We got in alittle discussion today after fixing my old 79 ford at the shop. Parked in the other two bay stalls was a 908 cat loader and a older 344. The conversation turned from old school nostalgic talk to downright doomandgloom. Does anyone think this equipment we're sold now will last thru ten years of construction abuse. Are we actually being sold equipment thats been developed through R&D from five years ago? To many questions really but I think ALOT has changed over the last few years.
Computers will be the downfall of the newer machines. On the older machines you could fabricate parts if you had to. If a computer fails, you replace the computer, or maybe its a tiny break in a wire or a failed sensor. Repair costs will become cost prohibitive much sooner.
Wire's cheap, and the computer can tell you which sensor is bad saving you costly down time trying to troubleshoot.
I know this equipment is as efficient as it gets I'm the operator mechanic. I also know we cant fix it or any other normal small/medium shop.
There are already cars old enough that new computers are not available. When the supply of salvage stuff dries up you're done unless you do major, maybe illegal, revamping. This will end the life of many machines.
There's good and bad things about both.
On the late model stuff I'm around, an electrician is needed more than a mechanic . I am still running a boom truck that does not have any computer on it.It don't even have an anti two block set up. The new truck they bought has all the computer stuff and is headed to the shop again under warranty (4th trip in two months) Asked the boss how long he was going to try and hang on the the older one "Until I can't buy parts,I need something to depend on" Ohsa mandated all this.I want them to mandate reliability also.
From my perspective, the design life of equipment now is no more than 10,000 hours. At that point a decision has to be made on a rebuild strategy or run to destruction. I have a few reasons I say this. If you look at the economics of heavy equipment you will see that the cost of parts now coincides directly with the cost of purchasing a new machine. Only on really large machines can it be said to be economically feasible to rebuild from frame up. The cost of the parts alone is almost equal to the cost of the new machine in anything less than a 988 wheel loader or D10 dozer. The next point is that the complexity of machines is being driven by environmental law. All these electronic controls are not the choice of any manufacturer. They add cost to the bottom line of the machine because of extensive research and development. All this generally tends to reduce availability over time. In a lot of ways these electronics are a two edged sword for manufacturers. They add functionality and efficiency when they work. When they don't work, they only make a manufacturer look real bad. In my experience so far, things like wiring harnesses and solid state controls only last around 10,000 hours. Now we are back to the first item of parts costs. The general pace of technology is also limiting the life cycle of machinery. Given the choice of rebuilding a D9L or purchasing a new D9T for about the same cost what would you want to do? Add to that the fact that you can finance the cost of the D9T and pay for it over time but the rebuild on your D9L has to be paid for with cash out of pocket. At the same time your D9L in the secondary market is only worth a fraction of its new value. How much money do you think your insurance company will pay you if it catches on fire and burns up. Are you going to risk the loss on your investment? I use the Cat brand in this statement because from my experience it is the only manufacturer where you have a chance of rebuilding economically at all. Finally the Tier system of environmental law in this country appears to be a guarantor of the limited life of heavy equipment. It hasn't really been settled yet but it is far more possible than not that when the Final Tier 4 regulation becomes effective in 2014 that non Tier Regulated engines will not be allowed to operate, period. That means for the most part that any engine built before 1996 will be required to be scrapped. So how many machines do you think will be worth repowering? From my perspective heavy equipment built now is all throw away.
When I bought my last pickup I was having a conversation with one of the sales men about service work. We popped the hood on one, a gas job, and I asked, so how much of this engine compartment am I going to have to tear apart to change the spark plugs? His answer, just trade it off. So essentially that sales guy was telling me that they want this stuff to trade hands every 50-60,000 miles. Economic stimulus I guess.
I agree with John C. Equipment built nowadays is throw away to an extent. I know contractors that will trade a machine as soon as an undercarriage ultrasound shows a certain percentage remaining. Regardless of the hours or overall condition of the machine. It is a business investment and that is the best way to look at it.
Everything now seems to be trending this way; an earlier poster already mentioned vehicles you can't buy computers for. Once they get to a certain point, the electronics become limiting. There is sometimes no way to replace a defective pcm or to chase down phantom electrical shorts. Everybody wants the latest greatest, employees don't want to run the old stuff, it's just the way things are now. Unfortunately the small people and those of us just starting out are gonna have it much harder than in the past. It's happening in agriculture too - the new machines are comfy and nice but you need a computer program to fix em, not a wrench.