Register free!
Search
 
     

The Green Industry's Resource Center


Click for Weather
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 01-31-2010, 12:34 AM
P.Services's Avatar
P.Services P.Services is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fenton Michigan
Posts: 5,923
Wow excellent information is that reply. Thank you. I agree with you 100 percent. I ran a 297c for about a week and it was weak compared to my deere. With that machine I had to back out of the pile because it couldn't lift a full scoop. Now the deere will just take all you can give it and power right out of it and laugh, I love that machine for that reason. I don't have a deere dealer that can give me the service my company needs to function in a professional way. I'm not going to get into all the reasons I dislike them that doesn't matter. If I were to buy a deere I would only buy it from jdskidsteer (doug) on this site. If it wasn't for him I don't know where my company or machine would be. Buying a machine from 1500 miles away is fine but what happens when I need service? I'm back to dealing with the same olds. Ok but back on track, I run my machine hard and use it for everything everyday. This machine moves a lot of dirt, pushes huge brush piles, hauls massive stumps on and on and on.... To give you a brief insight into my company plan, I'm trying to obtain from working this machine so hard and putting so many hours on it. Therefore I'm seriously looking and will 100 buy a wheel loader more then likely a 966b cat. This machine is going to do the heavy lift and heavy hauling jobs so the skid can live a easier life. This will also allow my to shoot productivity through the roof! I will be able to move basement spoils in a afternoon compared to three days. I will be able to push a 150 wide brush pile instead of taking it bite by bite. Further more the machine will be used for snow removal in the winter being that the company is growing ever more in that area. And lastly this will also give me one more machine to stay at the yard to load mulch and supplies. Wheel loader does the big stuff and the skid will do the boulder walls, plant trees, grade top soil, move this move that you get the idea. But it won't have to move 5,000 yards of clay 500 yards down the path, that's a loader job. Again in the winter the skid will also be used for snow, instead of saying "well my ctl is ok in the snow" I can say "my skid will out work a truck easy" I won't be worried about burning through tracks, I can even run it down the road if I need to. Will I miss the power of the deere? Yes. But I will just start up the 966 and it will make me wonder how I use to do this all with a little ctl. Yes I may have to wait a month or two until I put the spring cash in the bank to buy the loader but so be it. On top of all that info... I do a lot of work in one development and as of right now its all unfinished and in a rough form, a ctl can track all over the place and be fine. What happens in five years when that place is in a more "finished or it goes belly up? I will be looking to do other types of work thus working in very different envirements. Drive ways, streets, pavers, who knows. This machine would let me adapt to whatever happens. With a ctl that place goes belly up and I'm gona say ****! I put all my eggs in one basket and now I'm fed! I'm just trying to keep the big picture in mind, the big picture being the direction my company is headed and how we are going to get there. I'm thinking ahead a few steps maybe even a few years but its a plan.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 01-31-2010, 12:36 AM
P.Services's Avatar
P.Services P.Services is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fenton Michigan
Posts: 5,923
Holy crap that was a lot to type on a phone!!! But you need to know the whole story to give good advicea. Don't get me wrong I'm not set on a vts machine at all. But tonight that's what I'm thinking. It may change by tomorrow.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 01-31-2010, 01:50 AM
ksss's Avatar
ksss ksss is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rigby, Idaho
Posts: 6,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picasso View Post
Holy crap that was a lot to type on a phone!!! But you need to know the whole story to give good advicea. Don't get me wrong I'm not set on a vts machine at all. But tonight that's what I'm thinking. It may change by tomorrow.
Posted via Mobile Device

I am tracking with you, makes sense. I rent a wheel loader as needed, but try and use my 465 as much as possible. I had plans on purchasing a 3 yard loader before everything dried up. Gratefull I held off. I would like to hear what you think of a 272C. I have yet to run one. The versatiity that the VTS would give you would be a benefit.
__________________
See us at www.kaiserskidsteer.com

