The Cat 275 and now the 285 CTLs have been on the market for a little while now and I'm curious if anyone has noticed any problems with them. I'm thinking specifically of quality control/manufacturing issues but am interested in any issues you've experienced. Post any good experiences too! I always like to hear those.
Their great machines but we’ve had a few little minor glitches from being new models but nothing I’ve been concerned up. I know they’ve updated several things since productions started on them addressing little things so I’d say buy one with confidence and don’t look back. The added cab room is absolutely amazing and I’ve really been impressed with them so far..
Thanks @Reuben Frazier . We have a 285 and really like it but it came off the dealer's truck with the lift arms racked to the point the left bucket corner was over an inch above ground level when the machine was sitting on level concrete. No fun trying to keep a level grade with it. I played around with another 285 on the dealer's lot and it's arms were racked the same direction but not as bad as ours. I'm really curious if these are the only two machines in North America with this issue or if there are others. Our dealer said they'd take care of it but their actions so far haven't been matching their talk... Edit: I've tried adding photos but they're not showing up.
Hope it gets resolved. Sounds like the boom is made wrong or the pin location on frame is off. Simon C
Either the loader arms were not made square or the pin locations of the loader arms are incorrect. Either way, it will be a costly repair on their part. My guess would be the jig they used to make the loader arms is off. So however many they made before they caught it, are on the market. I am guessing CAT is trying everything else first to avoid sending out a complete new set of loader arms.
You're thinking the same thing we are and the measurements taken by us and the dealer's service tech bear that out. Their first solution was to shim the arm stop on the machine chassis but we told them that's unacceptable since the bucket would still be over on inch out of level. Their next solution was line boring the quick coupler pivot bushings to get the bucket level even with the arms racked. We told them that's unacceptable as it would change the bucket cylinder geometry and cause excessive wear. They finally agreed to swap the loader arms and said they'd pick up the machine when they had them in stock. They picked up the machine and completely stopped communicating, including not answering or returning phone calls, when it was in their shop. It just showed up in our yard one morning with no notice. They have line bored the quick coupler bushings which has caused the geometry issues we were concerned about and shimmed the arm stop. The repaint at the line bore site is a quickie spray and pray with the ground electrode point not getting painted at all. We really like the machine otherwise and it's a real horse. Just really unhappy with the dealer's handling of the problem so far.
Need to call Cat head office and explain why the repair is not acceptable. More people that hear about it the better. They will try anything to get away without forking out some big bucks. Simon C
I would flip out over that, which it sounds like you are as well. When you pay new machine money, you expect it to be built correctly. I get poop happens, especially on a new to the market product. However they (dealer/CAT) have to do their part and stand behind it. That is a half ast repair, that will come back to haunt you after your warranty is up. They should have sent you new loader arms. I am only guessing, but if CAT would have authorized new loader arms, you would have gotten them. I think CAT corporate is pushing back on that. Biach loud enough and I bet you get new loader arms. Put that problem on You Tube and the more clicks you get the more chance you have of new loader arms. Sucks having to go to such extremes, but a lot of machines are bought and not bought by such things. Every OEM is aware of that. I would also mention that all repairs done under warranty are easy to find (such as this). When you go to sell it or trade it, a query into what was done to this will show up and certainly be an issue on resale value.
We have two 265 and the arms need shimming there is a half inch play on main loader pins. cat dealer said they don’t have shims for them. Are old 289d3 with 6300 hr used and abused on seawer crew plus a concrete mixer on it. The arms and pins bushing were better then the new one when it got traded in then the two new replacements. Is cat using **** pins and bushings compared too 5-6 years ago.
I'd be taking the machine back and demanding a full refund. I personally would have never accepted delivery in the first place.
This is what my direct supervisor has been saying as well... We'll see where it goes. Thankfully I'm just the operator when I'm not in a dozer.
To find the problem its easy to put a bar through the bores and compare the level to the others. Just an adjustable machine level and a measuring tape to check parallels. The bores on the bucket need to be true to the cutting edge.
The problem is definitely in the arms. The bucket and quick coupler measured good. I dropped the machine off at the dealer again today. They're supposedly taking it to their main shop in Topeka...
The only right way to fix that in my view is to get new loader arms. It will be interesting to see if that happens or not.
It would be perfect to get the arm replaced but it certainly can be repaired properly. I did them regularly from small to large.
They definitely could be repaired. We don't feel a repair like that should be required on a zero hour machine. I don't know how many others are out there but I played around with an identical machine at the dealer that had the same problem as ours.
I've only had a couple of hours on a 265 and didn't notice this issue but I wasn't on it long enough to put it through it's paces. Looking at adding a 265 to the field. Got some homework to do first.
I believe the 255/265 used a different frame and arm size than the 275/285. The smaller ones still have the torsion suspension while the larger ones have an equalizer bar like a dozer.
Gotcha. We've been happy with the torsion suspension on our 279's and do not want a DEF CTL. Don't need a large CTL for what we do since we have dozers and excavators for dirt moving. Our CTL's are utility machines.
An update to what is turning out to be somewhat of a saga... First, a correction to post#3. The right side was/is the high side, not the left as I mentioned. I dropped our 285 off at the Cat dealer on the evening of September 19. It was returned to us yesterday, October 6. I noticed when I left the machine at the dealer that there was a new set of loader arms sitting on a pallet. No idea if they were intended for our machine or not but it came back to us with the same set of arms. I also took the opportunity to test drive 4 new 275s that were on the lot. All four had the same problem as our 285 and another new 285 I had tested earlier. This time they redid the line boring on the pins at the loader arm to quick coupler joints. The bucket cylinder binding is still very noticable. Rolling the bucket all the way back still causes the loader arms to twist due to the geometry change from line boring. These issues came from the line boring and were not a factory issue. On the positive side they repainted everything nicely this time and changed a decal that was scratched.
Curious how/what you would do for a proper repair?
I sold a 40 year old skidder a few years back that got only the rims painted beautiful and shiny. I told my wife it was like lipstick on a pig. It sold it for me, maybe the dealership thinks they will make it look good even though not perfect. Normally new is perfect or that is what I would expect. Simon C
Press it straight then line bore it so that all the bores are level and parallel with each other. Its the same process whether its a small skid steer or a 994.
I don’t get this. They sold you a machine, an expensive machine, that has loader arms that aren’t “level”. Clearly CAT has an issue. Line boring and splashing some paint and a new decal on a hundred thousand dollar skid steer that torques the loader arms when the bucket is curled seems like absolute nonsense to me. If it’s the same on all the CAT skid steers either the loader arm points are of or the loader arms are off direct from the factory. The fact that CAT won’t acknowledge the problem or fix it correctly would have me demanding a correct fix or money back. You bought it to make money not have it sit at the dealer.
You have a lot more patience then I do, I personally would have never let it get this far. Aggressive legal action and/or social media $hitstorm, or a full refund, those would have been their only options....
