tractor pans or scrapers which do you like better

[Taylortractornu]

Im trying very hard to accept tractor pans now, Ive worked a few jobs wit hthem mostly converted farms that go into dirt moving. I cant stand to run one too slow for me they are a bit more comfortable but they arent very manuveralbe to me plus they take longer to get out and usually have to be pulled. I ve seen some smller ones that did good but I worked for a company that had 12 of them. They were mostly new units but they had alot of trouble rear end going out and things like that. THe mechanic said that a self propelled scraper would tear the rear end out quicker than a tractor. I couldnt get him to realize we moved a million yards of dirt at the landfill with a 1975 762 JD scraper let alone how much it had moved before the land fill had it and we had no troubles. I know it costs more to buy a scraper and it has a little less cappacity thant some tractors can pull but I stll would rather have a selfcontained scraper.
THe first big job I was on with dad we took 2 worn out TS14B Terexes an the little 762 Paddle wheel and started on a 50 000 yard hill. The hill next to us another out fit got it and they brought in 4 new articulate Case/Stiegers a Cat Challenger,and a big articulated JD l of them had 2 new 24 yard pans. They told us how much cheaper and quicker theyed be doing the work. They stayed stuck, styed in each others way and so on. Ir was a pretty big job and in a few sockpiles youd always see on gettin drug off the side by the back pan. When they got hung they had to usually undo the rear pan then pull on it with a cable. When we got stuck dad usually just pushed us out with the D6. Mostly in the sand we never had to push load a Terex either.
I know a tractor isnt tied down to one Item only like a scraper but ive hardly seen many jobs that needed a multi use machine like that. Here alot of older farm tractors are cheap enough to have a disk or straw machine and sheeps foot and a tractor for each.

[motrack]

Deere really pushed the tractor/pan combo when I was working for them and we sold several. All the contractors who had them liked them as they had lower operating cost then a regular scraper.

The dealer I work for now just received some CDs from New Holland compairing the operating cost of tractor scrapers v regular scrapers, havent had time to look at it yet but NH is really pushing the tractor scraper combo thing.

the drawback to tractor scrapers are you cant turn as tightly, and harder to transport from one job to the next. Never seen one stuck to the point we had to unhook the scrapers.

If you are going tractor scraper combo you need a tractor with big HP and a powershift trany. I have seen guys try it with old tractors that had smaller engines and manual tranys only to be dissapointed in there performnce.

There is a learning curve to operating this setup and once you learn HOW to load it I think you would be inpressed.

[PAYTON]

bell 4 wheel drive tractor pull units are nice when its dry..there programable for the loading and unloading.. yes they do get stuck but its not that bad normally..

were running 3 on day shift and there decent espically for stripping top soil.

i know when we were doing the i70 work just west of indy walsh tried running a bunch of case with pull behinds and they were getting spanked.. always breaking down. half the time they could only load 1 pull instead of 3 they ended up bringing in a company running 637s the 37 smoked the tractor pan combos.. and i mean smoked them the 37s could run almost 2 loads to the t/p combos 1

me personally i dont like any pan! i hate them they suck im a young guy and i wanna be able to walk when im older ill stick 2 tracks thanks very much..


payton

[Taylortractornu]

I mostly run a 762 paddle wheel finishing so its easy going. Never been on a Cat scraper. I started out on th paddle wheel when I was 15. Alot of its in driving a scraper though1, I know some operators that are out looking for a rough ride. On the 762 its so light it bounces if you dont hld the accelerator flat on the floor to elemininate rpm surges. Dad says if i ever run a 621 or 37 ive not get on another Terex. I mostly operate dozer and excavator, and backhoe now.
I did one time run a few tractors with LGP tires on a soft job they did good with. I think the pans were Ashlands or Cepcos. running balloon tires. Then we brought in articultaed dumps and excavators they were faster than the tractors in some conditions.
On transport the company I worked for out of MO had a few tractor pans they drove from Poplarbluff MO all the way to Huntsville AL. THey said it was cheaper thant to break them down and haul them on low boys. I thought it was hard to belive to pay 2 escorts,fuels stops,4 tractor drivers at 17.50 an hour for 4 days pluss a set of worn out tires. The asphault loves tractor tires. Dad used to road scrapers lot way back when but he said lowboys werent super common here. I saw a funny crature a clearing company uses to build roads a 648 JD skidder pulling a little 5 yard pan. That was a pathetic animal lol. by the time you carry five yards and run the skidder over it every thing in the ground is pumping.

[motrack]

A Deere skidder pulling a 5yd pan would be a waste of time for anything but a small job..............once seen a contractor with 3 old Deere skidders that had dump boxes mounted on the back and was useing them for off road trucks.

[PAYTON]

roading equipment isnt that uncommon.. ive done it in the past 6 months actually.. nothing major.. but around indy.. if funny as hell to see 14g grader running down teh road or a trator.. hell ive even taken a 400 cat dump down the road .

longest ive ever roaded a piece of equipment was a 627e from bedford indiana to evansville indiana 2 hour drive in a truck running 65.. 8 hours on a scrapper.. there was 3 of us not a bad day actually except for my brakes locking up and stranding me on the side of the hughway..



oayton

[Taylortractornu]

Motrac that was a pitiful site with the scraper behind it. I t was a little Prime that has a scissor type lift so one lever lowers raises and dumps it all. whats sad it yo ucant see what your doing. I ran it about 10 minutes and did better than the guy that owned it But it was too clumsy. I cussed it like a red headed stepchild. What was bad the man we did the job for he had rented another mans 400 MF dozer with a straight blade. He could dump a pile and i could go through it like butter. Id wait for him to do about 7 loads to make it work walking the dozer. One thing I did like about the skidder was it had a brush rake on the front. The owner claimed it would out rake a D8K but i sincerely doubt it. It probably would out push it on loose stuff like cut overs and save on an under carriage.
Payton I ve roaded my share of equipment but never a great distance. I did move an old Trojan loader and a Case both with worn out center pins about 40 miles one theres still some nice marks in the road from it too. You just had to counte wiggle the steering lol. Dad has some good stories of roading old S9 Euclids when he was a boy, and also old DW20' and 21's.
Dad and I both have oved scrapers ith a tractor or truck tire pinched in the apron or between the elevator and the cutting edge. That works pretty good except on a gravel road then its like bb's.

[Steve Frazier]

From what I've seen in the equipment trade magazines, the Tractor/scraper combos seem to be phasing out the self contained units. I'm seeing more and more of these units for sale, the numbers are catching up with the dedicated scrapers.

[9420pullpan]

first of all they are great for stripping topsoil, wet conditions, and light cuts. advantages include cheaper than typical pan, but these pull type scrapers have to have the right conditions. they are worthless in the rock. i really like the john deere tractors they are probably the best. as far as the pans dont get deere pans JUNK. not built heavy enough. the miskin and e-ject systems pulltype scrapers in my opinion are the best. if in soft conditions i would definately consider buying a pan with tracks on the pan. i know ashland and e-ject systems make them. the tractors will go about anywhere it is the pan which acts like an anchor. with the tracks this lowers ground pressure which makes working in wet conditions easier. i have definately done alot of research on these i went to the con expo saw all the new equipment so if u have any questions. please ask!!! miskin invented a pull pan with a system to help heap the load. it uses and air compressor and it shoots bursts of air just behind the cuttin edge to heap load!! ask away!!!!

[9420pullpan]

pullpans for stripping topsoil and light cuts. Cat Push/Pull type pans in any other application especially rock

[Buckethead]

I have only run self-propelled scrapers like Cat 627s and 637s and Terex ts-14s, 18s and 24s, never run a farm tractor drawn pan. A friend of mine ran them behind a John Deere when they first came out he said the pan was narrower than the tractor, making it impossible for dumping on the edge of a topsoil pile, or fill. :Banghead Are the newer ones better matched to the width of the tractors? And how do you see the cutting edge of the rear pan to keep the cut and the fill smooth?

[Burnout]

Does anyone have numbers on productivity of the pullpan/tractor combo's? The company I work for is known for being big on Cat Scrapers, they have a huge fleet of 657's (60+) and last year they bought a Deere 9520 to pull a pan but ended up getting sacked to a big disc and box blade for haul road maintenance. I have always wondered what they were like compared to our 627's though.

[mitchell2905]

Here is a cost comparison on why pull pans are best: http://www.pullpans.com/Cost.pdf

[Turbo21835]

Ive never run a tractor with a pan, but spent plenty of time in Ts14s Cat 627Es and 627Gs. From what ive seen, self propeled scrapers are for moving dirt, tractors are for pulling a drag box, disk, sheepsfoot, or farming. Not moving dirt. They are too slow, and seems they are too limited to conditions. The last place i worked dirt had the competition running Cat challangers. They said the challangers are able to work in wet conditions. Yet, if we got an inch of rain, those guys were down for 3 days, our Ts14s were rolling the next day. If the jobsite was wet, I never saw the other company running the pains hooked togther, they always dropped one. They take twice as long to make a run as we would, while pulling 1 pan it seems like they would be losing their ass

[mitchell2905]

Ive never run a tractor with a pan, but spent plenty of time in Ts14s Cat 627Es and 627Gs. From what ive seen, self propeled scrapers are for moving dirt, tractors are for pulling a drag box, disk, sheepsfoot, or farming. Not moving dirt. They are too slow, and seems they are too limited to conditions. The last place i worked dirt had the competition running Cat challangers. They said the challangers are able to work in wet conditions. Yet, if we got an inch of rain, those guys were down for 3 days, our Ts14s were rolling the next day. If the jobsite was wet, I never saw the other company running the pains hooked togther, they always dropped one. They take twice as long to make a run as we would, while pulling 1 pan it seems like they would be losing their ass

We had some Cat srapers at our operation when we started, but quickly got rid of them and got Challengers because the self-propelled units were way to slow. The Challengers and John Deere tractors can move much more dirt quicker and at a much lower cost. But the operators do drive fast enough to get all 4 wheels off the ground on occasion!:dizzy

[ror76a]

Here is a cost comparison on why pull pans are best: http://www.pullpans.com/Cost.pdf

I suspect that that is a highly biased study. :stirthepot

That must be one powerfull D6 to burn 16 gallons of fuel an hour. I seriously doubt that tractors and pull pans would not require a compactor. I also think that a regular scraper can take care of a haul road just as good if not better than a tractor/pan combo would. And I could go on, but you get the point.

This all depends on the site conditions more than anything, but I woulden't believe that comparison any more that I would believe a used car salesman.

Now where can I buy fuel for $1.50/gal like it said on there....:D

[637slayer]

i have always believed the cat twin engine scraper to be the most versatile all around piece of machinery cat ever made, the 37 to be my favorite. from building roads to digging lakes the only support equipment you need is a fuel truck, unless you get into rock then you need a ripper.
ive never run a pull scraper but i think tractors are for farming too.

[mitchell2905]

i have always believed the cat twin engine scraper to be the most versatile all around piece of machinery cat ever made, the 37 to be my favorite. from building roads to digging lakes the only support equipment you need is a fuel truck, unless you get into rock then you need a ripper.
ive never run a pull scraper but i think tractors are for farming too.

Self propelled scrapers will soon go the way of the Dinosaur. Ag tractors and pans are the wave of the future. No mines or dirt-moving operation around my area uses traditional scrapers any more.

[JDOFMEMI]

Those of you touting the pull pans are lucky enough to be in a portion of the country where the soil is consistent. Here on the west coast, the jobs are varied from one to the next, and even from one side of the site to the other. Many have tried pull pans, and I do not know of a single one within 200 miles, and I live in the scraper capital of the world, over 2500 scrapers 623 and larger in that same 200 mile area.
The scraper study referenced above has so many holes in it, you could not bail out a mudhole.
The pull pans have their place, just not here.
Here tractors pull discs and bee gee's, or they work on the farm.

[Turbo21835]

We had some Cat srapers at our operation when we started, but quickly got rid of them and got Challengers because the self-propelled units were way to slow. The Challengers and John Deere tractors can move much more dirt quicker and at a much lower cost. But the operators do drive fast enough to get all 4 wheels off the ground on occasion!:dizzy

Explain to me how tractors are quicker than a self propelled machine? The info I find and challengers says they have a top ROAD speed of 24mph. Where as a Cat 627G has a top speed of 32mph while the cat 637G and 657G have a top speed of 33mph. I personally have had a 627G up to 36mph unloaded. My average speed while loaded was easily 30mph. Mind you that was with a rated capacity of 52,800lbs. I dont know of any tractor pan combos that can do that.

I dont understand how these tractor combos can even compare. Yes, purchase is lower, fuel is lower. But you have twice as many tires on the tractor compared to the self propelled. Then your looking at another 2-4 on each pan You have twice as many hitchs, cutting edges, lifting systems to repair. You have to break everything down to move it. at best, 2 truckloads if you have a truck driver who has the testicles to move a tractor with one pan hitched up, but more than likely its 3 trucks.

I see the upside vs a elevating scraper. They are not a production machine compared to an open bowl. But the elevators will always have their place with a finish crew. I think they may even compete with the single engines on an actual dirt site. Compete with the twins, for time and productivity? No way. The twins will maintain their own haul road with out slowing down to a crawl. They will out run, and out manuever a tractor with two pans. Lets see a tractor/pan work with a dozer while cutting a V ditch. Bring your tractor/pans to a rock job and compete with the twins, tell me how it works out for ya

[EZ TRBO]

I don't have alot of time around a number of different scrapers. We have our own 1970 JD 860 paddle wheel and for us it has worked great for years, for sure lots of breakdowns but that many moving parts over that many years its bound to happen. For a smaller company it was nice, go out with just that machine and fully strip an area of a project, kept your haul roads maintained, your stock pile sloped and wide enough and would be all ready to move the dozers in.

Only time I have really worked with a different type was with a TS-14, I ran circles around it, until we got to rock then he kept going and I had to find more clay. I enjoy running the self loaders(have been on our own 860, and rented 762's and 862's for bigger projects), nice to just do your own thing, haul your dirt and no one really bothered me.

No experince on the pans, but they were the thing on the dozers back in the day, and now with the AG type tractors. However, I am always told, don't by a full blown ag tractor, buy the ones that are built for industrial use, as ag is not built as heavy as industrial. Equipment World did a article on tractor/pan combos a few years ago. Nice advice, bout how the different companies are building AG LIKE tractors built just for the type of pulling a scraper demands.
Trbo

[Construct'O]

I agree i would wether put build my busniess on the 627 and 637 machine here where i live.To much mud.If i had those size job to do.Especially day in and out.

For short hauls and lots of room the tractor -pan thing might not be so bad.

For my little projects even the dozer with my hydraulic pull scraper works good.I use to have ag tractor for the power unit,plus also hydraulic unit on my dozer.That way i could use the hydrulic scraper either on the dozer or the tractor if need be.

We are talking soil conservation type work.Terrace,ponds,waterways and small building sites.I use a 14 struck, 16 yard heaped,Ashland scraper and a D6 dozer.:usa

[EZ TRBO]

I agree i would wether put build my busniess on the 627 and 637 machine here where i live.To much mud.If i had those size job to do.Especially day in and out.

