Komatsu’s thorough product-development survey said the D375A-5 crawler dozer’s replacement would have to demonstrate production equal to or better than Caterpillar’s D10T to take market share from the cross-Peoria rival. So the Dash-6 version of the D375A was launched with its Komatsu SAA6D170E-5 engine boosted 85 horses to 610 net horsepower – 30 more than the D10T. In fact, Komatsu claims that even with parasitic load at maximum (the SAE standard for measuring net horsepower pre-scribes an intermediate load level) the D375A-6 still delivers 580 horsepower, which equals the D10T’s SAE net power output. Komatsu says the SAA6D170E-5 diesel is not over-taxed, developing 610 horsepower at 1,800 rpm. In fact the maker pushes that same engine platform to 672 horsepower in the PC1250LC-8 excavator and 715 horsepower in the HD465-7 rock truck. Komatsu replaced the Dash-5’s twin gear pumps with a single variable piston pump and closed-center, load-sensing hydraulic system. The hydraulic design is derived from the successful D475A-5EO hydraulic system. Not only did the update reduce pump drag on the engine, but it also improved blade-response time. That’s one of the three top characteristics professional operator Guy Eldringhoff, from Barrick’s Goldstrike Mine in Elko, Nev. – a Cat D10 user – appreciates. Check out pro-operators' comments about the D375A-6, a few videos of them working the machine over, pricing information and some photos: Komatsu D375A-6
Very interesting article. I have to wonder why they are still using the 170 engine. It is a six cylinder and I'm sure will carry the horsepower with no problems. But they were committing to the QS series engines in V12 configuration a while back. I'm also curious as to the torque rating and why it was part of the specs in the ariticle. Do they also still run a power pod for the drive train? The economy modes I've seen so far on all the production machines are just a joke. Everyone I've spoken to says the machines don't produce when in an economy mode. The crucial number to advertise is fuel usage per ton of material moved. There is no fuel economy when slot dozing down hill and backing up steep. I'll have to find one of these in the future and see if it has the diagnostics on the monitor like the Cat has. I also didn't see whether or not the machine has a suspended undercarriage. I worked on a first generation model in eightlies and saw a lot of good things in it. I'll be looking forward to seeing one of these.
Horsepower aint everything. i am thinking that the weight and the funny looking track will come into play as well long story short, if I was looking for a big pusher I would still buy the CaT Pj
They have diagnostics built into the monitor like all the komatsus. Im not sure if the one we have at our shop is a -6, we have had it for a short while so im pretty sure its a -5EO, it is one powerfull machine though and operates very nicely. A local mine bought it and was shut down before they got to put over 75 hours on it.
Thanks for your perspective on the machine. Komatsu used their K-Bogie Undercarriage design on the D375A-6, and I have to admit that I don't know if it is suspended or not. Very good question. I will ask it of the product manager and post up when I get an answer. I'll ask about a power pod, but they never used that phrase during the product intro. Is it possible that could be known by another way, or you could describe what a power pod is so that I can ask a more informed question? And the photo of the machine pushing dirt down hill was not actually a slot-dozing shot. Video of slot dozing was on the flat. I will ask about torque at peak horsepower. Interesting that the bit of very pertinent information is not among the copious amounts of info they unloaded on me. Definitely diagnostics on the monitor, but I don't know how they compare with Cat's. Stay tooooned. L
The power pod was the torque converter, transmission, bevel gear and steering clutches all in one piece under the cab. If one component went bad, then the whole pod had to come out. It was quick to do but you had to pay for the whole exchange unit when all that might have been wrong was a steering clutch seal or something. When I was working on them you were lucky to get 10,000 hours before something went wrong and the whole thing had to come out. They were not a real quick change, component wise, like the Cat was and still is. The other big problem was the weight of the whole component. All we had to lift with was a 988B loader and by the time you got tied off to the pod you had too much distance in lines. The loader would top out on lift before the pod would clear the top of the frame. It made for some exciting times and tight jaws when one of these went down. The real advantage in the early days was the undercarriage could be replaced for about $30,000 complete. The D9L or D10N has never cost less than $70,000 for a complete bottom. With the experience I have with Komatsu I'm sure they have adjusted their prices more in line with Cat. CE Writer, Thanks for the article and the info.
K, Larry, gotta ask. Why the sudden change in reporting competition figures? You and Rod have both been on here saying that CE shies away from reporting brand A vs. brand B, so is this a change that we'll see in future articles? (granted the comparisons in the article were slim; I suppose another way to ask the question is whether the comparisons would be more drawn out in the future -- similar to your Field Tests, but comparing competitive machines instead of successor and predecessor.)
Tiger, No systemic change here in CE's approach to equipment coverage. We've made it a practice for some time now to offer specs on competitive models where the context adds to the significance of the machine. The difference you're seeing in this particular story is really just me covering Komatsu's presentation. They were very up-front about their development goals with the D375A-6 -- namely, competing with the D10T. Very few equipment manufacturers are this transparent in presenting their new products. The story's focus on the D375A-6 vs. D10T simply reflected Komatsu's message.
Gotcha. Admittedly, I was hoping that there would be increased coverage on brand vs. brand -- it'd be nice if a third-party had finally found a way to objectively compare production, for instance.
With all the weight and power above a D10 It better out work it. If it doesnt ill be shocked. Build something the same weight and horsepower that pushes with a D10 and ill give them kudos.
Well, if it follows in its predecessors footsteps, it will have to outpush a D-10 while it is running to make up for when it is broken down.
I still cant get my self to buy a Komatsu...
Amen 8N. I never could and never will be able to do it either. When I bought my excavator Komatsu begged and pleaded with me to bring one out to try. I ran one before and it sure did not have what my Cat has got. Around here if it digs in the dirt it is Cat. If it is a big truck it is Mack, or at least it was until volvo took the growl out of the Bulldog, and if it is a little truck it is a Ford with a 7.3 powerstroke.
I think some of the "replace it when it's two years old" thinking still exists at Komatsu. They used to think that a dozer that old was obsolete, so why build any long life into it. I'm supposing that most of that thinking is now gone. Frankly, with America in the situation it's in, I don't know why anyone would buy foreign equipment at a time like this. Obama may have finally done something right with his 35% tariff on Chinese tires this week. Maybe he can see fit to extend that tariff over to autos and heavy equipment, as well as everything Walmart sells. I suppose our Canadian and Aussi brothers may not agree with protectionism as much as I do, but America has gone steeply done hill in it's standard of living these last twenty years, particularly in the construction and mining trades. It's a matter of fact that America is not pulling any other nation up to our level, instead, we are being pulled down to theirs. (third world status) As for Komatsu dozers, I always had problems with them from big to little. I suppose that they are better now, but after Komatsu caught Cat napping in the seventies, Cat has worked hard, not always with success, to stay ahead of them. Having been a long time user and supervisor of maintenance with everything Cat, I won't say that I didn't have problems with the factory and some dealers. But I did have better luck with Cat than I ever did Komatsu.
I am all for free trade as long as free trade means free trade on both sides. The chinese and japs don't play it that way. All their way, especially the japs. Look at what it takes to sell US automotive products there while they run rampid here. Not that the US automotive companies have not brought a lot of it on themselves. The chinese is just another story all together with their steal, copy and export junk. I can't see Komatsu matching Cat in this or anything else.
More true words have never been spoken. Brian