I once bought a machine from Cat brand new and when it came it was with the wrong frame for the machine. I would not accept it as I told them it did not come as written in contract. They sent me my $10000.00 deposit back 30 days later. That was only after they received a letter stating legal action would begin after the 30 days. Have to fight for your rights or they walk over you. Simon C
CAT will try and get away with as little expenditure as possible to get this resolved. I think it has next to nothing to do with the dealer. If CAT sent them new loader arms, I am sure they would be happy to install them under warranty. Line boring everything to make it work is a BS solution on a new machine that was incorrectly manufactured. If your CAT loyal to the extent you will let the step on you and will allow them to get away with line boring your new machine to make it level, I guess that is on you. As I said earlier, a You Tube video or the threat of one, would end this really quick. Your story would get in the way of a lot of potential sales, CAT would not allow that to happen. Its unfortunate that would be necessary but I doubt they will be moved by anything else short of legal action. If there were 4 machines with incorrect loader arms at one dealer, I am guessing they kicked out a lot of machines before this was known to them, and they don't want to replace all of them with new loader arms. What they do for one they likely would be pushed (due to social media) to do for all of them. So they will avoid that if at all possible.
As a company that has never owned a CAT machine, had the poster said he had a machine that was new and jacked up, CAT stood behind it and correctly fixed it without hassle, that is powerful and influential on my next purchase decision (I doubt I am alone in that thought). It says your name really does mean something. However, when this situation occurs, it says just the opposite. It's not the cheap solution up front but further down the spread sheet it really is, especially with the power of social media. A mess up like this can actually create more goodwill toward your brand. Word gets out and it can cut both ways.
I appreciate all the input. Obviously we're not happy about it. Our dealer is telling us that Cat says the machine is within spec and won't do anything about it. They say the line boring work has been done out of their own pocket as a goodwill gesture. I'll try again to post some photos.
These photos are taken with the machine on a level concrete pad. Left corner of the bucket. Right corner of the bucket. Left side of the quick coupler, bucket disconnected. Right side of the quick coupler, bucket disconnected.
Arm stops on the machine frame. The machine is in the same postion as the photos in the last post. Left side. Right side.
The "fix". Right side arm stop. And a new set of loader arms at the dealer.
If it was me I'd be put a tape measure over everything including track frame alignment and checking for a manufactured twist in the chassis tub. Both these things I've experienced but non Cat. Early 299s had misaligned track frames, Cat issued a service bulletin for the fix after a while. Many 299 forest machines burnt to the ground which Cat refused to acknowledge blaming everyone else, turned out the wiring harness for the seat warmer was the problem. Many lost the shirt off their back
Here are photos of serial number plates of four new Cat 275 CTLs that have the same problem as ours. These four were the only ones on the lot in Chanute when I was there. None of them are as bad as ours is but they all would be unable to cut level with the arms at any position above the stops. I'm posting these because the dealer is saying that Cat will do nothing unless there are a lot of complaints...
Are those pics before the line boring or after? I can't believe that was within specs!! That is insane!!
The ones before post #32 are prior to the line boreing. Post #32 shows a 1/4" shim the dealer installed at the time they did the line boreing. I'm really surprised Cat says that is within spec. We currently have 7 other CTLs in the fleet including 1 Cat 299D3. None of them have any noticeable difference in arm or chassis from side to side.
Are all your other CTLs Cat?
Most are orange, one white, one Cat.
Correction. We have 6 other CTLs, not 7 as I mentioned previously.
Cat is just blowing smoke up you @$$. Every skid steer or CTL I have been on the arms sit down dead level on the stops (unless they'd been terribly abused.) A 1/4" off is unusable for any sort of hard surface clean up work, fine grading, etc.
In other words "not fit for purpose"comes to mind. I freely admit to having rose coloured glasses when buying and got bitten badly on one occasion. Now I would insist on doing my own PD in the dealership yard even it meant employing a 3rd party to help. Faults like this can be eliminated immediately by saying no deal and walking away then using SM to expose your findings. Enough people doing this will make the manufacturers lift their game.
Imagine trying to put anything on grade with that. Not saying it can’t be done, but you should just be able to go out and run it, not worry about having to figure out how to adjust to it. Imagine if you bought a brand new car that pulled “just a little to the left” don’t think anybody would accept that. I would send that thing back and get my money back. I’m not saying cat doesn’t make good equipment, but their arrogance is truly annoying.
This comment, if it is truly what CAT said, is nothing but extreme arrogance. They (in their opinion) made their new machine the way one would expect it should be from the beginning, bucket laying flat. (they did it a way few would say should be done on a new machine, but whatever). They did that out of their own pocket and out of goodwill. I would have needed some meds to calm down if that was the response I got from a company making a half asssed effort on a machine under warranty. It is said in a way that suggests that they could have done absolutely nothing on a machine that clearly wasn't manufactured correctly. I guess asking for the loader arms to be built so the bucket lays flat is nice when it happens, but if it doesn't, we may or may not fix it depending on how we feel about it, and if we do fix it, you should be happy with the goodwill we put toward our own manufacturing mistake 'cause we could have told you to "pack sand". Plenty of places to spend money in the dirt world, I don't need to give money to further this type of business mentality.
Agreed. I would own some of the older/larger Cat equipment, however their compact equipment line (SS/CTL/Mini Ex) has always been very underwhelming. I've said it for a long time, but I don't think Cat cares nearly as much about their compact equipment as their large equipment and issues like this just prove the point. This thread in and of itself is already becoming bad publicity for Cat. It shouldn't be hard to really put some leverage on them, you might have to go above your dealers head to get it done however.
This guy said he had mostly Orange CTL's, one CAT and Bobcat. Doesn't say if they have anything else CAT. I am curious if the new loader arms are for the large CAT operations. You hear that the big CAT buyers get treated a lot better than the smaller guy does. I obviously don't know first hand, only something you hear. Someone is getting new loader arms on a new CAT 275/285. What did it take for that to happen? If I was the poster, I would want to know that. Could be an unrelated reason or it could be you have to spend a lot more money with them to get new loader arms as opposed to getting your new machine line bored and extra shims added. At this point, I think that is a reasonable question to ask.
I wasn't clear in the statement you quoted. Our dealer says Cat has done nothing for us and supposedly no longer wants to discuss this with the dealer. According to the dealer the line boring was done by the dealer at the dealers expense. We have a small fleet of Cat equipment including a D6N, 329, 314, 308, and 305 in addition to the 2 Cat skid steers. We also have several non Cat machines which will likely be replaced in the next year or so. Not a large fleet by any means although our civil and utility division is expanding rapidly. Our Cat dealer is aware of this and wanting to sell more equipment. We also rent from them on a regular basis. We are a small commercial general contractor doing our own site prep, utility, and concrete work in addition to the buildings. The Kubota and Bobcat machines go to our concrete crews. We were told they would have a new set of arms waiting on our machine when it went in. I asked the salesman why it wasn't installed on our machine instead of redoing the line boring. He either couldn't or wouldn't give me an answer. The salesman also said we're the only buyer complaining about this and until Cat receives a lot of complaints they will be unlikely to do anything... That is almost word for word what a Liebherr salesman told me 20 years ago when the track loaders we were running had problems with final drives. Somehow, in spite of "never receiving any other complaints" Liebherr changed the final drives on their new machines a couple years later. By that time we were running Cat track loaders again...
Well you sound like a company CAT would or should be trying to keep happy. Guess since they will no longer discuss it, you have gotten all they are willing to give. How are you guys going to handle this moving forward?
How we handle it will be up to our operations guy and the owner. I don't know what they're thinking. I did mention the extra wear the bucket cylinder pins and bushings will likely have due to the line boring changing the geometry. The dealer says they'll help us with that in the future.
