I would like to get some opinions on various track loaders. I would like to buy an "all around" piece of iron for the farm/timber/creek. The creek is sand/gravel bottom and needs work preventing erosion, placing riprap, moving sand/gravel bars, etc. I also have fence row and timber clearing and cleaning to do. I'm thinking I would prefer about a 25,000 - 30,000 lb machine around 100 hp +/-, preferably LGP. Was thinking JD, CAT or maybe IH/Dresser. -Have heard bad things about big $ to replace hydrastat drives, also some bad things about sleeveless engines, etc. UC is not a big issue given limited use. I will probably only put 200-300 hrs on it per year but still want an "OK" machine that won't become a big boat anchor. I have a buddy who is a long-time heavy equipment mechanic so repair labor is CHEAP but want to avoid high $ parts if possible. Also don't want to be buried in a creek bottom Any ideas?
What kind of budget do you have to work with? I'm partial to JD machines so I can recommend looking at a JD 555G, though the other brands (Cat, Case, Dresser etc.) will get the jobs done just as well. No matter what brand you get try to find one with a 4 in 1 bucket and rippers. That will make for a very versatile machine.
I'd like to stay around 15k but definitely no more than 20k. Any issues with the JD transmission/torque converters? I have heard their engines are strong and pretty reliable. -Have also thought about a 655 possibly. How are the JD units for ground pressure? We have a JD 700J LGP at work that is a really sweet dozer with nice wide tracks but loaders I have looked at seem pretty narrow. I have been around a lot of heavy equipment but i'm not an operator nor a mechanic so am trying to educate myself a bit. thanks for your reply!
Track loaders as you probably know don't have grousers and they are heavier then dozers. Picked up a Cat 955 (32000 lbs) and all though old has a lot of power. This was the first machine I picked up and cost 10K. It needed a new exhaust system and could use new break bands, but other then that it's a real horse. Many of the older real heavy machines like this one farmers like to have. Issue with the big and heavy is it usually takes a while to sell once your done with them. After I picked mine up noticed one which was in better shape and kept seeing in for months, don't know if it ever sold, but listing is gone. So far as high dollar parts, well I don't know of any of them that do not have some of those in the machine somewhere. I like Cat mainly because you can find the parts, and many can be found after market. Case models appear to be the cheapest but someone may correct me on this comment. Good luck
thanks for the opinion alldodge. I think a 955 would be plenty of machine for me. Do you know if CAT ever had an LGP version? was looking at specs and they are saying 15 in track width....boy, that seems awfully narrow for 30,000 lb +. -will probably be keeping this machine for quite some time as the maintenance on my creek is a never ending job. I can't help but have awful visions of a track loader buried in the sand.....also, bigger they are, the harder they are to pull out. Here's a stupid question for you...can you put dozer grousers/pads on a track loader???
The pads are 15 inches wide but the length is around 10 feet, giving about 300 sq inch on the ground. I've been in some soft stuff but not sand, and while it does sink a little, I have never gotten into a situation which I wondered if it was coming out. Not to say you wouldn't run into a worst problem. No expert here, but it is my understanding the track loaders do not have grousers because of all the extra weight they can carry. The loaders weight a few tones more then a comparable dozer because they have counter weights in the back. These counter weights allow them to pick up and carry loads. If you fill the bucket up with a load, add the counter weights and then try to turn with deep grousers, the track is going to have some major stress on it. The loader I have in the pic below shows about 3/4 deep pads, they were higher but how high I don't know. Either way all the pads are the same and allow to driving on paved roads without damaging them, and ease of turning.
Pretty sure those things running long ways across your pads are grousers. d.d.
Yep, recon they are, but for the most part don't really fit the average definition of the term with the current issue. Could take a pic and post of the ones on my dozer if further clarification is needed
Yes you can put dozer grousers on a loader if you want. I believe the reason they don't come with them unless special ordered is that the track loader is primarily designed to load trucks which means lots of turning, and the semi grousers are easier on everything when doing lots of turning. I have seen LGP, and 'wide track' track loaders but they are very rare. If you are looking to buy a used one it will probably be very hard to find one. An equipment dealer may be able to track one down for you. You might also want to check Machinerytrader.com to get an idea of what's out there and prices. Good luck with the search.
