PDA

View Full Version : Skid steer / Multi terrain loader help


grassman222
01-26-2010, 08:43 PM
Hi everyone , i was wondering what would be better skid steer or MTL ? I do snow when it snows and from what i hear the MTL tracks will just get destroyed which makes me want to go with the skid steer but i lay sod and do yard renovations which a MTL would be better . So is there anything i can put on the tracks like ive seen these plastic bolt on things im not really read up on those though so i dont know . Any help is welcomed thanks :usflag:

talus
01-26-2010, 09:21 PM
I say go with the MTL but I'm obviously biased. The mtl pushes snow like nobody business. You will be much happier on the lawns also. As far as wear goes they will wear a little faster on pavement but from what I've seen with mine there is always a fine layer of slush or snow that helps them slide easier than you would think. A friend has the same machine I have (SR 80) and has been doing snow removal for two years. His machine has +/- 1700 hrs on it now and I hope mine will last just as long. The 3k hour mark will be reached before these wear out in IMO.

bobcat_ron
01-26-2010, 09:58 PM
I put my Cat 247B2 through hell and back, the tracks would have gone over the 1000 hour mark and the rollers over the 1500 hour mark, track wear was even less than I thought off and on pavement. It's not the tread design that makes them better on ice, it's the rubber, it doesn't freeze as much.

I have a few video's on my YT page, as well as the Larry Lugs I think you might be thinking about, I made a video with thtem too.

talus
01-26-2010, 10:03 PM
I thought it was also the suspension of the mtl's that helped the traction.

sawinredneck
01-26-2010, 10:09 PM
Why not an articulating unit?

Boxer makes several units.

grassman222
01-27-2010, 09:20 AM
i did look at some of the articulated loaders . i dont think they would work for me though. dont get me wrong i like them and probably could use one for curtain things and if i hit the lottery ill have one . I dont know i have a friend of a friend that sells komatsu machines so im hoping to get a good deal on anything i choose .

grassman222
01-27-2010, 09:24 AM
i thought i had it narrowed down to cat 257B MTL or the komatsu 35-1 MTL but im hearing alot of the cat being under powered and plus im paying alot for the name i think just like john deere . John deere i though was ridiculous on price for what i was getting , nice machines though .

grassman222
01-27-2010, 09:26 AM
thanks for your thoughts and opinions everyone ,keep em coming

ioilyouin
01-27-2010, 12:07 PM
Have you looked at a Bobcat A-300? Very turf friendly, but I have no snow experience. I've heard that they do quite well.

stuvecorp
01-27-2010, 02:40 PM
i thought i had it narrowed down to cat 257B MTL or the komatsu 35-1 MTL but im hearing alot of the cat being under powered and plus im paying alot for the name i think just like john deere . John deere i though was ridiculous on price for what i was getting , nice machines though .

Komatsu has a MTL? I haven't read/heard anyone that liked the 257. Maybe look at a skid with the VTS?

Ozz
01-27-2010, 03:16 PM
Komatsu has a MTL? I haven't read/heard anyone that liked the 257. Maybe look at a skid with the VTS?


No, Komatsu has a CTL. It's a Berco UC. (I think?) A lot like deere's carriage.

here it is:http://www.komatsuamerica.com/?p=equipment&f1=view&prdt_id=911#info
Has anybody seen the amount of HP in those machines? 179? Think about high flow with that amount of horses.

jefftb
01-27-2010, 03:27 PM
Komatsu 30/35 machines are big, heavy machines. The 30 seems to push much better than the 35. I never liked either of them and I'm a Komatsu owner. The 35 is the lift/carry machine but watch the breakout ratings compared to what you need it to do.

I can say that both are stable with heavy loads, the 35 tops 10K. Operator station is roomy, ergonomics are fair, can't see out the back much but forward and to the side is pretty good. I had either one on rent last year for quite a few weeks overall. The controls are responsive but they drink fuel at a rapid rate when run WOT.

All that being said, I dropped coin on a TAK TL230.

Tigerotor77W
01-27-2010, 04:32 PM
Komatsu has a MTL? I haven't read/heard anyone that liked the 257. Maybe look at a skid with the VTS?

I've met two owners who have liked the 257B. It's not a *bad* machine for general duty work, and if you operate it lightly (i.e. are okay with taking lots of trips with a half empty bucket) it won't really even seem slow. That being said, there are options out there that have more power both in the tractive effort and in the lift/tilt circuits, and if you expect to do a lot of digging the 257B will likely be outclassed by those machines.

On a separate note, people here classify "MTLs" as being different from "CTLs." The MTL is a Cat product (sometimes ASV is also lumped into this category) and uses a suspended undercarriage. Its tracks are rubber with Kevlar imbeds; contrast this to CTLs (everyone else on the market and Cat's 279C, 289C, and 299C models) which are generally solid-mounted undercarriages. Cat's CTLs do have undercarriage suspension, but the tracks of all CTLs are rubber molded around steel embeds. CTLs are generally -- though I do believe sometimes erroneously -- thought of as being more "durable," with Takeuchi the usual winner of such discussions; the MTL is seen as a "softer" product for use in almost niche applications. That being said, I do believe it's possible to operate even a Cat MTL and have its track life still be equal to that of a CTL.

stuvecorp
01-27-2010, 07:34 PM
I do tend to lump ASV in to the 'MTL' category. I thought the Komatsu was a CTL but have never seen one.

Jeff, where are our pictures?:)

jefftb
01-27-2010, 08:01 PM
I do tend to lump ASV in to the 'MTL' category. I thought the Komatsu was a CTL but have never seen one.

Jeff, where are our pictures?:)

Same place as the pics of my new Komatsu PC55 are....An unfinished task on the todo list. I did manage to get them all added to the insurance roster though. Right now they are sitting on a job 2+ hours away from me. We've had more snow on that job than I thought possible here in East Tennessee. Looks like a real good shot at 6+" by Sat/Sun up there.