I realize you are more or less just the messenger caught in the middle of this, but I'm surprised by how lackadaisical everyone in your company seems to be about this. What you have now is a big mess. The line boring should have never been done, everyone agrees that is a band aid solution at best. Now it's muddied the waters about whether it's really fixed or not, who's liable if it isn't and also gives Cat an out. I'm not sure what your options are now, but it's clear you are going to have to work your way up the food chain if you want to get anything done. I'd bet there are members of this forum who have contacts at Cat that can actually get something done. Those are the people you need to talk to, make them aware of the entire problem, how it's played out from the beginning, and make them aware of this thread as well. How Cat corporate handles this problem going forward could either be good PR or horrible publicity. AFAIK this is the largest equipment forum in the world and if this thread keeps going, LOTS of people will eventually read it. Then again, I'm beginning to believe Cat corporate is just that arrogant that they don't care....
MG,this has been going on for years. A large earthmoving contractor told me of their experience with a D9g and accelerated track wear, found that it had 2 different track frames and were incompatible. Cat wouldn't rectify that either. That contractor had a 100% Cat fleet and a cash buyer,sold the lot and went Euclid/ Terex. Cat never blinked.
I think your salesman should be raising kane with the dealership manager/owner to get Cat to do the right thing and replace the loader arms. You should get consumer affairs in your state involved as well. It is clearly unacceptable! Your company has enough Cat machines they should want to keep you as a customer. It shouldn't matter if you only had one machine though. There used to be a couple local TV news shows that had a segment where a "troubleshooter" would put stories like this on the news. They still do stories about shady businesses and I'd guess that they got satisfaction (95%) in the majority of cases. Your story and your evidence would make for a good story to be shown to thousands of people who watch the news. I'd bet the dealership and Cat wouldn't want that kind of BAD publicity. Local newspapers could like the story as well.
here is the spec may help in getting something done by the dealer
2
3
Thank you!
I'm sure it has been going on for years and probably with other companies as well. The difference now though is things can't just be 'swept under the rug' like they used to be 30yrs ago before the internet. In that situation they may have lost a big customer, or maybe a few if word got around, but nowadays this information is reaching thousands if not millions of people. If you google "Cat 275 problems" this thread is the first that pops up. Not to mention, right or wrong, AI is now going to take this information and run with it. There are a lot of BIG companies that have learned the hard way about the power of the internet and social media over the past few years. In a capitalistic society the consumers still have the final vote.
When you first measured the gap from the loader arms to the stop, did you lower the arms down as they mention in this diagram? By lowering the arms with the hyd release you remove the effort of the hyd cylinders. It looks like you were right at the max gap spec in your photo. I would not have thought to lower the arms with the hyd release valve. That difference may have shown the gap was out of spec. They show a half inch gap on the bucket to the ground would still be in spec. That seems crazy to me. CAT said the machine was in spec and they were not going to do anything....and from the info shown here, it very well may have been. Certainly, one can argue that the spec is not reasonable, but I guess the spec can be whatever they want it to be. It sure makes the QC position in that factory the easiest position next to filling the pop machine.
I lowered the arms normally. It never crossed my mind to use the hydraulic release. I can confirm it is almost impossible to lower it without putting any hydraulic down pressure on the arms. I have to say I found it hard to believe they could consider it in spec but like you say they can make the spec anything they like.
Yea it would not have crossed my mind either. It would be interesting to do as it is spelled out and see what you get even now with line boring. It might be your only option left. Hard to believe, especially given modern manufacturing capabilities, that they give so much variance, especially on a machines that are tasked with fine grading. Half an inch bucket gap doesn't allow the machine to fine grade with the accuracy that is expected, especially in today's market.
The bogus 1/2" spec. appears to me that Cat knows there's a problem and are trying to limit the number of loader arms they need to replace. Skid steers/CTL's are used for precision work. That's why they're so popular. You can see exactly what the bucket is doing. The spec. should be no more than 1/8". The loader arms should should be against the frame on both sides when lowered all the way in float position. If there's a a bunch of loaders with ****** up arms there should be a mandatory recall. If not then a class action suit should be filed. I'd bet cheap Chinese machines have more level buckets. Cat's jig or welding procedure for the arms is flawed. Perhaps they come out of the jig too soon or the welding isn't done equally on each side. If welding was confined to one side/area and then the other the heat input could certainly warp the arms, especially if done with welding robots. The arms should be checked for straightness after welding and straightened or rejected long before they ever go on the machine. Definitely not an isolated problem if another 4 new machines have the problem at the same dealer. Machines costing close to 100K should have pretty strict quality control.
Measure the maximum gap between the top edge of the coupler and the ground on both sides of the coupler. Compare the measurements and determine the difference in the measurements. A gap difference that is less than or equal to 6 mm (0.24 inch) is within tolerance. Judging by the gap you have on the one side at the stops I would image it has more than a quarter inch difference between the two sides of the coupler and the ground
I don't know exactly what these machines cost, but I bet its well over 100k. I would guess that the 285 is a 150K machine. Not that it should matter. I also thought an 1/8 inch of tolerance would be a reasonable amount of variance. Would be interesting to know what other OEM's have for a spec tolerance. Having so much variance in their spec, and the fact that they already did the line boring, I don't see any real hope of getting this fixed with new loader arms. Unless maybe the arms wont seat as called out in the spec document, I think they are done.
I have posted several pictures up thread showing these measurements. The pics aren't that great but the difference is (was) a little over a 0.25". The difference in the bucket cutting edge measurements was a little over an inch. The shim they installed on the stop is right at 0.25". As expected measuring showed the further away from the arm we checked the bigger gap distance there was side to side. Definitely over $100k... I've also wondered what other OEMs spec. I'm also curious about the spec on the Cat D3 series CTLs/skids. I've heard they had some issues with the arms on those on first release but can't confirm. I think at this point the line boring work did more to hurt us then help as far as any further help from Cat. We really like the machine otherwise. I may post a review about it if there's interest. It has over 130 hrs at this point. We did expect a few hiccups with a first run machine but also expected product support from the manufacturer
You should get a new machine or new arms. Nothing else is a satisfactory fix! I wasn't sure how much they cost as it's way too much for me.
Has the height of the boom mount bores on the machine itself been checked from one side to the other?
Yes. They are correct.
Sounds as though your dealer is incompetent so you either get someone who know what they are doing to fix it or try and get a replacement from Cat. I don't really get it. It's a 10 minute job to put some bars through the bores and check them with a level, and you can tell exactly where it is twisted.
According to the dealer, Cat won't touch it until they have a lot of complaints. The dealer did have a new set of arms delivered to their shop but they weren't installed because "they wouldn't fix the problem"... Kind of a vague answer and open to interpretation... The line boring was done by the dealer, apparently on their dime, despite us telling them we did not want it done. They are telling us Cat hasn't been any help at all up to this point. I talked to our operations manager about it recently and it appears we're just going to live with it for now... It certainly is disappointing watching the arms twist and flex when the bucket is cycled due to the misalignment from intentionally line boring the bucket out of square relative to the arms. We really like the machine otherwise. My only other complaint with it so far is it doesn't hold a full jug of DEF.
If it's twisting and flexing now, it will fail sooner or later.
Undoubtedly. It'll be interesting when that happens since I doubt this "fix" was authorized by Cat. I don't see Cat being willing to warranty it. The dealer says they'll stand behind it but who knows ...
