I've been told the Terex S17E. That bowl sure looks similar to the Wabco. Maybe I'm wrong. But the stationary cutting edge, and the strike-off blade attached to the moving floor have similar designs. The large pipe across the top rear of the bowl, etc. Later designs have the laid up box fabrication of the bowl walls like the backside of the Cat six way blades. Tying the lower front of the bowl walls together with a cutting edge would sure strengthen the walls at the lower front
Most Wabco bowls looked like this one. The 252 and 353 used the laid up box sections. This one was my pet in the early 2000's.
Michigan and Terex S11e used Hancock bowels. There may be more.
S-35 Terex used a Hancock bowl too. A lot of the parts (floor rollers and hangers, etc.) were interchangeable with Michigan 33 yd and early Wabco 333 machines.
Very well written article. https://contractormag.co.nz/classic-machines/hancock-scraper/ Says in there, Hancock/Clark/Michigan supplied Euclid, LeTourneau-Westinghouse (Wabco), MRS, Allis-Chalmers and Michigan. Also says Johnson (also in Lubbock, TX) slightly later supplied International and John Deere. I suppose Deere improved the design for their 760/860 if Johnson was busy with Cat.
I believe most of them except for Cat used Hancock bowls.
I think your right. The early ones used bowls supplied by Hancock. Latest ones such as the Terex S17E built from 2000-2004 my have been licensed by Clark/Michigan/Hancock but built in house as Clark ceased production in the mid '80s(unless Terex had a small contract for bowls from Clark). Haven't researched Clark's production history for 1980s on. The first John Deere 840 with the PTO driven elevator were supplied by Johnson. I believe as Cats needs consumed Johnson's production(and Cat buyout), Deere continued the design with in-house upgrades(just a guess). Now I'll come back and say the John Deere bowls sure look a lot like they had Hancock influence.
https://www.johnnypopper.com/weirddeere/The_840.html
I stand corrected on the John Deere. Contractor Magazine I posted the link was off a little
No problem. In the late 60's my grandfather ran a bunch of the JD 5010 scrapers, they definitely showed the Hancock influence. I did see one of the early 840 scrapers and it was a crude looking thing that I first thought was some farmer creation. Looking back now that may have been one of the first All Hancock builds.
Clarendon Manufacturing built the bowl for the S-17E. http://www.clarendononline.com/news/2000/0831/story_1.htm
Interesting. Couldn't have been very many bowls built. I would like to find the serial number breaks for each production year for those machines. http://www.clarendononline.com/news/2003/1009/story_3.htm but High Plains Journal shows their still in business. May 4 2016 CLARENDON MANUFACTURING Company, sales, parts and service. Hancock and Johnson. Manta shows they have annual revenue of $5-10M
I recall reading that now, local Contractor had a new 17E in 2000-2001. I haven't seen it for a few years. I really wanted to play with it, but at the time I was a competitor...
This story gives some additional information. After production stopped several of the S-17e tractors were sold with water wagons. http://www.clarendononline.com/news/2003/1009/story_3.htm
Same here, the dealer here at the time had one on rent to a contractor about an hour away from me, not sure what happen to it after that. I don’t understand why Terex didn’t offer the tractor with the ts-14 to give it more power, they also could have built a single engine open bowl to compete with the 611 Cat was producing at the time. It needed some type of suspension system to compete with Cat and Deere.
Terex had so many owners over the years, I don't think the R&D department was able to maintain a lot of enthusiasm to stay ahead of the bean counters. Especially with a world recession. If they had sunk more money into their wire harnesses to be more reliable, and integrated a suspended front axle to the TS14 tractors, they would have had a he!! of a machine. It's my belief there is an opportunity for aftermarket wire harnesses with upgraded sensors/switches for a lot of the older machines. Doesn't mater if we're talking about Terex or Wabco. I despise the European Cannon connectors Terex used. Wires are too thin, connector bodies are fragile and let moisture/dirt in. Deutch is much better. Pair new harnesses with Cat or Deere sensors and switches, machine uptime would improve.
Two listed for sale near Chattenooga, TN
I wonder if parts availability had anything to do with them disappearing? Suspension wouldn't be a deal killer for me. That 222F I posted above could outrun any 615 or 623 I ever ran against. But I was a tough guy then.
Suspension wasn’t a deal killer for me either but I think most people wanted it. I’ve never operated a Wabco, TS-14s didn’t ride great and I assume the S-17 was a similar ride, but I really like the TS-18s and they rode much better than 14s in my opinion. Terex also didn’t do them selves any favors with the seats they started putting in those machines. I ran some TS-14Ds, Fs, Gs with the factory seats and they were not made for a scraper. Did you ever have any experience with S-23Es? I always wanted to try one but never had the opportunity.