Proudly running CASE and Takeuchi equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 01-31-2010, 01:57 AM
ksss's Avatar
ksss ksss is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rigby, Idaho
Posts: 6,826
Interesting how you also had to back out of the pile to lift the loader arms. When I mentioned the same thing on the 256C, you would have thought that I was the antichrist. That was part of what I meant about having to reteach yourself to run one, cause they don't have the same capabilties that other machines do. The only people that have actually admitted this .........quirk... is me, you and the guy from CAT R&D that posted for a couple days and probably got fired.
__________________
See us at www.kaiserskidsteer.com

Proudly running CASE and Takeuchi equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 01-31-2010, 03:03 AM
P.Services's Avatar
P.Services P.Services is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fenton Michigan
Posts: 5,923
But why can't they just make a cat as strong as a deere?? It can't be a secret.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 01-31-2010, 07:25 AM
Digdeep Digdeep is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picasso View Post
But why can't they just make a cat as strong as a deere?? It can't be a secret.
Posted via Mobile Device
It's no secret. Breakout, both lift and curl are functions of loader geometry, cylinder rod and barrel size, and hydraulic system and pressure. An example; Takeuchi- great breakout (static), but it diminishes significantly when you are trying to drive into a pile and curl and lift at the same time (try it). Geometry plays a really big part in this- length of loader arms, angle of tilt cylinders, cylinder rod diameter, barrel diameter, etc. I can't remember the exact figure, but I remember telling me that he could increase loader breakout (not bucket) almost 15% by increasing the loader length from rear loader tower structure to the bucket pin by 6". I'm not a big fan of the CAT, but I know that it has over 7,000lbs of breakout on their big CTL. Reaching the upper limits of this won't come into play for most guys hogging dirt because you can only put so much dirt into a bucket (especially a CAT bucket).
__________________
Digdeep
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 01-31-2010, 12:58 PM
ksss's Avatar
ksss ksss is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rigby, Idaho
Posts: 6,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picasso View Post
But why can't they just make a cat as strong as a deere?? It can't be a secret.
Posted via Mobile Device

My version 2.1: CAT started with a weak powerplant, it posts hp numbers inline with everyone else so when you do a hp comparision it would appear that the CAT is as powerful as anything else. The torque however is as I stated woefull at best. CAT conceals this in two ways. The destroking pump shifts down so to speak to prevent the engine from lugging, combined with the antistall it prevents you from pushing the machine too hard. The other way is THEY DON"T PUBLISH THE TORQUE SPECS. Trying to get the torque specs is like trying to find Jimmy Hoffa. CASE, DEERE, TK and some models on BC but not all show you everything. Why? There is nothing to hide. When your digging or pushing while the CAT is destroking to accommondate for its lack of torque the CASE,Deere, TK type will push through because they are equipped with a deep torque reserve so to speak. No destroking to slow you down.

The result of this is this. The CAT will make a novice operator look better than he is. No stalling, so from that prospective it would likely increase your productivity. Now take an experienced operator who is actaully skilled enough to extract all the capacity out of machine and you are no longer as productive in a CAT. The machine is not capable of giving you any more what was programmed into it. It wont lift, poor wheel torque, and when pushing it hard the pump is constantly destroking. If CAT did not do the antistall the result would be exactly opposite, you would contantly be killing the machine due to the low availability of torque. So CAT did a good job with what they had, they started with a substandard powerplant, but built a system around it that makes the very most out of what they had to work with.

The killer part of this is, they sell. The reality is a lot of guys don't need a machine to be that productive. Marginal in many cases is enough, combine that with the CAT sticker and it works for them.

As for the arm breakout, I felt like that was predialed into the machine somehow, it would lift to a point and then stop like you flipped a switch, very irritating to me. The bucket breakout on the 256C with the little CAT bucket was acceptable to me. I did not have issue with it, I wished I had switched buckets and put a CASE bucket on it, but I never did maybe that would have been another matter. It was probably the characteristic that was most impressive, other than the cab which was nice as was the visibility to the sides (not the back).

The CAT machine compared to a Deere are two completely different animals. Without major changes a CAT will never dislay the heavy work ability that the Deere does. If you plan on changing your company structure somewhat and lean on larger equipment to accomplish what you used to do with a CTL that may work for you. However I suspect that you will regret the decision. Without fail you find yourself in positions when mobing the 966 to a job is not practical, job conditions are too wet, and too confining and you will be forced to complete jobs with the CTL.

