Not sure if there has already been a thread on this but, I was wondering what everyone's opinion on zero tail swing vs. standard on an excavator. Beyond being a little tougher for the mechanics I think that the zero swing is much more versatile and will run with if not out dig a standard machine of the same size. Comments welcome, thanks.
Zero tail swing on a Mini and Stander swing on a 120, 312 or bigger
Zero tail 135/140 machines are good in utility applications where space is a concern. For general excavation, a convention TS machine is more stable and comfortable to operate.
Only tried a Cat 304,5 with zero tail and that was not a good machine to operate when i was levelling a floor. Very unstabel,almost like a frog moving.:Banghead:Banghead So i would buy ordinary machine no matter what size it is:my2c
if you're in close 1/4's...buy the no turn radius...if not, get the stability of a regular machine, kind of a no brainer
I don't prefer ZTS machines unless I'm in a tight spot.
Depends on what your using them for. I was preparing non ferrous metals on a demo site with a 320clu, not exactly a no tail swing machine. Then we sold that and got a 320cl. On concrete, i actually liked the way the clu performed over the cl. It actually seemed more stable. As far as in the dirt, ive run a few of the no tail swing Komatsus, a pc138 and a 208. Liked them both. Stability isnt that much of an issue. You have to be smoother with them, but the perform just as good and it gives you flexibility
I like them Hi, Last year I got an Cat 320D LRR,not quite an zero tailswing but compared to the 320B L i had before it's really nice on the worksites Im working on!! Peter
I've been running 2 Cat 320CLU's now for 3 years and I can honestly say that standard tails SUCK. I can operate these CLU's in the same confines as a 100-150 sized hoe and still move more material. It's just the added weight of the machine that gets to be a PITA on some jobs where a light foot print is favoured. Even when I have to operate the standard 320CL I keep freaking out everytime I work 10 feet away from anything, fearing the worst.
I like the zero tail machines. I ran a 225 CASE and I thought it was very stable even with a thumb and oversized bucket. I would own one in a minute. It is nice to be able to swing without concerning yourself with the tail. The cabs are not as comfortable as the standard tail machines, but I don't find it a real big deal.
We have 4 328's that are about a year old now and they are great !!!!!! We have put them up against the 330's and they can hold there own.Nice for doing congested pipe work out in the street.I can move the stone box (20 ton cap) and a 10 x 24 box w/ no problems.Cat has really hit on something with this machine.The best part is that all 4 run the same.
There is an older thread that discussed this issue : . This issue has come back around for myself as well. I disposed of a 321CLCR a few months ago and want to replace it with another similiar size hoe, probably smaller due to the weight of the 321. I want to be able to move the (new) smaller hoe with my tag and tri-axle. I have a 325DL for the heavy stuff so I am looking at 314CLCR, 315CL, PC138U and possibly the 320DLU or PC 228U. The 320 and the 228 are as heavy as the 321 but there is not much of a choice from that size machine to a 314/138. Basically you get a 30K machine or a 50K pound machine and no choices in between - for ZTS models. After owning a 321 for 4 years, I can honestly say that Cat really missed the boat on some parts of this machine. Not in performance, stability or cab design (you get used to the cab being smaller) -but in the silly, thin sheet metal that skirts the turntable house. The thin sheet metal will look awful after being on the job for a year. Just the front toolbox door (under the front glass) is $1500 to replace! The Komatsu 228 and 308 has thick metal in the same areas. For my operations I like a conventional larger hoe (325DL) when we are doing "mass ex." Loading artics, digging shot rock, clearing and grubbing large sites - the machine is faster and more stable for cycle work. I like the smaller machine to be ZTS. Clearing small lots, demolition, urban work, digging footings/foundations, pouring cast-in-place junction boxes and headwalls (with a Garbro bucket) are tasks that the smaller machine will do. The nature of the above type of work really dictates a ZTS. Cat and Komatsu are the strongest dealers in town. I would consider a Kobelco, it's just the parts are so expensive, not that Cat sheet metal is cheap! So I am open to suggestions on the 30K range ZTS machines - how many of you have run them? Feedback is appreciated.
I don't know if it is available anymore, but Komatsu did make a PC158US. I know my dealer had a couple last year but I don't see a 2008 model on the Komatsu website.
Yeah - same here. There are a few on machinery trader but the North American Komatsu website does not list a PC 158. I think it weighs in at 37K.
we run the Kobelco 135sr and the 200sr.We considered several other machines,hitachi 135,john deere,cat,volvo,komatsu.It was very simple the Kobelco performed much faster then the others.You can get a extra counter weight for the kobelco 135 that only makes the tail about 3-4" longer which is no big deal in my opinion.I had a operator in our 135 that has ran excavators for 25+years and he said that it was one of the easiest machines to run smooth and fast.Granted they dont have as much stability over the side as they do with the tracks but that is something you learn to adapt to very quickly.The safety factor far out weighs the stability issue over the side.It is funny that after two years of running the zero tail swings I still find myself looking over my shoulder before I swing.(which isnt a bad habit i suppose)I always frown when I see machines that have the counter weight scratched down to the metal.There is no excuse for that in my opinion,a operator should know where every inch of his machine is at all time.Just another sign of a good operator.