I'd be calling Cat constantly and/or telling the dealer you want new proper arms or a new machine. Even if it's only one machine it's still unacceptable. Cat has to take responsibility! What is your Cat salesman doing for you? He should be fighting hard for you too. It's not a cheap overseas POS but might as well be with with %$#@ ed up lift arms.
The problem is that CAT is not interested in being a construction equipment manufacturer right now. CAT is interested in making huge generators for data centers where they can make as much profit as they want due to lack of supply.
I'm not entirely sure that is correct. Cat don't manufacture the size of generators that would be required to run something like a data centre, that's more in the realm of companies such as Wartsila. Our power plant products - Engine generating sets - Wärtsilä Energy Wärtsilä offers a wide variety of solutions for different industries. Find the best engine generating set for your power plant. www.wartsila.com
The upper pin of the bucket cylinders on this 285XE are sealed and filled with oil or grease of some kind and are designed to be "maintenance free". There is no instruction about or even a mention of these joints in the manual. I had asked the service guys at the dealer about it when we purchased the machine and they knew nothing about it either. They later confirmed to me that they are indeed designed to be maintenance free. Anyway, here we are at 400 hrs and the left side is leaking as shown in the picture. I'm wondering if this is a consequence of the arm racking due to the line boring the dealer did as mentioned up thread or if we have reached the service life of this system. My only experience with this type of pin is on Liebherr track loaders at a previous employer that used a maintenance free joint at the bottom pin on the bucket. Those were of a different design but for us they lasted about 2000 hrs before leaking. This may be another chapter in the saga of the "nothing wrong with the loader arms" machine... Merry Christmas to all!
Thanks. It looks like that is dated a couple months before we received our machine.
CASE has been running a maintenance free bushing in that same location on their machines since 2011. I have never had an issue with them. My beat is if yours is starting to fail it has something to do with the loader arm geometry change that the dealer did with the repin. My DL550 which is about the equivalent of the 285, that does take grease.
What has the dealer said about the issue?
I wouldn’t be holding my breath.
I noticed this Wednesday evening which was Christmas Eve. I notified my boss but I don't believe they had time to contact the dealer. It'll certainly be interesting to see what their response is. They told us they would stand behind any problems that developed from the line boring geometry problems... We'll see i guess... I do have a question about the composite bearings @pumkinhead posted up thread in post #75. Are they actually oil or grease filled like I assumed and the dealer service department confirmed or are they an oil impregnated material that doesn't have any actual fluid to seep out? I know there are seals at each end of the bearing but I can't get a good look at them without removing the circlip and spacer. Maybe I'm second guessing myself here but I guess it's theoretically possible that a small bit of grease from somewhere else could have landed at that exact spot without leaving any sign around the joint??? I'd consider this theory somewhat more plausible if I hadn't been working in a wide open area with no brush or trees within a quarter mile and if I'd actually been working with the arms and bucket more than 5 feet above ground level ...
They have ballsed up a simple job. They won't want to admit it.
Not sure about Cat, but that is what I have seen for "clean" bushings.
There is no seal with the composite bearing from my understanding just a spacer washer. The purpose of the composite bearing is to minimize grease at the point of entry on the machine. I would personally rather have a steel bearing and a zerk but I wouldn't worry unless you start getting play in the bore and at 400 hours I would imagine it would be from side loading the cylinder due to the twist or linebore job done to the frame. And the grease your seeing is probably form assembly working it's way out
This makes sense. Thanks. I looked in SIS to see if I could find a parts breakdown but I was unable to. Either I didn't know where to look it I didn't have the right credentials. I still regret the switch from the old SIS...
Solar Turbines does.
new 275 with 10 hours and the loader arms have enough slop side to side that they hit the front step when you have a little side load pressure. Cat sent tech to shim the arms and its better but still concerning. bucket seems to be level though.
I built steel shims with grease grooves for a Cat 236B skid steer years ago and they are still on and doing the job. I did them at the back end top pins and it worked very good. The dealer said there was nothing available so I went to a machine shop and $75 dollars later I left with some shims. Probably cost $150 today but made it totally tight side to side but with a hair of free play. Simon C
Where did they install the shims? At the upper back pins?
Seems like Cat quality control or even engineering for their skid steers isn't up to what you'd expect from Cat. I'm sure if a competive brand had the same issues Cat would be all over it. Very odd for a major equipment manufacturer and it's not isolated to one machine or model. It's something you might expect from a Chinese manufacturer.
Just a question, not implying anything- I believe Cat makes the skid steers in the US? North Carolina or near by? Not to beat the Con Expo drum but if you can get to the Expo, you will have the opportunity to tell your story to some of the most senior people at a particular company. I had an issue with my new 057 excavators coupler/ thumb in ‘23. I was at the Expo opening day first thing in the morning at the Kubota booth talking with execs from Texas (Kubotas HQ). They were aware of who I was as soon as I mentioned my issue. My Dealer and Kubota made it right 110%. It was a process but not unbearable looking back on it and they reaffirmed my confidence in Kubota and will always be my first choice. Back to the issue at hand, the Dealer isn’t Cat and until I heard it from Cat directly I would not be able to come to a final conclusion about the brand.
upper back pins and the (not sure what their called) black "stabilizer bars" under the arms.
I like that idea but I'll let Cat make the decisions for now, so if it doesnt work out they cant blame it on something we have done.
Unfortunately plans changed and we're unable to go to Conexpo this year. I was hoping to talk to the Cat reps at the show.. If anyone is there and wants to mention this issue to them I'd appreciate it. Reach out to me via PM and I'll give you my contact info to share with them or if you get their contact and share it I'll reach out. Thanks.
UPDATE: Shims didnt last one day pushing stone. Called the tech he came back out used some different shims. Loader arms still hitting step. He calls his boss they send out a "TC" technical communicator. I dont blame either of these guys, in fact I feel bad for them having to represent Cat and make excuses to pissed off customers for poorly designed equipment. This is where it gets good. The TC says that it only hits under a side loading event and Cat advises that it should never be put under a side load. Thats where I lost it. Cat has obviously lost touch with the real world of construction. Cat obviously has built a piece of junk and they are trying to hide it behind unrealistic operating advice. In what world does a CTL on a real jobsite only push or pull material in a straight line never turning with the bucket engaged. This is their advice. This will not be the end, I am not accepting this as an answer.
Ours does the same thing...
Im guessing they all do it. I dont think I will accept this. I will push for a refund under Indiana Uniform Commercial Code IC 26-1-2-314 if they cant figure something out . Did they tell you that you cant turn if the bucket is engaged with the ground or material?
Post #87 above is how I fixed one that did the same thing. After installing my shims with grease grooves done in a circular radius for the grease it never moved the boom again. Maybe sit back and think about for a minute as Caterpillar said there was no solution for the 236B doing the same thing. That was in 2008 and it still works flawlessly with over 4000 hours. You an sue a big company if you are ready for a 15 year fight, and too many sleepless nights. I would just fix their junk and move on. Every company is making some junk these days. Simon C
Its already shimmed to spec. I dont think they can make it any tighter. I dont see a solution that would actually work. The geometry of the loader arms just seems flawed. The last time I had a problem they couldnt resolve with a machine, they gave me a new machine that didnt have the issue. I am not sure they can do that this time.
