Wow I haven't seen one of these for years. Here is a couple links to a Euclid TC-12 Dozer, it had two GMC 671 Detroit Diesel Engines (a engine for each track) and.... well just click the links and see what I am talking about. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdcj33G3P7U http://home.gwi.net/~dclough/euclid.html
Here's one I took at this year's Convention, same one as in the first vid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MpS7HDlfPA&feature=related Awesome machine, but I think I'd need more than just earplugs...
Great video stretch, just curious since you have been there you may know. Can others run these machines or are they for display only? I never ran one but sure would like to, my hearing is already shot from all the years in the industry. It was a Euclid scraper when I first got in the trade that did most of my hearing damage I think. TS40 as I recall, had a 16-71 Jimmy in front and a 8-71 in the rear. In any case the Detroit Diesel's got the moniker "Screaming Jimmies", quite appropriate....
the guy in that second video is makin quite a cut with that machine. What size Cat does that equal, a D8?
I am not sure anything can equal a Cat (I am a big cat fan) but that would be a close comparison. The Euclid with 2 671 inline Detroit diesel engine is rated at 238 horsepower X 2 = 476 HP 'D8' originally stood for stood for Diesel with 80 horsepower compared to a D8T shows 347 gross horsepower
I'm not familiar with Euclid, but found this vid on youtube... looks like it might be the same machine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxV-ALX60Mw I like the counter-rotating tracks...something not seen except on newer dozers. Looks like the radiator set-up is in the rear too.
Euclid and Terex are one in the same see link below. http://wiki.gmnext.com/wiki/index.php/Euclid_and_Terex_History
I'll never understand why the TC12 didn't garner more notority, I can speculate that GM made 2 big of a machine that was difficult to transport with the trucks of the day and had to be split and that there was so few produced they never were considered a true competitor? They did have some great innovations for their era along with the drawbacks.......... With all the competition in the late 40's and early 50's between Cat, AC and IH for the advertising wordplay on most powerful, worlds biggest etc when the D9 entered the stage in 1955 it ended that, the Euc was clearly far bigger and more powerful than the D9 but GM had teething problems getting it into production and while they exhibited them in the 50's as a competitor to Cat it wasn't until ~1960 that they started selling them, likely as a single destination machine not to be moved thereafter, IMHO.
they are certainly a beast .. and the sound of the twin detroits is pure horn .. i wouldnt mind stumbling on one of those dozers in the back paddock
There should be some more pics on this thread
Cat Nomenclature - model names and numbers. Hi, Wyoming. Cat's model naming policy was that the letters and numbers would not mean anything specific. F'rinstance, there never was an 80hp D8. The closest model to that would be the Diesel Seventy Five at 83 dbhp and 95 belt hp. This tractor soon became the RD8 in 1935, with very little change. The original series of RD8, the 5E series, only saw 35 tractors built before it was changed. The next RD8 was the 1H series, which was the first of the RD8/D8 line to have the D13000 engine at 95 dbhp and 110 belt hp. The 'R' was dropped from the name in 1937 and they became simply, 'D8'. (The 'R' was dropped from all the other model designations at about the same time.) By the time the 1H D8 ended its production run in 1941, power had been increased to 113 dbhp and 131 belt hp. The logic behind the policy of the model names not meaning anything was so that they would not have to change model names every time they upgraded a model in horsepower, weight, capacity or any other variable. Also, as a matter of interest, to the best of my knowledge, the Euclid TC12 only ever made it to a total of 440 hp from both engines combined. I don't know if the Terex 82-80 made it beyond that rating. One of the big reasons why the TC12/82-80 didn't really catch on was that, with 2 engines and 2 separate drive trains, it was a pretty high-maintenance tractor. If the maintenance wasn't done and done properly, they tended to fall apart. Many companies who bought them so that they had a BIG dozer could not or would not keep the maintenance up to them. Another problem with them was that their track width left them riding high on the outside edges of a scraper's cut, thus reducing their ability to put grunt on ground and increasing track wear because they spent a lot of time running on the outside half of the track shoes. They were a better bulldozing tractor than a push-loading tractor for this reason. Their basic design with two frames oscillating on one shaft running right across the width of the machine also did not lend itself very well to the rough-n-tumble of working in rock, especialy HARD rock. It was only this cross shaft and, I think, 3 sliding guides that kept everything all nicely lined up through all the oscillations of the 2 otherwise rigid frames. The cross shaft and the guides gave their fair share of trouble, especially if they were not properly maintained and a close watch kept on them. From what I can gather, the basic concept was quite good. It was largely implementation and engineering that let it down. I'd still love to get my ample butt on one for a few hours, especially if I had a good set of ear-muffs with me.
My brother in-law is a old time cat mechanic and he told me the first D8 stood for diesel with 80 horsepower, also I read that on the net. If I can find the link again I will post it. According to my literature the 671 is rated at 238 horsepower x 2 = 476 HP. Also I understand the TC12 had to be broken in half to be moved from site to site and this also played a part in its demise. I would also like to have the chance to operate one of them for a "short" period time. A TSS40 Euclid scraper (16-71 in front 8-71 in the rear) is the cause of most of my hearing problems today so I am a bit leery of the Screaming Jimmies! No doubt the TC12 were very powerful I have seen them work.
