.

Mr Digdeep, I don't know about young, but it makes me feel real good when ppl think I am still Young :laugh: :laugh: on the other hand I do write english real bad, and that is for one reason, English is not my mother languge and honest to God some times this keyboard does eat half of the words :laugh: :laugh:
Sorry if I was not fair when I said that (Every Time) but it was the case for me here.

Digdeep
01-14-2010, 07:24 PM
Mr Digdeep, I don't know about young, but it makes me feel real good when ppl think I am still Young :laugh: :laugh: on the other hand I do write english real bad, and that is for one reason, English is not my mother languge and honest to God some times this keyboard does eat half of the words :laugh: :laugh:
Sorry if I was not fair when I said that (Every Time) but it was the case for me here.

I'm glad you took my sarcasm in stride:) It does amaze me sometimes how my mind speaks one language and my fingers type another :hammerhead: Don't worry about apologizing; we're all fond of our brands, and I knew what you meant :drinkup:

Tigerotor77W
01-14-2010, 08:36 PM
Whoa...Tiger!. Have you been in an S330? I can only imagine if I had OTT or VTS. I overflow my 74" Bobcat CI tooth bucket with crushed base and keep on going. The only thing that stops me is my tires spinning in the loose stuff. The torque numbers on the s330 is only 228 ftlbs, but I think those are low compared to how it feels. It feels MUCH stronger than my 272c did doing the exact same thing but with the CAT's smaller bucket. I'd really like to see the Big JD or CASE push next to a 330. It would have to be very, very close though CASE torque numbers are off the chart.

That's exactly why I am pursuing a CTL. Working in the wet. Sure, I'm taking a HUGE gamble that the drought won't come right back but even if it does, the extra traction and stability for expanding my mulching business will come in handy with a CTL..right? If can work more days, I can grow my business even more. Isn't that the marketing propaganda? I'm buying it but heck, I expect that they are all telling me the truth! :)

I posted just after you did and didn't see your post -- sorry about that!

About torque: no, still haven't had the pleasure of joyriding in anything other than a Cat. I was honestly planning to rent a few machines for a day and arrange tests and yada yada yada, but this idea materialized when I was still naive and in high school. :laugh:

So if an S330 can push with the Cases and the best of them yet has less torque, why? I was thinking about this today. The amount of torque it takes to break traction on a wheel (didn't think about tracks just yet) isn't that much -- yes, smaller machines have less torque available, but they're also lighter, so even then there shouldn't be an issue of breaking a tire loose. If, then, it takes just about 5000 foot-pounds to get a wheel spinning on a large-frame machine, what's the extra engine torque "doing?" I really lack a good idea of how the engine couples to the hydraulic system. Someone want to jump in, be my guest. I might frustrate you with questions, though. :)

As for the marketing stuff, well, that's what I believed, too! Use a CTL year-round instead of a SSL in the dry only, which would mean that CTLs *are* run in the muck quite a bit. Dunno...

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 09:00 PM
We need to get to the bottom of this! Bobcat's s330 is way low in torque compared to case yet the bucket is big and can push through wet base quite easily. Ditto for pushing a tree over or lifting and carrying a huge log or pushing oak logs together.

mrsops
01-14-2010, 09:09 PM
We need to get to the bottom of this! Bobcat's s330 is way low in torque compared to case yet the bucket is big and can push through wet base quite easily. Ditto for pushing a tree over or lifting and carrying a huge log or pushing oak logs together.

Thats what im saying put the bobcat s330 bucket on the case 465 since the bobcat bucket is bigger and lets do it.. Ksss get a demo on the s330 and try it lol

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 09:28 PM
Thats what im saying put the bobcat s330 bucket on the case 465 since the bobcat bucket is bigger and lets do it.. Ksss get a demo on the s330 and try it lol

you can flip a switch and have CASE controls. I am impressed with the push force of the 330. The 300 was okay but the 330 is stronger, no doubt. It is heavy, too, at 8900 empty (I removed counterweights and put on smaller tires).
I only have the 74" CI bucket but I over heap it and it spills over. I need to weld a backstop because it will routinely overfill the bucket digging into a pile of base.

mrsops
01-14-2010, 09:31 PM
you can flip a switch and have CASE controls. I am impressed with the push force of the 330. The 300 was okay but the 330 is stronger, no doubt. It is heavy, too, at 8900 empty (I removed counterweights and put on smaller tires).
I only have the 74" CI bucket but I over heap it and it spills over. I need to weld a backstop because it will routinely overfill the bucket digging into a pile of base.

I have the same 74'' ci bucket to. Unless i have to load material into the trucks i will throw the big 80'' bucket on

AEL
01-14-2010, 09:38 PM
Another S330 guy here. Love the machine. Oddles of power. It has the big rubber on it and the counterweights still on it. 80" bucket hasnt left the machine since it was delivered(meaning we never use a 74" on it) and it will fill that bucket without even breaking a sweat.

mrsops
01-14-2010, 09:39 PM
Another S330 guy here. Love the machine. Oddles of power. It has the big rubber on it and the counterweights still on it. 80" bucket hasnt left the machine since it was delivered(meaning we never use a 74" on it) and it will fill that bucket without even breaking a sweat.

Is the 80'' flat or tooth

AEL
01-14-2010, 09:41 PM
flat. I love using this machine with the root grapple moving logs and such (much like yellow does) Carrying large logs the machine is still very stable.

mrsops
01-14-2010, 09:44 PM
flat. I love using this machine with the root grapple moving logs and such (much like yellow does) Carrying large logs the machine is still very stable.

You gotta get some pics of your baby up on here :weightlifter:

AEL
01-14-2010, 09:54 PM
Il look for some heavy lifting shots later:weightlifter:

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 10:35 PM
I have the same 74'' ci bucket to. Unless i have to load material into the trucks i will throw the big 80'' bucket on

My machine is only 72 inches wide with my smaller tires. Looks exactly like an s300 but has the s330 motor and all the goodies.

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 10:36 PM
Il look for some heavy lifting shots later:weightlifter:

wholly crap that thing looks clean! Mine looks like it has been through hell and back with the paint. Thank you Texas Hill Country cedar!!! It's the pokiest, stickiest, nastiest stuff I mess with and it's sure to scratch your decals off!

If my machine weighs 8900 with all the counterweights and door weights off and smaller tires, I imagine it would be HEAVY with all that back on. The axle weights are 300 lbs by themselves, and the rear weight are another 60 or 120. Can't remember plus those balloon tires and HD rims would make a stable lifting machine.

YellowDogSVC
01-14-2010, 10:39 PM
Il look for some heavy lifting shots later:weightlifter:
do you have the 14 ply tires? How is that thing in slop?