Sorry if posted before. I didn't see it. https://www.equipmentworld.com/vint...4ZB18G7eJ7BWj-OrKvzHjRUjevtiMgCurV4X6h5W6lcUk
great job guys
Very cool!
A very nicely-executed conversion. Worth mentioniong though that the D9L morphed into the D10N when Cat changed all their model numbers in 1987. So it's not like the two models are so different. So what they've ended up with is a D9L with a D10R engine, and probably the same 10-15% higher fuel consumption from the HEUI engine that they complain about in the article when comparing the 9L to their existing 10R tractors. I would have been really impressed if they had installed a C27 to replace the 3412 engine and made themselves the equivalent of a D10T. Quite frankly it would have been far more reliable in the long term than a 3412E. It's kinda interesting that a Cat document has existed for probably 20 years for repowering a D9L...... "This Special Instruction provides the procedure in order to repower a D9L Track-Type Tractor. The replacement engine will be a Tier I level 3412E engine." I notice the link says they spent "hours of research" on SIS. I found it in signficantly less time than that, probably less than a minute. My opinion (*others may be available)
Equipment World is an advertiser magazine that writes puff articles that please the manufacturers. They sell advertising space as well. It's an OK rag for getting an idea of the features coming out on new machines but my impression is that the editors write up what the makers tell them write. They write all roses and candy canes.
Having never seen this publication before that explains a lot.
That's a good article about some vintage iron. Good to see contractors still using them. I wonder why after all that they didn't convert the track frames over to the D10N/R style as many did to avoid the high track wear on the D9L's that I've heard about. Maybe that changes the width of the dozer and that's why they like the D9L over the D10N/R/T?
The article mentions the D10s required more disassembly to transport than the D9L. You are probably right.
They knew it was there, everyone who has ever looked up parts for almost any older cat machine has seen it. They just had zero interest in giving cat the amount of money that they want for that conversion, and at this point any money for a new machine. When we get new machines they are usually a different shade of yellow lol. The problem we have with the 9l's is that the rearmost idler breaks the bolts holding the cap on, our older 9l's have an extension welded onto them and machined flat for the three bolt cap. I don't know what 147 has on it, if it's anymore sophisticated or not but that's really the only problem we have with the undercarriage. It went to its first job this week, I'm not on it but I can try to get pictures if anyone is interested.
The purpose of the document is to provide the information to anyone who wants to do the conversion themselves. There is no requirement or obligation to pay the Cat dealer to do the work.
True, however when you don't buy the 10r-1175 complete engine ar from cat and instead get a used engine at auction out of a 657, how do you know what parts will work from the scraper engine and which ones you will need to locate elsewhere.......research on sis. When you rebuild said engine, what parts do you need to put into it to get the horsepower rating you're looking for (9l's are about 460 HP if I remember right, a 657E has to be what, 550?) Find the different components between a 10r and a 57e........it might actually even take some hours to do that. In the REHS8199 special instruction it states "Install replacement engine in original mounting location". OK, will the front cover from a 3412 in a 657 accept the front engine mount? Will the converter bolt to the rear cover of a scraper engine? Probably gonna have to look up some part numbers, once again on sis. They bought an engine at an auction that they were attending, it wasn't for the right application so they made it work. Was the way they did it easier, no. Was it cheaper, definitely.
I,m assuming they rebuilt the final drives and rest of the power train as well? Curious if Cat did the conversion, it would be comparable to a certified rebuild/power train rebuild and how the customer done repower/rebuild would compare? Also wondering if pushing scrapers is an easier or harder application on a dozer and if the higher HP of the scraper engine will result in less life expectancy of other components?
Engine, torque, trans, steering/brakes, finals, undercarriage, hyd valves, plumbing, wiring, cab, hvac and paint. We have s/u and full u blades for them that get changed as the job that they're going to requires. The engine is setup as an early 10r so it shouldn't really be that big of a jump in horsepower, all of our operator's say that the 10's are pig's anyway's so I guess they'll find out how long it lasts lol. Pushing scrapers seems to be a pretty easy life for a dozer, but once the new and shiny part wears off, that dozer will get thrown into whatever it need's to do just like the rest of them. In a year it'll be out ripping and pushing just like it's sister's lol.
That’s one expensive D9L ... the article said 450k.
Today's equivalent machine, D10T, new is around $1.3 million. The capital cost of the rebuild is a real bargain.
About the only downside to a rebuild is the time it takes. If the outfit has another machine to use then it's not much of a problem at all. 1/3rd the cost of new is a really good deal.