This is the first time I've tried posting a link so I hope it works. http://www.machinerytrader.com/listingsdetail.aspx?OHID=9164715 This machine is a little smaller than what you're looking for, but would get the jobs done you are looking to do.
Our company let 2 977 Cats go in auction last year...and L Model and a K model I believe. Old but still ran good. We pulled piling to pile driving cranes with them for years thru swamps that only they could go thru. I believe they got around 3 grand for both of them.
Have been told and seen the aftermath of dozer shoes on a loader, not pretty as the load from a full bucket is different than a fully loaded push blade. Hard on idlers, lower rollers and truck frames, there are companies making weld on loader grouser bar if wanting to add to old shoes. I bought an old Allis, so far so good but lots of expense, lots of hard to find parts, lots of unavailable parts. I steered away from Deere as the money asked was more than I could afford for half the machine I ended up with. Cat will be a better choice all the way to a early 953 but look hard and long at undercarriage before you buy. Best to get one with at least 50% remaining shoes/rollers/pin & bushing wear, toothed bucket for breakout capability, cab if can get one reasonably. Hydrostats are not so bad, just are pricey for repairs, anything iffy about one, slippage, howl, lack of strength and look for another, DO NOT in any way convince yourself a needs a little work machine is fine for what you need as you may not get rails on work more than rails in the shop and time lost trying to make a mole hill from a mountain.
Well it figures that the link didn't work. If you go to machinerytrader.com and type in jd 555g in the search box, then scroll down to the last tractor listed there is an example of a wide track loader. I think the wide track and LGP options are even more rare on larger machines but I'm sure they're out there somewhere.
Picked up a 955L 85j series at auction this past summer. I didn't plan on buying it but I couldn't resist for 6 grand. I have an old Allis 7g with a parts machine that I will be selling this spring. I guess you could say I'm updating the fleet ! Anyhow there are tons of good 955's out there that can be had CHEAP if you are in the right spot at the right time. There are also lots of aftermarket and used parts available. I just put a turbo, track tension spring and new tension piston assembly on mine without breaking the bank. Cat also sells a reasonably priced classic parts line for older machines. It is also a machine that can be owner repaired fairly easily. No computers,hystat drives etc. The down side is I have stuck em the mud a couple of times and it ain't fun, We have hardpan clay around here and when you disturb it and add water it turns to soup. I'm not sure if you would have a problem on a gravel river bed.
It's hard to beat a 955L for a farm machine unless it's with a 977L. I had mine in a creek up to the top of the tracks with no problem. Parts machines are available, I bought a good set of used tracks and rollers on ebay for $1200 delivered. Some had tracks with 2 grousers per pad instead of 3, they are a good compromise between the street pas and dozer pads, if I ever need new pads that's what I want to get. Easy to resell, everyone trusts Cat to have parts available.
we bought a 1988 Deere 455g direct drive in 2012. we have used it on our farm, and a few small paying jobs. it is a great machine, but has different handling/operating dynamics than my 1992 Cat D4c dozer. the 455g is more nose heavy, and does weigh about 2k more. also the 455g has 14" wide pads, whereas the D4c has 18" wide pads. so you could venture to say I had a learning curve as to when to pull out and hit reverse when running the 455g. I did get stuck a few times and have had some close calls. the grouser bars are also worn smooth on the 455g. in some cases, you wont be technically be "stuck" until you lift up your loaded bucket and change directions. so what I am saying is be careful when operating in your creek bed, it can happen quicker than you think. also, I agree with everyones opinion above about the older cats; they are hard to beat. you might consider a 12k class mini excavator combined with a smaller crawler loader, such as a deere 455g/555g or a cat 931b. I purchased a takeuchi tb 135 8k lb. mini ex, and I have been very pleased with it. it will float and go where my other machine wont, and it gets a lot of work done in any given period of time.
thanks for all of your help guys. -Was just looking at a 1978 955L on machinery trader at Michigan CAT, $12k I believe. Even has 17" wide track shoes from what they are saying....seems to be a bit wider than most. Did those units have the sealed and lubricated tracks? they say a few links are seized up??? Feel free to chime in with some more opinions. Anyone familiar with michigancat?