For short hauls and lots of room the tractor -pan thing might not be so bad.

For my little projects even the dozer with my hydraulic pull scraper works good.I use to have ag tractor for the power unit,plus also hydraulic unit on my dozer.That way i could use the hydrulic scraper either on the dozer or the tractor if need be.

We are talking soil conservation type work.Terrace,ponds,waterways and small building sites.I use a 14 struck, 16 yard heaped,Ashland scraper and a D6 dozer.:usa

Bout the only difference in you and what we used to do is the location and you have said before, the trenching. Most times the 860 was all we needed for what we did. Add the 2 15C's and the 312 was bout perfect for us, oh yeah and the 773 Bobcat.

Trbo

[RollOver Pete]

I read somewhere that the cost per yard was less with a pull pan.
Weather it is true or not, I wouldn't know.
I've never been around or seen pull pans working.
I'd like to...
I'm sure they have their place.
:cool:

[cletrac]

We have 2 Case IH 485 Quads with ATI tracks, 6 627G's, 2 627 F's, 4 615's,4 613's and 5 TS14's. Each has a different use. Don't use a 613 to dig a pond and a 627 to finish a Condo pad. The Quads work great on wet topsoil but a 627 works on a long haul with a good haul road.:deadhorse

[Deere9670]

The local construction company was working on a tollway extension by my house all summer and they had all kinds of scrapers running including cat challengers pulling double and even triple pull pans. The one thing I dident understand was how do you see your cut height on the second and third pans? And does the operator have like "a million levers" in the cab or hows does he control each pan? Can some one explain this to me?

[Turbo21835]

I read somewhere that the cost per yard was less with a pull pan.
Weather it is true or not, I wouldn't know.
I've never been around or seen pull pans working.
I'd like to...
I'm sure they have their place.
:cool:

I cant see it happening. Our crew consisted of two Terex Ts14b, Cat D7H, Cat 815B, and Cat D5N. We would double haul as much as we could. On the good jobs, we could move topsoil at 89 cents a cyd. This covered the cost of the 14s and the 5 cleaning up and hitting the haul roads. Cut to fill at 96 cents a cyd. This covered the cost of the 14s, the 7 for push loading, and the 815 for compaction. The 5 would be billed half the day to topsoil, and the rest of the day was billed to fine grading. Most of the jobs were bid at $1.50 a cyd for topsoil, and around 2 bucks a cyd for cut to fill. Needless to say, when we asked for new seats on the scrapers, the company didnt think twice about taking care of us

[fensoncont.]

As far as the Ag. Tractors go on a cheaper costs per yard on the office end, I believe it. Keep in mind I don't work for a company and the only scraper I operated was a Deere 862B cutting subgrade for a driveway. The ag. tractors have a pretty low rate on them alone. The rate of the scrapers themselves there isn't much there, the life on the pan part isn't probably too bad, the tractor is where the life part of it struggles. I look at it as having no push dozer in the cut, here in Northwest Ohio we are on flat ground with fair soil. Most of our projects are highways with borrow pits and reservoirs, which don't make for bad dirt moving. I like to compare them to McAninch's scrapers but with a lower cost on the 'lead' machine.

I think the downside would be the money result and the condition of the machine after it's all said and done. Certain situations will acquire a dozer in the cut to help push load, which adds a hefty rate per hours, don't forget another operator. As I'm sure everyone knows dirt machines get beat pretty bad when your on a tight schedule and want to move a lot of dirt fast, the ag. tractors aren't originially built for rough work, there meant to pull disks, compactors, and farm.

It really tells me something though when Beaver Excavating and ES Wagner have went to these for some of there dirt crews.

Until I operate, supervise, bid, and count the money on both after the projects I will keep myself nuetral.

[JDOFMEMI]

..... The one thing I dident understand was how do you see your cut height on the second and third pans? And does the operator have like "a million levers" in the cab or hows does he control each pan? Can some one explain this to me?

The ones I have seen have the three traditional "levers" though they are little more than glorified toggle switches for electric over hydraulic operation, and then a diverter switch to change from the front pan to the back one, and easily adding a third.
With 2 or 3 pans, before coming into the cut, set each edge just off the ground (the rear ones have a rod sticking up that lets you "see" the height of the edge), then you load first the front, pull it up, switch, load the second, and switch again if you have a third.
Leave the control set to the back, and unload the reverse of loading (most times).
Deere, Volvo, Bell, and probably others have programmable automated loading and dumping functions, but I think they only work in nice consistent material. Of course that is the only place I think the pull pans work anyway, so I bet it is a good deal.

I demoed a Challenger MT865, with 2-17CY E-Ject pans, the same ones Cat now brands as theirs. We were in blow sand, and after a little practice, they would outwork anything else I have seen in those conditions.
I know the cans are too high in the pic, but not when I was running it!

[Neil D]

A lot of people are getting overly excited here lets not forget that different machines do some jobs better than others. The pull pans have their advantages mainly operating in light soils and sandy clays were they can load fast and from an owners perspective will pull more profit if you buy new and trade in after a short while. However I reckon 627's are a more stable business proposition-the higher purchase price is easily pulled back after few years work with out any worries about market fluctuations affecting residual values.

Neil

[Deere9670]

Nice cat and sweet pic's, thanks for clearing that up for me!

[Renfroe Grading]

Here is a scraper we recently built from a 621B. The D8N is a pull tractor we bought that was factory set up for that purpose.

[637slayer]

thats a nice shiny setup, i can almost smell the paint.

[Renfroe Grading]

Slow winter. we have painted a few up.

[637slayer]

along the side of the can i think i can read 621b right? then in fron of that it looks like it says something but i cant tell. i would have put renfroe grading somewhere on there, looks professional as is though.

[DPete]

Here is a scraper we recently built from a 621B. The D8N is a pull tractor we bought that was factory set up for that purpose.Clean looking unit, I suppose the tractor has a higher gallon per minute hydraulic pump to run those big rams. I have a cat & can most people out here laugh at it until the going gets tough.

[Turbo21835]

In my opinion, a cat/can is a totally different set up from a tractor/pan. The cat/cans have their place. Short runs with heavy cuts and fills. They also prove their value when it comes to muddy jobs. Im sure they dont need to be pushed thru a cut, picked up by another dozer to push it thru the stock pile like we would with wheel scrapers in muddy conditions. The tractor/pan combos do have a place. Personally i happen to think its on the farm.

[fensoncont.]

Great point there Turbo, the cat/can comments sure demonstrate McAninch's technique. It's funny you mention pushin motor scrapers through the cut. When I watched Beaver that summer in Delphos on the reservoir they didn't get one complete cycle of (4) 631E's to unload through the fill, they were forced to utilize the D8L to push them through the fill.

On the other hand when I watched Anderzack Pitzen Construction, Inc. over the last summer oin the Van Wert Reservoir they were running (4) 621's at a time and I did not see them once push a scraper through the fill, hell they didn't even have a dozer in the fill area full time.

[385Diggin' Doug]

pullpans for stripping topsoil and light cuts. Cat Push/Pull type pans in any other application especially rock

I see you added a new Case slogan.
Try this one:

CASE

Couldn't
Afford
Serious
Equipment

[Renfroe Grading]

It says 621P the smaller print says "Renfroe Scraper Special"

[637slayer]

:thumbsup

[Firecat11]

Here in Northern California we use both scrapers and tractors with pans. Most agricultural landleveling and finish work are done with the pans while the scrapers do the bulk of the work. We run three paddle wheels with two pans in our operations.

When strictly use the scrapers when there is large cuts and fills or rocky material. We have to rip most of the material we are working in to be able to move it or load it. Our soil around this area has a lot of hard pan and clay.

[bigblueox]

man i love the older case tractors. wish i could upgrade my 4890 to something like the first one. that would look real nice infront of our sunflower disc ripper!

[mitchell2905]

Why don't any of the AG pans have wheels located behind the hitch like the pan picture behind the D-8? Does it have something to do with the weight of the tow machine, such that ag tractors need the weight of the scraper on the tounge for traction?

[JimBruce42]

Why don't any of the AG pans have wheels located behind the hitch like the pan picture behind the D-8? Does it have something to do with the weight of the tow machine, such that ag tractors need the weight of the scraper on the tounge for traction?

I think it has more to do with the pan design itself than the tractor. If anything I wonder if it wouldn't help traction not to have the bowl pulling the front wheels off the ground. On our JD's we have suitcase weights on the front as well as wheel weights inside the front wheels to try to counter act the pan from pulling the front of the tractor up.

I'll try to get some photos of the controls tomorrow for those of you who wanted them.

[Turbo21835]

Jim, with ag tractors its all about balancing out them tractor. You need the weight on the hitch of the tractor. But you also need weight on the front of the tractor for front wheel traction and to help with steering. The set up with weights on the front, and on the front wheels is common for tractors pulling large heavy attachments. Growing up around the farm it was not uncommon to add weight to the front of the tractor for one implement, then when finished, take it off for the next attachment.

[JimBruce42]

Jim, with ag tractors its all about balancing out them tractor. You need the weight on the hitch of the tractor. But you also need weight on the front of the tractor for front wheel traction and to help with steering. The set up with weights on the front, and on the front wheels is common for tractors pulling large heavy attachments. Growing up around the farm it was not uncommon to add weight to the front of the tractor for one implement, then when finished, take it off for the next attachment.

Yeah, I think you're right turbo which would be why most pull-pans for tractors don't have dolly wheels, however i'd imagine that when you have a tracked type tractor (like Mcaninch), you would want the weight to be even across the entire length of track, so maybe that's part of why they use the dollies?:beatsme

[Turbo21835]

I would imagine so. I would also think those cans hold more than you can stuff in a tractor can. Not really sure, as ive never been around the crawlers. The tractor cans, I stay as far away from them as possible. Ive said it thousands of times, ill say it again. Tractors are for farming, not moving dirt

[aglasergps]

Hi guys, can an Aussie poke his nose in here somewhere? I've been around tractor drawn scrapers (what we call 'laser buckets' here) for over 25 years now and have a buggered neck to prove it. Always interesting to hear how others a world away attack the same issues we have. Have a few thoughts on the issue myself as I am now starting to build industrial scrapers to go behind tractors for civil and mining applications. The cost of fuel for the self propelled scrapers, especially the 627's, is making contractors look seriously at the issue here. I don't suppose you'd have the same issue there, we're paying about $1.90 / litre for diesel so it's hurting. Interested to hear if there are any industrial type tractors there or even modified ones for this heavy type of work?

[JimBruce42]

I'm glad this got bumped back up, I have a photo of the Controls in the 9520 I was running and kept forgetting to post them here like I was going to.


This is pretty much where the right hand rests all day...

Starting top left you have the gear/directional selector:
-In the shown detent is forward, push it forward to go up gears 1-18 or bump it back to go down gears 18-1.
-middle detent is for reverse, bump forward to go DOWN gears bump it back to go up.
-Nearest detent is park which is pretty much self explanatory

To the right top you have 4 implement switches.
-First one raises and lowers the (front) bowl
-Second one raises and lowers apron on the (front) bowl. Once the apron is fully opened it automatically switches to the ejector to push it forward. Pushing down will slide the ejector back until it is all the way back, then it switches back to the apron
- Third and Fourth switch will preform the same functions on the second bowl, if you have one hooked up.

You can set or adjust the flow and time to all 4. While the flow is always at the max. I usually had it timed just long enough so that if I clicked the #2 control into it's detent it would cut the flow right after the ejector was all the way forward or the apron was re-closed.

On the left behind the transmission selector is the throttle, which as a pull-pan is typically all the way open. You use the decelerator button on the floor under the right foot to control RPM's

Other things you can't see are the steering wheel (d'uh), Diff. Lock, clutch and brake pedals.

Hope that was all pretty clear... :beatsme

[aglasergps]

Cheers, we've also being doing controls like that for years. The new generation tractors you but now with these electronic armrests really put a stop to the rocker switch boxes in fabricated armrests we used to put together. Had tandems back in 1982 behind an old JD8850 wound out to 550hp - probably the reason my neck creaks and my knees are stiff..........but, boy it could shift dirt. No, I was wondering if anyone out there was putting tractors together from a running gear point of view. A mate has done a rear diff and tranny in his 9520 because they use common oil and it just spreads metal through the system and another guy had the same thing happen with his MT865. I known this is a sensitive question out there to a lot of guys with their particular tractor colour's blood, but it's a practical question any way! I know guys parked up for three days over problems like an air con pressure switch failure in these modern electronic tractors - that is a joke too. No I'm really looking for something industrially built with reliability in mind - not whistles and bells and a fancy two pack paint job.....

[JimBruce42]

Cheers, we've also being doing controls like that for years. The new generation tractors you but now with these electronic armrests really put a stop to the rocker switch boxes in fabricated armrests we used to put together. Had tandems back in 1982 behind an old JD8850 wound out to 550hp - probably the reason my neck creaks and my knees are stiff..........but, boy it could shift dirt. No, I was wondering if anyone out there was putting tractors together from a running gear point of view. A mate has done a rear diff and tranny in his 9520 because they use common oil and it just spreads metal through the system and another guy had the same thing happen with his MT865. I known this is a sensitive question out there to a lot of guys with their particular tractor colour's blood, but it's a practical question any way! I know guys parked up for three days over problems like an air con pressure switch failure in these modern electronic tractors - that is a joke too. No I'm really looking for something industrially built with reliability in mind - not whistles and bells and a fancy two pack paint job.....


Sorry for the confusion, I think earlier in this thread someone asked about controls, I should have clarified.

As far as a purpose built machine for pulling pans (besides McAninch's monsters), I think Cat recently purchased a pan company and made a Tractor/Pan that is NOT an ag. tractor in any way. I do not think it's in production yet, but I remember seeing photos of it from the Con/Agg expo this spring.

The John Deere's we run are called "scraper specials", but as far as I can tell, the only difference is a heavier hitch, axles, and articulation point, and some "optional" front weights. They aren't much different than their farming cousins though.:beatsme

Not sure if that is what you are asking for, but if it is I hope I helped.

[aglasergps]

No worries, I think CAT bought E-Ject systems 'cause I've seen some quotes here in Aus for the scrapers throught the CAT network. I didn't know about the tractor thing though - if it's true it would be interesting. You're not thinking about the new MT900 Challengers?

[OCR]

Had tandems back in 1982 behind an old JD8850 wound out to 550hp - probably the reason my neck creaks and my knees are stiff..........but, boy it could shift dirt.

aglasergps,

Do you know, or remember, how you got your 8850 cranked up to 550hp?

Did it have the original 955 CID V8, or was it re powered?