BTW-that Komatsu is indeed a CTL and not MTL. Its a BERCO undercarriage for sure.

ksss
01-27-2010, 08:34 PM
Same place as the pics of my new Komatsu PC55 are....An unfinished task on the todo list. I did manage to get them all added to the insurance roster though. Right now they are sitting on a job 2+ hours away from me. We've had more snow on that job than I thought possible here in East Tennessee. Looks like a real good shot at 6+" by Sat/Sun up there.

BTW-that Komatsu is indeed a CTL and not MTL. Its a BERCO undercarriage for sure.


You sure slide that in on the down low. How do they like running the TK?

grassman222
01-27-2010, 09:05 PM
Same place as the pics of my new Komatsu PC55 are....An unfinished task on the todo list. I did manage to get them all added to the insurance roster though. Right now they are sitting on a job 2+ hours away from me. We've had more snow on that job than I thought possible here in East Tennessee. Looks like a real good shot at 6+" by Sat/Sun up there.

BTW-that Komatsu is indeed a CTL and not MTL. Its a BERCO undercarriage for sure.

does the MTL undercarriage do a better job than the CTL ? Ive been told that the CTL is more for heavy construction type work , almost like a mini dozer .I geuss i want to know what the difference would be on the job , would it tare up the ground more or what ?

bobcat_ron
01-27-2010, 09:47 PM
The 257B2 is a great choice, sometimes I wished I had gone that route, but I'm not a fan of Vertical Path loaders, but given the amount of pushing power I had with the 247 after I tweeked the anti-stall relief valve, they are very powerful and still cheap on fuel.

bobcat_ron
01-27-2010, 09:49 PM
does the MTL undercarriage do a better job than the CTL ? Ive been told that the CTL is more for heavy construction type work , almost like a mini dozer .I geuss i want to know what the difference would be on the job , would it tare up the ground more or what ?

Cat/ASV MTL's still have way less ground pressure than CTL's but if you get into serious dirt pushing where you have sharp rock, you can get more wear out of the rollers, but using a wider bucket will offset the wear, I got stupid, I used 66" wide buckets and I got serious material ingestion and I saw faster wear.
A 72" bucket would be best.

Ozz
01-27-2010, 09:50 PM
does the MTL undercarriage do a better job than the CTL ? Ive been told that the CTL is more for heavy construction type work , almost like a mini dozer .I geuss i want to know what the difference would be on the job , would it tare up the ground more or what ?

CTLs can grade better, do worse in snow, have better traction,have more power(in general), and they do "tare" (it's tear, try some grammar) up grass more(but not as . they have supererior traction in most places (not snow) I've ran MTls (cat 277),CTLs (BC T190) and skids equipped with VTS (case 435) and like the CTL by far.

grassman222
01-27-2010, 10:29 PM
I'm horrible at grammar can you tell :laugh: :hammerhead:

grassman222
01-27-2010, 10:35 PM
CTLs can grade better, do worse in snow, have better traction,have more power(in general), and they do "tare" (it's tear, try some grammar) up grass more(but not as . they have supererior traction in most places (not snow) I've ran MTls (cat 277),CTLs (BC T190) and skids equipped with VTS (case 435) and like the CTL by far.




Ozz any idea why the CTL has no or little traction in the snow. Is it because the CTL tracks have the metal whatever built in them were the MTLs dont .
:waving:

jefftb
01-27-2010, 10:38 PM
You sure slide that in on the down low. How do they like running the TK?
Yeah, I'm not big on announcements....

The TK controls at first do feel jerky, but after about an hour they were used to it and actually like it better than anything else operated. The machine is fast from that perspective. The komatsu probably has a slight edge in fine control as of now but that could change over time.

The TK feels like a better built machine between the two. There is no question about it being more productive.
Posted via Mobile Device

talus
01-27-2010, 10:50 PM
Congrats on the new machines. Keep em clean.

bobcat_ron
01-28-2010, 10:58 AM
The Takeuchi pilot controls have to be the best I have eve used, they seemed to have gotten the true counter-rotation plumbing perfect, I noticed with the Cat pilots you have to constantly shuttle between forward/reverse while counter-rotating to spin in one spot, but the Takeuchi does exactly what you want it to do, as well as when you are pushing and turning with one track, it's the closest feeling to having rowing oars for control.

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 01:08 PM
CTLs can grade better, do worse in snow, have better traction,have more power(in general), and they do "tare" (it's tear, try some grammar) up grass more(but not as . they have supererior traction in most places (not snow) I've ran MTls (cat 277),CTLs (BC T190) and skids equipped with VTS (case 435) and like the CTL by far.

A lot of this is unsubstantiated and subjective... if anything, ASV have some of the best tractive effort on the market on dirt:
http://www.mbtractor.com/compared4.html

Sure, Deere has a video showing that the RCV can't push anything, but now you've got one vid for CTL and one vid for MTL. Can you really conclusively argue that one is better than the other for traction?

More power is subjective, too -- the PT-100 has 99 horsepower. As far as I know, there isn't anything more powerful than a PT-100 (unless you look at Supertraks).

[Edit: I know Takeuchis are beasts, and I know they're CTLs. But to broadly label CTLs as being "more powerful" or "have more tractive effort" than MTLs is just as erroneous as saying that MTLs are "more powerful" or "have more tractive effort" than CTLs. There's no clear statement that you can make about CTLs and MTLs in general as they relate to raw capability, as far as I'm concerned. Can't draw your comparisons based on a 257 or a T190 and say that as a group the CTL or MTL is better.]

ksss
01-28-2010, 01:09 PM
Yeah, I'm not big on announcements....

The TK controls at first do feel jerky, but after about an hour they were used to it and actually like it better than anything else operated. The machine is fast from that perspective. The komatsu probably has a slight edge in fine control as of now but that could change over time.

