Looking to buy used wheel loader. These two machines seem to be about the same size. These are the years I can afford. The c models seem to be 10-15k cheaper. Plan on loading trucks in small sand pit. I only have 3 trucks and don't load others much. Both have 20k plus hours. I haven't looked at the 966c yet. I have loaded with a 966b a little bit. I'm afraid there's not much difference in the b and c models. Any suggestions appreciated. Tony
The old machines are easier to keep running yourself but at 20,000Hrs they are projects, everything is likely worn bad. Later Bob
You mentioned a 950F....it would be a little newer. Thing I never liked about the C models were the bucket linkages, and how the steering linkage would get worn, and shake so bad, and didn't they have air brakes. I've never been a Cat fan, but I always liked a 950.
The 66c powertrain feels like it puts the power to the ground better. I have always liked the older cat powertrains. The F has some modern creature comforts and some of the electronic dodads. Personally take the coin you would spend on a F, take your time and buy a good componented 66c from a small or retiring show.
Thanks men. I guess I need to go check out the 966c. I'm currently loading with a 520b international. I believe either will be a step up. I do plan on letting other trucks in my pit later on. Just don't want to buy to small, or to old of loader. Also found a 988b priced right. It's not far from the 966c so need to look at it.
A 988 is a big fuel burning pig. Unless you have a quarry operation to keep going I would steer clear. They like to move into a site, and live there as long as possible. Even though I am a fan of the 950F over the 966C, at least you can walk the 966 down the road, or go into a subdivision, and clear property, or dig a basement. A 988 would pretty much have to stay in a pit. Our construction season here shuts down for the winter. The loaders stay busy plowing snow. The 980 which is noticably smaller than a 988 sits in the quarry all winter because it is too hard on fuel. A 950 is a nice all around loader, and I guess to me, an F would be newer. If you really have your heart set on bigger, for a small operation, get the older 966, but I would stay away from the 988.
back when I worked in the rock quarry are 988b was the pit loader. it wood load a r35 Euclid running off both sides in three buckets.
We hauled out of a quarry that had a 992 loading rock trucks. We were hauling R5 with tandem trucks to a road job. Their 980 was down, so the only thing down where the R5 was piled was the 992. We would back 2 tandems tailgate to tailgate, and he would load 2 at a time. What made me think of that, was your name TD15. We had 2 TD15s on the job. One had a plywood cab.
bet that was hard on tail gates with R5 hitting the top of them. are r5 rock is up to #400 rocks.
They were just old site trucks, spent most of their time hauling along side of articulated rock trucks. The quarry was just across the highway from the job. I'm not sure of the exact spec, but I think our R5 is 4 to 6 inch. The young fella was pretty careful, plus it makes the bean counters in the office pretty happy to get 2 trucks loaded at a time.
Down here in IL that wood be closer to a RR3 rock. so when you said R5 all I could see was dented up tailgates and truck drivers bouncing there heads off the top of the cab. Your right a good loader operator makes all the difference.
I'd look for a 980B just a bit bigger than a 966C. They are usually cheaper even though they're bigger because the 966C is the size everyone wants.
I currently have a 988B, nice machine but BIG. I have spent a lot of time in 966c's, never a 950b. There were 2 of them(950b) in town years ago and it seems they both had transmission problems at roughly the same amount of hours. IMHO the 966c's were the best loader ever. Not as nice to run as the new ones but good solid loaders. I also really liked the 966D, if you can find one.The old 950's are a good machine as well, easier on fuel and will load a truck in no time.Try and stay away from the 988's/980's, big and hard on fuel and costly to repair. Cheers LD
966C.... hands down.... dang near a bullet proof machine...
Yeah for simplicity the 966 At least if you lose electrical power you can keep on going
966C is one of my favorite loaders, worked on many over the years. If good basic maintenance is followed they will go on for a long time. 988B is a good loader for digging shot rock in a quarry, but a bit over kill if loading trucks for over the road. Also mush more expensive to repair and operate. The 966C's can bring a premium if sold at auction, running or not even missing things like engine and bucket! In the same condition a 966C will bring probably double the 988B.
That's why I suggest a 980B cheaper to buy. Not much bigger. Can load trucks faster. Still can go down the road.
Well I can recall following a 988 A 87A from our shop to a quarry 90 miles away one day when we could not get a truck to deliver it for the next day! I would agree a 980 B would be a good choice too, still a basic machine with if I recall it also had a 3306, just boosted a little with air to air after cooler. Unless one needs the size of a 988B I would not suggest one just on additional costs of everything.
When I worked at the asphalt plant we had a 966 and a 950 for back up. The 966 was very reliable hardly ever had problems but when it did and you had to run the 950 you would work your butt off trying to keep up. In my opinion both machine are excellent loaders so if you don't ever need the extra capacity of the 966 I would take the one in the best condition.
