Does anyone have any experience with both of these machines and can make a comparison? We're looking to buy a 5 to 5 1/2 yd machine and would much appreciate some info on how these 2 compare as for ease of operation, reliability, and smoothness during truck loadout. We leased a 966H for 4 months and returned it because it was too pricey and I didn't like the boom/bucket controls. The bucket roll response was not consistent during loading for the same position of the lever. It tended to increase rapidly at about 3/4 of full rollback and then slammed into the bucket stops which effectively struck-off about a ton of material. It was also extremely jumpy during bucket tip-over with heavy material like damp dirt. This machine had a single stick for both boom and bucket and I wonder if a double stick would be any smoother. We've never run a Komatsu and have always purchased Cat. Komatsus appear to have a smaller sticker price. Is there a good reason? Thanks for any help.
Woodward?? what contractor do you work for?
Owner/operator of sand & gravel operation.
The feel of the controls on a 966 can be adjusted and it sounds like the one you ran needed it bad. I haven't been on any Komatsu loaders in years so can't tell you much. Ten years ago they were pretty nice but had no resale value when it came time to shuck em. Good Luck!
Volvo Have you thought about volvo? I run a Volvo L150E day in day out at a sand quarry and they are very good machines. We also have a Hyundai 770-7A loader which isnt to bad either. Depending on your work a cheaper loader may be the better option. I had a trial run of a Cat 966H with 4.3Cm bucket for a week and to be honest it wasnt the best loader to run. Id rather be in my old volvo with 15,000 hours then a new Cat 966. Feel free to Pm if you want any more info.
Komatsu makes a great little loader. My only real concern with them is parts availability. At times, it can take a while to get parts, I realise that has a lot to do with our dealer, but none the less, it has been an issue. Have you looked into John Deere? Check out a 744K and see what you think, you might just be pleasantly surprised.
I spent the first 10 years of my operating experiance on komatsu equipment. The big problem for me was parts, especially since i worked all over the state. Komatsu uses alot of fittings on hydraulic hoses that are of thier very own standard in japan. Alot of times mom and pa hydraulic hose shops couldnt help me. My poor wife made alot of late night afterwork runs to bring me parts in timbucktoo. Also they dont build thier own hydraulic hoses and komatsu's O.M.M says you should replace all hoses at 2K hours . My dad runs komatsu iron but when his mechanic died last year he seriously considered switching brands.
There have been a lot of people find that the Deere 744K to be a great tractor. Great performance with the lock up torque converter and easy on fuel. Put the never grease system on it and lower your operating cost even more. There is more info about it here .
Thanks for the info. As for John Deere, I've run a 644J for about 2 months. Very smooth and fast machine. However, it seemed a little tippy to me and really liked fuel. Compared to our 950E & F, the John Deere was not as robustly built. Lots of fab parts, not much heavy casting. When we buy a machine we keep it until it's ready for the bone pile. Don't know anything about Volvos.
The hose fittings on Komatsu's are now for the most part ORFS now and not JIC like they used to be. So its alot easier to get hoses made onsite now.
Japan The three most popular coupling styles from Japan are: Japanese Industrial Standard: This coupling looks similar to our MJ and FJX fittings. There are two major differences - the threads are BSP and the seat angle is only 30-degrees instead of 37-degrees. Komatsu: This fitting looks similar to the JIS fitting. The major difference: Metric Threads, not BSP. Japanese Tapered Pipe Thread: This connector has the same thread as BSPT and will mate with BSPT connectors. It will NOT mate with the BSPP female swivel because it lacks the 30 degree inverted seat. Flanges for most Japanese hydraulic equipment - including Komatsu - are standard Codes 61 or 62 except for -10. Some drop dimensions are slightly different and the "O" Ring dimensions are different. Be sure to use the SAE "O" Ring in the SAE flange when replacing a Komatsu flange.