I didn't mention it to them. I didn't see the point after the twisted loader arm fix... Ours is pushing a grader blade over 50 percent of the time so some turning under load is inevitable. I think part of the problem may be that there isn't really a positive stop on the frame to hold them in place when lowered completely like most other machines have. I'm guessing that'll be a quiet upgrade at some point BTW, if you want to try another set of loader arms the replacement set they ordered for ours is still sitting at the dealer. They measured it before removing it from the pallet and realized it was no better than the set on our machine so it's still on the pallet.
ours will be on a grader blade as well sometimes. the stop or saddle when the arms are down is exactly my thoughts as well. At the moment I'm going to keep pushing for a solution. I used to let things go, but now I'm old and grumpy. I'll keep this post updated, the TC is supposed to be in touch again today after contacting Cat yesterday.
So following that logic the machine can only be operated on perfectly flat ground. Anything other than that would put a side load on the loader linkage simply by the angle of the ground, whatever that might be. I thought the whole purpose of a CTL was its ability, if necessary, to work on uneven and/or sloping ground.?
Does Cat say it shouldn't be side loaded in writing in the TC only or is that written in the operators manual somewhere? If that information is not in the operators manual somewhere and just recently came out in a technical communication, I think that is " the easy out" button of that machine. You certainly would not have bought it, having known that information. I can't believe anyone would pay that kind of money for a big azz machine knowing that side loading causes the arms to hit the steps. Of course, no one wants to make a habit of side loading, kinda like backfilling or moving material with an excavator with the side of the bucket while swinging. Sometimes you have to do it. As we have seen in this thread, Cats specs are "loose" to say the least, offering the most latitude possible. So loose that it would make the machine unworkable for tight grading work if your machine is built on the far end of the loose scale. Stating you can't side load the machine is equally as unbelievable as their build specs for loader arm tolerance. I really suggest demoing a DL550 Minitour. I run a GPS system on a GB128 Sharp Grade grader attachment pushes a full blade with ease. The machine is super heavily built (it weighs around 18K). Demo it, if it aint your gig so be it, but no one needs to be saddled with a machine that can have 1" variance in the bucket level, or a machine you cant side load. I am really surprised CAT is having these issues with this machine, and I am equally surprised they are not addressing it. Software issues or something similar I can get, but these build quality issues, that surprises me.
55yrs ago a contractor I knew of had a huge problem with the track wear on a D9g. Same bs from Cat about operator abuse, turned out it had 2 different track frames and were misaligned. Cat refuse to fix under warranty. At that time the contractors equipment was 100% Cat and was on a job that had a 5 year time span. He went Euclid and so did many others on that site, must of cost Cat a **** load. A similar story with a E240 Cat excavator that bent the boom and 1 of many in a Cat fleet. It had been ordered with hammer piping but the dealer didn't plate the boom as required by Cat and refused the warranty claim. About a month went buy then some Hitachi EX220 arrived and the Cat disappeared. Next thing 2 Komatsu 375 dozers arrived while the Cat rep was on site.I have seen other bad **** from Cat but strange thing is their inability to rectify genuine complaints over the years weither it's large or small machines owned by large or small businesses.
Years ago, Takeuchi ran an ad that I have never forgotten the gist of. To the effect of "Sometimes the power of the name is more powerful than the equipment that it represents ". I think it can be a correct and powerful statement at times. The green tractor guys can also fall into this as well. I think its easy for company that has such a powerful name and presence in the market to not do the right thing, simply because they don't feel they need to. There are probably many customers that can point to the times that they did do the right thing. However, as it is said, a mistake can erase a lot of good that you have done. These OEM's I believe look at the cost of fixing an issue like this and make a cost analysis of the issue and decide if it's worth it. While certainly with social media word spreads in ways it never could before, but when you are as big as Cat is, they can absorb a lot of bad press regardless. Most dedicated customers likely wont stop their buying decisions anyway even if they were treated poorly. So it becomes easier, I think, to put lipstick on the problem and move on. When your an OEM with that kind size and presence, it is hard for a customer (especially smaller ones) to fight them effectively to get them to do the right thing.
Like Ford deciding it's better to pay off (many) claims than address the Pinto gas tanks exploding in rear end accidents.
Or Ford blaming Firestone for the steering problem in the Bronco debacle.
I looked through the operators manual yesterday, I cant find anything discussing side loading. This also poses a problem as mentioned in a previous post when running a grader blade attachment. I also tried to find some cat youtube videos of the machines in action to see if they may be guilty of sideloading. No luck so far.
So just to add a little fuel to the fire. While we were looking the new 275 loader arm issue over yesterday we discovered that when the bucket roll cylinders go all the way out to the stops the cylinders continue to push with enough force to flex the cylinders and twist the loader arms outward noticably (.5" guessing). Now I realize that rolling the bucket to the stops and continuing to push is a bad idea but in the real world its going to happen some. it seems that maybe the cylinder is just a little too long. I also realize we are picking at this machine now and the more we pick the more we find wrong. Poor welds, rust, silicone caulking in cracks where I feel like welds should be (never seen this before ever). We have a decent amount of cat equipment but this machine is very dissapointing. It has some positives, but overall the build quality seems to be terrible.
What they want to happen, is to have you suck it up enough, that sooner or later, you trade the machine in and lose your ass. Whether it’s at Cat or not doesn’t really matter, as long as that machine is in the rear view mirror. That and hopefully memories fade and one day, you might buy a Cat again.
If Cat blames it on side loading, in a sense making it the customers fault, I would direct them to the operators manual and ask them to show where it states you can't at all side load without damaging the machine. Next obvious question to them would be, if its not in the operating manual how are you to know that, and had that been known, you would not have bought it. I think that would set you up nicely to get a 275 that doesn't have that issue (assuming they make one) or getting Cat to take it back.
Agreed, I think pushing material while turning is a standard practice for CTL's and they should be able to do it without damaging the machine.
Not to be a downer but if you look at this photo and others I posted in post #30 in this thread you can see the arms simply rest on a stop on the chassis with nothing to prevent any side to side movement. The step is literally the first thing the arms will contact when they move. Looking at it it could be assumed the engineers thought the step would act as a stop when the arms move that far.
I missed the part of it doing it while pushing and turning with a load. I was envisioning it flexing while side loading during the loading of the bucket out of a pile. Yes, that is certainly a common practice and if it's bad now, imagine after a couple thousand hours. Yes, the pic makes it all make sense. The arms are not pinned to the frame in anyway to stop the side to side movement. They need a stop on the frame that extends to the inside side of the loader arm that would prevent the arm from shifting left and right. Doesn't look like it would be a hard thing to fix honestly.
Absolutely agree, but I find it unacceptable.
This is the stops on the DL550. Notice the stops on each side of the silver bolts that pin and rotate the cab. Cat needs something like that to stop the side to side movement.
It is unacceptable, I don't get how this could go through a product testing phase, and not get addressed.
Cats earlier series ctls had saddles that the arms sat in and limited side to side motion
That I guess makes it even more unacceptable. How does something like that get missed, and CAT fight so hard denying it? If they blew it on that, acknowledge it, at least step up and make it right. That would go a lot farther with customers and those that don't run Cat. It would show that the name means what you always thought it meant.
I have no evidence, but the more I hear and see about Cat equipment, the more I get the feeling that the customers are the testers and time on the proving ground is a thing of the past.
It certainly appears to be the case with this machine. Had they wrung this machine out before they released it, they would have found this issue and addressed it.
