Would like to get advice on the pros and cons of the two machines. Does anyone have any experience with the cat track system- maintenance, repairs, cost and ease of use versus the T-300. I have heard some horror stories about the cat tracks being a real pain. I have had every size of bobcat skidsteer and still have 7 machines. I have run a cat track machine and love the ride and controls. The only thing stopping me from buying a cat is the info on the durability of the track system. HELP!
I don't *think* you'll have any durability problems, but do be aware that Cat people don't really like cleaning out the 287 undercarriage. The idlers are mostly enclosed in a metal sheet running along them which makes it nasty if you get mud in there. I personally the Cat is a more refined machine, but the T300 seems to be a more rugged machine. You might want to get some other people's opinions -- so don't hesitate to post away. I have a class in an hour... gotta go prepare a speech for that. Good luck with your purchase!
CatMTl Question Hey Bobcats250 I have been monitoring your posts here and elsewhere and have enjoyed them and found them very informative. If you lived closer I would offer you a job running my machines! Your comments on the 287 undercarriage about "The idlers are mostly enclosed in a metal sheet running along them which makes it nasty if you get mud in there." Is this also applicable to the other track machines? Specifically the 257. I have tried to do all of my homework regarding these machines and have made a commitment to buy one. But I have not seen much info on whether it was critical to keep the tracks clean. I know I forgot to do it on my 331 excavator 2 days ago and I was in mud all day. Yesterday morning, it was like there was concrete in the drive system and it took us 1 hour to clean it out and make it so the motors wouldn't burn out! I won't forget that again! Let me know what you have heard and what else should be looked at on a regular basis. I can't imagine Cat alowing something to be made and go out in the field and not be dependable. David "
capecodpondguy, I have to state here that I'm a student -- NOT a mechanic, salesman, full engineer (I'm an engr student). What I say here is based on what I have heard and looked at. Be careful, then, to take it with a grain of salt. About the 287 -- I believe the tendancy is to get mud caked between the idlers and the metal plate. In this picture ( http://www.troyjonesequipment.com/Cat_277_442.JPG ), for example, you can see how mud can get between the plate and the idlers. I didn't think this was the case with the 267/77 undercarriage, but it looks like the statement applies to the larger Cat machines as well. All I was told is that mud can get in there, and with that plate there, cleaning out the undercarriage can be tedious. The 257 does not have this problem: the idlers are completely open. I am *not* sure about the regular maintenance for specific undercarriages. I'd suggest taking a look at the owner's manual (which should be right behind your left shoulder in the cab). Good luck!
Back to your post: you might also want to head over to and see if there are any posts there that apply to your situation. I do know that Compact Equipment did an article on a company that uses 287s as "rescue" dozers and finds them excellent. The Cat tracks can be a pain -- but this doesn't mean that Bobcat's can't be, too. I would ask your dealer what experiences he has seen with the track system. What underfoot conditions do you work in?
They changed the track design on the 287B, Its a good machine! I would go with the 277B both have 3044c turbo charged engine (78hp) but the 287B has 1200lbs more break out force on the lift cylinder. I demoed both machines and bought 277 because couldn't tell much difference between the two.
Thought I'd post this link here: http://www.equipmentworld.com/apps/news/articleeqw.asp?id=46267 Review of CNH's (specifically Case's) new track system.
More compact track loaders A couple of closeup photos of the CaseNewHolland compact tracks below: The CaseNewHolland entry to the compact track loader market is interesting. New Holland is branding machines very similar to the Case units, although there are obvious differences in their loader booms (see photos below). Makes for an intersting bit of competition at the large end of the compact track loader range. L
Thanks for the pics! I had a hunch you'd respond to an Equipment World link... :lol: In any case, not surprising that NH is branding things similar to Case. Several innovations seem to come out on the Case side but make their way into the NH side... maybe except for the three-pump system in their hydraulic sxcavators which was a Fiat thing. In any case, yeah, I'd assume a few die-hard contractors (Case or NH fans) are probably going to switch. There must be several contractors using T300s now just waiting for a nice 450CT to fall into their hands. Ah well... I still have hope for Bobcat.
Interesting to me is that the New Holland machine's rated operating load (50% of tipping load) is about 300 pounds more than the comparable Case machine's. Even though the Case outweighs the New Holland by nearly 600 pounds. And they must be using different engines, because the New Holland is rated at 74 net hp, and the Case at 82. That's more distinction between brands than often shows up in the Case and New Holland machines. Looking at the biggest machines strictly from the perspective of the basic specs (operating load, horsepower, and operating weight), the New Holland LT190.B appears to be the closest thing on the market to a Bobcat T300. L
Yeah, I noticed that as well. It's the same with the skids of the two lines -- an Ls180 is rated at 2,555 lbs SAE ROC but weighs around 7,000; the 90XT, with an ROC of "2400 lbs," weighs 9,000 pounds. Case machines are certainly built heavier, but you'd think that the corresponding factor would be that they lift more. NH has always built a rather light, capable-lifting machine but you typically don't see their NH yellow on demolition sites. Case machines aren't so much ag based as NH, and they've really made a dent in the way skids are used and designed for construction needs. (Eg Bobcat beefed up its 873 to form the S250, probably in response to Case's XT loader arms not cracking as much as the 873 arms.) What surprised me the most is how no one decided to use a suspended undercarriage... Cat/ASV is still the only one in the industry. As for engines, it seems that NH has always used its own NH engines. Case uses the 4T-390 (but is now going to an M-series engine). In practice, it's similar to what Deere did -- put big engines from backhoe loaders in its skids. I'm not sure if the N-series (?) backhoes from Case will have the M-series engines used in its 400 series skids, but it'll be interesting to see. Deere's 300 skids don't use huge engines anymore... down to about 3.5 L rather than 4.5L or so.
