what are the differences between for example 963-963B-963LGP-963C-....... and another question, if i buy a 973C instead of 973 is it worth of this choice, i saw a 963C in youtube(now it is removed) that was incredible like a squirrel, so nimble that i couldn't believe. is it the difference between C and others, the cycle period? maybe it is fast with the help of electronic controls and joysticks. i see 963 and 973 that are not fast like C series, like old 955L, 977K and other series. and another question. what are the difference between old frond mounted engined crawler loaders and new series rear mounted ones. i think the old ones are more stable because of wider chassis. for example a 955L seems safer than a 963. maybe the rear engine is better for a counter weight but in this photo you can see that it is not the exact way to prevent the unbalance of machine because with the full load it can be unbalanced again, like this picture(look at the undercarriage's rear part, it is up) http://forum.bauforum24.biz/forum/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=100494 . When i see a 955L with a full load it seems same with this, so if we don't care about visibility, why rear mounted, their length is also more than old(for me better in the same time) front engined models.
for ex. in this video http://youtube.com/watch?v=AR3jIj36Gao 963 is so awkward, moving like a tortoise, but a few weeks ago the video i see about 963C was so amazing, it was so quick and skilful. so can be the difference is about the torqflow and the hydrostatic drive? i mean if we look at the old crawler loaders they are torqflow and moving seems like 963, but 963C and 973C and the other hydrostatic drive units are different. isn't the 963 and 973 are hydrostatic. if they are, why are they so awkward, where is the advantage of hydrostatic then. and i have last question. i heart that hydrostatic machines are delicate, and can be easily failure, is it true? And can we force hydrostatic machines as we can do on torqflows, is it possible, or must not we force them as torqflow ones? (we know that old torqflow machines like 977K, 955L are so strong and powerfull that you can force them to very hard jobs and they don't bother.)
look at the photos, do you understand when i say that the rear engine is not enough for counterweight. It means these pictures below. You can NEVER see this kind of things in old crawler loaders like 977, 955, 983,... Is it because these C series are so speedy and quick, rash?) and isn't this harmful for undercarriage? http://www.baumaschinenbilder.de/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=101981 http://www.baumaschinenbilder.de/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=101982
What's Inna Name??????? Hi, Junior. The 953, 963, 973, etc., denotes the model. The following letter, A, B, C, D, etc., denotes the particular series of that model. The photos of the machine doing the 'muslim prayer' act are, to me at least, an indicator of a LARGE dose of operator stupidity. The only way I can see that that pose would be achieved would be have a FULL bucket, travel forward flat out and throw the machine into reverse. You would be less likely to be able to do this with the older powershift machines like the 955, 977, etc., because they shifted somewhat more gently than the hydrostatic drives can be shifted. That is not to say that you could not do it with the older machines, just that you might have to work at it a bit harder. Having said the above, I also have to point out that doing it, or even attempting it, is stupid in the extreme 'cos it does NOT do the machine, whatever its vintage, any good at all. If an operator is stupid enough to try it, I reckon he deserves whatver he gets by way of injury, if any. I'd be more concerned about any injuries to the machine. Just my 0.02.
Not that I have spent much time on 953 ETC but IMO there much more balanced with a load in the bucket. Back up on soft ground or up hill and you well be doing the muslim prayer with or without a load on a 977 ETC.
Not UN-balanced Hi, Dozerboy. Yer right. The rear-engined Cat track loaders are quite well balanced. Funny thing is, because of the force with which those hydrostatic transmisions can be slammed through from one direction to the other, they are somewhat more likely to do this little trick.
Id hate to be around when that bucket let go...... And yes, that seems like a hell of a strain on the idlers
I came close to that position about 4 times yesterday backing up out of a basement excavation. I'm not good about wearing seat belts, however in a track loader they are MANDATORY. Buckle up tight in these things! As far as the series differences I've seen between a 953B and C it's mostly electronics. The B series has a mechanical injection engine with a manual throttle. The C has a switch that gives you idle or full throttle and another that selects fast or slow travel speeds. It also felt like the pedals on a B were working a mechanical linkage while a C seemed to be electric over hydraulic. The lift and tilt levers on a B are quite a bit bigger than a C so it's a little easier to control both at once on a c for digging operations.
