Trying a Cat 277

Discussion in 'Heavy Equipment & Pavement' started by 2004F550, Dec 1, 2005.

  1. 2004F550

    2004F550 LawnSite Senior Member
    Messages: 272

    Its a decent machine but I saw that it was a different suspension then the 287 and the smaller 257, etc. The 287 has a more triangular frame and track. I just wondered if anyone knew why the 267 and 277 used this type while the other models used another type.........
  2. Scag48

    Scag48 LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 6,067

    I've been told it has to do with stability. Not really sure what specific reason it serves but since the 277 is radial lift and the 287/257 are vertical lift so the undercarriage types depend on the lift type. Maybe someone knows exactly what each design serves, all I know is that it was for a stability issues or something to that nature.
  3. Tigerotor77W

    Tigerotor77W LawnSite Bronze Member
    from Germany
    Messages: 1,892

    Man, I used to know this... I *beliebe* the 267 and 277 use ASV's MTSS, the original suspended undercarriage design that first appeared with the ASVI 4500 and 2800 series machines. The point of this design allowed two torsion axles -- the roller frames could oscillate in...

    Aw, heck, I knew there was a better source out there: The RC100 in the article below uses the RTSS (287/257 UC designs); the 4500/2800 are RTSS. Link:
  4. Scag48

    Scag48 LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 6,067

    Very nice, 100HP is definately a nice feature. I wish Cat would produce something with more than 80 HP.
  5. Squizzy246B

    Squizzy246B LawnSite Senior Member
    Messages: 837

    Hey Scag...Why?..I just can't think of a situation where you can actually use that power in a skid. I think the 257 may be a tad lacking but the 267 we were running the other day was lacking in no department. We pushed through a ridge to make a service duct and the machine was knocking out boulders nearly as big as itself. I think a lot of operators lack the understanding/theory of weight distribution necassary to get the machine to work properly. Just MHO but I can't see the need...just the cost.
  6. 2004F550

    2004F550 LawnSite Senior Member
    Messages: 272

    We've tried every track machine from the T190 and T300 to the RC100 to this 277......personally I wouldn't buy a Bobcat, its just lacking compared to the others. Both the RC 100 and the Cat are good machines but we know Cat will always be there for sercive etc, so it would probably be a Cat purchase
  7. Caribbean Breeze

    Caribbean Breeze LawnSite Member
    Messages: 60

    I would buy the ASV, it has more ground clearance and better weight distribution because it is not a skid steer modified to run tracks. I know for a fact that the ASV is more stable working on slopes and loves mud because it has better ground clearance. Yes Cat will be around but ASV has been around over 20yrs plus. Asv is the 7th fastest growing company is America, so I feel comfortable with buying from them.

    For track machines, some of the people on this forum, in early 2004, they said ASV would be bought by Cat. It has not happened yet as many said it would. ASV might be a small company, I am going to work with them because their machines are great ( and I won't buy brand name because...)

    Take a serious look, I know you would not be wasting your time.

    Caribbean Breeze:waving:
  8. Scag48

    Scag48 LawnSite Fanatic
    Messages: 6,067

    Because with a machine the size of the RC 100, you're basically buying a bulldozer, and that's what I'd use it for. HP = torque in most situations and when you need to put the torque down to push something, I'd like to have alot. Also, with that high HP you can run those huge Loftness brush cutters very easily. 100 HP is a little ridiculous, but 85-90 would be nice. Sucks the fuel, though.
  9. dccarling

    dccarling LawnSite Member
    Messages: 62

    The RC-100 is only 71" wide, smaller than the larger Cat MTL's. More power, speed and lift.

    UNISCAPER LawnSite Bronze Member
    Messages: 1,426

    You have to consider what you are doing 80% of the time. When we bought the first 257B, I originally inquired about the 277. the salesman, who easily could have sold us the 277 went around to our jobsites, saw what we do most, and brought the 257 for a demo. At the time we had a T-190 Bobcat on the same jobsite. The biggest reason for the 257 was access. the 277 would be sitting idle more often. The second reason was trailering. A 277 can't really be pulled efficiently with a tag trailer and a pick up truck, you really need a gooseneck, and then pulling that trailer with a medium duty (45-55-6500 GM, or heavy duty truck (Mack Vision) is not possible.

    So, we went with the 257's for that reason. Ask yourself what you do most, and what you are using to deliver the machine to the jobsite with before you lock into one.

    It's probably the smoothest ride of all track loaders, with bogie double bogie and the rocker roller system it uses. The width and weight will limit you. As far as Cat and HP, if I had one critsizm it would be pertainate to HP. And even with that, the machines will do anything we ask of them. All high hp does in the size machine the 257/277 does is allows to be placed on the nose more often.

Share This Page