It should have been noticed rather quickly. No side loading is ridiculous. Corner loading the bucket introduces side loads and is a very common operation for any type of loader.
my regular cat mechanic said a lot of them have been back to the shop already.
D series also have problems with loader arms not being square with the machine. The first one I bought in 2015 was replaced for free. The replacement machine was the same way but not as bad so I decided to live with it.
Not in my experience. Bought 2 new machines and 2 attachments over the last 2 years. Have 2 279Ds that have been solid machines. No issue with the loader arms either. One is a 2015 and one 2019, bought both new.
My personal opinion is that it comes down to the dealer, whatever they may say about Cat helping or not. We happen to be in an area where Cat dominates and we can't count on reliable service for other brands. I believe this can leave the dealer feeling pretty secure about not doing more than absolutely necessary for the customer. I previously lived in an area where Cat had to compete with other local dealers and they seemed more willing to bend over backwards to keep us happy.
I see your point AMBMike, but honestly, I feel like CAT is putting their dealers in a tough position. The dealer didn't build the machine incorrectly, Cat did. Since of course they represent Cat and they are first line in taking care of the customer, they are the face of the issue. If Cat isn't willing to support fixing the issue, what is a dealer to do? The dealer doesn't have a lot of options as you know. Try to make it right, out of their pocket and hopefully do it in a way that doesn't damage their relationship with the mothership or effect the machines warranty. Seems like it could be a tight wire to walk. In this recent issue being discussed, wielding some stops on each side of the boom would, it appears would take care of the issue. CAT needs to just involve themselves in the solution instead of ignoring it, blaming it on the customer, putting out specs so loose that there is no accountability, properly vetting their machines before release, all of this could be a success story of how they stand behind their products, and not what this has turned into. Naturally if a dealer knows they don't really have to "earn" your business, they just get it, they don't have to stretch themselves out there, because your coming back no matter what. It is really surprising that no one else is a capable dealership in your area. Competition makes everyone better.
The dealers need to get together to force the issue with Cat. It's unacceptable for any manufacturer especially when they're supposed to be known for their high quality.
It might show up more on vertical lift machines. Force the loader all the way up or down and watch for movement. Every 59 throu 99 I’ve encountered does it.
I know Cat had issues with the D series vertical lift arms at first but our 2024 D3 doesn't have any issues. Off topic slightly but I'm personally disappointed Cat has stopped manufacturing radial lift CTLs, especially in the large frame size. Most of what we do with them is digging and grading, and in my experience at least, the radial lift machines have less play in the arms, are more robust, and have greater reach at mid height for backfilling or similar duties. Also, a large frame radial lift can still load high side trucks if you're willing to push into the center rather than dump in the center. If I'm loading trucks every day, a CTL or skid steer isn't my first choice, and if I'm loading or unloading any amount of pallets or pipe I prefer a purpose built machine, such as a telehandler or forklift. A radial lift will do all of these duties in a pinch and stand up to the rigors of earthwork and grading without complaint. And for loading or unloading palletized freight the extra reach can be the difference between doing it all from one side or have to position the truck to access both sides with the machine. A vertical lift machine, in my opinion, is an overly complex trade-off between a forklift and a dirt moving machine. It works great for loading dump trucks if you're not trying for production and don't mind paying truck drivers for waiting. They don't handle loading or unloading palletized freight all that well due to jerkiness when turning on hard surfaces, although this applies to CTLs and skid steers in general. They have worse sight lines, especially to the side, due to the extra linkages required. There are some things they do excel in like drilling post holes, although, again in my experience, an experienced operator has no issue keeping a straight hole with a radial lift. It almost seems like manufacturers became a victim of their own marketing and now face a shrinking market for radial lift machines due to the perception that vertical lift machines are a great match for every scenario. OK, I got that off my chest. Rant over.
I too like large frame Radial lift machines. I had two, a CASE 320 and 340. Being able to see out is much easier, far less moving parts, less things to get sloppy. They are going the way of the dodo bird. Takeuchi though seems pretty committed to them still.
I also prefer radial lift ctl’s. Way faster to grease in the morning. I actually prefer 100series takeuchis, with some minor under carriage and cab changes. There’s always something at the end of a job that needs to go on a truck after the hoe has left, that’s the reason for a vertical lift size 59 or 89. Reason I don’t buy more Takeuchi is the current dealer support, reason why most of my junk is cat is because of parts and mechanic support. I have also quit buying new cat, I buy 15-20 year old and have them rebuilt, then I get another 15k hours out of them.
Not ours. I bought the 279D's with the radial arms for fine grading. We have other equipment to load trucks and lift higher.
UPDATE: My cat salesman called today, Cat Corporate denies its a problem, "havent seen this much", bullcrap! My dealer is going to take the machine back into the shop and try to fabricate a saddle like the older models. I am happy with my dealer for trying to help with the problem, dissapointed with Cat for not doing better.
Sounds familiar...
Well, the upside is at least your loader arms are not jacked up and this fix should be pretty simple. The term "have not seen this much" says a lot, without saying it out loud. At least the dealer isn't saying, "there is nothing we can do if Cat doesn't authorize it". High five to them for stepping up. Watch, some time soon, the new machines will come from the factory with stops.
The dealer could pressure Cat to fix the problem and even send them an invoice for fixing the problem. Maybe Cat corporate is behind the logic that small customers and/or machines aren't nearly as important as the big customers with several big machines?? Lincoln Electric has a pretty arrogant corporate attitude like nobody else makes machines as good as theirs.
That’s the part often overlooked by dealers & corporate bean counters. Hopefully they will do what’s honorable in the end.
Allow me to throw another variable in here as a Cat 285 owner, and convert from previous Takeuchi TL12v2… I noticed my 285 had the slight can’t on the cutting edge when I first picked it up from the dealer back in early November. Things like that stick out to me, and I always want to know why. I had my suspicion then, and I think it is the actual culprit after taking a bunch of measurements. The guy(s) in this thread whose loader arms don’t sit down equally on both loader stops - that is a different issue… The main culprit I believe (and haven’t seen mentioned here) - the equalizer bar. I now have 80 hours on the machine, and wanted to get some time on it to see if the joints at the track frames were just stiff because of being brand new. When I take a bunch of measurements to compare off of a flat concrete shop floor, towards the center of the machine: the coupler/arm hinge pins, the top outer corners of the coupler itself when arms down and tilt cylinder fully retracted (so the coupler face is near vertical), there is about 3/8”-1/2” difference between sides. Of course, as you get further away from the center of the machine - such as the cuttings corners - the difference increases…but not simply because the machine is that bad out of square, but because from center: what ever change you make on one side you get the opposite change on the other. My machine has a 1” difference on the 86” factory bucket corners. Again, back at the arm hinge pins, it’s only about 1/4”. Coupler corners about 1/2”. Now, going back and measuring points on the machine frame, such as the loader arm stop frame brackets, the difference is again 1/4”. Go back further to the equalizer bar frame stops…1/4” difference. Next I checked “level” between machine farm side and loader arm side. Using a digital angle gauge, I zeroed in the from step on the machine tub (not the step on the loader arm cross bar that you actually use. On the new Cat machines, there is a second step to access the cab if your loader arms are up in the air. It’s 3/4” thick and part of the tub structure. Both loader arms, the arm cross tube, the coupler, even the left and right track frames, are all within .1* of each other. If I really mash the loader arm down into the stops, because I can watch one side just kiss its stop before the other side does - I can see the variance grow to .2* on certain surfaces. I’m just an amateur-level metal fabricator, but I do understand heat warp. Between all those different welded parts, and facing surfaces to bolt other major parts to that have had a bunch of welding, I don’t think that’s too bad considering its mass production and may not exactly have a tolerance standard much above that. I don’t know, as this is my first time really measuring heavy equipment tolerances beyond cutting edges and precision grading attachments. On another note, I do experience more loader arm flex than I’d like when side loading, and am considering some side stops on the loader arm stop pads. I can see evidence of my arms touching the machine step. That said, another thing I keep inconsideration is the amount of side to side play in the all the pin joints of the lift arms and coupler hinge pins. That free play is part of the design according to Cat, because I initially inquired about shimming the coupler pins up to reduce play and dirt intrusion. The other thing to consider is while my Takeuchi didn’t have the arm flex I see with the Cat, the Cat’s arm design is lifting 16” higher than a TL12v2. I figure there’s got to be some give and take to achieve this new territory in lift height. Time will tell. While perhaps Cat did a change to the loader arms after some of the posters ran their machines, and my machine did receive the revision, I don’t know. But all that matters is the cutting edge, and I still see the same issue as the other guys here. It just seems to me to be related to the equalizer bar squat on *mine* more so than manufacturing issues on the arm assembly. I would be very interested to see the other owners here do comparisons on their machines.
