What Iron are you running?

[FergusonTO35]

Isn't Volvo Construction the descendant of Michigan, Clarke, and a few other old marques?

 

[Big1066ih]

Volvo's pretty common around me

 

[Catbuster]

Isn't Volvo Construction the descendant of Michigan, Clarke, and a few other old marques?

Their loader lines are. Their excavators are developed from Ackerman. They’re a conglomerate of quite a few old firms. As far as I’m aware the only thing Volvo CE originally produced were their 6x6 wiggle wagon trucks. I think Doosan has quite a stake in Volvo CE now as well.

Volvo's pretty common around meView attachment 278864

Volvo seems to be common in coastal states. There’s a lot of Volvo machinery in B.C logging camps as well. All the Volvo equipment I’ve seen for a long time where I’m based from has been their wiggle wagons and a few smaller wheel loaders. Cat, Deere, Komatsu & Link-Belt dominate the excavator market. Maybe we’re behind the times or maybe it’s harder to import to the center of the country, or maybe it’s dealers breaking in. Who knows? Rudd is our Volvo dealer, and they also do Hitachi, Link-Belt cranes and a variety of underground mining equipment, and after talking to their sales reps they’re not pushing Volvo excavators very hard.

 

[Big1066ih]

Few link belts around but not many. Cat, Volvo, Komatsu n Kobelco, very few newer Deere around too. Im a driver, O/O. Been around it since I was 4, I'm impartial just happy to get out of truck n sling dirt from time to time.

 

[Catbuster]

I like your truck. We run KW T800s for quads-the Petes are nicer to be in all day, though. What’s your preferred transmission? I’m a 9LL guy in a dump truck, but 8LLs and 15 speeds are good options.

I am partial to excavator brand, though my preferences to new machines has varied over time. When I first got on one for an extended period (2002 if I remember correctly) I strongly preferred Hitachi. I thought they were the smoothest, best balanced machine on the market. Caterpillar was the brute force/high production option if someone could keep them under control. Caterpillar really upped their game with the D series and their bigger C series machines, I doubt that I will find a machine I like more than the 345D, those things had stupid power and were super well balanced. Right now... Link-Belt builds a smooth machine but I feel like they’re sometimes down on power, so I think I’m a Deere guy at the moment.

 

[Big1066ih]

Truck has an 8LL in it which in reality is all ya need but I really like an 18spd. I worked for a guy that had a 290 and 360 Komatsu n I would say they are the smoothest I recall, ran a new Cat 336 this summer few times n pretty slick too. I cut my teeth on a e70 n hitachi 100 but really enjoy being in a bigger machine. I like to give the "I've run one once er twice" when asked about running equipment to help out...

 

[Catbuster]

That’s funny, I think Komatsu machines when run WFO and set up for maximum production are the fastest (generally) on the market, to the point where they start to get jerky if the operator is all about speed. The Komatsu machines have plenty of power but will literally tear themselves apart. Walsh-Vinci bought a half dozen PC450s when they were getting their rock cut down to the tunnel invert for the east crossing of the ORB and they had at least one down a month for welding or replacement of the front package. Those guys were good operators, too.

I run plenty of Komatsu stuff, though. Their dealer runs Certified Rental that makes the ever-famous Cat Rental Store look bad. They once got me a PC800 on a day’s notice and had it going on site in two.

For lowboy tractors the 18 speed is the only way to go. Plenty low to start off and plenty of gears to get wherever you need to go. I like the 9LL with the extra creeper gear for feeding road wideners and asphalt pavers, but that’s JMO/YMMV and stuff.

 

[FergusonTO35]

When the Mountain Parkway was widened a few years ago, I noticed that Volvo off-road dumps and Komatsu excavators were the norm. This was a pretty heavy duty job, mostly blasting and hauling rock.

 

[Skeans1]

The video game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skeans1]

I don’t make a habit of posting up a bunch of pictures, but here’s a list.

