Id like to avoid DPF/regen and am looking to buy many new machines in the 6-14 ton range. Ive been aware of Bobcat and JCB for some time now but just stumbled upon CASE as having some non DPF units also. Am I missing any other brands to look at in the 6-14 ton range? Ive been calling dealers for the most part and doing what I can on the phone internet during the day. I have most brands within 150 miles of me and am not brand loyal. Ive spent thousands of hours already with rented DPF machines to know it doesnt work for me and ive just about milked all I can from my non emissions machines so its time for new.
On the engine side, Yanmar, Perkins, Kubota still use DPF. Doosan/Bobcat, FPT/Case, Kohler and more are meeting Tier 4 without DPF/regen. One detail is that Tier/stage 5 is hitting that market and some [Perkins] actually had Tier 4 final no DPF, but now have a Dpf to meet worldwide stds.
Thanks, that falls in line with what ive been able to find out thus far. Everything ive found with Yanmar or Kubota always has DPF. I just revisited Case recently after noticing their FPT engines dont use DPF. When looking at Case about a year ago both their 6 ton units run a Yanmar so I didnt look any further but glad I looked again because their 8 ton and 14 ton use an Isuzu/FPT without DPF. Thats what sprung me to ask the question and see what other make/model I may be missing? Right now Bobcat E60, E88, E145, Case CX80, CX140, and JCB, 85Z, 86C, 100C, are the ones ive confirmed in the weight classes im looking.
The E series CASE excavators use FPT engines. The cx75 is also Izuzu. New Holland is releasing new excavators from CNH that may also be running FPT engines, i am not sure. Go to their website, its the midi sized machines. Case is staying with the Summitomo midis for now it looks like,
The larger FPT engines have a DPF of sorts with Stage 5. Apparently it only needs a regen every couple thousand hours though. I believe Stage 5 is focusing on reducing the smaller soot particles from the exhaust.
Thank you. I did look at New Holland's 8 and 9 ton. They both use Yanmar with DPF. Anyone know about Develon? The dealer couldn't confirm aftertreatment and they have none of the models im interested in at the yard.
Hold those thoughts as these systems are currently being re-evaluated as to efficacy and validity.
Remember, just because it may not have DPF, or a DEF system doesn’t mean it doesn’t have other Tier 4 systems. It’s marketing wank to try to convince the unaware that their machine is better than another because it gets away without one of the three major components of Tier 4
You’re speaking with a salesweasel who doesn’t know **** from shinola. You have to talk with an experienced mechanic who is familiar with the aftertreatment systems on what machines have what.
Im aware ill have other systems on the engine. Id rather not have DPF because it causes me to consume much more fuel per day the way we operate. I do a lot of retaining walls with block or boulders, log loading, and grading that the engine doesnt need to be anymore than 60% throttle. Ive had two Sany units (Yanmar/DPF) and one Kubota (DPF) on rental for the past few years and they go into regen almost every 3 hours if im running 60% throttle or lower. Ive had one JCB (DOC) machine rented for a few months and saw the difference in fuel consumption. Now that im ready to buy my own machines I dont want DPF after the experience.
Thats why im asking here. I know the sales staff has a very basic understanding of their brands. The machines im intersted in are not in their yard so I cant go look for myself and the next Develon dealer is a day trip away. Most brand websites list the engines and aftertreatment but Develon only lists their engine which back when they were Doosan used DPF. Pretty much Yanmar and Kubota equipped machines are a definite no. Bobcat, FPT, Isuzu, JCB Eco, and Kohler are making non DPF engines under 125hp.
Its all about trade-offs. EGR useage makes soot. A DPF is needed to catch the soot. EGR alone can no longer bring the NOx levels down to acceptable levels without choking out the engine, so an SCR system is used. If the EGR is removed, a lot of engines can burn clean enough to not need a DPF. But now the NOx emissions are too high, so they need to increase the amount of DEF being dosed into the catalyst to control the NOx. Now with Stage 5 they want to further regulate the soot particulates, which will make some sort of a particulate filter neccessary.
So once again, Devices Did Not Work as expected so added More Junk to make something close to what was expected and still just Junk. Reduce NOx and expand Soot, to add SCR that has to Reduce the NOx the EGR didn't that now requires a DPF that loads and still costs more to catch the equivalent of ONLY 20-30% of the Particulates. Waste of Time and Money.