DEKLINE-As the owner operator of a sand and gravel company, I would think that you must need a new loader for production purposes. A few of the things you need for production is the amount of bucket loads per hour, make sure the machine has product support in case you do have a problem. Parts and Service is one of the most important factors to look at. If you can't get your machine to move, it's just a big anchor setting there while your trucks wait in line for the damn loader to get moving! Make sure you don't end up with a loader that might have 3 different types of metric fittings! I love to see American workers building things in our factories, in the long run they are the people that pay our wages. Make sure you get a scale with a printer, cheap for what you end up making over and above using a loader without it. I know you said the 644J Deere used more fuel than the 950F, but at the same time the Cat won't lift a bucket while it is pushing into the pile, while the Deere will do both in a smooth manner. Price out a 744K Loader or a 744J with a few hours, or even a 824J and you'll end up with the most productive and cost effective loader built anywhere. The Diff lock and the lock up torque converter will make you a bundle of money! Lot's of new options to pick from, like Auto Diff Lock, automatic reversing coolant fan to blow out radiators, and joy stick steering. Pay a little more to get what will make you money. John Deere, Americans building great equipment since 1837. Let us know what you end up doing. Good Luck!
Just my 2 cents. We have always run Cat equipment (except when we first started out). In the past 5 or 6 years we started getting some john deere equipment. I would recommend either the Cat 966 or a John Deere 744. We have demoed a couple of other brands like Volvo, Case, Hyundai, and Komatsu. Our operators HATED them. One of them said he "would rather sit in the old Cat 966C that have to operate that piece of **** (Case) again." We just keep sticking with Cat and John Deere and we always have good luck with them. It seems like whenever we stray away, we get burned. The PC200 we had didn't have any power and we dumped a lot of money into it trying to fix the problem, the Case 580 Super L we had blew hoses almost everyday, had transmission problems and wouldn't lift what a Cat 420B would. I would say its personal preference and what has worked for you in the past. Our crushing and screening guys love the 950G and the 980G. They also have a 624H that they wont let go for anything else.
Don't get a komatsu. We've rented 4 on this job and each one has a different problem. Ride control broke, tranny problems, and the most uncomfortable seats ever. Had to go to the chiropractor because of a bad sciatic. All machines were around 1000 hours. Hydrolics are weak on them also. We have a deere the same size as a 320 komatsu, the kom wouldn't pick up a chunk of concrete that the deere would. Id say go deere or cat. Stay away from kom
Kawasaki, Komatsu or Deere would be my choice if the dealer support is there. If none of those then Cat, Case, a shovel, Volvo.
ive had a fair bit to do woth komatsu loaders and all in all they are a good machine. versus the cat equipment about the only major difference is the komatsu's have a slightly longer reach than the cat equivalents. i also agree with what the other members said regarding parts, they can be hard to get on short notice. the biggest thing for me as a mechanic on these machines is komatsu doesnt need a seperate program and computer to diagnose fault codes it can all be done through the monitor panel in the dash.
We've been using Volvo loaders for a few years now, an L150 and an L180 on the yard (loading trucks) and until a couple of years ago an L330 digging the face (now replaced with a D10) We tried a Komatsu 470 which proved unpopular and unreliable, particularly the stick steering which broke almost immediately, we got rid of it for the L180. The L150C we had from new and now has 21k hours it, it has always been a reliable machine... why we are going back to Cat is a bit of a mystery.
Here's a pic of that L150C, I know it looks pretty unremarkable as L150's go but it's been a real workhorse, and very reliable. It' is soon to be replaced with a 996H, I should be pleased I suppose but in all honesty I'm going to miss that old shovel.
I think a 966 is a bit smaller than your L 150 C
I don't think there's much in it, the 150 weighs in at 24,000kgs, the 966 weighs in at 23,700kgs. Tell me, do you know if the 966H has a forward/reverse switch like Volvo's or do Cat still use that bloody awful stick on the steering column to change direction?
I think that is going to depend on which steering system the loader was ordered with.