From what I understand, the later 955Ls have a D6 undercarriage vs a D5 (8" pitch vs. 6.91"). I have a '75 model that runs the D5 undercarriage with 15" pads. I picked my machine up last fall and I have been going thru the CAT top to bottom. I have had FANTASTIC luck finding parts and even better luck with finding help on this forum :drinkup
To my understanding the lubricated track came out years later. Anything is possible, it could have been changed out
Sounds like sealed rail not SALT, bridged segments are fairly common on sit a long time machines, may work out on their own but maybe not. Whatever you do, DO NOT put oil, fuel, anything other than water on them to attempt to free the link pins, oil traps dirt and contaminants, will increase pin/bushing wear, run the machine in the creek a few times(Water) and they should free up.
there's SBG (single bar grouers ie dozer pads) DBG (double bar ie loader) TPG (tripple, ie excavator) width of track comes into play yes but so does length of track on the ground. go to ritchiespecs.com and look at ground pressure. for the money your wanting to spend and conditions you are working in i wouldnt think about anything other than a 953. ever tried backing out of a basement or a creek with a loaded bucket with a front engine machine? you'll know the difference trust me no knocking the old 955's but why would you buy one when you could have a 953..... no comparison new or used you are going to have breakdowns dont kid yourself if you think you wont.
sorry to dis-agrree but i dont find anything wrong with lubrricating them at all..... interrnal pin/bushing wear is more important to me than exterrnal bushing wear, i do agree that running them in water will make them quieter but why put water in them when you have the potential to lubricating them,...... the last time i looked water has little to NO lubricity value pj
He only plans to use it 200-300 hours a year for farm use. There's no need for him to spend big money on a 953 when a much cheaper 955 will get the job done.
Palmer, I would disagree, finding an older 953 , for not a lot more cost will be a much better option in my opinion. The rear mounted engine makes a world of difference over the front engine units. I have had both and would never consider a front engine unit again.
The 955's are good old machines on solid ground. They tend to be a little nose heavy as all front engine machines are. Also pushing trees they can hook a little hard and break rearend parts if you are hard on them. If you look around 953's and 63's can be had real decent. I picked up a 63 with almost new engine but needing an undercarriage for less than 15,000. For an all around machine a 953 is hard to beat. They stay on top of the ground real good and have good power. Picking one up for 15 to 20,000 and keep it in good shape it probably won't devalue any.
Thanks guys. I had looked at some specs on 953 & 63 and think they would be good units. Powerjoke....thanks for the fatherly advice....gonna have break downs, don't kid yourself. I do appreciate your comments...had just heard about hydrastat drive issues with 43, 53, 63 series and also that the 43 and 53 had sleeveless engines. Come to think of it, there is a 953 down the road from me....second owner uses it on his farm. Maybe I could sweet-talk it away from him.
Oil on tracks does cause an increase in external bushing wear, due to the grinding paste effect. Seen it. Also, the water/mud thing does free tracks up, it works in between the vertical face where the inner and outer links get rusted together. Thee pin/bush interface is lubed on SALT chains, but the actual cast links can still rust together. On the old style dry pins, no oil you throw on the chains will penetrate the pin/bush enough to do any good, but you run in slop or water, it'll find it's way in. Whatever the theory, the tracks usually free off.