I'm all for clean air but at some point it needs to be realized that the net benefit isn't worth it from such tiny amounts of emissions reduction.
Ive held onto my Pre emissions machines to avoid any of the out of pocket expense for emissions and rented machines as my business grew so I could exchange the day of or next day if there was a problem. It makes more financial sense to own and keep long term but I was still making good profit renting. Luckily a few years back I bought a complete 9050B to keep mine going into the future but I dont use it nearly as much as the 13 tonners. Ive already rebuilt my 9010B and Solar130 once and now they're coming due again and parts are not fully supported. Im on the lookout for a complete Solar130 as its a little newer but cant hardly find any 9010B worth buying whole for parts. New machines as far as capability far outshine the oldies and I can get away with an 8 ton machine for the majority of my work now. Luckily 10 ton and under appear to be mostly 75hp and under so no SCR/DEF at all, just EGR and either DOC or DPF.
I agree it’s a bunch of crap but the newer stuff has streamlined and improved a little bit after 15 years of experience with it A good example is the deleting of the EGR system and increasing dosing DEF instead. The DEF system was already there, and eliminating the nothing but trouble EGR is a huge win when you consider we have no choice about Tier 4 The biggest enemy of Tier 4 reliability remains extended idle times and when a fault develops, operators running the machine until it derates 100% instead of getting a problem fixed early while it’s minor and simple. But you can’t tell a modern operator anything.
The engines without Dpf that I'm most familiar with, Doosan/Bobcat and Kohler Diesel, the under 75 hp versions use EGR, and Doc, (passive catalyst). No scr/Def until over 75 hp.
Interesting. I have never had much to do with either of those brands.
Those are the brands I was most aware of before really digging into it this year. Although I did look into Doosan a few years back knowing they owned Bobcat and I found they had a different line of engines in the Doosan units vs the Bobcat units. The Doosan models I checked had DPF. I know Hyundai absorbed Doosan now and rebranded to Develon but ive yet to see any of the Develon size units in person. Last I looked at Hyundai they were Yanmar or Cummins with DPF in the size machines im after.
Thank you everyone for the discussion. After three days and a little over 1600 miles running around to view machines I settled on CASE. From the CX75 to the CX490 they use Isuzu engines without DPF. DOC, EGR, and DEF/SCR but no regeneration. Worked out great as I already have three CASE units 9010 and two 9050, so happy to add two CX80, CX140, and CX350. Now I just have to wait for them but should have them all shipped up or over to my closest dealer within a few months.
In my world, Isuzu engines have always been top of the heap.
When I saw this, I was thinking that my Deere '17 245G (made by Hitachi) has the same Isuzu 4 banger that comes in the CX210 (and probably others), and it doesn't have DPF. It likes drinking DEF though. I know that the 135G also has the same engine, just less HP. I don't know about the new "P" series though. I'm not sure if it has a DPF, or not, but I don't recall my CAT 325 NG ever going into regen. In all honesty, I have (3) machines that have the T4 final emissions on them. I've really not had much trouble with 2 of the 3. My Deere 245g has about 3,800 hrs on it and the only engine/emissions related issue that I've had has been the turbo. It has been replaced 2x but now Isuzu has decided not to replace them anymore.The issue is related to cold weather. Condensation can build up in the variable vein turbo. Especially if you don't get them hot enough. The condensation can freeze and not allow the veins to cycle during the machines initial warm up. This will put the engine in a de-rate mode. Isuzu's answer is to let the machine warm up. This will melt the ice. Turn the machine off, and then back on again. Now that the ice is melted the computer will be happy because the veins can now cycle properly. I hokey fix (in my opinion) but it has worked so far. I would think that you will have this issue (among others) for running the machines at only 60% throttle. The Cat 325 only has about 1400 hours but no issues with engine or emissions. The Doosan powered Bobcat A770 is another matter. I would not recommend owning one. All kinds of codes, replaced turbo, inter-cooler, blew the intake tube. It seems to be one thing after another. As it relates to running the machines at 60% throttle. I personally would not recommend this, especially on the newer emissions machines. Diesels need heat to run properly. Certainly one would plug up DPFs, and maybe this is the reason that you want to avoid them. One must also understand that the EGR cooler is going to plug up, and one is likely putting a lot more soot back through