It's been advised that I purchase a Turbo such as the Bobcat S185 or 773T for use on mountain property at about 8200 feet or higher above sea level. What are the advantages of the turbo at different altitudes? I'm located in Colorado. Thanks for any info. Gary
Diesel engines dont create vacuum like a gas engine does and its hard for them to get enough air to build the fire. With a turbo the engine is forced in air to create the fire. At high altitude the air is thinner and the whole process is compounded. Another consideration is the turbo diesels make more power to start with and have more reserve when the air gets thin. A machine that needs 45 horse power at sea level still needs that same horse power at high altitude and all the engines suffer power loss at high altitude. Hope that helps.
I would also ask your dealership the question of whether or not the engine is controlled by an ECM. Newer ECM controlled engines these days that are built to be emission compliant, in particular common rail fuel injection, will derate at altitude. Like frog said when the air gets thin the turbo boost will go down which decreases air charge in the cylinder. If engines did not derate fuel settings, then unburnt rich fuel mixture is the result. Also as the exhaust gas gets less dense as a result of less fuel it will drive the turbo less efficient, resulting in less boost. It's a vicious cycle. If it was me I would take a turbo machine and a non turbo on demo to your site and work them. That will tell you if you actually need a turbo or not. Salesmen will sometimes try to upsell whenever they get the opportunity. Hope this helps, Z
For what is worth I ran large mining equipment in Nevada at 7900 feet some had turbos some did not. Everything seemed weaker at that altitude compared to here at sea level. Ran some large excavators and crawler dozers of the same make and model at both altitudes for a good comparison. It did seem the larger the engine the more percievable loss in power. I ran some ag tractors in the 40-50 hp range that I couldnt tell much if any difference. Likely the noticable diffference on a 50hp skid will be minimal. The mine was a "little" place in smokey valley called Round Mountain Gold (supposedly the worlds largest gold mine).
The 175 is a weak sister at any altitude and I would avoid it at all costs. I live at 5K feet and work up to 10K. I would never own a machine without a turbo and no else up here does either (other than rental stores). The loss is substantial. That said if your just a homeowner and not moving dirt for a paycheck or running high flow attachments, maybe not such a big deal. However the added resale value will help recover the extra costs, also if it matters the USFS considers the turbo to be a spark arrestor so if you do any work on Gov. property that will prevent you from having to fit your machine with an aftermarket spark arrestor.
Excellent comments from everybody. Hadn't thought about the spark arrestor. I'll be up where the beetle kill pine is everywhere and the last thing I would ever want would be the chance of fire. I will stay with a turbo and wait for a low hours S185 to show up. I think that will be plenty of machine for what I want. Thanks. Gary
The S185 is a great machine; Its power is very well matched to its size and capacities. They are very fuel effecient. They are also by numbers the best selling skid BC has.
i have noticed that lots of people think the s175 is under powered. its a small skid steer, if you want more power get a bigger one. the original purpose of a skid steer was to replace a man with a pitch fork, not to replace a bulldozer. we had a 175 before our 185 and they were both good machines...ran them both over 7000 hours with no major problems.