Interesting thoughts. Thank you. How do you see the equalizer bar causing the symptoms you're having? Not saying your wrong, just trying to wrap my head around it. With the equalizer bar undercarriage the machine frame or tub is essentially resting on the undercarriage through three points, those being the equalizer bar center pin and the pivot shafts on either side just ahead of the drive sprockets. This means the level of the entire machine, with the exception of the undercarriage, is determined by the level of the pivot shafts until the equalizer bar pivots to the point of contacting the machine frame. What we're seeing may be different but on our machine and others I've tested the arm/coupler/bucket level differed from the frame of the machine itself.
Has anyone checked to see if the tub is twisted? I experienced this on a machine I owned, it had a 2" twist from corner to corner which created abnormal track wear. It was a forestry mulcher so the difference as far as doing finished grade work didn't matter. The manufacturer wouldn't acknowledge the fault but every other machine around the world had the same twist. I suggest removing the arms and check that they are correct, then measure up all of the rest of the machine. Having undercarriage suspension makes the fix so much easier.
The loader arms are confirmed twisted on ours, as well as the set of arms that was ordered to replace them. Measurements were taken all over the rest of the machine and nothing that would cause this was noted. Our dealer claimed we were the only ones experiencing this but admitted that the only other machines they'd sold at the time were either set up for forestry or went to farmers. The 275/285 CTLs don't have a suspended undercarriage like the 255/265 or the older 259-299 series machine. They are essentially a miniature dozer undercarriage.
We're the replacement arms measured before fitting them? With my machine it was the welding process that caused the twist even though it was welded in a jig, same thing maybe occurring here
They were measured before being removed from the shipping pallet. In fact, last time I drove by, they were still on that pallet at the dealer as they were no better than the arms already on the machine.
You’re exactly right, an equalizer undercarriage is suspended upon those three points. And on paper, same as the arms “on paper”, everything is square and correct. But the end result after welding and assembly, is differing. Due to a manufacturing defect, tolerance stacking, or combination of both, brings us to the current machines. Mess up any of those three points, and now you’re out of level. If you’ve ever leveled a lab scale, you’d see. The apex of the triangle is typically fixed, and the two corners are on adjustable feet. That’s how the scale is able to be leveled regardless of surface. To put my particular situation another way: my cutting edge is off due to my machine “listing” to one side. If I had to choose the first place to check, and would be also be the most economical point to correct my machine and get it to match the surface it’s sitting on, is the pin and bushings of the frame mount of the equalizer bar. I measured and comparated multiple points on the tub and the track frames. Track frames are pretty much identical, including the equalizer bar points. The tub is within 1/8” at the rear, and increases to 1/4” discrepancy by the time you get to the front. Putting a spirit level on multiple horizontal and vertical surfaces along the frame, tub, loader arm towers, and arms themselves out to the coupler, all show the bubble touching the line when sitting on a level floor. So, on my machine, the track frames are level/square, and my tub/frame AND arms/coupler are off, which we know results in the cutting edge being raised on one side. Track frame matches the floor, everything else matches each other but doesn’t match the floor…how are those linked? I’d be curious to know how exactly the center pin of the equalizer bar is ultimately placed and welded. Is it line bored after the tub and track frames are all set to level? Or are the individual parts just set in their jigs, welded, and then bolted together and hope for the best? Because how I’d be fixing my machine - provided the equalizer bar itself is correct and symmetrical, is leveling/matching all major pieces and then line boring that center pin. I think tolerance stacking plus some jig issues and heat warp resulted in my product. Now what if you combine some arms that have the same tolerance stacking or jig issues… Overall I’m happy with the machine. Most of my gripes besides the obvious lack cutting edge matching the surface the machine is sitting on, are electrical/coding issues in the display. Simple stuff that could be easily fixed with a software update, but Cat and the dealer are dragging their feet with any sort of response.
Certainly on the bigger machines all line-boring is done after the structure has been completely welded. On smaller machines like this product line I don't know.
Gotcha. Thanks. And I'm right there with you on the display. Cat sent a service tech out recently to replace the coupler locking pins due to them not latching correctly on some attachments and I asked him about a software update. According to him there's nothing available. My other gripes are minor as well. 1. I'm unable to dump a complete container of DEF in the tank. It'll accept about 75 percent before overflowing, even when running it to the point of the machine threatening to de rate. 2. The 14 pin aux electrical connector is placed below the auxiliary hydraulic connectors. We've had 3 of the 5 factory connectors replaced due to leaks and it always contaminates the electrical connection. On another note, I believe you said earlier you were waiting on a 285 with a ripper. Does your machine have a ripper mounted?
The DEF tank size is absurd and yet another perfect example of an engineer designing something having never been in the field. Such a simple thing got overlooked. My display gripes are related to using the quick coupler and if you try to back up too quickly after cycling the coupler - you know, because you’re being productive - then the top quarter of the camera image disappears. The same will happen if you try to unlock the parking brake before getting the lap bar down, or closing the door. You have to stop and cycle the ignition to reset the screen. Due to the fisheye effect, the top quarter of the image is actually how you see where you’re going. The rest of the image is just the rear door and a couple of feet from the bumper. As for the ripper, I am still on the fence because of the size, and likely Cat’s price. Originally I had planned to talk to the guys in Australia who have built my buckets, as they had pioneered the ripper concept for Takeuchis and other brands. While their new design for the Cat next gen’s is much tighter to the machine than the Cat design, you basically have to give up the side cameras…which I refuse. The Cat ripper sticks out so far though. But I would like to have the ripper, and it would allow me to get rid of the add-on counterweights that rob ground clearance. Stupid me forgot to add the rear aux kit when I ordered the machine.