IH are we talking about internal p&b or external ? read the post again, we are infact talking about internal as far as i can tell. you want to talk about paste try cleaning a pond out and then report back to me again, there is nothing wrong with lubricating the tracks, it will not last long and have vertually no residual effect and i cant imaging the mess of dumping used motor oil on them but diesel or etc. will not hurt a damn thing...... will it ever reach the centter of a p&b ? probably not unless you could submerse them and then it would disapear very quickly. if you have squeeky tracks on a loader that sounds like a flock of birds chasing you, the rails are already dry and theyre definatly on the way out. there is several post on how to measure internal p&b wear just do a little searching OP and good luck in your machine hunt. i stand by my previous post ditch the 955 idea and look for a 953 they are not that expensive hell they started making them in '84 if i remember right. I've bought older mechanically sound 953's for as little as $7500 before and you know as well as I do that a decent skiddy will cost at lest twice that much. dont be affraid to have one shipped in from a distance normally i have just paid for a 3rd party inspection ~$300-500 but I have had a guy from pocahontus arkansas (wont name names as he is a memeber here) give a totally **** poor evaluation and outright lie to me so just make sure you check out who you hire on a side note, in a link siezure the "Vertical" rail faces are not as much of a culpret as internal P&B in my opinion edit: 53's are very reliable good old machines in my book..... some had problems with heads and head gaskets but they updated to a radiator with an extra core in in and kept the heating problem better under control, the main thing i look at when testing an old hydro machine is running at full throttle without changing the speed travel lever lower the engine RPM and if the machine speeds up a lot you have a little problem in the hydrostat, normally an underspeed valve out of adjustment or some internal leakage. my guess is that there is just as many if not more used parts out there for a 53 as a 55 as there's been many of the scrapped in the last few years.....that itself should tell you something i dont care which loader you buy im just giving an opinion and opinions are like a$$holes, everyones got them and they all stink lol pj
Fr a number of years I had a JD 455D with a 4 in 1 bucket that I interchanged with a tree shear. It had dozer style grousers pads on it. At the same time I had a 955K with street pads and a general purpose bucket. They both could do the same amount of work although the 955 loaded faster as the bucket was bigger. The JD was a lousy gravel loader with the grousers but it worked great in the aspen cutting and bunching trees. It also worked great for clearing and grubbing. the 4 in 1 made a big differance. The 955 was nose heavy. The 455D had a decent sized rear counter weight and balanced put nice wih a load. Both had woods protection packages and were cumbersome to work on. Any of them in reasonable shape will do your job with a bit of patience.
I strongly agree with what powerjoke stated earlier about backing out of a creek or basement with a bucket full on a front engine machine. I have sunk my 455g a couple times doing just that. quite a bit of difference in a front engine and rear engine machine. also my 2 cents on soaking tracks. run the machine for several hours and get the tracks warmed up. then drive into the creek, submerging the tracks. the cool water should be sucked into the pins/bushings and should work as well as anything else.
Thanks for all your help guys.
I think we're talking about seized tracks in general, and the rail faces are a factor in some, not all, cases. For the amount of lubricity in diesel, you'd do more good relieving yourself on the tracks, though in my case, on a Sunday morning that would probably lift the paint. On the older IH, Case, and Cat machines I started on, they squawked away whatever conditions you worked in, but were a long way from worn out. As for pond cleaning, how many do I need to have done before I report in, son? I agree about the 955 being nose heavy, I always found the 41's, 51's and 55's to be a little on their toes facing downhill with a full bucket compared to the small Internationals and the hystats.