This is kinda off the topic but in the vein of tracks though: I have a NH LS180 (soon to be traded for a NH LS185.B). I have light-weight steel alloy tracks on the LS180. I observed my buddy run my machine and noticed it might benefit by having some sort of "runner(s)" or "skid(s)" between the tires to prevent the tracks from lifting or conforming too easily over obstacles---specifically thick mud or frozen, rutted soil. It would probably offer a better ride and much better traction. I say runners or skids because the nature of the steel tracks with its corrugation-like cross-section openings in and between the tracks would make for a bone-shaker of a ride with wheels or idlers. The runners and skids would normally be approx. a few inches from the tracks so they're not contacting all the time to reduce wear. The facings would be metal or possibly a high-wear UHMW plastic. Any comments or feedback? I was toying with the idea of fabricating some but wanted some input first .
I think it's an interesting idea. If I understand you correctly, your idea is to get a skid (like on a snowmobile skid) between the wheels so that if you start sinking into mud, the lack of tension in the tracks doesn't move the track up a lot, right? You might some luck with this... but I dunno, maybe manufacturers will continue to turn deaf ears until the product actually comes out, at which point they'll buy you for less than you're worth. Still an interesting point.
Sounds interesting. Here's a link to a fairly new idea from Loegering for quickly turning wheeled skid-steer loaders into track machines, and back again. I realize it's not exactly in the same ballpark as tracks over tires, but it may be a reasonable alternative for some: http://www.constructionequipment.com/products/pcontent/basic/ce05cp221.asp L
A little bit off topic, but we were mentioning how the NH was one of the few manufacturers to offer a CTL in the near-3,000 range... well, Deere has topped them all and is now the only manufacturer to go above 3,000# ROC at 35%. Its CT332 goes for 3,200# at 35%.
I spoke with my neighbor who works for fairly large excavation company in my area. Everything they run is CAT to include a 287. They are not happy with the upkeep required of the 287. If I could only express what an evolution it is to here that from these guys. Continous problems with idlers freezing up, mud packing in the under carriage. I am not sure why they have a tracked machine. Our area would be a poster child on why not to have tracks. I don't know if it is a B series or not. I think if the benefits outweighed the cost more OEMs would be using suspended systems. Only CAT/ASV seem to think it has value. I think for some guys it is betterthan a nonsuspended system. However for the majority of track machine operators, I don't think the suspended system is enough of a benefit to over come the associated costs. This would explain why no one seems to be following CATs lead into the suspended tracks. Everyone else is content with letting CAT/ASV have that market. Once CASE puts tracks on the 465/XT95 that will be the machine to contend with the Takeuchi 150, Deere 332 NH 190.5 The 450/90XT is not a heavy lift machine. Its purpose is excavating and running high performance attachments. Personally I think they should have released the 465 tracked machine first. I spoke with some of the CASE engineering last week and next year will be rather eventful for the CASE skid steer operating systems as well as some other upgrades.
Good to hear Case will be doing some more work with those machines... can't wait to see how the line turns out.
They made some of the upgrades to the cab in 400 series but they need to take it further. That will be coming in the next year as will pilot controls. It will be offered as an option. It should be interesting to see how those work. Complete redesign of the 465/450 is about 3-4 years out. I very much hope to have an input on that machine. I would imagine they will be prototyping that machine in the next year or so.
Question and a comment. Bobcat's "SJC" controls incorporate the pilot aspect as well. They might not be exactly pilot controls in how they control the hydraulics, but it is a form of the "anti-stall" feature. And while Cat has done relatively well with them, Bobcat's SJC hasn't sold extremely well, mainly because people don't take much to having control over the engine's stall characteristics, I hear. Should be interesting to see whether Case does a job that people will buy and adapt to. Finally, kaiser (or anyone), do you know how companies choose which contractors to sample for input on new machines?
My name was given to the engineers by the regional rep. that covers this area. I had been pretty vocal about somethings several years prior (the 85XT to be exact) which got my name known by some. The sales people also have input. They submit customer names and what they own and what they do and they are picked (I guess) by what the engineers are looking for in that round of testing. Thats how CASE did it and don't know how others do it. It is a great experience which has given me continued direct access to the guys that build my skid steers.
Cool. If I ever get a job at Bobcat or Cat, I'll definitely work hard to steal you back. :bouncegri (Just kidding... but I'll contact you if I do get on in the SSL industry.)
We have the 247,247b,277,and287 and always have a problem with idler and bogey wheels along with drive wheel maint. We can put a 277 track on in about 5 minutes but all the others have been a pain. The preventitive maint. on all the skid steers is high and repair cost of parts is too.
I would try a John Deere. I have payed on New Holland, Cat, Bobcat, and John Deere. It seams like the Deere has more power, and less tipsy than the other ones. You also have good visivility around you. Just my opinion.
Asv I have spent quite a bit of time on the ASV.It is just an outstanding machine.It has great balance,nimble,and fast.The rc-60 almost seems to be over powered!!Great hyd flow,good vis ect.:thumbsup
our rc100 is a pure monster :notworthy
You are 100% right. John deere really seems to have a good skid steer. They have more power than other brands it seems like, and is very very stable. The 200 series were junk. The 300 series are good. I have one and love it.
Have you tryed the ASV SR80 or 70? I'm thinking about buying a SR80. But I would like to talk to someone who has one. One of the things I like about the 80 over the 70 is the wide tracks. If anyone has any Info. on the SR80, good or bad I would like to know before I go buy one.
Welcome to HEF Michigan Badger! :drinkup
Thanks, I past my testing. Now I can start posting. :cool2 Look's like a lot of good Info. on this site.