We've got an 8850 too... and I've always heard they were capable of considerably more than the factory settings... I've toyed with the idea of
maybe doing a little tweaking on it myself...:eek:... just for the fun of it of
course...;)... probably have to pull a fuel tender then too...:Pointhead

Any way, I was just currious...btw... couple pics. in AG section under thread... Want to see some iron?...cheers...:)

OCR

[Jake]

Tractor pans can load faster. I have been operating a JD 9630 with 21 yard pans. When I am pulling a single pan, I load in 9th or 10th gear and can lap the 627's every 10 loads or so.

[637slayer]

lap a 27? while they are in the can or what?

[JimBruce42]

Tractor pans can load faster. I have been operating a JD 9630 with 21 yard pans. When I am pulling a single pan, I load in 9th or 10th gear and can lap the 627's every 10 loads or so.


Sounds like the 96's have a lot of power, how do you like the new 30 series compared to the 20's? I know in good material I could get loaded in 7th gear, never really tried higher, in the 9520...

Got any pictures?:notworthy:cool2

[Jake]

Going in to the cut behind the 627, I can load faster and get ou of the cut sooner then he can

[RollOver Pete]

Going in to the cut behind the 627, I can load faster and get ou of the cut sooner then he can

Got any video?
:cool:

[Deere9670]

Got any video?
:cool:

Yea we just want to see this 9630!!!!!! PLEASE??? What do they cost anyway, like $270,000?:beatsme

[Jake]

It's a rental from Atlantic Tractor of Oxford, Pa. I will see if I can get some pictures up soon. It has the auto load feature, but I do not care for that.

[JimBruce42]

It's a rental from Atlantic Tractor of Oxford, Pa. I will see if I can get some pictures up soon. It has the auto load feature, but I do not care for that.

I never really used it the few times I had the option. Who do you work for Jake?

[aglasergps]

Thought I'd attach a photo I took during trials we did a few years ago. This was the first Bell 4206 to hit Australia and we hooked a pair of buckets (pans) to the back of it to see how it would handle them. There were a pair of Cat 627's on this particular job site and contractor was good enough to let us trial them along side his scrapers. These pans were 12 yard strut capacity (measured) and we reakon we were putting about 15 yards in each one. From when the cutting edge of the first one hit the ground to the last one coming off the ground with the apron closing, it was only about 25 seconds. The haul was 400 metres and we clocked more loads than the twin powers by the end of the day. After 3 days the difference in fuel usage between them was another matter the contractor didn't find all that amusing. The guys in the 627's got so frustrated they started push/pulling to try and catch us. Was fun to watch..........

[Jake]

Jd 9630

[Bellboy]

aglasrgps: Arb... but i love Bell. good, yes?

[aglasergps]

I liked the Bell concept simply because it has the Allison and the converter and in my mind, made it potentially a bit more bullet proof in an industrial (bulk earthworks) environment when it comes to operator abuse. In an agricultural field levelling application the powershifts are probably still more effective in terms of their ground speed/gear ratio matching.

[hoeman600]

found these in mew mexico last winter. their ws 2

[Mass-X]

aglasergps: “The guys in the 627's got so frustrated they started push/pulling to try and catch us.”

So the 627’s were loading singly until they saw the pull-pans passing them up and then decided to push-pull in an attempt to catch up? I’m not following the logic there.

[aglasergps]

Yes, they were single loading initially and eventually went back to it. It just started to look - what's the best way to describe it - like they were trying to prove something when they started to push/pull and you could tell they were flogging the gear to try and keep up. No twin power operator likes to think their machine is being outclassed by some new toy tractor. All we were doing was trying to show the tractor drawn scraper concept and that it could do the job.............it just proved to be better than anyone expected.

[Richardjw~]

Yes, they were single loading initially and eventually went back to it. It just started to look - what's the best way to describe it - like they were trying to prove something when they started to push/pull and you could tell they were flogging the gear to try and keep up. No twin power operator likes to think their machine is being outclassed by some new toy tractor. All we were doing was trying to show the tractor drawn scraper concept and that it could do the job.............it just proved to be better than anyone expected.

Excellent common sense answer!!! Backed up with facts......horses for courses, some folks struggle to grasp this concept.

Good luck!!!

[JOE 535]

We run case 535s with 17yd pans ben in business since 1979.All the compairsons all the talk, they dont run this equipment dont know to operate and most of all they dont know what it cost.I can sit here with a calculator and make all of us rich.But from my years of experance tractors are great up to a mile haul after that the cycle time is much slower and cost is not much different moving less. In wet conditions you can drop the back pan and i can go were you will be parked or pushed.If you are going to compair you have to compair apples for apples.

[Renfroe Grading]

Currently building a set up nobody has seen before that will be both unique and effective.

[637slayer]

are we gonna have to wait? no hints, if its in this thread it must be a pull scraper.:beatsme

[Renfroe Grading]

I will go ahead and tell you. I have put a hitch pull bale on the front of a Terex ts14c and adding the hook to the rear of my D8N/621 pull scraper shown previously in this thread. I may end up building a D8N with a hitch pull bale as well and hook 2 D8N pull set ups together.

[fensoncont.]

Sounds like a very interesting setup. I would like to hear some more details as to how this is going to work? Pictures of this creation would be awesome as well.

[Renfroe Grading]

Almost have the terex completed and will get pics

[Hollywood627G]

Yes, they were single loading initially and eventually went back to it. It just started to look - what's the best way to describe it - like they were trying to prove something when they started to push/pull and you could tell they were flogging the gear to try and keep up. No twin power operator likes to think their machine is being outclassed by some new toy tractor. All we were doing was trying to show the tractor drawn scraper concept and that it could do the job.............it just proved to be better than anyone expected.


I was always told and have witnessed first hand that a single 27 is faster then 2 due to the fact that you have to load 2 scrapers instead of one. We had 2 Bell tractors and 4 627g's on a 1.8 million cu yd. job here in AZ (U.S.A), and it didnt matter wheater it was pre wet topsoil, sand, or caliche the 27's blew them away. Load time, haul time, fill smoother and faster, and can build more on the job. i remember one day a 27 was down and the other 27 moved as much dirt as one of the Bell tractors and the 27 was running single all day!

[cat 385]

not a good picture it was hard to get it in one frame

[Mass-X]

Hollywood627G: "I was always told and have witnessed first hand that a single 27 is faster then 2"

This is a false statement. If you’re trying to insinuate that one 627 will outrun a pair of 627’s in cycle times, yeah, its a few seconds faster in the cut because it’s only one can to load. If you think running a big fleet of 627’s as singles is a fast way to move dirt, give me the address to your project so I can sit back and eat popcorn while I watch you go out of business.

The entire purpose behind the creation, development and refinement of the 627, 637 and 657 is for them to work in pairs. That’s the reason for the tail hook and bail.

I have spent a lot of time in scraper cuts with a stop-watch. Maybe I should emphasize, A LOT of time in scraper cuts with stop watch. A pair of twins, regardless of size, being run by competent operators should be able to hook up, both load (heaped capacity) and unhook in around 40 seconds. Give or take 5 seconds for slight variations in material types, operator ability, etc.

A single 627 can fill the can level with the top of the can (struck capacity) in about 30 seconds loading alone. Getting the machine heaped will take a steep hill, a mile long cut, or a push-cat. That’s a lot less dirt than if it had a partner push-pulling. Not to mention the excessive wheel slip of a 627 self-loading.

If speed is all that matters; run them as singles and move that dirt fast. But running twin engine scrapers as pairs will move a lot more dirt per cycle (which equates to a lower cost per yard). It’s the superior way to move dirt with twins.

[Mass-X]

Challenger MT975B

[Mass-X]

A couple more.

[JDOFMEMI]

Hollywood627G: "I was always told and have witnessed first hand that a single 27 is faster then 2"

This is a false statement. If you’re trying to insinuate that one 627 will outrun a pair of 627’s in cycle times, yeah, its a few seconds faster in the cut because it’s only one can to load. If you think running a big fleet of 627’s as singles is a fast way to move dirt, give me the address to your project so I can sit back and eat popcorn while I watch you go out of business.

The entire purpose behind the creation, development and refinement of the 627, 637 and 657 is for them to work in pairs. That’s the reason for the tail hook and bail.

I have spent a lot of time in scraper cuts with a stop-watch. Maybe I should emphasize, A LOT of time in scraper cuts with stop watch. A pair of twins, regardless of size, being run by competent operators should be able to hook up, both load (heaped capacity) and unhook in around 40 seconds. Give or take 5 seconds for slight variations in material types, operator ability, etc.

A single 627 can fill the can level with the top of the can (struck capacity) in about 30 seconds loading alone. Getting the machine heaped will take a steep hill, a mile long cut, or a push-cat. That’s a lot less dirt than if it had a partner push-pulling. Not to mention the excessive wheel slip of a 627 self-loading.

If speed is all that matters; run them as singles and move that dirt fast. But running twin engine scrapers as pairs will move a lot more dirt per cycle (which equates to a lower cost per yard). It’s the superior way to move dirt with twins.

:exactly:iagree

Not to mention that 2 loads, one self loaded and one doubled up, even if they look the same, and they won't , the one loaded doubled up will have more dirt in it due to the compaction in the can from the extra horsepower involved.

I seen a contractor using 3 D-9's to push 651B's, and the loads looked the same as the ones pushed with 2 D-9's, but they had weighed the loads for a while, and by the eye, they looked the same, but the ones tripled had about 3 yards more dirt in the can verified by weight due to the compaction of the material.
It takes 2 things to move large quantities of dirt, weight and horsepower, and it takes those in the right balance so as not to spin tires, tear up components, or lack the motivational effort to get the job done.

As I have said before, there is a place for the pulled scraper, but if you want to have the top production, then push pull twins, or large singles pushed by a big enough crawler get the job done the fastest.

[RolyD8k]

:exactly:iagree

Not to mention that 2 loads, one self loaded and one doubled up, even if they look the same, and they won't , the one loaded doubled up will have more dirt in it due to the compaction in the can from the extra horsepower involved.

I seen a contractor using 3 D-9's to push 651B's, and the loads looked the same as the ones pushed with 2 D-9's, but they had weighed the loads for a while, and by the eye, they looked the same, but the ones tripled had about 3 yards more dirt in the can verified by weight due to the compaction of the material.
It takes 2 things to move large quantities of dirt, weight and horsepower, and it takes those in the right balance so as not to spin tires, tear up components, or lack the motivational effort to get the job done.

As I have said before, there is a place for the pulled scraper, but if you want to have the top production, then push pull twins, or large singles pushed by a big enough crawler get the job done the fastest.
we have seven D8Ks & 463s being push loaded on short haul,working with us are two rubber track quads each with a pair of 18 yrd pans scooping up loose loads,a lot more production from a pair of push loaded D8s,if anyone can load a film on here from youtube that i took called scrapers earthmoving you can judge for yourself

[d4c24a]

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R2OnVBK-jrE
one of rolys youtube clips for your enjoyment :notworthy

[alan627b]

Jerry, if you are ever in Omaha, call me and we can watch my employer go out of business together! I prefer push-pulling, but trying to find someone else to do it with is a challenge. I don't get it, I'd rather tag team or be pushed by a cat than saw my arm off trying to get a load myself. Which I have to do frequently. The fact our scrapers are so mismatched on power, and missing bails and blocks, also makes it frustrating. I'm starting to think about finding an outfit with better junk....
Carry on guys! Good pictures.
alan627b

[Jim Irwin]

Horses for courses, i heard all this stuff before.

My own experience. You will never get a tractor pulling a pan on road contractors work, my 11 yard scraper will turn around in the road width, and it will also windrow after the grader. And if the stock piles are close, you cant beat a 11 yard elevator.

The costs of transporting the tractor, scraper pans also, would be made up by my single machine transport cost.

My experience only.

Jim

[RolyD8k]

Graham,thanks for the link:drinkup

[t_dirt]

RolyD8k,
I work for a company that has 4 newer Case Quad tracks. We pull single or double Reynolds 17's or single K-tec 1225's. We pulled doubles this summer and destroyed a bunch of tracks. The lugs ripped off a few, the cables came out of a few and some did both. How many hours do you get on a set of tracks? We beleive that the double places too much weight on the back end and over loads the track.??
Any thoughts.
Awesome SITE!!!!!!!
t_dirt

[JDOFMEMI]

T-dirt

Welcome to our community.
Hope you enjoy us.

[t_dirt]

Here are a few pics!!

[RolyD8k]

t-dirt
thanks for the pictures,i own the D8s but not the quads,the owner says he,s getting under 1000 hrs per set,how does that compare to yours?:thumbsup

[t_dirt]

Some 2,000 hrs some 200 hrs. Alot around 750-500 hrs. I wonder what the average is for anyone else???

[bigblueox]

just out of curiosity what are the cables for pictured on the front of the machines( i see them on pretty much all pull pans)near the weight racks? are they some kind of saftey cable/ chain?

[JimBruce42]

just out of curiosity what are the cables for pictured on the front of the machines( i see them on pretty much all pull pans)near the weight racks? are they some kind of saftey cable/ chain?

They are for towing the machine if it gets stuck. You don't want to just chain to the front of the tractor and pull cause the weight of everything is pulling on the articulation joint and putting a lot of stress on that pin. So the cable is attache to the rear, I think the hitch itself, but I can't remember at the moment:confused: So when you pull you are pulling the tractor and the bowl and not threatening to pull the tractor in half:Banghead

Sad thing is, these tractors (wheeled included) can power through some nasty stuff, 90% of the time, you get stuck cause of that d**n bowl acts like one big boat anchor and will get hung up awful easily.:Banghead:Banghead

[bigblueox]

gottcha thanks!

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Folks.
I don't get over to this section of the site much 'cos I spend a LOTTA time in other sections but I done found this thread and the debate about pulled scrapers or singled twin-powers out-working doubled twins or push-loaded scrapers. I'm with Mass-X and JDOFMEMI here. I would even take it a step further.

Provided that you have the 'grunt' up front, a tandem drawn pan combination will almost always have a greater weight of material in the rear pan than the front one 'cos the tractor has the weight of the loaded front pan to add to its tractive potential while loading the rear pan. Furthermore, from my observations, the rear pan(s) almost always loads quicker for the same reason.

Another little point that a lot of less experienced scraper and push-cat operators don't realise is the amount of power and traction that it takes to get the dirt moving again in a part-filled bowl if the scraper operator digs too deep and stops the push-cat. The more material already in the bowl, the more power and traction it takes to get that material moving again to allow more into the bowl. So, scraper operators, try not to bog your push-cat(s) down but keep an even flow of material coming into the bowl.

On one job some years ago, I was running a D8H push-cat loading 4 x 631 open bowl scrapers in fairly heavy clay. On average, it took around 45 seconds per scraper to load, from pick-up to departure. One day, two scrapers were standing side by side with the operators yelling to each other across the gap when I got back from extracting another (elevating) scraper from a bog. Being an adventurous soul, I picked them both up together, one on each side of the blade and loaded them at the same time. It took about 80seconds to load the two of them and we did this numerous times after that intial effort so I had plenty of opportunities to time it. My point is this - I'd bet that neither of those two scrapers was carrying the same WEIGHT of material as the other two that I was loading individually, simply 'cos the D8H didn't have the power or traction to push two 631's together effectively.