I've never run one. Would like to. Cherry S17E for sale in Decatur, IL. Only 1200 hours. Stored inside. There are a lot of knick knack items they could have upgraded to make the whole package better. A swivel seat with an excavator joystick attached to the armrest similar to how the JD 8000 tractors are made would be better. Active seat suspension like the JD8X30 series tractors and newer would be best. Fuel gauges, cameras, GPS integration, etc. I believe since Terex from 1990 on wasn't a market leader, R&D and machine upgrades were kept on a choking budget. Also boiled down to local dealer support. Yes parts availability was an issue. As was CATs ability to send sales and service support reps around checking for customer relationship/equipment issues(i.e. iron out problems before they become serious issues) cast a large shadow over the minor brands. We've had enormous problems with CAT equipment, but the service rep stops by every 2-3 weeks, and they support the equipment. Back on topic, I've read all 51 pages of Wabco threads. Read over and over how the Hancock bowls load easier and faster. I'm an efficiency fanatic, just connecting the dots.
Just as an example a 623 is 1/3 slower than a 222 on the same dig, haul and dump cycle even with a cushion hitch. 3 things that make the Wabco faster, Hancock bowel design, Allison transmission with VIP and electric elevator. Swapping operators won't make Cats go faster. Same thing when comparing Cat 613, Inter 412 and Wabco 111a. The first 2 had Johnson bowels.
I never realized bowel movements was a scraper term. Learn something new everyday.
Typo
Run a scraper hard for 8 hours... It's a scraper term.
A bit of Australian earthmoving history related to Hancock bowled scrapers 40 years ago. Back in the early '80s when cotton irrigation development was in full swing in Australia, particularly north west NSW, elevating scrapers were king. 222 wabco's, 110-15, 210H Michigans then Clark with odd old C@t J621's floating around. Land levelling the black soil plains for furrow irrigation, 1:1500 down & 1:3000 crossfall (30 metre pegged grid survey, lasers were in their infancy & unreliable) was the general rule of thumb. Water storages (5:1 inside batter, 4metre top & 1 1/2:1 outside batter, 4-5 metres high) were more often built with elevating scrapers as the dirt would finer & compact better than the raw slabs dropped in with open bowlers or dozers. Machines with the Hancock bowl were the most preferred as the elevator flytes went out nearly to the edge of the bowl, with minimal loss (when working fine dry dirt) whilst travelling to a fill area. They could dump short which was ideal for landlevelling & storage wall work. Cutting tail water returns (TWR) channels, the Hancock bowl could "dive in" one side (with the aide of a batter tyne on the wheel track) to cut the 1 1/2 batter with ease. On the major cotton farm development I worked on for nearly 2 years, my boss upgraded his fleet of old Michigan110-15's to 8 new Clark Equipment 110-15B's, with consecuitive #. The main upgrade was a vastly improved elevator frame & top axle. They retained the tried & true loader diff with planitaries, with sprocket to dive the elevator chains. A Sunstrand pump ran hydraulic drive onto the diff. A much better set up than any other elevator drive I've seen since. Can't locate any photos, my remote hard drive crashed & I'm having trouble finding them on the new one.
My 101F in full flight back in 2009
Years ago an old operator told me that one time he was running a Cat self loader on a sandy job. The mechanic installed some plates inside the elevator somehow, as baffles to keep the sand from running out on the haul road. I wish I had asked him to draw a picture, as I never have come across one with that.
I recall seeing sand baffles in the 333A scraper parts manual. Not sure if I still have one. I think they went in the elevator frame just above the cutting edge.
The "baffles" I've seen were like a one way door. A piece of 1" shaft welded horizontally with a thick steel plate hanging down, opening inwards while loading but swinging shut once the machine was fully loaded. I think they were on a J621 C@t, early '80's
One thought, when I was replacing the floor skin with bisalloy, on the 101F bowl, was the set up of the single trunion ram which pulled the floor back, then pushed the door forward in one operation. A well thought out bit of engineering.
Thank you both, I have a better idea of how it would work now.
Found this recently. Brand new Clark 110-15B on its way to it's first job Jan 1980
Alright time to dig out your old belt buckles
Was that actually a white hearse?
A Holden panel van. Lots of young blokes had them. Similar to a hearse, usually had a stiff in the back.
Freezer van ?