B vs C Hi, Unimog. I've only run 2 x 953's, a 'B' and a 'C'. The 'B' had an old Cat 950 4-in-1 bucket on it, modified to fit but still a good 10% bigger than the 4-in-1 bucket on the 'C'. Both had Cat rear-mounted rippers. The 'B' handled its bigger bucket in fine style and would run rings around the 'C' in any going. Yes, the controls were a little easier to operate on the 'C', being electronic but I spent over 2 years on the 'B' and never once wished I had the 'C'. I could almost clean your fingernails with a tooth on the bucket of that 'B'. The 'C' never, ever had that kind of feel. There was almost zero difference in fuel consumption but the 'B' would outwork the 'C' in any going, despite it being a 4-banger against a 6-banger. Just no contest. Another BIG plus was that we could do a LOT of our own repairs on the 'B'. About all we could do on the 'C' was services and hose repairs, because of those damned electronics. On the 'B', you could tilt the cab to get at things under it. The 'C' cab didn't tilt. As I said, I've only operated those 2 x 953's but if they are any indication, I'd reckon Cat went backwards with that 'update'(?)
More differences - well one more really Hi, Unimog. There was one more VERY user-friendly difference between the 953B and the 'C' that I operated. The 'B' had the hoist and crowd controls on the one joystick. I LOVED that.
Yeah with the 4 in 1 bucket you have a single lever control with another to run the auxillary hyd. on the bucket. I thought the single lever would be easier to run but I'm getting used to the twin levers. You are right about the B being a bit better than a C. We had a B and C both and the B was faster and we think it's stronger too. Our B has a 3116 engine which is a 6 cylinder I guess some are 4 cylinder? I can't say I'm a fan of the HEUI system. Not only is it harder to field service, it shears the heck out of the oil. I'd really like to try a D out and see how it is. The specs show it has a good amount of HP so we'll see.
so, what do you say about differences in joystick and non joystick controlled loaders?
Joystick vs twin-lever. Hi, Junior. As I mentioned above, I loved that joystick control. I can handle twin levers or, in the case of 4-in-1 equipped machines, 3 levers but, given similar machines, I'd take a joystick anytime.
hi deas, on the other hand what i said before, although rear engined loaders are seem not balanced front engined loeders doesn't make it, like the third and fourth picture below(opposite of the first and second) see how balanced while handle the bulldozer.
Re Balance vs idiocy. Hi, Junior. May I suggest that you go back and re-read my first post on this thread about the way that situation could have ooccurred. The rear-engined Cat loaders ARE better balanced than their front-engined predecessors. I have already explained how that situation could have occurred and I don't intend to repeat myself. However, I would suggest that the photos of the Cat 951 lifting the front of the Case 'dozer might look a little different if that 951 started to back up while the parking brake was locked on the dozer.
excuse for my bad english i did not write it for you, sorry. because of my english.
No Apology Necessary Hi, Junior. You do not need to apologise for your English as it is not your native tongue. I have absolutely no doubt that you speak English far better than I speak Turkish - I don't have any knowledge of Turkish at all. All I was suggesting was that you go back and re-read my earlier post about how that rear-engined loader might have got into that situation. I might add that doing that with a front-engined track loader would be a LOT more dangerous because of the extra distant that the operator would travel and the probable higher speed that he would be travelling up at due to sitting further back from the tip point (the front of the tracks). And think for a moment what might happen if the operator of that 951 lifting the front of the dozer were to put it in reverse and back up whith the brakes locked on the dozer.
standing a loader on its nose With the bucket linkage that the rear engine loaders have, you can stand them on their nose easily like in the photos. I have done it myself with a 963 and a 980 rubber tire loader. Also I believe that the bucket on the rear engine machines is further forward from the tracks than a front engine machine, which will tip the machine more when loaded.
One thing that I haven't seen discussed is that the C models have a completely different HPCU. The C's are more or less just two pumps, back to back, and electronicaly controled.
Cat 953 differences Anyone know when the basic 953 became the 953B. What can you tell about the machine from the exhaust style, and its mounting behind cab. Wide diameter central behind cab or narrow diameter offset. I am hoping to build a working model 953 and am try to get these differences nailed down so that I get an accurate representation of a particular marque.
I can't aggree entirely because the HPCU (hydrostatic transmission) in a B or older model is a work of art and cause many hours of heart ache if improperly serviced. Were as the C- series are more complicated electronically they are simpler in operation. 2 pumps 2 motors, a pilot valve to actuate them. Now a D-series is twice again more complicated because of the Electro-hydraulic controls.