The TK feels like a better built machine between the two. There is no question about it being more productive.
Posted via Mobile Device


I know when I was at CASE they had Komatsu machines there to compare against. I thought Komatsu had the the controls with the best combination of feel, and control. They did an excellent job in that regard. The rest of the machine I did not care for but the control system is nice.

ksss
01-28-2010, 01:13 PM
A lot of this is unsubstantiated and subjective... if anything, ASV have some of the best tractive effort on the market on dirt:
http://www.mbtractor.com/compared4.html

Sure, Deere has a video showing that the RCV can't push anything, but now you've got one vid for CTL and one vid for MTL. Can you really conclusively argue that one is better than the other for traction?

More power is subjective, too -- the PT-100 has 99 horsepower. As far as I know, there isn't anything more powerful than a PT-100 (unless you look at Supertraks).

I think the PT100 has around 306 foot pounds of torque. I think that is tops.

Ozz
01-28-2010, 05:17 PM
oops,double post.

Ozz
01-28-2010, 05:22 PM
A lot of this is unsubstantiated and subjective... if anything, ASV have some of the best tractive effort on the market on dirt:
http://www.mbtractor.com/compared4.html

Sure, Deere has a video showing that the RCV can't push anything, but now you've got one vid for CTL and one vid for MTL. Can you really conclusively argue that one is better than the other for traction?



You sound like a defense attorney.... So I like CTLs, big deal...LIVE WITH IT.

Can YOU conclusively say that an MTL pushes the best with wery little seat time? I've ran them all. Have YOU? Specs are great but running the machines are completely different. Internet comparison can kiss my ass too because of the reasons stated above.

Everyone, sorry for hijacking the thread but that just plain pissed me off.

Grassman,

The CTL's tread pattern is not conducive to snow. The UC is not suspended like an MTL either. The MTL's UC is better in b/c it's suspended and the tread is more conducive to snow.

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 06:56 PM
Can YOU conclusively say that an MTL pushes the best with wery little seat time? I've ran them all. Have YOU? Specs are great but running the machines are completely different. Internet comparison can kiss my ass too because of the reasons stated above.

Everyone, sorry for hijacking the thread but that just plain pissed me off.


Relax. I haven't run them all and I don't know how many times I'll have to write that before every new person here understands this. I'm not touting the MTL product; all I'm saying is that there is NO guarantee that "CTLs" are better than "MTLs," just as there's no guarantee that MTLs are better than CTLs. I'm just saying that your post is subjective and is your opinion. I'm not calling your opinion wrong, but I also don't think it's fair to say that CTLs are always going to be better than MTLs except in snow. That's grown to be the accepted fact but I disagree with it... that being also my opinion.

Who knew that saying that each has its merits in a slightly different way would "just plain piss people off."

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 08:12 PM
Relax. I haven't run them all and I don't know how many times I'll have to write that before every new person here understands this. I'm not touting the MTL product; all I'm saying is that there is NO guarantee that "CTLs" are better than "MTLs," just as there's no guarantee that MTLs are better than CTLs. I'm just saying that your post is subjective and is your opinion. I'm not calling your opinion wrong, but I also don't think it's fair to say that CTLs are always going to be better than MTLs except in snow. That's grown to be the accepted fact but I disagree with it... that being also my opinion.

Who knew that saying that each has its merits in a slightly different way would "just plain piss people off."

Damn Xing!!!!!!! You should know better by now!!!!!:rolleyes: You're just too confrontational.

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 08:58 PM
You're just too confrontational.

:p

I was trying to type this on my phone, but I effed something up and couldn't see a "Reply" button. Anyhow: I do owe Ozz an apology on this one -- I didn't mean to bite his head off on the first reply or on this last one, and certainly there's nothing wrong with new people on the forum, either; I didn't mean that at all condescendingly. I've become more and more annoyed at both the maker and bashers of the MTL because one entity seemingly refuses to acknowledge some shortcomings and the other entity refuses to see that the MTL is a decent product. Individual experiences vary, but how often does everyone agree on even something as simple as a movie? Some people find Will Ferrell hilarious and funnier than Adam Sandler, but other people think Adam Sandler is funnier. I just meant to say that unless you're going to operating in sharp jagged rocks all day, everyday, there's not really a specific circumstance that one product will be 100% better for everyone.

I didn't mean to get my pants in a wad -- my bad, Ozz. I owe you a drink if I'm ever in your area. :drinkup:

I feel like whenever I cause a stir everyone else shuts up and hides. :laugh:

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 09:10 PM
:p

I was trying to type this on my phone, but I effed something up and couldn't see a "Reply" button. Anyhow: I do owe Ozz an apology on this one -- I didn't mean to bite his head off on the first reply or on this last one, and certainly there's nothing wrong with new people on the forum, either; I didn't mean that at all condescendingly. I've become more and more annoyed at both the maker and bashers of the MTL because one entity seemingly refuses to acknowledge some shortcomings and the other entity refuses to see that the MTL is a decent product. Individual experiences vary, but how often does everyone agree on even something as simple as a movie? Some people find Will Ferrell hilarious and funnier than Adam Sandler, but other people think Adam Sandler is funnier. I just meant to say that unless you're going to operating in sharp jagged rocks all day, everyday, there's not really a specific circumstance that one product will be 100% better for everyone.

I didn't mean to get my pants in a wad -- my bad, Ozz. I owe you a drink if I'm ever in your area. :drinkup:

I feel like whenever I cause a stir everyone else shuts up and hides. :laugh:

Don't sweat it dude. My math teacher mentality is coming out, and I'm thinking up a real good post to compare traction between a similarly sized CTL and MTL. It's coming to me. It's the lesson planner in me.

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 09:14 PM
Don't sweat it dude. My math teacher mentality is coming out, and I'm thinking up a real good post to compare traction between a similarly sized CTL and MTL. It's coming to me. It's the lesson planner in me.

Warn me so I don't see the results and cry about it. On the other hand, if you wanna work together on it I'd be happy to help out. :)

ksss
01-28-2010, 09:24 PM
Warn me so I don't see the results and cry about it. On the other hand, if you wanna work together on it I'd be happy to help out. :)

OH boy, this has ugly written all over it. You know I will have to play the other side just cause thats what I like to do.:cool2:

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 09:50 PM
You sound like a defense attorney.... So I like CTLs, big deal...LIVE WITH IT.