What I have noticed is that when you have built your business around smaller equipment for years, a certain reputation follows you. I have been working since 06 to expand to larger jobs which require heavier iron. However 15 years of being a skid steer guy, means that your going to find yourself doing jobs that often should have larger iron on it but for whatever reason they cant. So they turn to you. Had they not needed that particular capability they would have likely went with Bobs Excavating in the first place, since for 15 years he had been doing work with a 330 and 988.

Having experienced a more powerful machine, I think stepping back will be difficult. I hope that all made some sense.
__________________
See us at www.kaiserskidsteer.com

Proudly running CASE and Takeuchi equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 02-01-2010, 11:36 AM
Digdeep Digdeep is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksss View Post
My version 2.1: CAT started with a weak powerplant, it posts hp numbers inline with everyone else so when you do a hp comparision it would appear that the CAT is as powerful as anything else. The torque however is as I stated woefull at best. CAT conceals this in two ways. The destroking pump shifts down so to speak to prevent the engine from lugging, combined with the antistall it prevents you from pushing the machine too hard. The other way is THEY DON"T PUBLISH THE TORQUE SPECS. Trying to get the torque specs is like trying to find Jimmy Hoffa. CASE, DEERE, TK and some models on BC but not all show you everything. Why? There is nothing to hide. When your digging or pushing while the CAT is destroking to accommondate for its lack of torque the CASE,Deere, TK type will push through because they are equipped with a deep torque reserve so to speak. No destroking to slow you down.

The result of this is this. The CAT will make a novice operator look better than he is. No stalling, so from that prospective it would likely increase your productivity. Now take an experienced operator who is actaully skilled enough to extract all the capacity out of machine and you are no longer as productive in a CAT. The machine is not capable of giving you any more what was programmed into it. It wont lift, poor wheel torque, and when pushing it hard the pump is constantly destroking. If CAT did not do the antistall the result would be exactly opposite, you would contantly be killing the machine due to the low availability of torque. So CAT did a good job with what they had, they started with a substandard powerplant, but built a system around it that makes the very most out of what they had to work with.

The killer part of this is, they sell. The reality is a lot of guys don't need a machine to be that productive. Marginal in many cases is enough, combine that with the CAT sticker and it works for them.

As for the arm breakout, I felt like that was predialed into the machine somehow, it would lift to a point and then stop like you flipped a switch, very irritating to me. The bucket breakout on the 256C with the little CAT bucket was acceptable to me. I did not have issue with it, I wished I had switched buckets and put a CASE bucket on it, but I never did maybe that would have been another matter. It was probably the characteristic that was most impressive, other than the cab which was nice as was the visibility to the sides (not the back).

The CAT machine compared to a Deere are two completely different animals. Without major changes a CAT will never dislay the heavy work ability that the Deere does. If you plan on changing your company structure somewhat and lean on larger equipment to accomplish what you used to do with a CTL that may work for you. However I suspect that you will regret the decision. Without fail you find yourself in positions when mobing the 966 to a job is not practical, job conditions are too wet, and too confining and you will be forced to complete jobs with the CTL.

What I have noticed is that when you have built your business around smaller equipment for years, a certain reputation follows you. I have been working since 06 to expand to larger jobs which require heavier iron. However 15 years of being a skid steer guy, means that your going to find yourself doing jobs that often should have larger iron on it but for whatever reason they cant. So they turn to you. Had they not needed that particular capability they would have likely went with Bobs Excavating in the first place, since for 15 years he had been doing work with a 330 and 988.

Having experienced a more powerful machine, I think stepping back will be difficult. I hope that all made some sense.
Some very good points. However, not to take too much away from Deere or Takeuchi, but Deere doesn't publish engine torque either, Takeuchi doesn't have the engine specs they once did, and I don't think they should really be lumped into the same class as the Case, NH and the ASV when it comes to engine displacement, power and torque. Here is list of 7 main CTL makers with the engine displacement, gross hp, and engine torque. I had to find Deere's by looking up the engine model under the Industrial section of their website and picking the highest hp classification for that engine. The published hp for the 333D is actually 4hp less than the engine spec under the industrial section so the torque value may be a little on the high side for the benefit of the doubt.