It did help to relieve the monotony of the day though. And the spotters down on the dam wall could not figure out why those two scrapers so often came in nose to tail, sometimes one in front, sometimes the other.

I suspect too that I would only want quad-tracks hauling pans for me in low-traction or boggy conditions or maybe on soft sand. In better going, 4wd tractors may not be quite as quick at loading but it seems to me that you pay a pretty fair premium in track wear expenses for that slight decrease in loading time.

Just my 0.02.

[Greg]

Place for both. Here we use D7's and D8's pulling Cat pans. The rubber tired tractor pans seem okay with easy going like stripping top soil. Cat Challanger coupled to a scraper raises particular h--- with the rubber tracks.

On short hauls and in tough going can't beat Cat and four wheel Cat pan converted to hydraulic.

[Richardjw~]

Here are a few pics!!

Looking at your STXs I don't see any ballast on the front end. To get these tractors to perform properly in scraper work you will need about 65% of the weight over the front end - that is a serious amount of cast iron.
If you don't they will definitely peel the lugs off the back tracks for a past time.....as well as put a strain on the drive train.

The other thing to remember is that these machines aren't designed to load at speeds less than 8km/h (5 mph)......they are high speed low torque. In addition you will find that by factory settings they will de-rate to a lower power in their first four gears to protect the drive-line

[t_dirt]

2 of the four have weights, i need to see if they are better or worse than the other 2 on tracks. I wonder what the weight ratio is front to back? Can you over ride the power de-rating or just load in 5th gear??
Just to make it clear i am not the operator of these tractors, I am the GPS model guy/estimator. I am just trying to figure out how to save the company i work for some money and not buy every track in a 3 state area!!!

[Greg]

Good luck. You may need every track in a 5 state area from what I have seen of the Challengers pulling pans in anything but top soil and light clay.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, T dirt
Are you by some odd chance finding that the rear tracks are wearing/chopping out faster than the front ones?

[t_dirt]

yes, i do beleive the rears are wearing faster than the fronts. We thought it was due to the increased traction from the loaded pan. Lots of power+stong drive components+lots of traction= something has to give.... tracks????

[Richardjw~]

I wonder what the weight ratio is front to back? Can you over ride the power de-rating or just load in 5th gear??


Absolutely not, its in the software of the machine for a reason.....to stop total destruction of the tractor

[Richardjw~]

not being funny T Dirt, but your local Case IH dealer should have a ballasting calculator to work out what weight goes where.

Are these proper scraper spec. tractors?

Basically the machine (STX380?) weighs in at 21,800kgs & you can go up to 24,500kgs for optimum weight (in the ops manual), to get the 65% split weight you need around 15,600kgs over the front tracks to get the job right

Eighteen x 45kg weights & the carrier on the front end will increase the front end weight by 1191kgs and because of the law of physics actually adds nigh on 2 tonnes to the front and take it off the back

[Deas Plant]

Hi, T dirt.
If your rears are wearing/tearing out before your fronts, you ARE way out of balance. The loaded front pan resting on the drawbar is not 'directly' causing the problem. That is to say, it is not the weight as such but the extra traction that it gives to the back end when loading that second pan.

The front ballast the Richardjw mentioned is even more important when loading a second pan - or third , or fourth - than when loading a single or the front one of a multiple hitch. Otherwise, too much of the work is left to the rear tracks and they just ain't in the same class for handling those sorts of loads/strains as a standard crawler. Heck, you cain't even ballast the front TRACKS with water or cal/chlor - or lead powder - like you can with a wheeled tractor.

Another trick that might help would be to set up a quad-track with a front dozer blade and use it to pushload the other rigs. This would require a push block on the back end of each rear pan. A block that pinned into the rear drawbar and could maybe swivel a bit to either side might do the trick. Just a thought. I think you would also find that this would increase production by packing more into each scraper load due the extra horsepower and traction, as JDOFMEMI and Mass-X pointed out earlier.

Hope this helps.

[OCR]

Here's a nifty calculator that I used when we were installing the pusher axle
under our water tender.

Of course you need to know the weights you're dealing with... or guess real
close.

It's basically a weight and balance calculator... the type of stuff we had to figure out by hand, back in A&P school. I don't think I ever got one right...
due to simple math errors... :cool2

You have to mess with it to work on things it wasn't designed for... like put in
minus numbers... if you're removing something... and so forth.

It's pretty self explanatory... open the link and read the instructions... or,
click... go to calculator, after you open link, of course.

Lot of other info. on the page that pertains to trucks, which it was designed
for.

Also, you can't us it to figure weight transfer under power, which is what you're kinda looking at on the scraper deal.

But, it would work to get your front to back split how you want... if you know
your axle weights.

http://www.roscommonequipmentcenter.com/eng_exp.html

And you do have to use all the boxes... even if they're just zeros... or you will get a NaN... Not a Number... :)

Here's one to do unit conversons... such as kilograms to pounds... And, a
whole bunch more.... :)

http://rlhudson.com/Unit%20Converter/index.htm


OCR

[Richardjw~]

Hi, T dirt.
Heck, you cain't even ballast the front TRACKS with water or cal/chlor - or lead powder - like you can with a wheeled tractor.




Don't even consider water ballast for tyres in this application. The tyre sidewall HAS to flex in order to put the traction down correctly. Water will prevent this.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Richardjw.
Might I, from the lowly vantage point of a mere 48+ years of working with tractors and heavy machinery, beg to differ with your last statement. Further, may I put it to you that, if you do the job properly, you will have MORE sidewall flex, NOT less, with water-filled tyres.

[Richardjw~]

Hi, Richardjw.
Might I, from the lowly vantage point of a mere 48+ years of working with tractors and heavy machinery, beg to differ with your last statement. Further, may I put it to you that, if you do the job properly, you will have MORE sidewall flex, NOT less, with water-filled tyres.

lowly or not, tyre manufacturers now do not recommend filling the tyres with water - period.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Richardjw.
Maybe I'm outa touch, or maybe I've been hiding under a rock somewhere but I have NOT heard anything like from that ANY tire dealers DownUnder.

I have run 4wd loaders in sand with water in the tires and beat the pants off similar machines with air-filled tires. I have worked narrower, water-filled tires against wider air-filled tires, especially on 4wd loaders, and at least stayed with the other wider-tired machines if not beaten them. Again especially on 4wd loaders, it makes them a much more stable machine as well as adding traction.

Not recommended for high-speed haulage units such as normal scrapers, dump trucks and ADT's due the build up of centrifugal force at speed. How-wevver, where 4wd tractor-pan combinations are working on un-graded haul roads or not achieving high speeds, above about 20-25 mph, I'd certainly be thinking about it.

But I've never found the thought-box with my name on it yet.

Just my 0.02.

[Greg]

sounds like a heck of a bunch of extra everything when you can use reguar scrapers or pull pans behind a Cat.

[JDOFMEMI]

Don't even consider water ballast for tyres in this application. The tyre sidewall HAS to flex in order to put the traction down correctly. Water will prevent this.

Unless you fill the tire to the point of pressurizing it only with water, the sidewall will still flex. Most tire filling charts I have seen show how many gallons to add to get 50% fill, or max fill of 75%. The remainder is air filled, and keeps the tire flexible while greatly improving the bite. Pure water is one thing, adding CaCl in solution gives much more weight than straight water.

It is a pain to deal with, flats are a real mess, but the balance and traction makes up for it in the right application.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Greg.
That has been my contention all along, since I first saw a tractor-pan combo. You are maintaining 2/3/4/5 units in each combo as opposed to one unit with a scraper, a heap of extra tires, it takes much longer to load, in some dump situations, you have to go around a second time to dump that last pan and they won't work in harder ground without a ripping tractor anyway. And they plain won't work in low-traction conditions.

And people want to talk about transport costs. If you are running any more than ONE pan behind a tractor, you are going to need a second float. If you are running FOUR pans behind a tractor, which we've seen photos of on this forum, you are going to need at least 3 floats - PLUS something capable of either loading or unloading the pans at EACH end while you are transporting.

O.K., so you do need either a pushcat or push-pull twin-powers for normal scrapers to work effectively BUT normal scrapers will work reasonably well in country where a tractor-pan combo would have to watch from the sidelines 'cos the tractor couldn't pull its pans through the mud or sand or whatever and Cat-n-can rigs will work well in even more places than normal scrapers, governed largely only by haul distance.

Just my 0.02.

[RollOver Pete]

lowly or not, tyre manufacturers now do not recommend filling the tyres with water - period.

Hmm...:confused:
I'm not sure if I've ever listened to any manufactures recommendation-period.
:cool:


"4 out of 5 Dentists surveyed would recommend sugarless gum to their patients who chew gum."

[Richardjw~]

Hmm...:confused:
I'm not sure if I've ever listened to any manufactures recommendation-period.
:cool:

At the end of the day its no skin off my nose what you do or who you listen to....... the topic here was about enhancing performance for these tractor scraper combinations either on tracks or tyres. Its not for nothing that the manufacturers spend £££££ on research and in this instance recommend cast iron in these applications.

Remember a tractor tyre running at 18psi transmitting 500hp through it is an entirely different construction to that used on a 500 hp loading shovel

http://www.moderntiredealer.com/t_inside.cfm?action=art_det&storyID=1035

and the sentence "Many farmers are comfortable with calcium chloride ballast because that's what dad used,"

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Richardjw.
The ORIGINAL topic here was, and I copy and paste:

"tractor pans or scrapers which do you like better".

As seems to be very common in such discussions, the focus had shifted a little by the time you came along, from the original question to how long or SHORT a life rubber tracks had in this application and the reasons therefore.

You came along with some good sense about balance and ballast - and then you posted this gem, and I copy and paste:

"Don't even consider water ballast for tyres in this application. The tyre sidewall HAS to flex in order to put the traction down correctly. Water will prevent this." (Un-C+P)

Note that at this stage you didn't mention that tire manufacturers didn't recommend water ballast in their tires these days. You just made a flat blanket statement that water ballast would prevent the tire sidewalls flexing.

It was at this point that you started unravelling. I doubt there is a person of either gender on this forum who has had anything to do with water ballast in tires who hasn't noticed that water-ballasted tires tend to have MORE sidewall flex, NOT less. I personally have never yet met anyone who attempted a 100% fill with water but, even if it was done, you would have to put a fair bit of pressure behind the last of the water to STOP sidewall flex.

I have read the article at the other end of your link. (Yer certainly dug that one out of the archives, didn't you? 2001.) It does say that some tire makers and some tractor makers are suggesting suitcase and wheel weights rather than liquid ballast. It also goes on to say that the tire dealers are NOT finding that this advice is changing big mobs of people's approaches to getting more traction. Maybe the tire and tractor makers ought to point an ear or six in the direction of the end users.

I have also yet to see wheel weights give as much increase in traction as a 75% fill with water and running the tires at about 18 - 20 PSI instead 30 - 40 PSI air-filled. I think this might have something to do with comparative footprint???????? And you still have to keep the darned wheel weights bolted up tight too.

Yes, 500 hp TRACTOR tires are a somewhat different proposition from 500 hp 4wd loader tires. Have you ever watched the distortion and flexing, especially in HEAVY digging, that are part of a loader tire's life? You just don't get that same kind of punishment dished out to tires on tractor-pan applications.

In closing, we love to 'see' new faces posting here but I think most of us would prefer that the posts make good sense, have somethiong worthwhile to contribute AND explain the logic or reasons behind whatever information or views are posted. Flat, blanket statements, especially without accompanying reasons, do not tend to be well received here.

[Richardjw~]

Apologies to all the readers for appearing abrupt, but I never use 20 words when 2 will do.

It wasn't really a case of digging around for the info, just using Google.....it was the first thing it threw up (so to speak)

So Deas now you agree with my statement that adding water is not recommended for scraper applications?

If you want to continue reading then have a look here....http://salesmanual.deere.com/sales/salesmanual/en_NA/tractors/2008/feature/ballasting_and_optimizing_performance/6030p_7030p/6030_6030p_7030_7030p_ballast_liquid.html

here......http://salesmanual.deere.com/sales/salesmanual/en_NA/tractors/2008/feature/ballasting_and_optimizing_performance/9030/9030_tractors_optimizing_tractor_performance.html


here.....
http://www.goodyear.ca/tires/farm/pdf/GoodyearFarmHandbook_1.pdf


and here.....http://manuals.deere.com/omview/OMAR283051_19/?tM=

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Richardjw.

[QUOTE=Richardjw~;109814]
So Deas now you agree with my statement that adding water is not recommended for scraper applications?[QUOTE]

Now yu dun gotten me all kew-ree-yus. I'm tryin' ter figga rout whair eye dunn sed that eye aggree wiff y'all an' eye jes cain't fine ditt.

Eye kin fined whair I dunn sed this:
Quote:
"I have also yet to see wheel weights give as much increase in traction as a 75% fill with water and running the tires at about 18 - 20 PSI instead 30 - 40 PSI air-filled. I think this might have something to do with comparative footprint???????? And you still have to keep the darned wheel weights bolted up tight too." Unquote.

Eye cain't figga rout howe thatt ekwates 2 aggreein' wiff yer.

Quote:
"You came along with some good sense about balance and ballast." Unquote.

If'n yer figga that iz aggreein wiff yer, minetinkit yer dunn mist ther poynt 'cuz eye bloo ittall ayway wiff this necks lion:

Quote:
"and then you posted this gem, and I copy and paste:

"Don't even consider water ballast for tyres in this application. The tyre sidewall HAS to flex in order to put the traction down correctly. Water will prevent this." (Un-C+P)" Unquote.

I will be blunt here. That is a line of crap on a par with some of Dozer 575's better lines of similar substance. (If you don't know who Dozer 575 is, just do a little ferreting around in the dozer discussions in this forum.) There is only ONE way that water will go anywhere near preventing the tire walls flexing. That is if somebody were silly enough to attempt a 100% fill with water. Even then, it would be almost impossible to stop some degree of flexing due to the natural flex and elasticity inherent in the tire's construction.

The accepted WISDOM for filling tires with any form of liquid ballast for as long as I can remember and anywhere I have been where it has been done is to fill the tire somewhere between 40% and 75% with water, et al., and pressurise the rest with air. I personally prefer a 75% fill - to valve level with the valve at the top - and then add a little more than half the air pressure that you would use if the tire was totally air-filled. This gives about the best balance between traction and ride and the best footprint, at least in my humble experience. AND it allows the tire walls to flex more freely than a straight air fill simply 'cos there is way less pressure in the tire.

I have never used cal-chlor as a filler, simply 'cos I have always lived in parts of the world where freezing was not a problem. I do know that it plays real havoc with tubeless rims if proper care is not taken so I'm ackshully quite happy that I have never had to use it.

Now, do you still think I agree with you?

I meant what I said about new faces in the last paragraph of my previous post in this thread. May I suggest that you re-read it. And perhaps you ought to look at your habit of only using 2 words when 20 would possibly better explain your case.