the combustion chamber. I would think that the fuel savings is not enough to over come the possible reduced life of the engine. You've indicated that you've already rebuilt a couple of your engines (maybe even 2 times now?). Is it possible that the 60% throttle operation may be contributing to shortened engine life? Of course, my information is not necessarily first hand. We run our machines at full, or 90% throttle. I've only got (13) machines, so maybe the fuel savings wouldn't be significant enough for me to notice in my fleet. Maybe you've already done this, or do this regularly, but I would recommend oil analysis to check out what type of impact that your throttle settings might have on oil contamination/life. Even if it idd have a negative effect on the oil, maybe you could still realize your fuel saving, but keep engine life preserved by reducung the hours of the srvice intevals(?). More frequent service intervals would certainly drive up oerating costs, but maybe you'd still come out ahead when considering the fuel savings, and the extended engine life. Food for thought, and it would be an iteresting experiment. Wow! (6) new machines! Is it six? It reads that you got (2) of each, or was it only 2 CX80's. The 350 punches way above 14 tn. BTW, I've heard that the 140 is a very nice machine. As an FYI, the Link Belts and Case's are the same except for paint and logo. Both made by Sumitomo.
I forgot to mention something. One of the biggest issues that I see with the newer emissions machines is in the fuel filtration. These systems are demanding very strict filtration. While this is not really a problem, in and of itself, it does drive up the cost of filters. The bigger issue (in my opinion) is the cold weather fuel gelling. These ultra low micron filters will plug much more often in the winter. I suggest that you keep several on hand.
No, not 6 units just 4. I should have worded it the other way around. As far as my preference for no DPF and the way I have generally run my business, ill try to be short. I started in 1998 and have done only clearing/rough work developing land for housing to this day. I run only excavators and started out with three machines, 1989 Kubota KH191, 1996 Case 9010B and 1996 Case 9050B. I still have all those machines to this day so when I say rebuild, I mean everything. Along the way I picked up one more machine a 2001 Daewoo 130. Ive purchased many whole identical machines just for parts over the years to keep them all going. Not much is original to the serial number on any of them anymore and I can confidently say any original part left is well past 25,000hours. Im definitely doing pins, bushings, and undercarriage earlier than a machine that sits on the bench but im getting between 12,000-15,000 hours on an engine before it gets weak. With scope of work being heavy clearing of mostly undeveloped land im up against nothing but rocks and ledge for the most part. Very little soil to work with on most jobs so I end up with so many rocks its more cost effective to build walls and decorate the place with most of the walls being purely aesthetic and serving no real purpose. Between placing rocks and loading the smaller diameter log length my 6-8 ton units do a lot of 60% throttle. My 13 ton units usually stay busy grubbing and hounding close to full throttle but occasionally place or load. My 30 ton unit is always close to full doing the hard grubbing and hounding. As my business grew ive had a few 8 ton machines rented at a time as they are an economical size for most of my work. Id keep them for thousands of hours before the dealer wants to sell them. I used those rentals to feel out the emissions systems knowing in the future id have to actually buy new machines. Im going to find out if these new emissions units on the CX80s will suffer from lower throttle work but its worth the test because from what my experience is now with rented units the fuel savings is between 3-5 gallons a day per unit not going through regens. Hope this helps with clarification.
Good luck with your new machines and hope they serve you well.
I agree with DGODGR. The SCR machines seem to run best at full RPM. I run my Link Belt X4 at full throttle, I use the different settings rather than the throttle to change how fast the machine runs (most of the time). The new CASE E series/LBX4S machines have a multitude of settings within each work settings. I suspect, but cant confirm it, that the purpose of this is to allow the machine to primarily function at full RPM but use the different settings to match the work speed. Just a hunch.
I will heed the SCR warning. For the most part the two SCR machines will be working at or close to full throttle primarily. The two CX80's that will be doing most of the 60% throttle work have only DOC and EGR. Ill surely report back any and all experience as I rack up close to if not over 2,000hrs annually with a full crew, many of which will work 7 days a week if I don't send them home.