Hi, CarterKraft. Welcome to the forum. We were and still are smart enough to know that servicing and adjusting the transmission is something best left to the experts. About all we do there is oil and filter changes and hose/pipe replacement. But transmissions are not the only things hiding under that cab. Now I have a question for you. Have you ever had to replace the main pressure hoses from the transmission to the drive motors on either a 'B' or a 'C'? If I had to choose between the two, I'd take the 'B'. 'Cos you CAN tilt the cab. Those hoses are one of the few real PITA's in the rear-engined loader range and I've NEVER been able to understand why Cat didn't put a little more effort into making them easier to get at. Having a supported steel pipe for the first half of the distance from the 'tranny' would solve the problem. I have suggested that to my current employer but so far none have been changed to such a set-up, in spite of about 3 of these hoses being replaced since I suggested it. We have 5 x 943's and 3 x 953's now.
Okay, you might have reached a stale mate there. I love the B and prior for the tilting cab feature, but the there is allot more room to work around the pumps and motors on the C because of the lack of the HPCU taking up all the space. If I remember correctly the last pressure hose I replaced on a "B" was a pain in my tail. Just recently I changed a hose on a BBD C series and it was a piece of cake, minus the split belly pans I can't stand. Friday night I had to work on my first D-series and I think it has the best of both worlds, a tilting cab and no HPCU. Also no split belly pans.
Looks like the 951 is about ready to go over Junior... There IS a huge difference between a Case dozer and a full bucket stuffed into a hard bank. Posing for the camera also helps...
Another BIG plus was that we could do a LOT of our own repairs on the 'B'. About all we could do on the 'C' was services and hose repairs, because of those damned electronics. On the 'B', you could tilt the cab to get at things under it. The 'C' cab didn't tilt.
What does HPCU stand for? And what's the point of the belly pans (any reason to have split them in the first place)? You said you had to work on a D-series already... any more coming in broken? What was the issue with the first?
Personal perceptions. Hi, CarterKraft. I guess it's all a matter of perception but I always thought those split belly pans were an excellent idea. Sure, the hinges would often give up after a bit of (ab)use but I re-build them a bit heavier than the originals and have no further trouble with them. In fact, a Cat hose fitter working on one of our machines last week noticed the modified hinges (I'd already been there, done that.), said he liked it and was going to do the same to any busted hinges that he encounters from here on. Quite aside from the above, I always thought it was easier to remove/replace those hinged and split belly pans on the rear-engined Cat track loaders than the ones on the Cat D5B that weren't hinged. Just my 0.02.
Another strike against the 'C' series. Hi, Folks. Yesterday I came across another reason why the Cat 953B is a better machine than the 953C. Our C ran out of hydraulic power with NO visible oil leaks. The immediate suspect was/is a failure of the hydraulic pump or pump drive. So far, so good. Now we come to the DUMB bit. This machine has one sytem supplying oil to both hydraulics and transmission. If you attempt to move it in these circumstances under its own power, it would appear that you risk spreading any metal in the shared oil right through both systems. Great. Brilliant. Just what we needed - an easier way to cause more damage and increase the work needed to get it going again. We got around it by pulling the drive shafts in the planetary final drives and pushing it out of the way with another machine.
Deas is right on spot with his comment! if any front engine loader would shift as fast as a new machine, it would probably tip even easyer... try to operate a bobcat with a little bit too hevy load, then youl know! on the other picture where the 951 lifts the case 1050, there is also operating tecnique to keep it from standing on its toes! if the 951 operator would put in reverse there, he would be thrown out of the seat like a nasa rocket! but when he is having forvard traction it helps to keep the rear low I could bet my head that a new style loader has it's wight more back than the old front engines! :drinkup
I learned on the 955's then went to a 953A that's what everyone round here calls the first series in the u.s. the 'A's started in 1980 and were built until 1992. the 'B's were made '93 until '95. the 'C's started in '96 :Banghead never was a big fan of the 'c's even though i spent quite a bit of time on several different one's. i currently own a 'b' with over 12000 hrs on it. it is a good un':drinkup:notworthy as for the balance issue,it is a whole lot easier to stand a front engine machine on its nose than a rear engine. I've been told by cat salesman that a 953 'a' 'b'or 'c' is designed to crawl forward down a 45 degree bank with a full bucket of dirt and not tip.........just don't throw in park.:usa :notworthy
even if you've got your seatbelt on :cool2
Actually, I believe that ever since the B series came out, customers had a choice between a single lever and dual levers. Ive run B's with both twin and single stick bucket controls. Ive even seen a C with twin lever controls. I actually prefer to run the twin sticks, but only when set up in wheel loader configuration (close stick is for bucket, {forwards curl out back curl in} and far stick is for boom). On a 4-1 or side dump, the furthest stick operates 3rd valve.
What happens in park? Or do I not want to know...