Thanks men, the 988 was to far gone for me. I loaded my truck with the 950f, it's seemed just a little small. I would like to dump 2 buckets in the truck and 2 in the pup trailer. Ideally 22-24 tons or 18-20 yards. I did like the reach the f model had, when leveling off the load. I'm gonna try and load some with the 966c next week. Trying to get loader my help is comfortable with.
In my opinion all the 950's were a little gutless for their size.
I have not been around a 950F very much, but I believe that it would be about the same size (both 4 yd buckets) and at least a little faster than a 966C, thus it should out load the older machine. Some of my guys claim that the newer equipment doesn't have the power that the old stuff has, but I think what they mean is it doesn't have the noise - when you put the pedal down in that old 966 you will defiantly know, but the newer equipment is so much quieter and some loaders have a form of traction control, they actually get a lot more done by the end of the day. We have had this discussion about my 235 vs the 324, and when we put them on the same job the 324 dug circles around the 235, even though the 235 is making more noise. Again, I don't have much experience around a 950F, so I could be completely wrong. That said my question would be how much are you going to use it? If it is going to be running all day every day I would vote for the 950F or even try to find something newer (in comparable or nicer condition). If it is going to be used a couple days a week or load a 3 loads a day 5 days a week I would go for the 966. I recently bought a 966C for one of my sand pits, and I kind of hate to buy something that old, but it will sit most of the time so I did not want to have a lot of money tied up in it, but I have to have a loader there for loading that random load or 5 a week, if we are on a big haul loading trucks all day for a few days we move in a newer loader. That's how I look at it anyways.
I agree, there is nothing with a 950. It's a good all around machine. Not sure why people are so afraid of computers. Eventually that is all that will be available. I have a 96 F150, and it has never seen a code reader in it's life. If not for technology, we would still be running gas jobs with points and condensers.
Sounds like a 5-6cyd machine is what you need.... 980B? The 966 and 950 will be worked to death trying load that amount in 4 buckets. You spend all your time to get a heaped bucket every time. Then you might as well do 5-6 passes. Step into a 980B or C and you will feel like the hulk. Put it in first and drive right through it. That way your first 6cyd bucket is heaped while the trucks shuffle and your last 4cyd 3 are just a grunt. The hydros in the newer machines are easier to operate due to the higher operating pressures and controls. That with the transmission makes them faster. That dose not always make them more reliable unless you think it is faster to fix a rubbed out wire than a linkage with nine trucks lined up waiting. Id like to see a 40yo 324 be as productive as a 70yo 235.
I'd vote for a 966C all day, every day. I've never had any serious issues with them, and they always performed well. We found a 1981 that a county was getting rid of for $35 grand, with only 7000 hours on it.....and yes, the hours were accurate. It needed a paint job and a turbo, that's it. We had an old 966C that came from God knows where (it was around long before I came to the company) and it was pretty tired, but it still ran great, and never gave us an issue. We bought a1979 966C from a local paving company, who finally retired it after MANY hard years of service. It never gave us an issue. I have no issues with a 950F either, but I'd go for the 66C any time!
Thanks again everyone. With my trucks we load 20 to 60 loads a week. In the future I would like to hire a man to run the pit and load other trucks. I swapped my 690b excavator out with 345b, so I see what newer, bigger machines can do. We are working my 520b to death some weeks. It takes 8 buckets to load truck and pup. And I've got a 510b for a backup loader. I'm gonna stay patient and see if one will fall into my lap. I want to buy cat for the simplicity of getting parts. What is the last model that still has linkages and cables c,d, or e? If I could get parts I would have done bought this dresser 540b or hough90. My mechanic can keep the non electronic stuff going. The newer stuff gives him fits. Thanks again Tony
I believe that a 966c era was the last with linkages, after that they were all pilot controls, much nicer than a worn out linkage. Again I am not very familiar with the f series, but isn't the only thing electronic about it the transmission? I have a 2001 komatsu loader and the only computer on it is the trans, everything else is mechanical. I have not had any electrical issues with it.
What he said!! I'll push for a 980B one last time. The 966's are so popular they're expensive in my opinion. They sell in the $30,000 + range for a good one. The 980B's $20,000 + . They can be trucked just as easy as the 966's.I've owned 2 Hough 90's and parts are a huge problem now. I replaced my H90's with 980B's and what a difference. The Cat's are smoother, quicker, more balanced, heavier and just keep on going. Much nicer to drive. I'll probably get slammed for this but I think the H90 would out do a 966 loading trucks. If all you're doing is loading trucks with the loader a 980 is the way to go. Good luck with whatever you buy. Keep us informed. Randy