Can YOU conclusively say that an MTL pushes the best with wery little seat time? I've ran them all. Have YOU? Specs are great but running the machines are completely different. Internet comparison can kiss my ass too because of the reasons stated above.

Everyone, sorry for hijacking the thread but that just plain pissed me off.

Grassman,

The CTL's tread pattern is not conducive to snow. The UC is not suspended like an MTL either. The MTL's UC is better in b/c it's suspended and the tread is more conducive to snow.

I’m going to chime in because I just can’t help myself. In my “subjective” opinion, a similarly sized MTL (hp and weight) will outpush a similarly sized CTL, and based on the machines you’ve listed, I have run a far broader range of machines than you have.

For arguments sake (and knowing I’ll be going off on a wild tangent so bear with me), I’ll try to be “objective” by using this logic (CAT 277C compared to a Case 440CT- they are 570lbs different in weight and 1hp apart)- The CAT puts 71.2” of track length on the ground and the tracks are 18” wide. This equates to 2,542sq. in. The 440CT comes standard with 15.7” tracks that put 56.6” of track length on the ground. This equates to 1,780sq. in. To get as close to “apples to apples” we’ll use 17.7” tracks even though I don’t know if they are an option on the 440CT- this would give the 440CT 2,003sq. in. So, here are the direct track surface area comparisons-

CAT 277C- 2,542sq. in. (18” tracks)
Case 440CT- 2,003sq. in. (17.7” tracks) is this an option on this machine?
Case 440CT- 1,780sq. in. (15.7” tracks) standard

The 277C puts 20% more track length on the ground
The 277C has 21% more track surface area compared to 17.7” tracks and 30% more compared to the standard 15.7” tracks.

I think the argument could be made that since the CAT 277C has 48 bogies and idlers (contact points) in it’s undercarriage it distributes weight over more of the inner track surface area, and thus transmits that weight to the ground under those points. The Case 440CT has a total of 5 rollers/idlers, of which 3 are “triple flanged” (middle rollers) and the front and rear are single flanged (idlers). We’ll count the middle rollers as three each (triple flanged) for a total of 11 contact points on a side or 22 total on the inside surface area of the track. These contact points ride on steel bars and for arguments sake again we’ll say that they distribute all of the machine’s weight directly from each contact point through these bars to the ground. The CAT track has no steel bars to blunt the effect of weight through the track to the ground (for arguments sake). If the 440CT has the 17.7” tracks it could be argued that most of the outside and inside of the wider track isn’t even distributing machine weight since the rollers and idlers don't extend out much from the center of the track, thus not really adding any benefit in the form of traction, especially out at the last two inches of each side since there isn't even a bar that extends out that far (Is this why Bobcat recommends the narrow tracks for more traction?)

Rigid vs. suspension related to traction- My opinion (subjective of course) is that a rigid undercarriage acts much like a wheeled machine when the operator tries to dig or push. When down force is applied to the cutting edge of the bucket. Machine weight is transferred to the rear if any upward force is applied the the machine due to the loader arm downforce, thus reducing the effectiveness of much of the front part of the undercarriage/track (Ron noticed this and pinged someone in one of the pictures- I can’t remember the thread). Of course, this could also happen to a machine with a suspension (lifting the front of the tracks off the ground), but my opinion (subjective once again) is that the down force on the bucket doesn’t have as much of an immediate impact because the torsion axle acts/performs almost like they do when there is weight in the bucket while it is off the ground. There is resistance to the downward force of the heavy bucket almost like ride control. When the bucket edge is forced down I think there is a counter force from the torsion axle against it and it tries to force the tracks back onto the ground.

IMO these are the main reasons why I think that MTLs have better traction compared to CTLs- more track surface area, more contact points to distribute weight, and torsion axles that assist in keeping the front of the tracks on the ground longer than a CTL. I don’t think it is related to the treads or the rubber compounds/hardness. The tread design is a “C” pattern on the CTLs and not a “bar” pattern because the “bar” pattern would beat the machine and operator to death. The “C” pattern gives a more consistent ground contact area under the rollers. Rubber hardness is measured in durometers and I’ve taken a knife tip to both types of tracks and there really isn’t that much of a difference.

This is merely my opinion on traction differences between MTLs and CTLs.

This isn’t a CAT protection or a Case, or any other CTL bashing post. They were the first two machines that I could think of that were very close in weight. I think that a big difference in machine weight would provide advantages to a the heavier machine.

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 10:15 PM
That was impressive. I was hoping you'd rig up two machines and beat the he** outta 'em. Damn.

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 10:18 PM
OH boy, this has ugly written all over it. You know I will have to play the other side just cause thats what I like to do.:cool2:

You're killing me! Xing's the smart one since he's the engineer.

I'm only into math. :sleeping:

Tigerotor77W
01-28-2010, 10:25 PM
You're killing me! Xing's the smart one since he's the engineer.

Bwahaha yeah right... let's have a vote and see how many people think I could actually make a better SSL or CTL than the best one out there now. :D

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 10:28 PM
That was impressive. I was hoping you'd rig up two machines and beat the he** outta 'em. Damn.