High load and throttle help keep the DOC and SCR catalysts at optimum operating temps. Same for when DPFs are installed, high temps help passive regeneration Regardless of the technology, idling and low loads are the worst things for these machines. And train your crew that when issues start, they need to inform you ASAP instead of running the machine till it locks out at low idle and won’t run anymore. The owners manual isn’t just to sit in the seat back pocket and take up room, it tells all about the warning lights and operation of these machines for best result.
Thanks for the clarification. Even though you are not buying (6) machines, (4) machines is still a substantial investment. I'm guessing that you are looking at $750k+ in purchases. Congratulations on your successes, and you are obviously very confident in the strength and growth of the building industry over the next several years. I'm glad to hear that. We specialize in hard rock excavation, so I can somewhat relate to your situation. We do not (however) have so many boulders that we just stack them into walls to save haul off expenses. While I can see the asthetic value (and asthetic value = dollar value in most real estate markets), we feed any rock that is not a good landscape feeature into a crusher. Since we break almost everything (as opposed to blasting) we generate a lot of crusher feed. That crusher feed just becomes another revenue stream for us. Have you looked at crushing? Since this is a public forum, and I look at it as a platform to disseminate good information, and varied viewpoints, perspectives, and ideas, I would like to comment on a couple of points that you've mentioned above. I think that you are doing fairly well with regard to your engine life at 12-15k hours. I assume that you are referencing the (2) larger Case excavators when you state those hours. I don't have any ownership experience with the 8 tons, but I wonder if one can get that kind of engine life from an 8 ton platform. Maybe someone else can chime in. My minis are much smaller (~5tn), and the most hours I have on one is 6,700 hrs on my Kubota powered Bobcat. I do have 13k on my '96 Cat 416 backhoe, but that machine spent most of it's life as the sole machine in my fleet, with only me operating it. With it being the only machine in the fleet, it received all the necessary maintenance at the exact time that it was scheduled. Since your 8 tons are similar engine and power requirments as the 416, maybe those hours can be realized in the 8 ton class. You mentioned that you've been renting 8 ton machines, but I don't recall if you have any long term ownership experience with them. If so, maybe you can comment on that, and what brand your 8 ton machines are. Allow me to digress back to expected engine life, and in particular, new emissions controlled units compared to the older engines (say tier 2 and older). Even if you are getting the 12-15k hrs from an engine (or whatever it may be with the smaller machines), and you are doing so by running them at 60% throttle (I assume that this is done to reduce fuel consumption and realize a lower operating cost), and that your rationale for not wanting a diesel particulate filter, is the excess fuel consumption that comes with it, I would suggest some additional things for you to consider. I will reiterate that diesel engines perform optimally (fuel consumption, power output, and engine life), when they operate at an ideal temperature (say around 200-210 degrees of coolant temp), and as KSSS has pointed out, I think that this is even more critical with the newer low emissions engines. Diesel engines generate a lot of soot when you let them idle too much, or run them at lower RPMS. In the older engines, this only equates to pollution (if that's not bad enough). Many newer engines have DPFs to help combat this problem and, as you have found, some do not employ the DPF. But what the newer engines all have right now is Exhaust Gas Re-circulation. So even if you have no DPF issues, you may have EGR issues, and don't forget about the "R" in EGR. That soot is going back into the combustion chamber. That soot is like sand paper to your valve guides, valves, and cylinder walls. Surely, that will contribute to reduced engine life. The other consideration is the increased fuel econimy that the newer engines offer. My '03 Cat 315 C (a tier II machine weighing ~40k#) consumes more fuel than either my Deere 245G, or my Cat 325 Next Gen, even though the latter machines produce much more HP than the former. It's fairly close but the larger machines (60k#, and 65k# respectively), will move FAR more dirt for each gallon of fuel it consumes when compared to the 315. It should also be noted that I do NOT run any of the machines in "ECO" mode. The last point that I will put forth for consideration, is operator interface and machine performnce oriented. As an operater with over 40 yrs experience, I have found that most machines (and certainly all the excavators that I've ever run -and most of my experience is on excavators), can be controlled with MUCH more precision at full throttle compared to lower throttle opnings. One can usually begin to detect a "lag" in the blending at anything below 80% throttle. At least that's what I've experienced. Obviously, I'm not a huge fan of reduced throttle openings (though I will often run the 315 at 90% throttle), but I also know that there are many ways to skin a cat, and that mine is not the only one. All that to say, even if I would do some things differently than you, I am not trying to get you to change your protocol, or operating habits, or make you wrong. According to what you have wirtten, you have found protocols that have worked for you. I am (however) offering my perspective (as someone who already has eperience with the lower emissions machines, and a long history -even pre emissions history- to draw from), for the benefit of anyone who may be inclined to hear some truth in what my experience is. No matter what, enjoy your new iron. It's always fun to get new iron!
