Our company recently just developed a new series of wheel loaders. These loaders are very energy saving compared with the same ones of other brands. For the users, the D series could save them thirty thousands RMB on oil fees per year. But they do have a shortcoming, they are not very powerful when loading, unloding or shoveling. Do you think the shortcoming very serious, or could the oil efficiency compensate it?
30K RMB is about US$4.7k, if you divide this by 356 you get about 13 bucks a day savings, now if the machine does 20% less work than a standard machine..........well the figures don't add up for the energy saving machine. Remember the operator gets paid by the hour and the truck driver gets paid by the hour and the contractor gets paid when the job is done on time. If you lose an hours worth of production every day, 13 bucks is not going to cover it. And you may well find that the operator is harder on the machine to try and compensate for the lack of power. Also how do you achieve this energy saving? Does it add complexity to the machine? Whilst we are on the subject, how do the torque rise Diesels go in loader application, I would think they are ideal in that they give extra power when needed and use less fuel when cruising. Or is there a delay in the torque rise and the engine bogs down before the torque rise comes into effect?
My personal experience with loaders that try to gain efficiency through reduced power is that I floor the accelerator regularly, and push the machine to it's limits to get adequate production. Fuel is expensive but a lack of power is worse in these machines. I always wish for a bigger, stiffer torque converter in my loader, even though my loader already has a slightly above average sized torque conv for it's horsepower. Throw in a big, stiff torque convertor with lockup, and pair it up with a hefty engine, and the operator won't have to push the loader to get it to move dirt. You may actually end up using less fuel with an oversize engine/torque convertor because the engine is not being lugged or overloaded, and the torque convertor power loss is reduced. P.S. I like the big tires I see on the closer loader in your picture.
sounds like a 25,000 lb ATV
Yair . . . This could be an interesting thread. I believe that in too many cases horsepower is used as a substitute for finese and technique. I hear what sultan's saying but then with the wrong operator you start to burn up tyres. As they say there are no free lunches, everythings a trade off and fuel will start to get expensive in years to come. Cheers.
For savings of 13 bucks a day , you are joking . Pour some more fuel in there and get the damn thing moving
mate you make lonking sound like a joke of a company i cant belive you would even advertise this
Somebody fill me in here, what am I going to use a wheel loader for it it isnt "loading, unloading, & shoveling"? Seems to me that its the main purpose of the machine. $13 dollars worth of savings, really thats 10 to 15% of 1 hours work on the machine. Longking, stick to something you guys are good at, like making lead fishing sinkers disguised as childrens toys or something.
hahaha this thread is funny if nothing else.
I would rather spend on the extra fuel ,than stressing an UNDER powered machine.
THIS should increase power www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXW0bx_Ooq4 without increasing fuel usage.
I think this is not a small shortcoming. Drivers of wheel loaders are hourly paid. If loader hourly production reduces, its mean affecting over all work because work will not complete on time. So saving small amount will not compensate big loss.