You actually got me thinking about this when you mentioned the Deere video that showed it pushing against the ASV RCV. That RCV was a pig of a machine-slow, crappy visibility, loud and I could go on. I remember sitting in one that the local dealer brought in and thinking that it was a perfect example of why engineers need to get out from behind their desks. But for all it's nastiness, it could lift, had something like 130"+ of lift height and almost 36" of reach, and it didn't lack for traction. It made me wonder how Deere could quantify that big of a difference in pushing power/traction even though the machines were very close in hp and weight (I think the Deere was heavier) and the ASV machine had way more track surface on the ground. The Bridgestone tread design isn't really all that agressive in order to give it a smooth (er) ride either. I knew it was typical Deere marketing (they're very good), but it got me thinking nonetheless.

stuvecorp
01-28-2010, 10:42 PM
Bwahaha yeah right... let's have a vote and see how many people think I could actually make a better SSL or CTL than the best one out there now. :D

So you're the one that has been messing with my 440/VTS.:nono:

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 10:46 PM
So you're the one that has been messing with my 440/VTS.:nono:

I think he's a secret Loegering engineer that designed the bolt that sticks out too far from the inside of the undercarriage for some trailers. I heard him bragging about it on another site :rolleyes:

stuvecorp
01-28-2010, 10:52 PM
I think he's a secret Loegering engineer that designed the bolt that sticks out too far from the inside of the undercarriage for some trailers. I heard him bragging about it on another site :rolleyes:

And he was involved with making the VTS stick out that additional couple inches? Oh he is so Evil.:nono::)

Digdeep
01-28-2010, 11:00 PM
And he was involved with making the VTS stick out that additional couple inches? Oh he is so Evil.:nono::)

I don't typically talk politics, but think we should make him listen to President Obama's State of the Union Address a dozen times just to torture him!!!!! Nothing like hearing a man say the word "I" hundreds of times in one speech :drinkup: Watching Botox Nancy aand VP "my teeth glow in the dark" Biden sitting behind him was just a bonus :clapping:

ksss
01-28-2010, 11:06 PM
I’m going to chime in because I just can’t help myself. In my “subjective” opinion, a similarly sized MTL (hp and weight) will outpush a similarly sized CTL, and based on the machines you’ve listed, I have run a far broader range of machines than you have.

For arguments sake (and knowing I’ll be going off on a wild tangent so bear with me), I’ll try to be “objective” by using this logic (CAT 277C compared to a Case 440CT- they are 570lbs different in weight and 1hp apart)- The CAT puts 71.2” of track length on the ground and the tracks are 18” wide. This equates to 2,542sq. in. The 440CT comes standard with 15.7” tracks that put 56.6” of track length on the ground. This equates to 1,780sq. in. To get as close to “apples to apples” we’ll use 17.7” tracks even though I don’t know if they are an option on the 440CT- this would give the 440CT 2,003sq. in. So, here are the direct track surface area comparisons-

CAT 277C- 2,542sq. in. (18” tracks)
Case 440CT- 2,003sq. in. (17.7” tracks) is this an option on this machine?
Case 440CT- 1,780sq. in. (15.7” tracks) standard

The 277C puts 20% more track length on the ground
The 277C has 21% more track surface area compared to 17.7” tracks and 30% more compared to the standard 15.7” tracks.

I think the argument could be made that since the CAT 277C has 48 bogies and idlers (contact points) in it’s undercarriage it distributes weight over more of the inner track surface area, and thus transmits that weight to the ground under those points. The Case 440CT has a total of 5 rollers/idlers, of which 3 are “triple flanged” (middle rollers) and the front and rear are single flanged (idlers). We’ll count the middle rollers as three each (triple flanged) for a total of 11 contact points on a side or 22 total on the inside surface area of the track. These contact points ride on steel bars and for arguments sake again we’ll say that they distribute all of the machine’s weight directly from each contact point through these bars to the ground. The CAT track has no steel bars to blunt the effect of weight through the track to the ground (for arguments sake). If the 440CT has the 17.7” tracks it could be argued that most of the outside and inside of the wider track isn’t even distributing machine weight since the rollers and idlers don't extend out much from the center of the track, thus not really adding any benefit in the form of traction, especially out at the last two inches of each side since there isn't even a bar that extends out that far (Is this why Bobcat recommends the narrow tracks for more traction?)

Rigid vs. suspension related to traction- My opinion (subjective of course) is that a rigid undercarriage acts much like a wheeled machine when the operator tries to dig or push. When down force is applied to the cutting edge of the bucket. Machine weight is transferred to the rear if any upward force is applied the the machine due to the loader arm downforce, thus reducing the effectiveness of much of the front part of the undercarriage/track (Ron noticed this and pinged someone in one of the pictures- I can’t remember the thread). Of course, this could also happen to a machine with a suspension (lifting the front of the tracks off the ground), but my opinion (subjective once again) is that the down force on the bucket doesn’t have as much of an immediate impact because the torsion axle acts/performs almost like they do when there is weight in the bucket while it is off the ground. There is resistance to the downward force of the heavy bucket almost like ride control. When the bucket edge is forced down I think there is a counter force from the torsion axle against it and it tries to force the tracks back onto the ground.

IMO these are the main reasons why I think that MTLs have better traction compared to CTLs- more track surface area, more contact points to distribute weight, and torsion axles that assist in keeping the front of the tracks on the ground longer than a CTL. I don’t think it is related to the treads or the rubber compounds/hardness. The tread design is a “C” pattern on the CTLs and not a “bar” pattern because the “bar” pattern would beat the machine and operator to death. The “C” pattern gives a more consistent ground contact area under the rollers. Rubber hardness is measured in durometers and I’ve taken a knife tip to both types of tracks and there really isn’t that much of a difference.

This is merely my opinion on traction differences between MTLs and CTLs.

This isn’t a CAT protection or a Case, or any other CTL bashing post. They were the first two machines that I could think of that were very close in weight. I think that a big difference in machine weight would provide advantages to a the heavier machine.


dam that must have took a while. Study hall must have been pretty uneventful! Well said and put together and makes sense to me. You must have really dummied that down.

I think the suspension itself does everything that was said. The problem perhaps is the unit parked on top of the suspension. They don't dig that well (speaking of CAT, never ran an ASV). The other thing I would say is that while a CTL may not be as good as an MTL in putting traction to the ground, for most all applications it is good enough. Especially considering the CTL is cheaper to maintain in harsher conditions. The sophisticated suspended undercarriage while providing some advantages doesn't provide enough to offset the costs the majority (yes your right not all) see with it.

I think the VTS with its torsion bars offer somewhat of a cushion. It helps I know that. I think the CAT CTL offers the same type of system. The spongee feel takes a little getting used to but I really like it. It might be something for other CTL OEM's to look at.