[aglasergps]

Weights...steel or water....that is obviously the question now. I'll also throw in my $0.02 worth in, it's been a while since I've been here. I ran 4wd tractors and tandem buckets for nearly 15 years when I was younger and now have a neck to prove it. We found that we had to use a lower air pressure in the tyre with water because of the lower volume of air in the water filled tyre. There was less room for it to compress so we had to start with a lower pressure to allow it to let the tyre flex. The other reason we ended up with the steel weights was simply because the water was such a pain in the a..e when it came to a repair.....................

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Aglasergps.
I first encountered water-filled tires on Chamberlain Champion 9G farm tractors which had a top speed of 27 mph. These tractors had a transverse front leaf spring that did help to take a bit of bounce out them but they were an exceptional ride for a farm tractor of the day anyway, at any speed. How-wevver, I can tell you from personal experience that they were NOT quite as good a ride with all air-fill in those rear tires. We ran them at 16 psi with 75% water fill or at 34-36 psi with full air fill.

My next experience with water-filled tires was a Kawasaki KSS60Z 4wd articulated loader. It was not a good machine to road anywhere very far when I first started on it as it had air-filled tires at about 45 psi.. It was also not a particularly stable machine to operate.

Then we added 75% water-fill all round with about 18 psi air pressure. It was a vastly different machine. It could put its grunt on the ground much better and was far more stable in operation. I could actually side-cut a 1-in-2 batter with it quite happily.

It could wind up to around 50 kilometres per hour or slightly more on the flat and up to 55 kph down a hill. It handled almost like a car at those speeds. I was staggered at the difference the water-fill made to its handling.

Another time, I wasn't the operator, just a spectator. The tractor was a Bell 4206 pulling 2 x 18 cu. yd pans and it was having trouble filling them, particularly the front one. I suggested that they add 75% water to the tractor tires, again with about 18-20 psi air pressure. Different tractor, different ride. The operator loved it.

Yer pays yer money, yer takes yer pick.

[tctractors]

I would class myself as a bit thick ???, but 1 job I worked on required the Scrapers ( CAT 631's ) to cross over public roads with the aid of traffic lights, if the Scrapers hit the lights at the wrong time and had to stop, they had a night-mare struggle to get up a steady greasey slope about a 100 yards past the road crossing, the answer was to water fill the tyres, I dont know to what percentage this was done to but I think it was the best part of 90 gallons (2 Barrels) in each wheel, the mixture of water and some chemical jollop was a time consuming task, but the resulting traction was best described as fantastic, the grader never needed to give them a bunt up the hill afterwards, the old driver that instigated the wheel filling told me, they always ran DW 20's with a bit of water in to help things out, the only water/glycol thing I used to be up to snuff on, was the brake coolers in the hubs, but these were only filled to the half way line, so it would seem the water ballast thing was done by our Grandad's who new a thing or 2 about getting the best out of what they had.

tctractors

[Greg]

We always use to use flagmen when crossing roads that way. That way the vehicle traffic always got stopped for the scrapers. That way never had to slow down or stop, just kept moving along at full speed.

[tctractors]

Greg, these traffic lights had a Man switching them for the Scrapers to fly over the crossing, but 25% of the time they had to stop and take their turn with the heavy traffic.

tctractors

[Greg]

figuured it had to be better than just automatic lights.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, TCtractors.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. I would guess that around 90 imperial gallons (They're bigger than the under-nourished U.S. gallons. LOL.) would be fairly close to 75% fill for 631 tires.

Did the bloke on the switches for the lights take the odd nap now and then that the scrapers sometimes had to wait for the traffic?

[Someguy]

pullpans for stripping topsoil and light cuts. Cat Push/Pull type pans in any other application especially rock

Which Cat pans are you speaking of ? Cat 80s ? When was the last time Cat built pans ? (Excluding the pans they are reselling now...)

How would a BIG 4WD tractor pulling a stout Cat pan compare to a TS14 ? Some people say you can't do precision work with them, like cut slopes and such. 14s aren't that heavy and the 4-71 versions are a bit underpowered. A good 4WD tractor with a 25MPH powershift transmission should work pretty well, not ?

[Someguy]

Here is a scraper we recently built from a 621B. The D8N is a pull tractor we bought that was factory set up for that purpose.

That is a nice scraper !

I wonder how it would work without the dolly, mounted on a ball right over the rear axle of an articulated tractor ? Any idea how much weight it put on the dolly ?

[Turbo21835]

Which Cat pans are you speaking of ? Cat 80s ? When was the last time Cat built pans ? (Excluding the pans they are reselling now...)

How would a BIG 4WD tractor pulling a stout Cat pan compare to a TS14 ? Some people say you can't do precision work with them, like cut slopes and such. 14s aren't that heavy and the 4-71 versions are a bit underpowered. A good 4WD tractor with a 25MPH powershift transmission should work pretty well, not ?

I wouldnt say any of the TS14s i ran were under powered. Most of them were older than me, and a little tired. I had no problem running them wide open when we had good haul roads. Cut plenty of slopes with them. This was all with the help of a push cat, as the rear end likes to slide downhill. Solution is to let the push cat grab you before you start cutting. Been on some fairly steep slopes, some rather uncomfortable but the challenge was fun.

[Someguy]

deleted

[Someguy]

I wouldnt say any of the TS14s i ran were under powered.
I guess it depends on your definition of "power".

Cut plenty of slopes with them. This was all with the help of a push cat, as the rear end likes to slide downhill. Solution is to let the push cat grab you before you start cutting. Been on some fairly steep slopes, some rather uncomfortable but the challenge was fun.

I meant that the pull scrapers couldn't cut slopes. I know that 14's can cut slopes.

[Greg]

Last pull type that Cat built was the 400 series, 435, 463, etc. Set up with a dolly the way they were originally built they will cut a slope. Do it here all of the time. No dolly and direct to the draw bar is probably going to be a different thing.

[Hollywood627G]

Hollywood627G: "I was always told and have witnessed first hand that a single 27 is faster then 2"

This is a false statement. If you’re trying to insinuate that one 627 will outrun a pair of 627’s in cycle times, yeah, its a few seconds faster in the cut because it’s only one can to load. If you think running a big fleet of 627’s as singles is a fast way to move dirt, give me....

never said that or thought that. like i said before, 1 scraper is Faster then 2.

A single 627 can fill the can level with the top of the can (struck capacity) in about 30 seconds loading alone.

30 sec is long. it only took me an avg. of 15 to get full with 1ft. extended sideboards.

Getting the machine heaped will take a steep hill, a mile long cut, or a push-cat. That’s a lot less dirt than if it had a partner push-pulling. Not to mention the excessive wheel slip of a 627 self-loading.


Yeah i had an arguement with my push partner one day because he took the length of the cut to load his scraper over the screen above the crowd, while it only took me 3 scrapers long to do the same. you should start at the end of the cut, not the beginning.

Back to the original question, push pulls are better.

[Mass-X]

like i said before, 1 scraper is Faster then 2.

Explain to me how twin engine scrapers running single, and therefore faster, is superior to the same two twins engine scrapers running push/pull?

It’s all about lowest cost per yard. A pair of twin engine scrapers running together, while just slightly longer in cycle times, moves material at a much lower cost per yard than those same two scrapers running/loading single. Unless there’s a very steep hill involved, I’m curious as to the logic behind running push/pull scrapers single?

30 sec is long. it only took me an avg. of 15 to get full with 1ft. extended sideboards.

Load your 627 in a dozen or so different types of material and get an overall average load time. It’ll be somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 seconds.

[Hollywood627G]

Dude, all i said was FASTER. Not more productive, not superior, or insinuating anything. One scraper can go around faster than two, which if you look back at the original statement i was responding to, the man said they were running single and started to hook up to run faster.
Like i said in my previous statement, IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW YOU CUT!! Bury that ******* edge in the dirt and dig!! How often do you hit a dozen or so different types of material in one day? or a week? Maybe on a job you will hit a dozen different types according to the soil test, but how many actually effect the machine? Hard, Soft, and Loose. Only 3 types i know of that effect it. 30sec.?!?! PLEASE!!!! Like i said, 15 in Caliche, Top Soil and Sand.

[Deas Plant]

Hi, Hollywood627G.
My twin-power experience is somewhat limited but my general scraper is a fair bit LESS limited. You claim 15 second loading times single loading with 1-foot hungry boards in topsoil. Boy, I'd sure love to see you do that in some of the topsoils that I've seen - they set harder-n a bull's forehead. A D8H hydraulic dozer blade will simply skate across the top without ripping it first.

In sand? I've seen a 627B running in sand where it was battling to get much more than a water level load on its own. Put a D7F or a D8H behind it and it could get a FULL load in around half the time that it took to get a water level load on its own.

Caliche? I'm not familiar with that term here in DowNunder. What I am familiar with is having 2 x 627B's running push-pull with a Cat D7G pushing them. Their load times were down around 12 - 16 seconds for both to be loaded to running over and on their way and that was in good quality clay that was way easier to load ripped and it compacted very nicely, thank you. Do that with a single and get the same load weights. On the rare times that these guys did load single, it was up between 30 and 35 seconds and way smaller loads.

And what kind of edge was it that you buried in the dirt?

Just my 0.02.

[Mass-X]

Deas already addressed a couple questions I have. But for clarification:

Dude, all i said was FASTER. Not more productive, not superior

Let’s not argue semantics. We can agree to disagree on faster/productivity methods.

How often do you hit a dozen or so different types of material in one day? or a week? Maybe on a job you will hit a dozen different types according to the soil test, but how many actually effect the machine?

In ’04 I was on a virgin highway construction project with a total quantity of 12.7 million cubic yards. There were 85-88 scrapers on site. The soils technicians on site were complaining about the 490 material proctors on the project. In a single day, well over 20 different types of in-situ material would be handled by the scrapers.

I can think of at least a dozen types of material that would all be best to be loaded a little differently with a scraper. On that specific project, we had to have a host of full time rip-cats, several Vermeer rock grinders, and two loader-mounted Iron Wolf’s to keep up with processing and prepping material for load-out.

I won’t paint with a broad brush and speak for anyone else, but I can personally think of several projects I’ve been on with enough variation in material types that the dozer and scraper operators had to learn the best ways to handle each type of material.

Hard, Soft, and Loose. Only 3 types i know of that effect it. 30sec.?!?! PLEASE!!!! Like i said, 15 in Caliche, Top Soil and Sand.

I’ve spent enough time in the seat of a scraper, particularly twins, to know that after a couple loads, it’s not hard to tell what gear, where to maintain your RPM’s, how deep you set into the material, how far open to keep the apron, etc. That doesn’t take into consideration the degree of slope in your cut. Not to mention rock. There’s more than just sand, topsoil and caliche once you get outside the Phoenix valley.

There are plenty of situations where push-pulling can load a 627 in 15 seconds. But like I stated earlier, when loading singly, load times will easily double on average.

[alan627b]

The only situations I can think of where a pair of push pull scrapers will work better singly would be
1) inexperienced hands
2) mismatched scrapers, depending on mechanical state of repair
3) very muddy underfoot conditions, and that may mean safer, not faster or more productive.
Mass-X, feel free to add others as you see appropriate. This is just based on my experience.
Deas, Caliche, as I had it explained to me, is a very hard, cemented layer of decomposed
sandstone, or sandy soil. Deposited originally in thin layers and cemented together over eons by moisture and desert heat. What I saw of it, looked like frozen sandy soil, as it came out in thin slabs/chunks.
I was told it's very hard on ripper cats.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, it's found frequently in the western United States.
Hey, I'm from Nebraska, that was how it was explained to me in Arizona and california on vacation....
alan627b

[jgivens]

Does anyone have photos of tractors pulling 4 pans? I thought I saw one on here the other day but can't remember. It was a Big Bud pulling the pans. Thanks in advance for your help. Hey I would post pics of our tractors and pans but it won't let me if anybody can help with that yell!

[jgivens]

nevermind I found it!

[SilverStar86]

My company has 5 Case STX-450's that pull 3 Reynolds 17CS12 scraper bowls each and 2 JD 9630's pulling 2 JD 2112E scaper bowls each. They work great, the only problem we have had with any of them is one of the Case's got struck by lightning and shorted the computer out.

We road our equipment from job to job. We have roaded them over a 125 mile trip before and still no problems. A sub contractor we work with before has drove them from Amarillo, TX to Marietta, OK and back (thats about 370 miles one way).

Yeah the turning radius in not the greatest but it moves more dirt quicker and more cost efficent.

[t_dirt]

My company has 5 Case STX-450's that pull 3 Reynolds 17CS12 scraper bowls each
Hey SilverStar86,
How do your tracks hold up? Do you have weight on the front? How Much. We pulled double Rynolds this summer and the tractors ate the tracks up!! We ended up pulling singles twords the end!!

[SilverStar86]

They do have counter weights on the front. They dont have tracks, there tires (two on each corner). They are the scraper specials, they come with counter weights already on the front, not sure just how much. We pull three and road them with all three pans attached, tire hold up great.

[HoJay]

I seen mentioned on here it takes the tractor pans some room to get turned around. I was wondering what they were like circle dumping, dumping high, like when your padding road 8-10 meter top?

[Greg]

Can turn my Cat's with pans on a dime. If you circle dump real tight you need a dozer to spread material.

Why would anyone want to road equipment 125 miles? 370 seems crazy beyond belief.

[HoJay]

"If you circle dump real tight you need a dozer to spread material"
Yep, thats what I mean. Can a ag tractor and pan circle dump very well or do they get hung up? We usually pad in with the scrapers circle dumping and the spread cat carrying a heavy lift to try to avoid pumping up water from our high water table.

[KMB83]

greg,

guys road farm equipment that far. not a lot, but a couple of the big boys.

125mi/ 25mph = 5hrs / .9 for traffic inefficiencies (i dunno) = 5.5 hrs

got the cost of the machinery working for 5.5hrs, diesel, wear, etc and the man running it.

say you break that rig up, how long is it going to take to back those on a trailer? chain them down, get the correct # of semi's, get permits, unload. i bet roading isnt that bad of way to go. could be wrong?

[Greg]

None of the farm guys here run that far.

Takes me a few minutes to split apart Cat and pan, few minutes to load Cat, little bit to chain down and away we go. Have annual permits. Several years ago used to pull the scrapers behind dump truck to move them. Can haul them a h--- of a lot faster than pulling them. Granted, I can't road move my Cats, but look at the road ware on those expensive tires on those machine.

[Turbo21835]

say you break that rig up, how long is it going to take to back those on a trailer? chain them down, get the correct # of semi's, get permits, unload. i bet roading isnt that bad of way to go. could be wrong?

A lot of the big outfits did it. Some outfits still do it. I seem to remember stories of a big company based out of Wixom Lake Mi that was a nation wide contractor doing this exact thing. I also remember SurferJoe telling a story of watching scrapers parade by him. Maybe the same company? Im hoping he will chime in.