What is not counted in that 450K? I've been part of many total rebuilds from TD9 Internationals to D375 Komatsu, D8 and D9 Cats, and WA600 wheel loaders. A total rebuild never runs 1/3 the cost of new and they never last more than 65% of operational time that a new machine runs. Many costs are not counted. A lot of bragging on labor costs never include the loaded actual costs of labor. Are freight costs included? How about administrative costs? Someone has to pay for that shop space, the miscellaneous costs like rags, solvent tanks, blocking and lifting equipment and so on. How is insurance accounted for in those figures? You have industrial and casualty numbers that fit in somewhere. When all is said and done the owner with his own staff and facilities is lucky to do the job for less than two thirds the cost of new, with no warranty provisions and slightly more than fifty percent operating time before another rebuild is necessary. The cost per hour is usually worse for the owner than on a new machine. The final thought is few if any banks are willing to finance that rebuild as well. How many companies would put out that amount of cash on their own?
Good grief!
That’s a good point you’ve made
If you are going with quality rebuilds/remans to new spec or quality OEM new parts and proper repairs of any machine defects why does machine life not equal new? I’m not arguing I’m just curious. Is it machine fatigue, poor worksmanship, or poor assembly practices?
No one uses 100% new parts. The base block will have some machine work at a minimum that puts it out of standard dimensions. There will always be changes because of accumulated stresses over time. There will always be something or someone pushing people to get the job done faster and for less money. Finally, for end users, a machine rebuild is usually a rare occasion. At the factory, they have a team that assembles each machine multiple times a year with all new components. The last nail is that the money for the rebuild can’t be financed. Anyway you look at it, a rebuild is not a new machine.
Generally every Cat machine after it leaves the factory and gets any major part or component replaced they are getting reman. I would argue that there is no reason they can not last as long as new. In fact they incorporate any design or engineering updates your existing may not have had. Yes they fail or don’t make benchmark at times but no different than new. That’s why if you are serious you do planned rebuilds and not run to failure or destruction and then try to compare apples to apples on new vs rebuild. As for finance that is why Cat has Cat Finance. They finance rebuilds all day every day with secured lending You are correct that it is not a new machine. It is a great performing stud of a Tier 3 machine for a lot less than the new Tier 4 equivalent Obviously the above info is Cat specific as they are the leaders in this field with the rebuildable base machine, Certified rebuild options and finance arm
That might be true on fresh Cat reman components, but what about all the components already in dealer warehouses? I witnessed an in the box reman Cat engine installed in a D11 run for the first time and then fill up the oil pan with coolant. Someone at the factory didn't install a soft plug correctly and it blew out of place. Cat provided another engine but, did not provide for the labor to R&R the failed engine, freight nor the time lost waiting for it to be delivered. So what are your counter arguments? You might get a Cat finance package for a certified rebuild machine done by a dealer, but I have never seen it in the twelve years I worked for a Cat dealer. Please school us on secured lending. That usually means you have to use all the rest of your machines as collateral and risk loosing all of them should the "rebuild" fails early on. In that case you no longer have any leverage to force a settlement on a machine you still have to make payments on. Perhaps you have some other information on the term "secured." If your company is a huge earth moving operation with vast sums of capital and a years long project list that will provide the kind of leverage to ensure cooperation by the rebuilder, then I would say it is worth looking at. If you are Joe Blow construction and mining company with twenty mid sized machines of varying age and a limited work horizon, go look for decent used iron. There is a reason the rest of the machine builders don't go in on a rebuilding program.
What that a reman engine failed that a customer bought over the counter ? Yes it happens. I have also seen new machines engines fail just as fast. Do you think new machines make benchmark life hours with no failures (no downtime, no lost production, no low-bedding of components or machine costs ?). The world is changing, dealer offerings are as well and just because when you where at the dealer it wasn’t a thing does not mean it is not now. Secured is no different than the new machine financing. You stop paying and Cat comes to get the machine. Again not rocket science or different than if you buy new. This is why Cat finances rebuilds when other banks don’t. They know what they are worth and have means to dispose of them and get their money back a lot easier than a bank that doesn’t know the difference between tracks and wheels
New machine warranty would cover all the freight and labor to make the customer whole. If the factory wouldn't cover it, the dealer would. This failed engine cost the dealer and shows no one is immune to poor workmanship or defects in material and design. What is your background in sales, service and finance and employers?
Not sure if you are referencing a D11 or just in general. A 299D CTL vs D11 failure, what failed, why if failed, dealer, customer, warranty and time in a warranty period all are factors. Whole minus the biggest cost in some cases - loss of production and downtime. Could not agree more that no one is immune. Unfortunately no one feels this pain more than the customer. Background - service and sales. 20 years at dealers.
My example was in reference to the D11 only because it showed the most glaring example. I can't in any situation conceive of a machine rebuild on a skid steer. When you speak of factors for warranty you are touching on the gray areas that dealer service departments use to deny a warranty or limit the amount of cost to the dealer. With your background, you know that loss of production and downtime plus any other incidental costs are never covered in any standard warranty. I'm glad you are here to provide the dealer perspective.
Interesting reading gents by well informed people. It’s an eye opener for me for sure.