With the information mentioned, just a general question. Do the DOC and SCR actually get prematurely clogged and a cause for concern or are they like a catalytic converter on a gasoline engine and just work until the metal mesh degrades enough to collapse? DGODGR, thanks for the in depth post and yes I do enjoy enjoying sharing knowledge with other contractors. I have entertained both purchasing and or hiring a crusher but both never made fiscal sense. We call it a potato harvest around here. Every other scoop if not every scoop you end up with a potato. The way I work my sites I move anything the least amount possible. I get so many potatoes in a given spot that as im moving through the site I work them right back into the landscape as a one and done. As far as smaller engine life the only long term I have is my 1989 KH191. I replaced the engine when I purchased it at roughly 2800hrs and now have almost 13,000hrs on the it. Been an awesome 6 ton machine, just very primitive and slow. To be honest I dont know anyone who keeps things as long as I do. My guys and I have spent plenty of time in emissions era rented units, so we do fully understand the function and goal of the systems. I just have zero long term use with any one machine as by 1500hrs the dealers are wanting them back for resale while they have good value. Buying new machines has been a long time coming as you can see my newest machine was a 2001 and these new machines are paid in full many times over already. Im not set in my ways and neither are my crew, we will adapt to the way these newer machines may demand to be operated. If we have a few hiccups along the way trying to operate the way I see most efficiently, that is completely on me and ill accept the blame. These are the last machines I am buying before retirement and I will rebuild them as I do now until I cant get parts anymore. Im also going to keep operating my 9010, 9050, and Solar 130 as well. The KH191 will take a back seat to the CX80's. Technically ive got two 9050 but one will be cannibalized by the other eventually. I am looking forward to the increased fuel economy of the newer engines and that alone should offset in the case I need to operate at higher throttle to keep emissions lasting longer but if my records show I can save a buck by throttling down im going to until proven otherwise. Luckily the housing market around here is booming because of the close proximity to two major cities and two moderate cities. Working remote has allowed many people to move into the rural regions so ive been scooping up large plots of land for the last 30 years and having them logged for some cash until im ready to clear them for housing. Most plots are 50+ acre and can be subdivided 4 or 5 acre lots. My machines stay on one plot until its all roughed out and then the land is sold. Once I move a machine out it doesnt go back so that also aligns with why it was never financially justified to even hire in a crusher or anyone id have to work around out of my order, go back over the area multiple times, or worse case have to bring machines back after ive moved onto another plot.
I can't speak intelligently on exact cause of failures. I've never had one fail. I would say that they are a catalyst though. DOC= Diesel Oxidation Catalyst. So likely like that on a car. I'm not sure if a catalytic converter in a car, employs an SCR (selective catalytic reduction) system. Surely there is no DEF in gas engines, but maybe they inject gasoline to aid in the catalytic process(?).
From my understanding both the DOC and SCR are just pass through catalysts where a molecular conversion takes place. They are not a filter like the DPF that is designed to trap particles. I guess a better way of asking my question, is there a potential for the DOC and SCR to get clogged with soot and fail prematurely? Id image soot passes through them as the DPF is always last in line.
Get one of these units on an older piece of equipment answer is yes, but more often Coking of Engine Oil on the element grids due to heat of the DOC in conversion. Turbochargers do fail, will feed mass quantity of oil down a exhaust system, can start a rather nasty fire in those instance.