Only small work on the Komatsu. I'de buy the CAT machine. Iam looking after a 966H with high hours .. Great little loader .. The 966H (A6G S/N) has the direction lever at the wheel and a rocker switch next to the implement controls.
Well I was handed my brand new 966H about three weeks ago and I very nearly walked out. I have never operated a machine with so much plastic on it, the switch gear feels like it's been made by Fisher Price, it's cheap and nasty. Over the past couple of weeks I've had a few heated discussions with managers who have finally conceded that the reason we are moving to CAT is because they are cheaper than Volvo (966H is approx £30k cheaper than the L150F) it's a bean counting exercise. Word of warning for anyone who is looking at the cheap option, within 2 days we had the following problems with the 966H: major engine oil leak, beacon fell off, rear door strut fell off and reversing lights failed. The CAT fitter who came out openly admitted that these days CAT machines are built down to a price. Buyer beware, you get what you pay for.
Sounds like you've gotten a real lemon Jasper. Such issues on a new unit are indeed unacceptable but I've never encountered any such issues on any operational CAT loader I've run. I haven't run a 966H but I have run a 966G and I found it to be a very nice loader. It had 6k hours without a single significant issue. Hope they fix up your machine. My own CAT IT18F has been impeccably reliable thus far, though I have found the f series to be a bit better built than the g and h series loaders.
Try the Komatsu WA470/480 (LC) dash 6 that are nice machines. easy to operate and the cab is comfertable.for maintenace u have good acces to all the filters.
our company just bought a kamatsu loader (wa 250) didnt like it at first rather the hundi but it was grown on me and i have really come to like it. no problem with parts, is good on fuel and operates very well. how ever smaller then what you are looking for but may still be a good showing in what kamatsu has to offer. we currently are thinking about using strictly kamatsu when upgrading all of our machines.
i run a komatsu wa480-5 and i love the thing. im in it 12 hours a day and it has a very comfortable cab. Great power. ect.
I would suggest a Cat 966, I am in the business of trading both machines for the past 20years and have found that Cat loaders are more desirable than Komatsu or Case. I bought both a 966H and WA470 at very good dollars at an auction late last year. I have since sold the 966 plus a long list of requests for same unit. At this point I still have the Komatsu WA470 available for sale. From a sales perspective we usually get more requests for the Cats as against the Komatsu.
get a komatsu for sure. wa470 and 480 are very popular here. get a -6 and make sure it's not a H (HANOMAG) get the jap one and she'll be sweet for ages
Duffy, I would be interested to know why why you say that, I would have thought both machines would be built to the same standards. RnR.
Notable issues with the hanomag versions of the Komatsu. Self admitted by Komatsu themselves.
Could you elaborate on that. RnR.
Im no expert, but I understand that Hanomag was taken over by Komatsu and continues to build loaders for Komatsu as Komatsu but in a h series? As for elaboration The difference in build quality is noted when you work on the machine. The massive field campaign on all 470 480 and 500 h loaders was all to do with slag and **** left in hydraulic tank causing steering pump and hydraulic failures. The hanomags seem to break down alot more in my experience.
That is interesting Duffy, the reason I asked, was because we purchased a 2005 WA 380-5H that had done 3,000 hours, out of Germany last year. To date, we are very happy with it, so I guess time will tell. Komatsu have been building wheel loaders in the Hanover factory since 1992, so one would hope that by now, they have got the problems sorted out. http://www.komatsueurope.com/corporate/eo_hanomag.cfm?lang_id=en Getting back to the original question, we have three WA 380's, -1, -3 and a -5. The -1 has 11,500 hours on it and has had no problems at all. We have had an excellent run out of all of them so far, they are relatively easy to work on, perform well and they are very nice machines to operate. The one thing I have noticed with Komatsu machines compared to other machines, is the amount of room in the engine bay and around the transmission, it just makes them so much easier to work on. I would have no hesitation in buying the WA 470. I can not comment on the Cat machines, because I have not operated any of their late model equipment. RnR.