[CM1995]

A sub contractor we work with before has drove them from Amarillo, TX to Marietta, OK and back (thats about 370 miles one way).

We hired a pull-pan sub running Red Tractors pulling double pans in the past from Mississippi. He would road his tractors and pans whenever he could. He told me he once roaded his tractors from Miss. to Amarillo TX one time. Don't know if it is true or not.:beatsme

However I do know this one-legged fellow (the other leg was disconjoined in a pan maintenance accident) did road his tractors from a project 20 or so miles away, to our project. In the convoy, there was 3 tractors total, and he was pulled over by the local police, driving down a 6 lane HWY. That must have been a sight to see - three pull tractors with duals and 2 pans each in tow, stopped on a 6 lane suburban HWY with a one-legged fellow trying to explain it all to the local police.

Disclaimer: I in no way am making fun of folks with disabilities or condone such behavior, but you have to admit that would make an interesting situation.

[Greg]

Goes to show police don't discriminate. They will go after anybody and everybody. Up here if you were caught pulling a pan behind a truck it would require an over width permit, flags, oversize load signs, strobe lights and a doubles rating on the CDL of the driver because of the pivot on the front axle of the pan. :Banghead

It just plain AIN'T worth the hassle on top of the slower speed required when pulling the pan behind a truck. DOT cops see you pulling one here it is an automatic stop. If you are chained down right, have the right flags, signs and strobe lights they will pretty much leave you alone unless they see something obvious.:Banghead

Once in a while you will see someone roading a Cat 627 or 621 but that is rare. Also requires a permit for the machine to do so. Again up here, it just plain AIN'T worth the hassle.:Banghead

[KMB83]

turbo-

i've read the post your talking about: sounded like a site to behold. he was talking 50's at a time...

greg - i heard what you said, it would take me more than a couple minutes to break down 3 scrapers. but i'm used to one that is little (7.5yd) behind say a 1-ton truck. and i'm not good at getting the hitch lined up by myself....

with that said, i'll still stick to my statement, when you break it down on a cost basis it isnt as dumb as it sounds. semi costs, added labor, loading, unloading, etc. farmers i know have operated distances of 150-300mi from their home base in our area. These boys farm 150mi north of home base in illinois to arkansas....!!!

http://www.illff.com/

i dont know how much more wear a road generates with little resistance and high speeds, versus a pull-pan situation where slip, power, and traction are necessary a high % of the time. i'm not a tire expert.

i just dont think it sounds as bizarre from a macro standpoint.

[jgivens]

We drive our tractors to every job we have. We've moved as many as 6 tractors with dual pans at one time. We're based near Bowling Green Ky. and if you have a map of Ky to see we've drove them from Mayfield to Paducah over to Owensboro, Madisonville and as far up as Elizabethtown and all points inbetween. We've even drove them to Cave In Rock Illinois. When you're talking about tearing down 7 tractors(we have 7 now) and 14 pans, 21 if you got a triple set up you're talking about lots of trips back and forth with the lowboy(days), lots of time chaining and booming, lots of time hooking back up, and lots of $$$$$ lost. It just makes more cents for us to drive them. As far as tire wear...we have 04' and 05' tractors with original tires on them, roading them hasn't really hurt them.

[jgivens]

couple more pics

[Greg]

Like I said before. Here it is D8's and D7's. Can't drive them. Pans are Model 80 and 463 Cats. Nightmare to pull them with permits needed for each truck. DOT, reduced speed and doubles endorsement on CDL's, etc. Two guys unhook easily. Loading the pan and unhooking all goes in one step. And once again, pulling one here with a truck is just begging to get pulled over.

[9420pullpan]

Nice pics jgivens, I have done that a few times over here in NE PA. Scares the hell out of people hahaha

[JimBruce42]

Nice pics jgivens, how do you guys like the "cat" challenger tractors compared to the JD's?

Pullpan, lol, doesn't take much to scare drivers around here does it? :drinkup

PS- I kinda miss my tractor...

[JDOFMEMI]

Great shots there, Jgivens. Just goes to show the differences accross the country. Things like that that are normal where you live would get others in deeeep trouble.

I agree with the logic of it for you. I bet the road trip costs less than the lowboy for the tractor only, not to mention the pans.

I had a subcontractor in Nevada once with 12 scrapers, 631 and 637, on a project, and they roaded to the next job over 30 miles away. Getting harder to do all the time now though.
Working in the city, you have to get a lowboy and a permit to go to a job accross the street.

[jgivens]

Nice pics jgivens, how do you guys like the "cat" challenger tractors compared to the JD's?

Pullpan, lol, doesn't take much to scare drivers around here does it? :drinkup

PS- I kinda miss my tractor...

That was a "field test tractor" that our Cat dealer Whayne Supply brought out to us. Its stay was short as they whisked it off to Texas to another contractor to use. It was a very powerful tractor but we couldn't use it like we wanted because of the logger tires on it. Duals work better for us in the wetter/softer conditions. With that said I would love to run a big kitty with duals on it!! Attached is my favorite tractor!:thumbsup

[jgivens]

Great shots there, Jgivens. Just goes to show the differences accross the country. Things like that that are normal where you live would get others in deeeep trouble.

I agree with the logic of it for you. I bet the road trip costs less than the lowboy for the tractor only, not to mention the pans.

I had a subcontractor in Nevada once with 12 scrapers, 631 and 637, on a project, and they roaded to the next job over 30 miles away. Getting harder to do all the time now though.
Working in the city, you have to get a lowboy and a permit to go to a job accross the street.


Glad you all like my photos!! I have lots of them to show and plenty of time to do it. We've been off for a couple weeks, the weather just isn't being nice to us.

Jerry it is normal to see tractors on roads here, I can't count the times we meet or see tractors as big as ours moving when we do. Even through the towns well you see in the picture above just ease through and it's no big deal.

[Richardjw~]

Attached is my favorite tractor!:thumbsup

You got good tastes!!! ;)

[Nothinbetter]

Jgivens:

Why is the Case IH/Stieger your favorite? Does it pull better? More power? Nicer cab? Or are you just partial to red? I ask because not because I think Deere or any brand is better. I ask due to it seems like I see more of the Case than other brands for this application.

Also is there a reason its weights are on the rear axle of the Case? I would think it would be a better set up to have them on the front like the Deere’s.

I too like your pictures, and can see why roading is a better idea than trucking.

[jgivens]

I just wanna say this is a great site. Glad I was able to find it!

Nothinbetter: The answer to all the questions is Yes! The case does pull better, it is weighted on the front and rear. The front wheel weights just happen to be on the inside wheels along with suitcase weights up front. Let me know if that is wrong, We had no clue as Case had it set up that way.

The Case is a 530HD as well so yes it does have more power than the 9520 Deeres we run, when we need the power in hard pulls like loading or on hills it rolls on where the Johns will literally choke out and die. (I like the Case over the Caterpillar as well!)
The cab has alot more room, more visibility, more machine info. at the touch of a button, and I like the bigger controls better. The only thing wrong with the CaseIH tractor and I think all of them have this problem is the ride, It rides awful! You'd think with the longer wheel base and more weight it would ride nice :beatsme Dunno? Anybody else think the Case tractors ride rough? Anything I can do about it?

[Nothinbetter]

Jgivens, thanks for answering my questions. I worked on farms as an operator as a teen and still help a few from time to time. My own experience has been that Deere’s will ride better. This is base on "row crop" tractors, not artic's like these. They were one of the 1st to make a factory cab, and they put a lot of R & D into operator comfort. Not to say at this point anyone makes a bad cab, I just like the Deere set-up. I have found I prefer machines with unfilled radial tires. Liquid filled and bias ply seem to ride rough. Lighter also seems better when going over rough ground. This is based on my own experience with farm tractors, none as large as these monsters.
One thing I have found it is also important to set the seat up for your self. They may seem like small adjustments, over a long day can make a huge difference.
Weights, on a small tractor, wider is better, on these with duals I don’t see where it would make a difference if they were inside or outside the rim. Most tractors I have seen that large, the weights have been the same as far as set up front and back. Either both axles on the inside, or both on the outside.

[Nothinbetter]

I also remember being told about "power hop". which can make a tractor ride rough under heavry loads. So I looked it up and found this on the Michelin web site.
__________________________________________________ _____________

When does “power hop” occur ?

Power hop can affect any make or model of 4WD or MFWA tractor. It occurs under medium to heavy drawbar load with towed implements. Typically the ground is dry, with loose soil on top. Power hop tendency and intensity increase as power input increases. Power hop can occur with bias or radial tires, but maybe more prevalent with radial tires because of the higher level of traction developed.

But, power hop can be controlled!

What factors can influence Power hop? But, power hop can be controlled!


Not enough overall tractor weight for the horsepower
Incorrect weight distribution between front and rear axles
Incorrect tire pressures
Improper drawbar height for the implement
Installation of tires smaller than recommended by the tractor manufacturer
Engine horsepower improvements without additional ballast
Following the “Rules To Obtain Optimum Tire Performance” Will Solve Most Power Hop Problems.

__________________________________________________ ______________

If You Have Power Hop on A 4WD Tractor
Ensure the tractor has a sufficient weight to horsepower ratio for the field operating speed. Add cast ballast as necessary to achieve the required weight. Michelin does not recommend the use of liquid ballast in the tires as this will change the stiffness of the tires and may make power hop difficult or impossible to control.*
Ensure the tractor has the correct weight split between the front and rear axles; no more than 55% of the weight on the front axle for towed implements. Setting the front weight split to 55% or less with towed implements is extremely important for 4WD tractors.
Ensure the tires are set at the correct pressure for the axle weights. All the tires on each axle are to be set at the same pressure - duals or triples are all to be set at the same pressure as the inside tires on each axle.
If power hop occurs, raise REAR tire pressures 6 psi above the optimum until the power hop is controlled.
* For complete rules to obtain optimum tire performance, ask your authorized Michelin® dealer.

If Power Hop Persists

If power hop persists, continue to raise REAR tire pressure in 6 psi* increments until power hop disappears.
However do not exceed the maximum tire pressure recommended in the 30 mph table published in the Michelin Ag Tire Databook or website.
If Power Hop Is still present, particularly on firm soils and / or operating at speeds below 5.5 mph

Return pressures to the original level for the axle weights for optimum performance, as discussed above.
Increase FRONT tire pressures by 6 psi*.
If power hop persists, continue to raise front tire pressures in 6 psi* increments until the power hop is controlled.
However do not exceed the maximum tire pressure recommended in the 30 mph table published in the Michelin Ag Tire Databook or website.
For best performance and reduced soil compaction, Michelin® recommends that lower “optimized” tire pressures be used during conditions when power hop is less likely to occur.

[jgivens]

Thanks for the info. I honestly believe the Deeres just have a better ride than case but that's just my opinion. I'm sure some think different. You bring up something interesting though talking about tires.... the Deeres have Michelins and the case has Firestones. Could that make a really really noticable difference? Either way we're working on switching them out one at a time, know what I mean? ;)

Here's some machines that have come and gone.

[Richardjw~]

__________________________________________________ ______________

If You Have Power Hop on A 4WD Tractor
Ensure the tractor has a sufficient weight to horsepower ratio for the field operating speed. Add cast ballast as necessary to achieve the required weight. Michelin does not recommend the use of liquid ballast in the tires as this will change the stiffness of the tires and may make power hop difficult or impossible to control.*


deyjavu :drinkup

[aglasergps]

Hi guys, it's been a while since I've been here. Thought I'd add a few pics of an old machine I purchased recently. It's an Aussie built tractor designed specifically for pulling scrapers. The last few comments I have read here have been about ballasting....This thing is so well ballanced and has the overall weight, rubber and converter transmission for pulling scrapers (pans) in just about any conditions. It is not an agricultural tractor with a few added gimmicks so it can be called a "scraper" tractor (and it is not a Versatile either if you were wondering about the colour scheme!). This one has a zillion hours and is as good, if not better now,than the day it was made. Interested to hear any comments but it works and has the longevity to prove it. I'd like to see a red or green machine with 30,000 hours + looking and working as good as this thing. Attached are some photos and a youtube link. There are a few things I'm going to modify to modernise it a bit but the basic concept is what I think leads it to be classified as "industrial". I have both Trimble GNSS Autosteer and Trimble GNSS 3-D FieldLevel on it which is probably worth more than the tractor is in monetary terms but it still makes for a decent earthmover.......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVH9Zi7v9KA

[Richardjw~]

got any of them FW25 Waltannas kicking around your parts

[Greg]

Looks a lot like the early Steigers that were sold here in the states except for the color.

[aglasergps]

Greg, a bit more about this machine. This model Waltanna was built very differently to the Steigers of the past (and most other articulated tractors for that matter) in a number of areas as they were built purely as scraper tractors. There were only ever 3 of these big frame machines ever made and all are still pulling scrapers - says a lot about them really. This particular one has a 460hp Cat 3406C, 6 speed Allison and the biggest Rabas you can get under it and the best commercially available air seat available. The articulation area is really tough with heavy pins, bearings, drive lines and uni's. The previous owner of this one couldn't replace the original 29.5 tyres so he put on these 37.25 x 35 Michelins instead. I reakon it was a really good move on his part. They let you work just about anywhere - it floats on soft ground but can the power to the ground when you need it without slipping the tyres. It lopes along - that's the best way to describe it. It doesn't jar like duals do when you cross uneven ground. At the moment it only has the standard 40 gal Cessna but that will change when I get a big 65 gal Danfoss pump fitted shortly. It also does over 40 kph (about 26mph), not bad for an old machine. It's not the fanciest machine but I don't need a laptop to service it. I only need one of those to keep up with the current satellite status to get the best from the Trimble GNSS....oops, sorry, was that too obvious?

All this machine really needs is an updated cab with a better sound system and my operator will be happy (he will most probably get it if it stops raining.......). Basically I'm happy with the old girl - it will do a lot more work yet. I would love to see it on a couple of 12 foot industrial scrapers. This would be a serious competitor for the self propelled scraper fraternity - and isn't that what this forum is discussing?

Richard, I have seen a few FW25's around, don't know if the guys use them or not.

[Richardjw~]

Richard, I have seen a few FW25's around, don't know if the guys use them or not.

Reason I ask is that in U.K. anything Ford or an alias-of is collector status, with guys bringing back tractors from New Zealand & the Falklands I wouldn't have thought it would take too much to do the same with one of them

[Greg]

Lots more power than any of the Steigers built here in the states. Lots more frame the way it sounds also. There is a lot to be said for a machine that you can service without a laptop too. Rather than putting two 12.0 footers behind it I would prefer one unit that would match the tread width of the tractor. In my experience that gives more flexibility to the machine. How big of a pan can this thing handle?

[aglasergps]

This Waltana on these 37.25 tyres is only about 10 feet wide overall. It would be a waste of power to only use one scraper when it could so easily load 2 scrapers without any fuss. It weighs about 25 tonnes so has the traction and because the tyres are so tall it really stays afloat on soft ground as well. How big can it handle - that's the age old question isn't it? At the moment it loads the modified 16 foot cut Horwood Bagshaw easily with probably 20 -24 cu yards in a field grading application. In a bulk operation with a drop centre edge it could also do that easily. I could just as easily tag another one on behind and double that as the back scraper always loads easier.