Excavators:
-Cat 345D L x2
-Cat 336E L
-Cat 330D L w/thumb
-Link-Belt 235X3
-Cat 315C L w/thumb

Dozers:
-Cat D8L
-Cat D8R
-Cat D7G
-Cat D7R
-Cat D6R
-Cat D5K
-Cat D5G

Loaders:
-Cat 963D
-Cat 963C
-Cat 953C x2
-Cat 950G
-Cat 928G
-Cat 924K

Backhoes:
-Case 590SM
-Case 590SLx2
-Case 580SM
-Case 580SLx2

Skid Steer/Misc
-Cat 287C XPS 2 speed
-Cat 299C XPS 2 speed
-Case 465 S3
-Case 440 S3

My Cat dealer (Boyd, formerly Whayne/Walker) and I have a great working relationship, although I may be heading for a different excavator brand when it’s time to replace the old 315, 330 and the two 345s. They all have a lot of hours on them and the latest Cat excavators we’ve had out have not been as impressive as some of their competition.

What’s the plan for the next excavators? I’d love to see a 200/300 sized no tail swing built up for a shovel with boom options for you guys that dig as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catbuster]

@Skeans1

Jared, I’m gonna warn you now-After reading my post- I get pedantic.

I’m trying out the Volvo, it’s a 290 sized boom on a 350 undercarriage with zero tail swing. The highway contractor we’re setting pipe and structures for has a Caterpillar machine (335F) that is the same class, and it seems like it has some more power than the Volvo, looking at both machines digging the same material, both with pin grabbers and equivalent size buckets. John Deere & Hitachi have a machine that shares everything but the engine and and a few hydraulic components, but it has more tail swing than the Volvo or the Cat. I’ve talked to one person that’s run both and they think the Deere is more stable and faster when multifunctioning but the Cat may have more digging power.

What I’ve found is that the 330 & 336 (350 size) machines I have generally have more reach than I need and don’t have much more power than the 290 size machines. If these reduced tail swing machines with that much reach are stable enough, I’ll probably get them as replacement for my 350 sized machines. I can’t see any downside to a reduced tail swing that does everything a similarly sized standard tail swing machine.

I would bet that big John Deere reduced tail swing would do fine running a processor, the hydraulic flow specs on that machine are impressive and it has three pumps. It uses the same front as the 290G, so the mounts should be the same as the 3154 & 3156 forestry machines. Even then, I don’t doubt somebody like Jason out of Pape’s Eugene branch could put mounts for a shovel front on one.

For the rest of them, that 315 sits a lot, I don’t think it’s going anywhere. I usually just see it go out on smaller site jobs or smaller diameter pipe construction. The 345s are production machines, they’ll run for 15,000 hours before I see serious problems and they’re sitting around 9500 each. You might have seen over on the other site where I bought that 349, but it was fairly disappointing and I was lucky enough to sell it. I’ve had a Deere 470G on demo since that was a better all-around machine and I think that’ll be my next purchase once I replace my 350 sized machines.

 

[motoOzarks]

 

[Skeans1]

@Skeans1

Jared, I’m gonna warn you now-After reading my post- I get pedantic.

I’m trying out the Volvo, it’s a 290 sized boom on a 350 undercarriage with zero tail swing. The highway contractor we’re setting pipe and structures for has a Caterpillar machine (335F) that is the same class, and it seems like it has some more power than the Volvo, looking at both machines digging the same material, both with pin grabbers and equivalent size buckets. John Deere & Hitachi have a machine that shares everything but the engine and and a few hydraulic components, but it has more tail swing than the Volvo or the Cat. I’ve talked to one person that’s run both and they think the Deere is more stable and faster when multifunctioning but the Cat may have more digging power.

What I’ve found is that the 330 & 336 (350 size) machines I have generally have more reach than I need and don’t have much more power than the 290 size machines. If these reduced tail swing machines with that much reach are stable enough, I’ll probably get them as replacement for my 350 sized machines. I can’t see any downside to a reduced tail swing that does everything a similarly sized standard tail swing machine.

I would bet that big John Deere reduced tail swing would do fine running a processor, the hydraulic flow specs on that machine are impressive and it has three pumps. It uses the same front as the 290G, so the mounts should be the same as the 3154 & 3156 forestry machines. Even then, I don’t doubt somebody like Jason out of Pape’s Eugene branch could put mounts for a shovel front on one.