P.Services
01-28-2010, 11:27 PM
arnt the cat ctls on a suspension also? dont the boogie wheels move on a torsion type axle?

Tigerotor77W
01-29-2010, 12:16 AM
arnt the cat ctls on a suspension also? dont the boogie wheels move on a torsion type axle?

There are two levels of suspension... the Cat C-series MTLs (2x7C) have the option of having either single-level or dual-level suspension. Dual level suspension is bogie suspension; single-level is just at the torsion axle. The 247B2 and 257B2 currently have just single-level.

P.Services
01-29-2010, 12:20 AM
i knew that, i was asking about the ctls as in 279 289 299. are those boogies on a suspension? dont they pivot back and fourth?

Tigerotor77W
01-29-2010, 12:22 AM
It made me wonder how Deere could quantify that big of a difference in pushing power/traction even though the machines were very close in hp and weight (I think the Deere was heavier) and the ASV machine had way more track surface on the ground.

Could be the anti-stall valve in the RCV (it's not called anti-stall, but there is one, yes?) was turned down or just wasn't adjusted well. Hell even the Bobcat couldn't spin its tracks, and I really do think a T300 can spin its tracks in dry dirt...

So you're the one that has been messing with my 440/VTS.:nono:

I'm curious about it -- maybe there was a reason for the design, but I'm not familiar with the design of the VTS. :(

I don't typically talk politics, but think we should make him listen to President Obama's State of the Union Address a dozen times just to torture him!!!!! Nothing like hearing a man say the word "I" hundreds of times in one speech :drinkup: Watching Botox Nancy aand VP "my teeth glow in the dark" Biden sitting behind him was just a bonus :clapping:

Haha... incidentally I didn't get a chance to watch (or laugh, as you seemed to have been doing!).

Tigerotor77W
01-29-2010, 12:23 AM
i knew that, i was asking about the ctls as in 279 289 299. are those boogies on a suspension? dont they pivot back and fourth?

Oops, I meant to address that. *Just* the MTLs have bogie suspension; the CTLs have solid bogies (like the SLSS -- single-level suspension -- options) on the MTLs.

P.Services
01-29-2010, 12:27 AM
i coulda sworn i was told they have a rubber block type suspension so each set of boogies can rock back and forth. i almost remember talking about it on this site before and rot had compared it to the suspension under cats large dozers.

stuvecorp
01-29-2010, 01:26 AM
Bwahaha yeah right... let's have a vote and see how many people think I could actually make a better SSL or CTL than the best one out there now. :D

It was funny to me but didn't transfer over the Interweb, I was inferring if you want to make an ultimate skid that you were 'prototyping' the 440S3 with VTS('the best one out there'...).:)

bobcat_ron
01-29-2010, 10:11 AM
i coulda sworn i was told they have a rubber block type suspension so each set of boogies can rock back and forth. i almost remember talking about it on this site before and rot had compared it to the suspension under cats large dozers.

They still use the torsion axles (single level suspension) on the CTL's, that allows the tracks to independently move up and down, or one end down the other end up to help it go over rough ground, like when you have to climb over a curb at an angle, the first track that rolls over the curb will move up while the other track stays on the ground, the torsion axles take more of the twisting and rocking motion out before the machine rolls around, very smooth and comfortable,

Tigerotor77W
01-29-2010, 10:26 AM
It was funny to me but didn't transfer over the Interweb, I was inferring if you want to make an ultimate skid that you were 'prototyping' the 440S3 with VTS('the best one out there'...).:)

Ah, okay. I dunno. I figured the best skid out there right now is the Bobcat T190! I'll base all my power improvements on that one. :gunsfirin

Ozz
01-29-2010, 05:07 PM
:p

I was trying to type this on my phone, but I effed something up and couldn't see a "Reply" button. Anyhow: I do owe Ozz an apology on this one -- I didn't mean to bite his head off on the first reply or on this last one, and certainly there's nothing wrong with new people on the forum, either; I didn't mean that at all condescendingly. I've become more and more annoyed at both the maker and bashers of the MTL because one entity seemingly refuses to acknowledge some shortcomings and the other entity refuses to see that the MTL is a decent product. Individual experiences vary, but how often does everyone agree on even something as simple as a movie? Some people find Will Ferrell hilarious and funnier than Adam Sandler, but other people think Adam Sandler is funnier. I just meant to say that unless you're going to operating in sharp jagged rocks all day, everyday, there's not really a specific circumstance that one product will be 100% better for everyone.

I didn't mean to get my pants in a wad -- my bad, Ozz. I owe you a drink if I'm ever in your area. :drinkup:

I feel like whenever I cause a stir everyone else shuts up and hides. :laugh:

I'm sorry too mate. I'd take either one before a shovel or wheeled skid (for some stuff, for deo I'll take a solid tire skid.)
I have no issue with an MTL, I just think for areas with out much snow or extremely sensitive environments, I'd take a CTL.

BTW, I like adam sandler.

Hell, I only came here over HEF because Willie told me about here.:dizzy:

grassman222
01-30-2010, 10:27 AM
So pretty much everyone is saying that the Mtl would probably be my better choice if i were using it for snow . i wouldn't worry about snow that much but this year so far we have had about two and a half feet. So i figure why let my machine sit . Thanks for all the input keep it coming. :usflag:

ProTouch Groundscapes
01-30-2010, 11:53 AM
after using my asv rc100 this year at our church job, moving pallets around, loading brick and mortar up on the scaffolding etc... the footprint that it leaves is really nice. barely any compaction and the grass could be raked up if need be. although ill be doing the re-seeding there this spring.

ive rented many wheeled skids in the past, as the asv is our first machine, and first tracked machine ive used. and ive always threw down plywood when working over customer lawns and i would still end up bringing in topsoil and grass seed for repairs.

the last machine i used, a rented s185 with brand new tires running a 6 foot harley rake, i barely had any traction. its much harder to do a finished grade with a wheeled machine b/c if you end up going back over what you already graded, your gonna get ruts and have to redo it.