Terex-ASV PT100- 4.4L, 99.9hp, 304lb-ft
Case 450CT- 4.5L, 90hp, 288lb-ft
NH C190- 4.5L, 90hp, 288lb-ft
Deere 333D- 3.1L, 95hp, 252lb-ft
Takeuchi TL250- 3.8L, 98hp, 240lb-ft
Bobcat T320- 3.8L, 92hp, 232lb-ft
CAT 297/99C- 3.3L, 94hp, 217lb-ft

It's interesting that nobody ever talks much about the NH C190 on the site, but it has the exact same engine that the Case 450CT does, and the exact same undercarriage. Takeuchi went backwards about 21% in engine torque and down almost 14% in displacement by switching from the Yanmar to the Kubota engine.
__________________
Digdeep
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 02-01-2010, 12:25 PM
ksss's Avatar
ksss ksss is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Rigby, Idaho
Posts: 6,826
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digdeep View Post
Some very good points. However, not to take too much away from Deere or Takeuchi, but Deere doesn't publish engine torque either, Takeuchi doesn't have the engine specs they once did, and I don't think they should really be lumped into the same class as the Case, NH and the ASV when it comes to engine displacement, power and torque. Here is list of 7 main CTL makers with the engine displacement, gross hp, and engine torque. I had to find Deere's by looking up the engine model under the Industrial section of their website and picking the highest hp classification for that engine. The published hp for the 333D is actually 4hp less than the engine spec under the industrial section so the torque value may be a little on the high side for the benefit of the doubt.

Terex-ASV PT100- 4.4L, 99.9hp, 304lb-ft
Case 450CT- 4.5L, 90hp, 288lb-ft
NH C190- 4.5L, 90hp, 288lb-ft
Deere 333D- 3.1L, 95hp, 252lb-ft
Takeuchi TL250- 3.8L, 98hp, 240lb-ft
Bobcat T320- 3.8L, 92hp, 232lb-ft
CAT 297/99C- 3.3L, 94hp, 217lb-ft

It's interesting that nobody ever talks much about the NH C190 on the site, but it has the exact same engine that the Case 450CT does, and the exact same undercarriage. Takeuchi went backwards about 21% in engine torque and down almost 14% in displacement by switching from the Yanmar to the Kubota engine.

Deere's torque specs always have shown up on the CASE comparision website. However I have not checked on the new D series. Thats a great reference. Also I knew that they were now putting the CASE powerplants in the NH machines. I wonder how well that will work for durability in the NH machines. When I went through the factory about 4 years ago. They pointed out the differences in the sizing of components between the CASE product line and NH. CASE being much heavier. The tub on the CASE machine is one piece and massive, the NH is much lighter and bolted or at least was then. After reading about the tracks bending at the mounting on the NH (at HEF)I think this may be a sign that they have hung too much on too weak of a chassis. Perhaps the internals have been beefed up to handle the more powerful engines. I liked it better when NH ran the detuned components.
__________________
See us at www.kaiserskidsteer.com

Proudly running CASE and Takeuchi equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 02-01-2010, 01:17 PM
Digdeep Digdeep is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 1,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksss View Post
Also I knew that they were now putting the CASE powerplants in the NH machines. I wonder how well that will work for durability in the NH machines. When I went through the factory about 4 years ago. They pointed out the differences in the sizing of components between the CASE product line and NH. CASE being much heavier. The tub on the CASE machine is one piece and massive, the NH is much lighter and bolted or at least was then. After reading about the tracks bending at the mounting on the NH (at HEF)I think this may be a sign that they have hung too much on too weak of a chassis. Perhaps the internals have been beefed up to handle the more powerful engines. I liked it better when NH ran the detuned components.
Good points/questions. I noticed the bending comments too. Maybe that is why NH hydraulically limits their ROC's on their CTLs even though the ROCs don't come close to 50% of the tipping loads.
__________________
Digdeep
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:14 PM.

Page generated in 0.14489 seconds with 7 queries