In a construction environment the width becomes the biggest issue for site mobility. A 16 footer is just impossible to move around the typical construction site. Because of our road regulations here, I'm going to build a pair of sub 3.5 metre overall width ejectors. Anything over this width is a real pain to mobilise as there are some serious restrictions and requirements when you go over the 3.5 metres.

The guy with the photos posted earlier showing all those machines moving through town and down the highway without individual escorts for each machine front and back would be locked up here and the key thrown away.................I need a police escort for my scraper on some roads.

It's all fun.............................

[DonZX14]

Interesting thread..Just joined the site and really enjoy the discussion . I can see were the tractor/pan combination might out work a scraper , but up here in northern Alberta we get a little thing called winter! (for about 5 to 6 months out of the year ) Dealing with the frost (sometimes up to 6 feet of it depending on how much traffic has been on the area) is hard enough with a scraper , I couldnt imagine the tractor/pan combination lasting very long . I'm guessing the repairs in the spring would break you financially . You need at least a ripper cat for scrapers to work productively (for singles a push cat )in the winter . My way of thinking ..Scraper is the only way to go ...work them 12 months out of the year not 6 . Tractor/pan may have it's place and to be fair I have not seen them work in the frost , but alot more scrapers here in the oilpatch . Has anyone compared tractor/pan to the auger scraper ? I used to run 657E augers for Sureway Construction in Edmonton and in sandy silty conditions you could not beet them , lock her in second and just enough power so as not to spin the wheels and full loads every time, and depending on the operator , very good cycle times as well . No voids in the load and no push cat = lots of $$$

[aglasergps]

I'd suggest you try a pan with teeth on a drop centre instead of a flat edge - that would probably work with a bit of experimenting with size and spacings. You don't need horsepower to load hard mateial, just traction (weight) and constant speed.

[jgivens]

This Waltana on these 37.25 tyres is only about 10 feet wide overall. It would be a waste of power to only use one scraper when it could so easily load 2 scrapers without any fuss. It weighs about 25 tonnes so has the traction and because the tyres are so tall it really stays afloat on soft ground as well. How big can it handle - that's the age old question isn't it? At the moment it loads the modified 16 foot cut Horwood Bagshaw easily with probably 20 -24 cu yards in a field grading application. In a bulk operation with a drop centre edge it could also do that easily. I could just as easily tag another one on behind and double that as the back scraper always loads easier.

In a construction environment the width becomes the biggest issue for site mobility. A 16 footer is just impossible to move around the typical construction site. Because of our road regulations here, I'm going to build a pair of sub 3.5 metre overall width ejectors. Anything over this width is a real pain to mobilise as there are some serious restrictions and requirements when you go over the 3.5 metres.

The guy with the photos posted earlier showing all those machines moving through town and down the highway without individual escorts for each machine front and back would be locked up here and the key thrown away.................I need a police escort for my scraper on some roads.

It's all fun.............................

I see tractors around here with NO escorts at all. We always have one in front and one in back no matter if we move 1 at a time or 6 at a time.

[Greg]

Granted, I pull pans behind D7's and D8's so only one unit which matches tread width of the tracks on the Cats. So instead of two pans, hook up one with the yardage you want to move, it will just be longer and will turn a lot shorter than hooking them tandum. The turning radius is a big thing for me here.

[aglasergps]

If you have track machines I understand the turning circle thing. But if you have a wheel machine that has a fixed turning circle, tandems that are set up right you can physically turn in the same circle as a single scraper. Yes the overall machine length is increased, but there aren't as many limitations as one would imagine.

Tandem small vs single large..........that one will go on forever!

[mitchell2905]

http://www.scrapertractors.com/627Gvs9520.html

[JSD]

The ones I have seen have the three traditional "levers" though they are little more than glorified toggle switches for electric over hydraulic operation, and then a diverter switch to change from the front pan to the back one, and easily adding a third.
With 2 or 3 pans, before coming into the cut, set each edge just off the ground (the rear ones have a rod sticking up that lets you "see" the height of the edge), then you load first the front, pull it up, switch, load the second, and switch again if you have a third.
Leave the control set to the back, and unload the reverse of loading (most times).
Deere, Volvo, Bell, and probably others have programmable automated loading and dumping functions, but I think they only work in nice consistent material. Of course that is the only place I think the pull pans work anyway, so I bet it is a good deal.

I demoed a Challenger MT865, with 2-17CY E-Ject pans, the same ones Cat now brands as theirs. We were in blow sand, and after a little practice, they would outwork anything else I have seen in those conditions.
I know the cans are too high in the pic, but not when I was running it!


I was there that day and was impressed. I made a deal with the local dealer and used all 4 tractors at times over the next year and a half. The only problem I ran into was an occasional track issue. It was normally because the operator was running too hard.

I ran the challengers and pans together with 623's and 627's. The pans don't excavate or fill a corner worth a crap, but they out performed the scrapers on short to medium haul lenths, round times and quantity. Only ran them in potato dirt and mud.

They are a very feasable tool if you have some scrapers to supplement.

I roaded all 4 of them in about a 50 mile radius from job to job.

[Hollywood627G]

http://www.scrapertractors.com/627Gvs9520.html

The test is a joke. a 27 hauls 22 yards, not 20. It was nice they gave the pans their full yardage though. 72 loads in an 8.5 hr. day? That's a joke. At that distance you should be atleast in the 120's. The fuel consumed compared to the load count is wrong, that much fuel consumed should account to more loads even with the haul distance. I'll be sure to get my fuel consumed and load count on monday. My 27 partner and I had 1min. 40sec. round trip times on approx. 1200ft. haul ( the time we hook up in the cut, load, fill, and come back around and hook up again) timed by Walt whom is the Empire sales rep. for northwestern AZ. I believe we used around 280 gallons that day. Ya'll can do the math and figure out how productive that is. With a good operator, push pulls dominate.

[dozerdave]

Really guys, I think if you put your farm tractors pulling those humped up looking scrapers to work in a rock cut that had to be ripped by a single shank ripper in order to get a load you would see the difference between farm tools and cats and cans or 637 or 657 scrapers running in pairs not single loading. Then when the rock gets harder you clean up a patch and bring in the drills and get ready to shoot. Then the best tool is a large shovel and trucks. End spills. It would depend on the yardage to move how you would set up your operation. If you don't have much rock to shoot you would use a large loader and trucks. If it is maybe a spillway for a nice big dam project then the shovel is the way to go. I guess what I wanted to say is the whole world isn't made out of potato dirt and there is a place for cats and cans and push pull scrapers paired up.

Roading equipment, yes I have made a few trips and I have to say I think during those trips was my first experience with road rage. One time we roaded DW 20 scrapers from north of Oroville Ca. up by Jarbo Gap to San Mateo Ca. up above town on Parrot Drive. Those folks really get serious about getting some where. The book at that time said to pull over if you backed up 5 cars. Where are you going to pullover in down town San Mateo? Another time I was on a 12 blade from Oroville going to a housing project out east of Sacramento toward Folsom. A woman in a big black Cad. had to pass me somewhere south of Rocklin as we were meeting a truck so I pulled of the highway which had a long row of black walnut trees along the fence line. The limbs and green walnuts ripped my umbrella off and and put lumps on my head before I could stop. Nope, no ROPS in 1960.

[Greg]

You think if you put farm tractors those humped up looking scrapers to work in a rock cut etc. etc? It is more like I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We see the farm tractor pan combination around here only in top soil and clay, nothing else. I will stick with my D7's and D8's pulling conventional Cat pans on my short haul jobs.

[Abscraperguy]

Interesting thread..Just joined the site and really enjoy the discussion . I can see were the tractor/pan combination might out work a scraper , but up here in northern Alberta we get a little thing called winter! (for about 5 to 6 months out of the year ) Dealing with the frost (sometimes up to 6 feet of it depending on how much traffic has been on the area) is hard enough with a scraper , I couldnt imagine the tractor/pan combination lasting very long . I'm guessing the repairs in the spring would break you financially . You need at least a ripper cat for scrapers to work productively (for singles a push cat )in the winter . My way of thinking ..Scraper is the only way to go ...work them 12 months out of the year not 6 . Tractor/pan may have it's place and to be fair I have not seen them work in the frost , but alot more scrapers here in the oilpatch . Has anyone compared tractor/pan to the auger scraper ? I used to run 657E augers for Sureway Construction in Edmonton and in sandy silty conditions you could not beet them , lock her in second and just enough power so as not to spin the wheels and full loads every time, and depending on the operator , very good cycle times as well . No voids in the load and no push cat = lots of $$

I worked for a construction outfit in northern Alberta that used tractor/scrapers and here are some of my opinions.

1. Pull scrapers do work up here but not all makes are without problems up north. John Deere dump pans and Crabtree's work but they do have problems with frozen dirt building up between inside and outside side walls and pushing them in. Reynolds seem to work ok. The outfit I worked for ran all of the above until they found something that worked alot better, the Ktec 3100. Easy to pushload if needed and no problems. They've actually ran them complete winters for the last two years.

2. Tractor/scrapers operate very differently than buggies. I'm not entirely sure that long term buggy operators can make the switch to understanding the difference never mind operating them.

Has anyone figured out the cost of ownership buggies versus tractor/scraper? If a person bought a brand new buggy of similar size to a tractor/scraper combo what would the residual value be after 5 years. I know this is only part of the pros/cons debate but I'm curious from a purchase/resale cost point of view.

[ronnie]

Here is a scraper we recently built from a 621B. The D8N is a pull tractor we bought that was factory set up for that purpose.

i've seen that unit across from jakes restaurant i operated both of the old 31's you guys got from 3d they were rough riding(no coushion hitch ) but they would be goin when the others were waitin on a grease monkey

[ronnie]

1 guy in south carolina still has the right idea i just seen a brand new 627g go haulin it up a 4 lane highway yesterday and a j/d with it's pull pan still sittin in the fiels beside the zaxbys were gradind for still growin them weeds around it still hard to beat them convintional scrapers even if they only have 1 lever in them(i've nevr got to try that yet but a buddy of mine said i'd like it

[coolcatman1]

hey everyone im new to the site i have'nt run either yet but i will be hopefully running a scraper tomorrow any tips

[Txdrt]

fnot built heavy enough. the miskin and e-ject systems pulltype scrapers in my opinion are the best.


Have you seen the K-Techs. They are a newish company out of Canada. Great pans, I would put them up against anything. They have done tons of homework and have improved the engineering. We ran ours with a Case and no probs, just stay out of the rock.

[Abscraperguy]

Have you seen the K-Techs. They are a newish company out of Canada. Great pans, I would put them up against anything. They have done tons of homework and have improved the engineering. We ran ours with a Case and no probs, just stay out of the rock.

Yeah I have run their 2800, 1228, and 3100 models. Very good machines. I know a bunch of the guys that work in design and sales. The company I used towork for switched away from the Deere's and Reynolds after trying one of their scrapers.

[JASON M]

Farm tractor drawn pull pans? ha ha ha. I've used what was probably the first pair ever used in Louisiana. Good idea to get more utility out of a farm tractor, but remember the keyword, "FARM"
Anyway, did a mass dirt job in La. Here's what we had: Had (2) Kom PC-300's (w/ mass arms) loading (4) Volvo artics. (4) John Deere 8400's pulling a pair of Reynolds CS's. (2) Case IH Quad-Tracs pulling each a pair of Reynolds LGP CS's on one end of the job.
The other end of the job, we used ONLY (3) Terex TS-18's getting push-loaded by a new Cat D8R. I ordered the TS-18 operators to leave the units in first gear only.
In summary, the levee project was a short turnaround haul excavating an adjacent borrow area of lean red clay material. Haul distance approx 800 ft, one way. THE SCRAPER OPERATION NETTED MORE DIRT/ DAY THAN ALL OF THAT OTHER UNITS, COMBINED!:eek:

As told to me by one of the oldest, largest contractors in the state of La, "Caterpillar has been in the dirt moving business for over a hundred years" "How do some of these little bicycle farm-type pull pans think they can compete?"

They cannot compete. It takes weight and horsepower to move the REAL DIRT. All ya gotta do is add the total weight and horsepower.... pretty simple.... and my aforementioned results reinforce this.:cool:

[bigrus]

For "land levelling" we used 450hp Steigers with 15yd3 buckets in "light" cut & fill applications when laser control first came on the scene back in the late '70s :)

[JASON M]

lap a 27? while they are in the can or what?


Yeah, ok, maybe you can lap the 27, but "Did you remember to drop your cutting edge for loading?":D

[JD9520]

Dave Kolb Grading out of STL, MO is pulling 3-2112e scrapers behind their 9630 tractors. They replaced the duals with a set of track wrapped rubber tires, these tractors are running with the 631's and the D10s in southern MO and yes they are working in the rock and yes the 9630s are holding their own. If anyone is on 67hwy or 54hwy at the Lake of the Ozarks, you can watch see them run. There is a place for both Cat scrapers and Pull Pans and the way the other contractors are moving dirt in MO, I would say that Pull Pans are doing more of the dirt work.

[JASON M]

Let's do the math: Cat D9 "whatever suffix" = 95,000 lbs Terex TS-18 = 75,000 lbs. Total empty weight = 170,000 lbs. This is the tare weight of the loading mechanism, the mechanism that is poised to engage a ground engaging tool, is 170,000 lbs.
How much does the farm tractor have? 40,000 lbs??
How 'bout power? The D9 is putting out at least 400 hp. The twin scraper is putting out over 500 hp. Add 'em up and you've got 900 flywheel hp!..... all horsepower being applied to that single cutting edge! How much does your farm tractor have? 500 hp?........... not even a comparison.
But there is more. As the twin motor scraper begins to load, his tractive effort continues to grow............ to the tune of an additional 70,000 lbs, when fully loaded...so when it comes to the "nut-cutt'n," (getting the voids out of the can, and getting the paydirt #'s elevated through compression of the load) a farm tractor cannot compete.... lest you believe that your farm tractor sporting 500 hp with 40,000 lbs of tractive effort can outperform the push-cat/ twin-scraper combo's 900 + hp with 240,000 lbs of tractive effort.

The push-cat/ twin-scraper combo nets a compressed, low void ratio large cubic yard payload. The farm tractor ends up with a bunch of non-compressed, high void ratio "hat-full-of-dirt" looking payloads. If you had access to an axle scale and measured the tare weights of the haul units and then the gross weights of the loaded haul units ON THE JOBSITE, you would see the difference.

[aglasergps]

...don't also forget that the weight of the machine has to be pulled around as well. Just because it is HEAVY, doesn't mean it will load or travel any quicker or easier than a lighter machine - depends on the type of material you work in and the ground conditions. I've seen projects where the single power scrapers are barely able to haul their own weight around, let alone ask them to actually carry any real volume of material................and the tractors can travel and move dirt easily so it's not that clear cut.