For the rest of them, that 315 sits a lot, I don’t think it’s going anywhere. I usually just see it go out on smaller site jobs or smaller diameter pipe construction. The 345s are production machines, they’ll run for 15,000 hours before I see serious problems and they’re sitting around 9500 each. You might have seen over on the other site where I bought that 349, but it was fairly disappointing and I was lucky enough to sell it. I’ve had a Deere 470G on demo since that was a better all-around machine and I think that’ll be my next purchase once I replace my 350 sized machines.

I’ve never been around Volvo myself but I can tell you this I will never own a Cat machine again the pissed me off pretty good. I’m sure either would run a head but for shovel logging or loading logs is a great place for a zero or reduced tail swing as long as there’s still vision behind you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catbuster]

I’ve never been around Volvo myself but I can tell you this I will never own a Cat machine again the pissed me off pretty good. I’m sure either would run a head but for shovel logging or loading logs is a great place for a zero or reduced tail swing as long as there’s still vision behind you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Peterson *f-worded me pretty hard when I worked out your way-and I worked for a huge contractor. If I was out your way I’d find myself using Pape as much as possible. Here at home it’s the opposite, our Cat dealer (Boyd, formerly Whayne) is excellent and our Deere dealer (Meade) have nice enough people but it seems like they never have parts in stock.

So far the Volvo is doing alright, I can’t believe how much less fuel it uses than my 300/350 size Cats. Kinda short on bucket power, definitely have to put a hammer on in more places. Lifting power is good, and it’s Link-Belt smooth. I have to give it back Wednesday. Lots of thinking on that-I’d have to buy all new buckets, hammers & the like whereas right now I have four machines that use the same coupler.

I like the “newer” reduced tail swing machines. The older ones tended to be very unstable. The newer machines are much heavier and have bigger undercarriages, heavier counterweights and aren’t always a true “zero tail swing,” especially with the larger models. They’re much more stable and actually feel like I can get some work done with them.

 

[Catbuster]

Update: Cat’s 335 (75,000 lb very close-to-zero tail swing machine) has some serious lifting power and is way more stable than it should be. This one is configured with a 11’ 10” stick, a pin grabber, and that’s a 42” bucket. That tank base probably isn’t super heavy, but it has a lot of steel in it. It then set their 10,000 gallon fuel tank in the base.

Absolutely would work awesome as a shovel.

 

[Al Smith]

Not much compared to others .At the house Oliver OC-6 crawler ,gasoline engine and a TO -20 Fergy with a big bore kit .Basically takes it from 120 cu inch to 129 and 4 more HP over stock
At the shop another Fergy with a Davis industrial loader .Three Cat D4's , JD 70 gasser and one Model A JD . My departed dads Allis model B circa 1938 .
That little AC is only 14 HP with a semi mount 14" plow .In hard sod it will pull both front wheels off the ground and is geared so low in granny gear it won't stall .In the little podunk town I grew up in I did okay plowing gardens .I could turn more ground with that thing in a half hour than they could in a full day with roto tiller .In the mid 60's I was making about 25 bucks an hour doing that .

 

[Guido Salvage]

I use this IH 454 diesel and John Deere 350 around my sawmill, worked both of them today.

 

[Catbuster]

Been doing some deep trenching in nasty soils. The Deere is doing pretty good. It doesn’t have the lifting power my kitties do but it’s more stable. I miss woods road building.

Then I go to a job I’m a sub on and go to their (probably 10 acre) laydown yard and you get reminded that your big hoe isn’t really that big... This is what they’re using to run big drainage culverts. For a while this was the “small” excavator on site.

 

[Skeans1]

View attachment 296030 Been doing some deep trenching in nasty soils. The Deere is doing pretty good. It doesn’t have the lifting power my kitties do but it’s more stable. I miss woods road building.

Then I go to a job I’m a sub on and go to their (probably 10 acre) laydown yard and you get reminded that your big hoe isn’t really that big... This is what they’re using to run big drainage culverts. For a while this was the “small” excavator on site.
View attachment 296035

Ok if that’s the small excavator what was the big girl?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Catbuster]

Ok if that’s the small excavator what was the big girl?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not my pictures-But the big one was this:


The other big one on this job was one of these:


There was only a 90 foot cut that covered 200 acres. While we were not on the site at the time, I was told by the site superintendent that all three of those big bastards ran 12-20 hours a day loading 100 ton trucks for the better part of a year.