Origins and ratings. Hi, Wyoming. Before you get too excited about your link, may I suggest that you read pages 112-113 of Randy Leffingwell's "Caterpillar Farm Tractors And Bulldozers". It has a somewhat different story. It tells that the letters and numbers were chosen because they didn't mean anything relevant to the weight or horsepower of the individual models. I have already explained the logic behind this decision. I don't care what the 'rating' is/was for a 6-71 GM diesel. As I understand it, each 6-71 in the later TC12's was set at 220 hp, giving a total of 440 hp. It was a little less than that in the development phase and, I think, in the earliest models. The earlier models also did not have the later hard nose but a pressed metal 'styled' grille and surround. See attached brochure with further evidence. Yes, prior to the advent of widening floats, it was almost a must to split a TC12 to move it. Apparently, the splitting was not a major problem. Drive the tractor up onto two floats parked side by side, pack the two sides and SPLIT. From all the reports I have heard, getting the two floats aligned closely enough to re-assemble the two halves was a REAL hassle. As promised earlier, I have attached two shots of the fan drives which appear to be belt drives taken off the rear output shafts from the torque converters to the transmissions. I have also attached a photo of the lower front oscillation guide. There was another similar guide at top front between the two cable sheave mounts to help maintain vertical alignment.
Deas , that must be shots of peters machine just on the note about the tracks running on the outside halve of the shoes , if my insight serves me right i think then had an offset plate - meaning that the shoe was offset to the trackchain towards the inside so it would fit in the scraper wheels O , on the lighter side , guard them toenails when cutting LOL
You've been peeking!!!!!!!!!! Hi, Greeniron. You've been peeking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. Yes, those detail photos are of Peter's TC12, taken while it was on the float at Yatala, the day before it headed North. It is handy that the seats and floors were out of it at the time as it allowed me to get some detail photos that otherwise would not have been possible. Yer jus' gotta be in ther right place at ther right time, I guess. Did you get your ripper ram beam sorted out? How are the projects going overall? If you don't mind, I would like to pay you a visit sometime early in the New Year to have a look at your green machine collection. Yes, I had heard of the offset track shoes. I had also heard that, while they reduced the problem, they didn't cut it out altogether and did tend to wear the insides of the rollers and idlers more than the outsides, though at a slower rate, which is the reverse of what the standard track shoes did. You probably have more knowledge of the TC12's and 82-80's than most people here, me included, so I for one would welcome any input that you may have for us. There is also another thread currently running on the same topic. You can find it here: Catchyalater.
Deas , i thought you had already been for a drive my way in an old toyota ute with a friend any time you want to come for a look you would be welcomed i`m not that hard to find so long as i`m home and yes i have seen peters machine in his brothers yard at rocky
Not yet. Hi, Greeniron. Nope. I haven't been to your place yet. I don't know who that other 'me' might have been but I certainly don't remember it. Thanks for the welcome notice, though. Circumstances may dictate that I have 2 or 3 weeks off in about late January - early February and that might be a good time for me. I'll keep you posted.
Fergort abowt this wunn. Hi, Folks. I dunn fergort abowt this li'l paperweight - should just abowt fit Digger242j's desk. A new(?) use for at least some TC12 components???????????????????
thats a beast ..many a farmer would of scrapped that one ..and many a enthusiast would of went broke trying to restore it lol
Toybox refugee. Hi, Kennymopar. It was quite a gadget in its day but would tend to look like a bit of a refugee from a toybox alongside a D11R or T, a 'Kummagutsa' D575 or the Acco dozer, all built since then.
It has been well over 40 years since I last worked as a mechanic so all my shop manuals are long gone, however I have started ordering books online to refresh my memory and learn more. I just added "Caterpillar Farm Tractors And Bulldozers" to the list and I will read suggested pages for sure, thanks for the information. It is only $11.28 at amazon. The link I referred to was a in a book I seen online now to find the link again. I often find conflicting information in different books so I suppose it all boils down to which book you choose to go by. I don't know what the TC12 horsepower was set at, maybe I should of said "capable" of 476 HP eh? Unless one happens to have a dynamometer in their back pocket who knows for sure? Thanks for the pics I see what you are talking about concerning the shaft. My suggest reading would be "Moving The Earth" by: Herbert L. Nichols, David A. Day, David H. Day, for anyone wanting to learn more. It is a huge book with over 1200 hundred pages with many pictures, It was one of our class books when I was in the IUOE apprenticeship program.
Euclid TC-12 horsepower rating Hi Wyoming, Read Euclid Earth Moving Equipment 1924-1968 photo gallery author Eric C Orlemann ,publisher Iconografix 2004. This book covers about every Euclid model up to the transition to Terex in 1968. The first TC-12's had combined horsepower of 388 (365 flywheel) in early 1955. The upgraded TC-12-1 in 1956 had 436 horsepower (413 flywheeel). The TC-12-2 in 1959 had 454 horsepower (425 flywheel) 1966 upgraded to the 82-80 (BA) the horsepower reamained the same. The 82-80 (DA) in 1967 was rated at 476 horsepower (440 flywheel) The last batch of this machine under the Euclid trademark was june 1968, any machine after July 1st 1968 was designated Terex As to transporting one these "super-dozers" average time for three men to disassemble the unit for travel was approximately 15 man-hours. Dug
Great information Dug thanks I added the book to my list! If the takedown time was 15 hrs and like Deas said "getting the two floats aligned closely enough to re-assemble the two halves was a REAL hassle" it had to have a bearing on its demise. Added to that keeping one of these things running given all the moving parts had to be a hassle also. In any case it was a beauty to look at and watch, from a distance! I always liked Caterpillar's equipment, but I spent my time on Euclid's for sure. If someone went for parts for a Euclid they went to the Euc house if going for Caterpillar parts they went to the Cat house.... LOL
tc12 the sound will do it for you