talk about drifting off topic but oh' well..... first of all I ain't your son, nor an ammeture or an idiot so don't go there and we won't have a problem. we all learn everyday none of us are immune to that, infact that's probably what drew a lot of us together on this great site in the first place. either we had a problem and needed help or to share our experiences with others..... as my dad (not you by the way) always said, you better learn from everyon else's mistakes because you will not live long enough to make them all yourself short of sand there is nothin i know of that is more abrasive than sticky pond muck, we get about 3k out of rails on 63's that's why i have one machine thats dedicated to such task. you say that the old machines squeaked badly on older machines..... how long did bottoms last back in those days? would you agree that components last longer nowadays be it from technology in metals or lubricated tracks ? again. chain seizure is more likely from moisture causing rust internally rather than link faces. is it something to be concerned with? no most will limber up on there own. and i never said to smear gun grease on everything to let the dirt stick to them in the first place, i dont know why you jumped to that conclusion pj
Ditto on the posts calling for a rear engine loader if possible vs a frount engine loader.....rear engine loaders are miles ahead of the older frount engine units.....and a 953 is about as versitile as it gets
PJ, don't believe I called you an idiot or an amateur, or mentioned grease, but you were the one who mentioned reporting in, whatever that was supposed to imply. I'm definitely not an amateur, or, I hope, an idiot, but I'll let others draw their own conclusions on that. Whatever, let's call it 50/50 and get back on topic. Chains do last a lot longer nowadays, I'd say if we had new chain technology on the older machines you'd see a lot of benefit. The new machines put so much more power down through the tracks that it's easy to abuse the undercarriage. I wouldn't complain about 3000 hrs on 963 tracks, I had responsibility for one machine that killed a set of SALT tracks in under 1000 hrs. Again I had one set of chains (non SALT) where the link faces were caked with rust to the extent the machine would hardly move. Took a pounding with a 14 pounder to get the last kinks out. It had been working in salt water then left to stand a few months without being washed. Maybe you haven't seen this, but then as you say, none of us have seen it all.
Well, I guess I'm getting steered to the 43, 53, 63....you guys are the best. Seems to be a ton of 963 out there and I'm sure for good reason. Did a little research into engines...3204, 3304 and 3116. -Can't say that I get the warm and fuzzies but of course, a lot of times guys are on these sites with PROBLEMS so I may not be hearing the GOOD stories. Seems to be a lot of 953 and 963 out there in the 10k - 15k hour range. Assuming that the UC has had work done a few times already at those kind of hours, what should I be looking at for engine work? What's the typical life of a 3116 (which is I believe what they put in the B series)? How about the 3204 and 3304? I think I would like to avoid the C series because of increased electronics...please advise.
That is a great idea. I have 4K hours on my factory original '53C's rails, turned at 3800 and I expect to get 5500-6000 out of the rails. Operating conditions are as varied as operators and opinions. :cool2
That would have come from the factory with SALT. I think all 955L's with the D6 sized undercarriage were SALT.
I have a 953C with 5000 hrs and am just now replacing the original rails and pads, it also has a 3116 engine. SO far I have not done anything to it except service it timley and replace batteries. The engine will start at 0 degrees with out being plugged in anytime, the electronics have never gave me any problems but I am sure they will surface with more hours.
FWIW 943....#25k 953....#30k 963.....#40k 963 is significantly heavier than your wish list 30K# machine....but ground pressure between all 3 machines is similar good 953bs are hard to find just for the reasons you listed (i will buy the next good one i see localy) my brother in law keeps a 953c around his farm and they abuse the heck out of it and its still going strong...but like you i would hate to deal with the electronics if they ever fail
I would pick the 53 although I own a 63. I do a lot of brush and the extra weight and power helps. I've had 53's also and they are my favorite. Really fast on their feet if that makes sense. Do try to find a wider pad machine if you can, they really stay on top better. They are a lot easier to move at the 30,000 lb. wt. also.
What kind of work are you doing? I know 53's are easier on chains than 63's in like-for-like work. The last but one 63 I operated didn't have a ripper and was horribly nose heavy when working, and ran on SALT chains. The rails had started to scollop quite badly after about 700 hours, and had stretched quite a bit. It had spent 600 of those hours on a very abrasive granite sand.
The loader spent it's first 500 hours and first set of pads working in a chert pit. Chert is a clayey gravel/rock formation that can be highly abrasive, obviously. lol The rest of it's time has been spent on various tasks from clearing and grubbing to demolition, loading trucks, grading pads and all the other tasks loaders are good at. This will give you an idea of our varying site conditions we operate in as I am located in a rather unique area of the state where the Appalachian Mountains end and the coastal plain begins. Our soil conditions range from solid rock to sand and everything in between. I am located in the center of the state where the formations come together, right above the "B". http://geology.about.com/od/maps/ig/stategeomaps/ALgeomap.htm