I Have just purchased a Cat D8K serial #77V 16,000+ the Pads/Grousers/Plates ? have about 30% Left I want to replace them with a wider Grouser,(I think there 24 inch now) Chains, Sprockets, Idlers, Rollers are all 90% Good. I need to no how wide can fit her without having any problems jamming up. I just do general contracting, Dams, Roading, Clearing, House and shed sites Etc. Mind you she don't arrive for 6 more weeks i'll put some pics up when she hear.
You might be able to get 26's for it but I don't believe there are any wider than that unless you build them.
Problem is you run out of clearance on the inside, hit the finals for one thing. I think to get more than 26" they have to be offset bolt pattern so they hang more off the outside. Also depends on the blade setup, you run into the sidearms or C frame. Been a long time though since I dealt with D8's... They make 28's and 30's but I think the machines that can take those were specials. One of the old CAT hands should chime in here
Undercarriage Manual shows 26", 28" and 30" shoes are available in either Extreme or Moderate duty service versions. Can't say what the practical limit is. As stated your probably going to be limited by the blade set up.
Mate; My D8K has standard Bull blade with single tilt on side arm
Yair . . . Aussie Leroy . Are you going to wider plates to ease the load on ageing finals or do you need the flotation? Cheers.
Aussie Leroy, do some digging around cause in the cobwebs of my mind I think the original type rails are no longer going to be offered by Cat. I think you have to adjust to changes in link width for the future... not exactly sure. I think it may be my age.
I was thinking that. We run D10T's that are probably 50% heavier than a D8K on 24" wide shoes and have no issues whatsoever with them. The only reason I would go for wider shoes is the need for flotation. In my experience wide shoes tear up everything in the undercarriage system faster than narrow ones and tear up the finals as well because of the increased traction they give. The mantra always used to be "fit the narrowest track shoe you can get away with while maintaining adequate flotation." Regarding Grandpa's comment about the rails, the 2P-9492 Link Groups listed in the Parts Manual are replaced by 188-5310. According to what I can see the 188-5310 is a direct replacement for the original Part Number.
I agree with Nige here, wider shoes only ask for more trouble in most instances. You end up with similar issues as putting dozer grouser on a loader tractor, end up replacing or repairing a lot of undercarriage component that generally last longer like bottom rollers.
Yair . . . Nige . Due to some glitch in the ordering our first pair of 9G's were delivered with different plates, one was on 24" inch and the other (I think) were 27's. A scratch pull was no contest, the machine on narrow plates would pull the other backwards by a large margin however, in wet conditions the little bit of extra width on the other tractor wasn't worth a damn as regards flotation. Cheers.
Mate; my reason for asking is I was only thinking of floatation it's a bit wetter down hear
I'd try the tractor with whatever it has on right now as a first step and then go wider only if you prove the need for it. For me there are too many negatives in using wide shoes to overcome the positives, EXCEPT in a condition where they are absolutely essential for flotation. I'm in a tropical location where we get approximately 3000mm of rain a year, so along with high humidity the ground conditions get well sticky most of the year. Even so with tractors weighing in at around 70 tonnes fully-equipped compared to an 8K at somewhere around 50 tonnes we don't have a need for anything wider than 24" shoes.
Weld some grouser bar on the existing plates. If it's slipping they're too wide, if it's sinking they're too narrow. In my more or less useless opinion if you need flotation anything bigger than a D5 is too fat to be tromping around swampy stuff. D5 oval or high drive with pyramid pads seems to be preferred around the Pacific Northwest, but of course I am more than willing to be corrected.
We have an 8t with 36" pads. It floats better but still heavy and sinks easy. Compared to the 6t with pyramid pads.
I agree with most everybody else. In order for that 8 to get around in soft stuff you'd probably have to have 40" pads. Since that's not going to happen if it's too soft for what it has then you're prob SOL.
Thanks Boys; The only reason I ask is i'm replacing the grousers anyway so I thought if any of you guys have tried the D8k with wide pads and it was better then I would look at her, I have a D6k for low ground pressure. I do like reading all your opinions and I thankyou all for the input Cheers Leroy
I had an 8K with 28" they rubbed the dozer arms when tilted on a semi U. Got rid of them, 24" is about right for the K IMO
In the UK,there are quite a lot of H/K series D8's with 26" pads.They tend to be seen on tractors pulling scrapers.I have ran 8 or 9 D8's and all but 1 had 24" pads.The other had 22" pads and the difference in general tip muck was very apparent with the machine bogging at the tip end often.I even drove it myself and it was pretty useless.I changed it to 24" when they wore out.