so for me, doing alot of re-seeding work and work over sensitive areas like lawns, an mtl was the best option. and this thing is unstoppable in the snow as well.

grassman222
01-30-2010, 03:13 PM
after using my asv rc100 this year at our church job, moving pallets around, loading brick and mortar up on the scaffolding etc... the footprint that it leaves is really nice. barely any compaction and the grass could be raked up if need be. although ill be doing the re-seeding there this spring.

ive rented many wheeled skids in the past, as the asv is our first machine, and first tracked machine ive used. and ive always threw down plywood when working over customer lawns and i would still end up bringing in topsoil and grass seed for repairs.

the last machine i used, a rented s185 with brand new tires running a 6 foot harley rake, i barely had any traction. its much harder to do a finished grade with a wheeled machine b/c if you end up going back over what you already graded, your gonna get ruts and have to redo it.

so for me, doing alot of re-seeding work and work over sensitive areas like lawns, an mtl was the best option. and this thing is unstoppable in the snow as well.

Thanks for your info . i havent really looked at the ASV ,but i know they use them in the state forrest fire service so they have to be some what good . Like i said before i have a friend of a friend that sells komatsu machines and he was going to sell me a new machine for a really good price. Well its going to come down to me trying them all :laugh:. I know CAT uses ASV undercarriage but i dont know , im going to have to try a few more , but if im getting a really good deal on the komatsu :confused: I got nothing but time :usflag:

grassman222
01-30-2010, 03:38 PM
Does anyone know about what the ASV machines are going for ?:confused:
I understand you may not want to share the price you may have paid but approx. price will help .

grassman222
01-30-2010, 05:18 PM
And whats the big deal with the vertical lift ? Is it just bad cause you cant see as well? Or is there some other reason? It has a high dump height also doesnt it? The sides of my truck are about 71/2'- or 8' high so i need all i can get to be able to dump.

Ozz
01-30-2010, 06:32 PM
And whats the big deal with the vertical lift ? Is it just bad cause you cant see as well? Or is there some other reason? It has a high dump height also doesnt it? The sides of my truck are about 71/2'- or 8' high so i need all i can get to be able to dump.

There are more elements to twist/bend whn you push hard or dig in.

grassman222
01-30-2010, 09:10 PM
O ok , which im guessing would decrease the break out force as well?

grassman222
01-30-2010, 09:23 PM
And i forgot to say this earlier but no bobcats at all for me . I'm not a fan of the bobcat . Sorry

Ozz
01-30-2010, 09:30 PM
O ok , which im guessing would decrease the break out force as well?

No, it just wears on the machine.

I don't see your prolem with Bobcat, They'd be my 1/2nd choice (tied with Case/Cat) for a CTL. I for one, think they make a good product. I love the T250, It's a big machine that's radius path.

Do you already have a loader (wheeled?) or will this be your only machine? What will you be doing with it? That's where you need to determine the size of the loader you get

grassman222
01-30-2010, 10:00 PM
Why thank you for your guidance. I have owned two bobcats in the past and was not pleased with them in any way shape or form . They were both wheeled. the first was a 773. and the second was a new S185 and that thing went back within the 30 days i had it , horrible , horrible. I will say this the 185 was better than the 773 for sure but that machine is not for me.

Digdeep
01-30-2010, 11:13 PM
And whats the big deal with the vertical lift ? Is it just bad cause you cant see as well? Or is there some other reason? It has a high dump height also doesnt it? The sides of my truck are about 71/2'- or 8' high so i need all i can get to be able to dump.

The argument about a vertical lift path machine being weaker, having a much higher operating cost, bending, breaking, etc. is pretty much a dead issue these days. Vertical and radial are both very reliable and the cost to run a vertical is minimally more (you will end up replacing a couple more pins in the future). You need to decide if you need the maximum reach to be at the top of the lift path (vertical) or mid-way up (radial) each has its benefits- loading tandem trucks (vertical) unloading trucks (radial). The majority of your heavy pushing and diging is done with the loader against the loader stops/frame so the extra linkage doesn't really com into play. This is a generalization, but most (not all) vertical lift path machines have poorer visibility to the rear of the machine compared to a radial.

stuvecorp
01-30-2010, 11:34 PM
The argument about a vertical lift path machine being weaker, having a much higher operating cost, bending, breaking, etc. is pretty much a dead issue these days. Vertical and radial are both very reliable and the cost to run a vertical is minimally more (you will end up replacing a couple more pins in the future). You need to decide if you need the maximum reach to be at the top of the lift path (vertical) or mid-way up (radial) each has its benefits- loading tandem trucks (vertical) unloading trucks (radial). The majority of your heavy pushing and diging is done with the loader against the loader stops/frame so the extra linkage doesn't really com into play. This is a generalization, but most (not all) vertical lift path machines have poorer visibility to the rear of the machine compared to a radial.

You know I never got what the use was for the vertical lift until Shane explained it. Up here it is not pushed at all. I would love to have vertical lift on the 440 if I could so truck loading would go easier.

ProTouch Groundscapes
01-31-2010, 12:37 AM
the reason CAT mtls got a bad rep for their undercarriages is that they used the lighter system found on the ASV PT80's and below on their heavier machines.

take for instance the CAT 297C, it weighs 10,139lbs and rides on an undercarriage almost exactly like the ASV PT80 which has an operating weight of 8,972lbs. now im not saying the undercarriages are exactly the same, bearings, bushings etc... may have been beefed up. but the ASV PT100 with an operating weight of 10,150lbs, much closer to the 297C, rides on a completely different undercarriage than the rest of its smaller ASV brothers.

this seems to be the most glaring issue with the reliability of the CAT MTL's that has been brought up so much. Im not saying its the exact cause, but may be a contributing factor, along with the fact that the CAT machines are just wheeled machines with undercarriages.

notice the difference:

http://www.tracworkscivil.com.au/images/9cat297c.JPG


http://www.equipmentimages.net/image/equipment/other/asv/cl_pt100_3.jpg

ksss
01-31-2010, 12:49 AM
The argument about a vertical lift path machine being weaker, having a much higher operating cost, bending, breaking, etc. is pretty much a dead issue these days. Vertical and radial are both very reliable and the cost to run a vertical is minimally more (you will end up replacing a couple more pins in the future). You need to decide if you need the maximum reach to be at the top of the lift path (vertical) or mid-way up (radial) each has its benefits- loading tandem trucks (vertical) unloading trucks (radial). The majority of your heavy pushing and diging is done with the loader against the loader stops/frame so the extra linkage doesn't really com into play. This is a generalization, but most (not all) vertical lift path machines have poorer visibility to the rear of the machine compared to a radial.