I could maybe understand the DEF tank sizing if the 299 didn't actually accept a full container. It seems like something easily researched when deciding on tank sizing ... I actually really like being able to see the rear bumper in the camera feed. I sometimes end up working in tight areas and being able to see the rear of the machine in real time is a life saver. Ours doesn't have a ripper mounted yet but the rear aux kit is in place and ready. They keep telling me we'll be getting a ripper soon but we'll see. I spend a lot of time grading with a GB124 blade and hard spots are a time killer. I'd really like to try Sharpgrade's new GS130 grader attachment. It has small rippers as an option plus side shift, side wings, blade pitch, and a detachable front wheel assembly. Do you have the Norm Engineering buckets? If so which ones? I'd love to have their big 4 in 1 bucket for our machine. I've added a 10" spill rack to the top of the 92" bucket but it could use even more.
Yes, they’re the Norm pro series buckets. Although, they’re back from my old Takeuchi, so they’re a bit narrow for the new Cat machine. I have the 4in1, and then had them build me a GP bucket with the same design as their 4in1. I have an expensive idea I’d love to be able to make happen one day: take the smart controller off the GB124 and adapt it to the Sharpgrade unit. I think the Cat grader is too small for the 275/285 class. But I like the smart controls.
It is too small. Our dealer has told us that Cat is building a grader blade for the larger machines but I haven't heard that anywhere else. On the Sharpgrade, they apparently have a system that enables them to run their blades from the carrier machine's joysticks as long as they're electronic and not pilot controls. I think they call it Simulgrade or something similar.
I saw the Sharpgrade 130 at Conexpo, I spoke with the SG owner about it. I have rippers on the DL550 so that is not of interest to me, but having the side shift on the blade would be very nice. I had that on my BC grader and I like that feature. Being able to curl the blade would also be helpful. I played with the blade controls that work off the handle. It would take some getting used to for sure. I am not sure that I wouldn't prefer the buttons that I have on my 128. I redid them from what the machine came with and its much better. My concern with the 130 is having 3D Topcon control. Some of that it sounded like still needed to be figured out. Sharpgrade is currently the only blade option that I think will stand up to the 285 and DL550 if you are working it hard. The 130 is not cheap, and with the added functions over the 128 it has a lot going, a lot of hoses and so forth. However if you have enough machine to take advantage of what it can do, I think it would be worth it. It certainly takes some hp to run, but it is really more about tractive effort.
The Sharpgrade 130 is the real deal. Snapped this at Conexpo.
Originally, I had thought I would be able to use all the buttons on the new Cat joysticks to run my Skeer. The lower aux buttons are only accessible by Cat attachments. They are not standard voltage, but a proprietary CAN setup. While not applicable to the Skeer, I’d love to be able to run the Sharpgrade like the Cat smart grader to be able to convert the joystick movements themselves to control the lift and tilt of the blade, plus the assist capabilities. Very intuitive.
I remember you from the first time I posted on this forum. How are you liking the Sharpgrade after about a year of owning it? Both the unit itself as well as the customer support? Is your 550 on steel tracks or rubber?
I know it’s not what you want but you could weld a mounting plate on one of your buckets with enough angle to compensate for the arm being un level. That should work? I’d be trying to get My money back on the machine but this could possibly work until it gets figured out idk. Good luck
I like the SG really well. I redid the buttons that control the blade functions so they are larger. Other than the buttons on the one I got I think it is a quality system. They have continued to advance the operational control from the model I have. The joystick control is pretty cool, but with the 130 and all the functions it has, it would take some time to convert the actions to muscle memory. I am able to push an enormous amount of material with it, I don't see the Level Best Version holding up to that. Doesn't surprise me that Cat may be building a more super duty version for the 285. I have rubber tracks. I do wish at times, a lot of times actually that I had gotten single grousers. They now have rubber pads for the single grouser tracks, that had that been available, I for sure would have gotten the grousers. The customer support has overall been good between SG and RDO who I bought it from and did the initial setup. That set up had to be redone, but the guy that did the first set up was a clown, but we got it worked through. The SG is very accurate, combine with the Topcon Total Station control, I don't think you could ask for anymore accuracy.
UPDATE: Caterpillar sent a rep out along with my dealers techs. Cat now aknoweldges there is a problem and they are currently working on fabbing up some saddles to control the side shift of the loader arms up front. I am interested to see what they come up with and will repost updates as this moves forward. Hoping for a decent solution.
That is good to hear. I would love to know what made Cat now acknowledge that they have a problem. Enough customers complained? Maybe this thread all over the interweb? Because anyone who runs these things knows there needs to be a stop, apparently the older models have them and I think every machine on the market has some way of stopping that side to side motion. This fix is easy, the crooked loader arms, not so much, maybe they are working their way through the issues on these machines and they will get to the loader arms as well.
Thanks for the updates! I look forward to seeing their solution.
The Cat dealer's PSR showed up on my jobsite out of the blue the other day and spent half an hour looking at the arms and line boring work. I showed him how the line boring changed the bucket cylinder geometry and the twisting effect it has on the arms. I also pointed out the lack of side to side restraint for the arms. He didn't say if anything is being done about this but it's kinda nice to know it's still in the back of their minds... He did say he would operate some new machines and see how they are in regards to the arms being twisted.
UPDATE: we have had this solution for a bit but we have been crazy busy and I am just now getting around to posting the pics of the saddles/brackets that were designed and built by Cat/MacAllister equipment to try and remedy the loader arm hitting the step issue. These brackets work great when the arms are down. Obviously they do nothing about the slop in the arms after they are lifted off the brackets.
That to me is below average, done just enough to quieten your disappointment.
They didn’t even bother to give it a quick spray of Cat yellow
I have a Cat 275 with 140 hours on it. Been great so far with no issues. Love the performance compared to my old Cat 277. The only item I have noticed is the visibility of the attachment couplers when changing attachments, but over time I have been able to overcome that issue by centering the distance between inner portion of the top of the internal lift ears with spots I can identify on a given attachment. A minor inconvience in my opinion.
Any update AMBMike? Considering a 275 or 285 for a future project.
Ours is approaching 1k hours. So far it's been a solid machine and in combination with the grader blade and either UTS or GPS has relieved our dozer of nearly all fine grading duties. This frees the dozer up for other projects or on large projects it works well in tandem with the dozer. The 285 is a stable machine whether grading or doing loader work and grades better than the 279/289/299/255/265 due to equalizer bar undercarriage. It has a large comfortable cab with a great seat and controls. If needed I can carry my lunch box in the cab with me and still have room for my 11.5EEEs in the foot well. The visibility to the bucket corners is restricted slightly compared to a 279/289/299 but it's easy to get used to. The side and rear camera views are superb and allow an operator to back up to or alongside a building, curb, sidewalk, etc with confidence. There's a few minor things I'd like to change as I've mentioned before. The screen in the cab takes too long to wake up, the DEF tank needs to be half a gallon larger, and I'd like to see some form of blocking at the front to prevent the loader arms from moving side to side as much as they do now. Other than the twisted loader arms it's been a great machine for us and has been making our estimating team happy. If this one suffered a mishap tomorrow morning I believe we'd have another one coming before the day was out. Get the big heavy duty bucket for it and build an extension on the back of the bucket. The machine can easily handle it, even in heavy wet clay.
Great info. Thank you taking the time to share! This one of the first things I've noticed just sitting in a 275 and 285 at the dealers yard. Have not demo'd one yet. Our newer 305 is the same way with the screen - takes forever to boot up and is annoying. We have a potential project coming up with a fair amount of 30",24" and 18" RCP along with internal roads and parking lots where we will be placing the base. A 275 or 285 would fit the bill for unloading and shaking out pipe then double up and help the D3 spreading base with a blade would be a good fit.