On the smaller machines (up to 308) I would go with the ZTS. Around here the area you have to work on is VERY tight if you're in a residential area. :my2c
Welcome to the HEF Reuben!:drinkup Thanks for the info on the Kobelco. I believe they are good machines, it's just our local dealer is just not that good. I would still consider one. ConEx is a little over a month away - so I will have the opportunity to compare. Another question on the 30K ZTS machine - blade or no blade?
Tracey Road equipment sent us a kobelco ed-150(135 with a six way blade) for 2 weeks to try out.The under carriage is beefed up like you wouldnt believe,the x-frame is huge! I can honestly say it would out push a jd 550 h in volume capacity. It would be great machine to have for housing development,logging road construction, etc. My Reason for not purchasing the Ed-150 was that I felt the blade got in the way.DONT BUY A ED-150 THINKING YOU ARE GOING TO REPLACE A DOZER! IT is a really great machine though.Sometimes I think I should have went with the ed-150.
The ED 150 is an interesting machine, but I was refering to the blades you can get on the 314, PC138, etc. If I need a dozer then I will have either my D5G, D6N or the 953 on the job. The blade on the ED seems like it would get in the way of normal hoe work (it seems bulkier than a 2-way blade) and have some expensive parts to replace to boot. I don't think the extra cost of the 6 way blade would warrant getting one. A 2-way blade is nice on the mini-hoe for stability and backfilling/backdragging. It would be nice to have a blade on a 25K-30K hoe for the same reasons. One issue I can think of is when you are digging close to the machine or loading trucks from a bench, you would have to turn the blade to the back and dig/load over the final drives.
Short Tail Swing You will ALWAYS find SR's will weigh more than conventional machines. To discuss SR's we CANNOT use the original weight classes as an indicator or of performance. They WILL be heavier than the original machine. If properly designed for North American markets. (No, I do not work for Kobelco or a[/B] dealer.) Example, Kobelco SK 210LC counterweight, 9800 pounds, Kobelco 235 SR Ctwt Japan..14,000#, North American 16,000#. To carry such weight and still have durability and travel power to give ability to turn, the undercarriage is from the next size larger machine (At least on Kobelco who really started the SR movement)...SK 250LC as is the swing bearing. Swing power MUST be increased, verses a conventional machine, as on an incline, the counterweight cannot help the boom swing up hill as does a conventional machine. The booms will be different due to needing to raise it higher than a standard machine. Hopefully, the sticks will interchange with your other machines. They do on Kobelco. Most drive and hydraulic components will be the same or very similar as standard machines Stability is actually BETTER on the 235SRLC than the SK 210LC due to it's undercarriage and weight. You will note that SR's by any manufacturer, feel..."Nervous". Consider a tipping condition due to large bucket on a conventional machine with the counterweight around 9 feet from the center of rotation, now although heavier, move the counterweight to 4 feet from center of rotation. During tipping, the conventional counterweight will move up and down, perhaps 4 feet, while the SR will move 12" at the similar tip condition due to it being closer to the tipping point and center of rotation. Stability is similar, but the actual tipping event is much faster on the SR. Cabs must be smaller to keep front swing radius as low as possible. While paint and sheet metal damage is important, consider safety of passing soccer Mom's and workers on the job. To the earlier post about the 200 SR, a Kobelco SK 210 has just over 9000# counterweight and the 200 SR, which performance wise is between the 160 and 210, has 12,000#. The ED concept uses the drive train from two sizes up excavators and the displacement turned down for durability. My two cents, put the blade behind you and in the air. Will be out of the way and act as counterweight. These blades are not backfill blades as on other machines, but meant to work. No, they will not replace a dozer due to speed in high gears on large jobs, but there are not intended to do so. Cat has also jumped on the band wagon with this and Hitachi in Japan. Yes, I have put it blade to blade against a conventional dozer )with a tree between)..( OK OK..but I HAD to try!!!) and shoved it like a toy. Trust me, there are larger SR's coming from several manufacturers.
320d Lrr The 320D LRR I got weighs in at 57200 pounds in Sweden, it is almost 4400 pounds heavier than the 323D L.
We are looking at leasing another machine for a big job we got coming up.I have always been said on the short radius machines.Then I saw on here where there has been posts were ppl are saying the sr's on unstable.So I thought I would research standard tail and short tail.I spent about a hour looking up cats,kobelco's,komatsu's,etc SR's and found that their standard tail brothers(ex.kobelco 210 v's 235sr) only have about a 50-100 pound lift advantage over the side at full extension.Over the front the SR's actually have a higher lift capacity.Cat's web site says this is due to the SR's mechanics.Thought this was very interesting.Guess the fact they are unstable is a myth.