Yea totally agree. I like the reach of the vertical lift machines for loading trucks and the higher ROC but other than that it really doesn't buy you much. I see no difference in durability between the two. The radial machines are easier to grade with because of the cleaner site lines. I will say that putting VTS on a radial lift machine makes loading trucks a little more difficult. Cant really snuggle the machine up to the truck like you can with tires.

Tigerotor77W
01-31-2010, 02:22 AM
but the ASV PT100 with an operating weight of 10,150lbs, much closer to the 297C, rides on a completely different undercarriage than the rest of its smaller ASV brothers.

Now I'm playing devil's advocate, but the 287B used the same UC as that of the RC-100 (at the time; now the PT-100).

For the most part, however, Cat's machines weigh more than the ASV machines the Cats' UCs are taken from.

ProTouch Groundscapes
01-31-2010, 11:17 AM
ya, i just pulled a picture up of a 287b and it has the same UC. I have an RC100.

how come the 100's heavier UC is not used on the larger CAT machines?

Tigerotor77W
01-31-2010, 11:38 AM
ya, i just pulled a picture up of a 287b and it has the same UC. I have an RC100.

how come the 100's heavier UC is not used on the larger CAT machines?

There's a variety of reasons, but to be honest, I'm not sure that the SR-70 and SR-80's new undercarriage is that much "lighter-duty" than the PT-100's. The PT-100's undercarriage is difficult to clean and adjust; mud-packing is an issue on it as well. In certain instances it's not a big deal, but in some areas of the country, mud-packing means hours of additional work either to get the machine clean or hours of work to get the mud out and get the machine running.

At last count, I think the new undercarriages are holding up far better than the old ones were, regardless of whether it was the 267/277 style or the 287/PT100 style.

jimmyjack
01-31-2010, 11:48 AM
Does anyone know about what the ASV machines are going for ?:confused:
I understand you may not want to share the price you may have paid but approx. price will help .

got my PT80 for i think 52 and change , 0% for 60:dancing:.............. what part of jersey do u live in, we got it from powerco they have a yard in allentown pa and clinton nj ( i think) really good guys to work with

bobcat_ron
01-31-2010, 02:51 PM
The new style ASV undercarriages are easier to work on, I've seen pictures with the B series Cat's and their undercarriages are all torn off at the dealer just to replace the rollers, that was the cost factor that would often kill the resale value, dealerships have high shop labour rates, and if it takes just 2 hours to pull a complete side frame off a 287B, replace worn out parts and put it back on, you are looking at over 8 hours per side.

Stick Pro
01-31-2010, 02:59 PM
The 287b undercarriage is junk. We have one so i would know, the new 97 87 77 cats are a better setup, much easyier to clean and adujst. But good news we can have the complete setup down to the torsion axels off in under than 45 mins on a bad day. We have had plenty of practice at it.

grassman222
01-31-2010, 04:59 PM
The ASV looks big , like it would be hard to move around . I like the look of it though

grassman222
01-31-2010, 05:03 PM
got my PT80 for i think 52 and change , 0% for 60:dancing:.............. what part of jersey do u live in, we got it from powerco they have a yard in allentown pa and clinton nj ( i think) really good guys to work with

Thats about what some others are going for . I wanted a Cat to begin with when i first started looking but my friend is , i think giving me a really good deal on the komatsu 35-1 brand new . what to do , what to do :confused: :hammerhead: :dizzy:

grassman222
01-31-2010, 05:06 PM
But i geuss it doesnt matter what hes giving it to me for if i cant use it . Well i can use it just probably will have more problems , expenses ,ect. which is dumb on my part .:hammerhead:

ProTouch Groundscapes
01-31-2010, 05:27 PM
what i like about my rc100 is that its only 69" wide.

grassman222
01-31-2010, 05:37 PM
I'll be looking into alot more than i thought i geuss. I'm worried about the snow the most , not that we get alot here but we do get a good amount every other winter it seems like . And i hate missing out on easy money . :usflag:

grassman222
01-31-2010, 05:41 PM
got my PT80 for i think 52 and change , 0% for 60:dancing:.............. what part of jersey do u live in, we got it from powerco they have a yard in allentown pa and clinton nj ( i think) really good guys to work with

I live about 30 minutes away from philly. I know there is a company that sells ASV not to far from me and the sales man did send me prices on ASV machines like two years ago and unfortunatley around $52k is way out of my price range but i do like the machines i just never real went and looked at them up close .

P.Services
01-31-2010, 08:20 PM
Thats about what some others are going for . I wanted a Cat to begin with when i first started looking but my friend is , i think giving me a really good deal on the komatsu 35-1 brand new . what to do , what to do :confused: :hammerhead: :dizzy:

What are you paying for it?
Posted via Mobile Device

grassman222
01-31-2010, 09:39 PM
I cant tell you exactly but, under $30k And yes its 100% brand new not used or refurbished or anything like that . Thats y i keep going back to the komatsu . but if the machine is no good for me im not going to dump any money into at all.

grassman222
01-31-2010, 09:43 PM
its amazing what they mark machines up to . Its just ridiculous!

P.Services
01-31-2010, 10:17 PM
thats a crock of bull shi t. you are not getting a new machine for under 30 grand.

grassman222
01-31-2010, 11:37 PM
we shall see