What happens in park? Hi, Tigerotor77. In the situation described by Honest Outlaw, crawling down a 45 deg. slope with a full bucket, if you throw the machine into park, you are highly likely to find yourself conducting a detailed, CLOSE-UP inspection of the windscreen. Then there is a little putty knife that pops out of a hidden slot at the bottom of the windscreen and scrapes you off the windscreen so that the next operator can see where they are going. Not too many people know of this wonderful piece of forethought and planning by the Cat designers. LOL.
Aw you beat me too it Deas, but did it much better style as usual :notworthy I was going to say think of it as an emergency brake with the expected repercussions
Thank you. Hi, AtlasRob. Thank you. I try. Some folks say I'm very trying. I'm not sure what they mean. LOL.
Ahhh even when you throw them in park they don't stop quite that fast.... I have been there and done that. Now if you wanna throw er in reverse... that is another story. Deas... that putty knife you mentioned... I actually did know about that one. I got the optional scented putty knife. After it scrapes you off, it mists a nice scent of royal pine to mask the inevitable odour of your now brown shorts.
Between park and reverse????????????? Hi, Burnout. I wear brown underwear so nobody gets to see the fear. LOL. In my experience, the Cat hydrostatic loaders stop quicker if thrown into park than they usually do if thrown from one direction to the other due to the shock reducing effect of the valving in the transmission. When thrown straight into park, the hydraulic brakes come on rather quickly. I'm rather partial to wintergreen myself, or aniseed.
I think they only stop like that when their new... our 973's don't stop worth a crap, and the C series have a roll feature... many manholes have been hit by our guys jumping in a C and not knowing they stop right away when grading near them. Now if you really want a show.... hit the center brake in one, they'll stop in a real hurry. The windshield on mine got broken 3 weeks ago, I had to run the 385 so they let a new guy run my machine. He has been operating a 977L for a few months, he went over a little hill, slid forward on the seat and both feet went down on the steering pedals. He then left the seat and had a conversation with the windshield... I believe it went like this..... Operator; la di dah di dah oh look a hill 973; c'mon buddy I dare ya Operator; OH....fudge (yes he said fudge, we don't curse at Sureway...lol) 973; Your stupid buddy Operator; Ow There you have it... a lovely conversation. Sadly the 973 Cam wasn't going that day.
When new???????????? Hi, Burnout. Dunno what's goin' on with yours but our 943's are mostly nudging 20 years or more and they ALL stop promptly when you put the trans control back in Park. Just like stomping on the center pedal. Ditto our 2 x 953's. And my boss is NOT exactly renowned for his prompt and meticulous attention to maintenance details - if I may be so polite. LOL.
Aha... interesting information. I'll be careful to the scraper ready before climbing any hills...
Maybe it's just the way we run our babies then. Our track loader man, and the guys from Cat have all said that what we do is not reccomended for track loaders. Long pushes aren't easy on em, and we are always beating the crap out of them. I am starting a new subdivision this week which means lots of services so I will be able to fire up the old 973 Cam and show you gentlemen what I mean about a hard life.
Hard use. Hi, Burnout. We use our 943's and 953's fairly hard too, some moderately long pushing, within the confines of the house pad, and a LOT of pulling back from banks and batters and out of tight corners. A LOT of our trim cutting is done in reverse too 'cos we use spreader bars and it's a lot easier to control their cut while cutting backwards. Our tracks probably still outlast what we might get if we were using them for loading only 'cos there's less sharp turning involved.
Our workload for a 73 is pretty bad. Today I was opening up the double ditch mainline for services. So instead of pushing my dirt off the pile I sit in the hole and dig it out of the wall, so I spent 11hrs of the day side loading my bucket time after time. I do no back dragging... I can't stand it. The 73 doesnt have that nice square lip on the backside of the bucket like the smaller models do so we can't back drag, we will rake backwards with the teeth but thats about it. For us we spend lots of time counter rotating to turn around in the narrow ditch which is brutal on the undercarriage. I am just hitting the 6000hr mark on my unit and I need sprocket segments which onl have about 1500hrs on them and their frigged, my chains are done, the pads are wearing thin, and the bushings have all been turned and are squared off on 3 sides. My bucket also needs to be removed so that it can be shimmed, new pins and new seals, and they'll probably weld the big bucket extensions on her since she is off warranty, and I have asked for clean out chains. But thats all happening this winter, so until then I have to make my undercarriage last. Today we noticed my tensioner on the right side seems to be slacking off, in 300hrs it went from a nice 2" droop to almost 6" today.