The Green Industry's Resource Center

Cat_246B · #11 01-24-2012, 05:27 PM

I couldn't get it to work. stupid me

AMCAT · #12 01-24-2012, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobcat_ron

Big question is, Kubota or Mitsubishi 3.8L engine?
Posted via Mobile Device

I heard Kubotu electronic engine ( built to CAT spec)

AEL · #13 01-24-2012, 08:07 PM

Viability out the rear looks horrible!
Posted via Mobile Device

Digdeep · #14 01-25-2012, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobcat_ron

Big question is, Kubota or Mitsubishi 3.8L engine?
Posted via Mobile Device

Kubota. All of their skids and CTLs will be switchingto Kubota. The 3.8L is the same one that is in the large Bobcats, Kubotas and Taks.

Digdeep · #15 01-25-2012, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ksss

Kinda interesting. Cat never mentions torque in their skid steers. You wont find a spec for it on any of their propaganda literature. Except when they increase it, its XX percent higher than it was before.... oh but were not telling what it is. I would love to met the person who runs their skid steer marketing plan.

217 up to 277 is a big jump. I guess they can finally let the world know

Digdeep · #16 01-25-2012, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AMCAT

I heard Kubotu electronic engine ( built to CAT spec)

Was told that it is the same as Bobcat's and Taks, just turned up. Bobcat has got to be really liking the fact that someone else has gone to Kubota.

YellowDogSVC · #17 01-25-2012, 10:45 AM

And Bobcat tunes down their 9k lb machine to 85 hp. If you want 92 hp, you have to get a counterweight you don't need, and if you want 99 hp, you have to have a 12.5k CTL.

Looks like CAT will be at the head of the pack if the performance matches the numbers.

ksss · #18 01-25-2012, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Digdeep

217 up to 277 is a big jump. I guess they can finally let the world know

It doesnt add up. The percentage that they claim as increase does not add up to 277 foot pounds. Guess we will see shortly.

Tigerotor77W · #19 01-25-2012, 10:12 PM

Sorry for pic quality -- the high quality pic is an .eps file and probably wouldn't show up if hyperlinked. From the press release:

P.Services · #20 01-25-2012, 10:27 PM

and i thought the C had shitty rear visibility.

Think it will be another Deere for me.

Will look at Case also though...

and how about they make a machine that can go for 7,500 hours and not need 30,000 in parts to get there? This crap of throwing a CTL away when it gets to 2,000 hours is insane.