Gas engines run right on the bubble of rich and lean. If you remember high school chemistry there are two types of reactions, oxidation and reduction. Well the carbon monoxide and soot and unburned hydrocarbons in the exhaust need to be oxidized into carbon dioxide and water vapor. While the oxides of nitrogen need to be reduced into nitrogen and oxygen. These are two conflicting requirements which need two types of atmospheres. So they control the amount of fuel very carefully. A reducing catalyst and an oxidizing catalyst both work to clean up both types of pollution. Diesel engines are always way lean, not burning all the air. So a reducing catalyst cannot work because there is way too much oxygen to reduce the oxides of nitrogen. An oxycat works great on soot and hydrocarbons though, so they throw that in. A diesel engine that does not generate much NOx generates a lot of soot. So it needs a DPF. A diesel that does not generate much soot generates a lot of NOx. So it needs a lot of EGR, and lots of urea/SCR. It is a tradeoff back and forth.
If I’m reading right the CX140 should be an E series and the CX350 should be a D. Within the next month or two, Case is updating the 350D to a 380E and will have the extra features of the E series. My dealer has some coming in any time now. And also the 80C is going to a 90E any time now too. The 90 is going away from Sumitomo and will be a CNH machine. I can’t even get an 80C from my dealer now, they already have the 90s.
I was wondering if CASE was sticking with the Sumitomo machine or using the CNH midi's. NH has been marketing the 90's for a bit. The CX75-80 have been needing to be updated, but I thought NH was going with the CNH machine and CASE was sticking with Sumitomo, guess I was wrong. I sure like the E series. I tried to trade into a CX190 from my 160X4 last Spring, but the numbers just didn't support it, but damn I wanted it.
Great post, that was informative.
Major issue on diesel exhaust and some to gas is once add enough mechanism to reduce discharges by 1/3 the engines cannot breath properly. Works fine on a Dyno as can reach optimum speed/hp in a controlled evolution and retain it for all systems to function, does not work as well starting and stopping shifting slowing and all typical driving/road conditions between along with changes in air density or defined temperatures minute to minute or hourly. All the devices noted were only field tried once installed permanently, no test beds for the years and years to define the issues would be seeing as are today save use and damage to consumers buying these.
Just wanted to thank everyone again for the full discussion. I appreciate the technical information and everyone's experiences. Im going to keep it all in mind as I operate my new machines. Yes, the models I purchased are not all from the same generation. The comfort of these new machines I like but other features I can live without as I run such a basic operation. Grubbing, stacking boulders, and a rough grade is the extent of my work. Pin on dig bucket and thumb is as complex a machine I run.
To update, everything is going well with the new machines. The operating costs between the CX80 and CX140 are so close I ended up selling both CX80 and purchased another CX140. I have not used the CX350 much at all but will as soon as my permits come through for the plot its sitting on. Seeing my 9010 working along the CX140 is noticeable speed wise in favor of the newer machine. End of the season revenue numbers vs operating cost will tell the real story. DEF is quite the expense on the CX140 and I dont feel im actually getting ahead with the new machine's productivity vs cost.
I have not run the 140E, but have spent time in the 190, 220, and 380E. I thought that the speed of machine and the better programming (being able to adjust the machines boom, stick and swing made it more productive than my X4 machine (same as a CASE D). That was simply on productivity not accounting for the cost. The 380 was the fastest machine of it size I have ever run, spent two days in it and I didn't want to leave it. Maybe the 140 isn't as different from the previous series as others.
The Case machines were great, and id definitely recommend the brand to others. Unfortunately, ive parted ways with the ones discussed in this thread. Business took a new path so I traded the Case equipment for another brand that has more of the type of equipment I need for the new project that is going to last past my retirement.
I did recently get on a 370X4S same as CX380E. Very nice machine but not much different than my CX350D at least the way im using it. The CX350D has the powerboost and variable boom, stick, and swing functions that the newer E series has. My 350D was plenty quick in the material I was using it for but ultimately needed to step up to a 50 ton machine and Case didnt have anything readily available in that size, so had to jump ship. The CX140E machines I had were doing clearing work so all the new tech and speed didnt have as much of a chance to shine over my older 9010B. Loading out material into a truck would have been a different story and that's exactly the work I moved into and why I sold off the smaller hoes. Nice stuff from Case though and too bad they dont have more of what I need now.
I didn't know that the 350D had those same functions as an E series.