FYI Jason M, any 450 - 550 tractor worth it's salt doing this type of work has to weigh 22t (50,000lbs) and a single scraper at least 10t (22,400lbs) - a total of nearly 75,000lb. Compare that to the total horsepower available in your scenario (I'm guessing about 900hp) and you'll find that the weight to horsepower ratio isn't as disposed towards the dozer as you'd make out!

[JASON M]

I know that there are guys on this thread that have lots of experience, for sure. But I'd bet that not many have actually compared the different units (farm tractor vs conventionals) with a standard 100,000 lb axle scale ON THE JOBSITE. I have already done so. The immediate visual representation of the farm tractor's payload is misleading. Not only is there an enormous void left in the front of the pull-pan, but the dirt that is indeed there is typically riding in a "loose state" The conventional scraper's load is Jam-packed.... it's got to be. 200,000 lbs of push-cat and scraper tires have a tendency to do that.
No matter how you estimate it, the farm tractor, pulling his pull-type pans cannot match this. And no matter the type of farm tractor, no matter how many "tires" that you mount on the axle, no matter to a great extent, the horsepower of the farm tractor, you still don't end up with shear weight of the conventional twin-scraper/ push-cat arrangement.

I don't think that I stated anything erroneously and talk about weight and balance for a moment. External weights were always added to the front of a farm tractor to do (2) things: First and foremost, get equal loading to all (4) tires, then to add weight. When you apply huge drawbar weight to the farm tractor, the front axle becomes "light" and does very little to contribute to the forward vector. In a dynamic loading situation, the farm tractor is never truly balanced; it goes into the cut (empty) with tons of weight on the nose of the tractor, resulting in little effort from the rear axle, then, for only an instant, is it balanced, making both axles balanced; then it finishes its loading with more weight on the rear axle and less on the front. Point is that it is never perfect.

Now let's assume the push-cat/ twin-scraper arrangement. Both units remain perfectly in balance during the entire loading sequence, UNLESS the enexperienced push-cat operator lifts the rear of the twin-scraper with his blade, negating the drive effort of the scraper's rear axle. This not withstanding, the higher the push-cat's blade, when it contacts the scraper's push-block, the more tractive effort that the dozer realizes. It's simple statics; the more resistance the scraper offers, the "heavier" the dozer becomes (dynamically) It actually forces the steel tracks footprint into the ground. This is the principal of felling trees with a hyd excavator. Hit it higher and the excavator's dynamic footprint is enhanced. Tree falls over relatively easily; same phenomenon with a push-cat's blade.

BTW, I own (4) Reynolds LGP CS scrapers, (4) Prime pans, and (6) very old, original, (but welded immensely) 14 cy pans. I've pulled 'em with everything from Case 2870's, J.D. 8400's, J.D. 9400's, big Quad Tracs, and big round-tired Steigers. I am biased because I've owned 'em all, run 'em all, and evaluated 'em all. Farm tractors and lightweight pull pans are like the old gas-burning over the road haul trucks of yesteryear; they'll pull like the devil but they won't do it for long. Then you'll have to rebuild 'em. Dirt moving is a contact sport; and until electronics become less susceptible to the dust, vibration, and moisture of Real Dirt Work, new farm tractors will be cost prohibitive to big dirt work.
I see today, that there are company's out there building structurally-sound pull-pans for farm tractors, but check out what they are becoming... the good ones, I mean..............;) big, heavy, mining-tire wearing, thick steel framed, large hyd cylindered, old-school appearing dirt pans. :D Are pull-pan manufacturers going forward or backward?:eek: Caterpillar, Terex, and the like had it right from the start. And I've found that late-model engines, because of EPA mandates, burn equivalent amounts of fuel, even with all of the new, electronic technology in injection systems.

Yep, I endorse "Old-School Iron"........... and the shorter the haul, the more disparity in load count. The old-school conventional Push-cats/ twin-scrapers will dominate by a large margin.:)

[JD9520]

Heres something to think about. If Cat doesnt think that the tractor and scraper combo will not work. Why would Cat come out with a scraper Tractor and Why would Cat buy the Eject Scraper company? Everyone on here has a good valid point, but from here in MO the tractor and scraper option looks to be more productive. I would agree in short haul the cat will be more productive but when you compare new cost to new cost you can buy 2 tractors and 4 pans for the price of 1 Cat, reducing your overhead and allowing you to move dirt cheaper

[JDOFMEMI]

This has gotten lively again. Nothing like a good discussion with multiple viewpoints.

I still believe that each type of operation has its place.
In muddy conditions, it is hard to compete with the lower weight and high flotation of the tractor and pan combo with its wide tires or tracks, and pulling a lightweight pan. True, it may not load as much as a conventional scraper in good conditions, but it is running in conditions that would leave that conventional unit stuck in the mud most of the time.
Move into good conditions with easily loaded dirt, and a short haul (<500') and the tractor and pan will be closer to even, and depending on conditions, it could go either way easily.
If the ground gets just a bit harder, or the haul just a bit longer and the self propelled scraper starts to dominate. Like Jason M said, it is all about the weight of dirt in the can, not just the loose volume. Here in SoCal, we double and tripple push the big scrapers for that reason. With axle scales you will find about 3 bank yards more in a load that has been pushed by 2 D-9's than with just one. Add third dozer to the push, and get about 2 more bank yards in there, even though the top of the load does not look too much larger. It is all about having the weight and horsepower to pack the dirt in there.

Move into rocky conditions and you better leave the pull pans home. They will not last. The scrapers will get it done still, but the operating cost starts to go up with tire wear and damage, as well as cuttin edges and structural damage. There comes a point where it is best to park them and run trucks with large hoes loading. It is a little slower, but cheaper due to less damage and wear and tear. Especially with tire prices and availability where they have been.

The other thing the tractor and pan option supporters say is that the initial purchase price is less. True, if you compare new to new, but not many here run new scrapers.
I can put together a fleet of used scrapers 20 years old for much less than the cost of new pans, and from what I have seen the tractors pulling pans are hard pressed to run even 10 years. The 20 year old scraper fleet will move dirt just as well as a new scraper fleet with the right maintenance and a couple spare units, which you can afford with older ones.

If your job is only in conditions favorable to a tractor and pan, go that way, but as a contractor who may be in sand one month, dirt after that, and then a rocky job, with who knows what next, you are better off with a tool that will handle any of it, and that is a scraper fleet, with some trucks to handle the rock.

[DPete]

Well put JDO, lots of pros and cons, scraper trains do a beatiful job if the conditions are right and must be economical to run by the price per yard they move dirt for, the loballers here all run them They also are wide and cumbersome and I wonder what their downhill ability with a load is. Also can they pick up grader windrows? or just spread it out. I don't know what their practical haul speed is I'm guessing about 1/2 of a conventional scraper. They won't cut hard ground, I have ripped for them in clay material and after removing about 6" they had it packed back down where they could'nt load it. You can put a 623 or 631 or larger on a truck and go, what about moving a scraper train? Can go on and on they have their place, mainly land leveling IMO

[JASON M]

You guys in the West run your scrapers much harder than I would dare. You speak of immense hauling speeds. I don't see how they hold up (older conventional scrapers) but obviously, you are doing it with success. Kudos.
Here in La. (soft clay ground), I find it more advantageous to leave the big iron (D9G w/ pushblock pushing TS-18's) in 1st gear and let the weight and the horsepower get max loads. This does lots of good things. First, your structure is not bouncing around, shock-loading the structure. This saves alot of structural welding! The operators can work an entire day, instead of physically wearing them down. It's much safer and easier to get positioned in the cut. It also saves the drivelines from getting "shocked" by continual shifting. The U-joints aren't spinning nearly as fast; grease stays where it should. The apron hinges aren't banging the bushings out.
I find my "uptime" far outweighs the little increased production of making the operators rawhide my iron. So often, I see my dirt-moving competitors (mostly the farmers) out there with a welder and a large excavator hanging one of the little pull-pans high into the air for repairs.... and I mean major repairs! Looks like some shark fisherman hanging a prize Great White Shark at the pier!
On another point, I find that if the material cannot be hauled productively with a push-cat/ scraper arrangement......... then you need to be using over-the-highway trucks pulling bottom-dump trailers loaded by a mass excavator anyway, particularly if the haul is over 2500 ft, one way. But that's my experience I've found in the Louisiana Delta mass dirt projects. An average job will be 1-2 million net cubic yards. We don't have any rock and wouldn't know anything about that. I bet it can make you scratch your posterior plenty.

But in fairness to the little pull-pans, they don't make as much of a mess. They don't overcut, compared to the big iron. They don't impact-load the ground as much. They don't pump the water up through the ground as much as a conventional. For this reason, they are great for precision grading and I've still got a bunch of 'em (pull-pans)...... but I use 'em for either small-scale jobs where time isn't a factor or working as finishing machines. I particularly like my Reynolds LSE-14 finishing bucket; really tidies up behind the big Eucs.

[JASON M]

Heres something to think about. If Cat doesnt think that the tractor and scraper combo will not work. Why would Cat come out with a scraper Tractor and Why would Cat buy the Eject Scraper company? Everyone on here has a good valid point, but from here in MO the tractor and scraper option looks to be more productive. I would agree in short haul the cat will be more productive but when you compare new cost to new cost you can buy 2 tractors and 4 pans for the price of 1 Cat, reducing your overhead and allowing you to move dirt cheaper


In answering your question about pricing of "new".......... I would submit to you that I've not even considered buying "new" twin-scrapers @ 1,000,000/ each. The market, mass jobs in La, prohibits that kind of philanthropy. I can, however, buy some pretty good used units @ less than $50000, dump another $25,000 into 'em and have a haul-unit that is 60% as good as a new one is. Stated another way: I can have a machine that is 60% as productive as a new one for less than 1/10th the cost! I call that good business. By contrast, you cannot do this with a tractor/pan arrangement. A tractor/pan arrangement will not be worth its scrap value at 10,000 frame hours; a heavily built conventional tandem, (or even single engine) for that matter will still be together. Also, I can repower the entire Tandem Scraper Unit (engines and tranny's) for less $$$ than it would cost for a single engine in the fandangled farm tractor. The frames, aka "STRUCTURE" don't wear out appreciably, but that light-weight farming stuff does wear out. You can't resurrect it economically; it'll be ready for the garbage can. The cab will be falling off; planetaries are work-hardened, motors are shot, tranny's are shot, (12) drive tires worn-out from all of the "cat-scratching" , light-weight frames are fatigued, etc. Start bending a coat-hangar in your hands long enough and it will break; just illustrates my point about STRUCTURE.... heavier is better.;)

My observation is that folks using farm-tractors and pull-pans are really falling into "false economy" I guess they get big federal farm loans to pay for their new tractors and pans, and turn into contractors overnite. They don't know the score; simply turning money over, I call it; lowballing jobs. They end up with some worn out junk, almost unfit for use, even on a farm! Smart? Maybe they know something I don't. But that's what I see, here in the Delta. Happens all the time.:cool:

[JDOFMEMI]

Jason M

Sounds like you have a good deal that works for you in the conditions you run in. That is the name of the game, doing what suits you where you work.

[Gavin84w]

Heres something to think about. If Cat doesnt think that the tractor and scraper combo will not work. Why would Cat come out with a scraper Tractor and Why would Cat buy the Eject Scraper company? Everyone on here has a good valid point, but from here in MO the tractor and scraper option looks to be more productive. I would agree in short haul the cat will be more productive but when you compare new cost to new cost you can buy 2 tractors and 4 pans for the price of 1 Cat, reducing your overhead and allowing you to move dirt cheaper

You nailed it right there dude, you can buy 2 tractors and 4 pans but now those 4 pan sales that went elsewhere could well be Cats, thats why they bought eject,s deal, to get into it, sell pans, sell parts and make shareholders returns on there investments.

[bell142]

Hey Jason M, Glad to see that im not the only one in Louisiana that doesnt like pans. What part of the state are yall in? And where in the h*** are the million cy mass grading projects in the delta or state for that matter, do you need any help?
Ive got scrapers at the yard waiting on go! We too have had pans and i have to agree with you on every point, however T-rex's? Come on Man!!! LOL Well, they are tuff old birds!

[JASON M]

Jason M

Sounds like you have a good deal that works for you in the conditions you run in. That is the name of the game, doing what suits you where you work.

Ya know, I've never read a novel in my life. I've heard others say, "This book is so good that I can't put it down" I never could relate to what they were saying. But it seems that this board has drawn me, like one of those crappy novels grab other folks. I can surely relate to the guys out here on this board. There is alot of experience and intelligence out here. I find myself amazed at the knowledge out here on these forums. I thought that ingenuity was gone in the USA. Maybe not.

[EGS]

This has gotten lively again. Nothing like a good discussion with multiple viewpoints.

I still believe that each type of operation has its place.
In muddy conditions, it is hard to compete with the lower weight and high flotation of the tractor and pan combo with its wide tires or tracks, and pulling a lightweight pan. True, it may not load as much as a conventional scraper in good conditions, but it is running in conditions that would leave that conventional unit stuck in the mud most of the time.
Move into good conditions with easily loaded dirt, and a short haul (<500') and the tractor and pan will be closer to even, and depending on conditions, it could go either way easily.
If the ground gets just a bit harder, or the haul just a bit longer and the self propelled scraper starts to dominate. Like Jason M said, it is all about the weight of dirt in the can, not just the loose volume. Here in SoCal, we double and tripple push the big scrapers for that reason. With axle scales you will find about 3 bank yards more in a load that has been pushed by 2 D-9's than with just one. Add third dozer to the push, and get about 2 more bank yards in there, even though the top of the load does not look too much larger. It is all about having the weight and horsepower to pack the dirt in there.

Move into rocky conditions and you better leave the pull pans home. They will not last. The scrapers will get it done still, but the operating cost starts to go up with tire wear and damage, as well as cuttin edges and structural damage. There comes a point where it is best to park them and run trucks with large hoes loading. It is a little slower, but cheaper due to less damage and wear and tear. Especially with tire prices and availability where they have been.

The other thing the tractor and pan option supporters say is that the initial purchase price is less. True, if you compare new to new, but not many here run new scrapers.
I can put together a fleet of used scrapers 20 years old for much less than the cost of new pans, and from what I have seen the tractors pulling pans are hard pressed to run even 10 years. The 20 year old scraper fleet will move dirt just as well as a new scraper fleet with the right maintenance and a couple spare units, which you can afford with older ones.

If your job is only in conditions favorable to a tractor and pan, go that way, but as a contractor who may be in sand one month, dirt after that, and then a rocky job, with who knows what next, you are better off with a tool that will handle any of it, and that is a scraper fleet, with some trucks to handle the rock.

That is a very good post. Well put.:notworthy

[JASON M]

Hey Jason M, Glad to see that im not the only one in Louisiana that doesnt like pans. What part of the state are yall in? And where in the h*** are the million cy mass grading projects in the delta or state for that matter, do you need any help?
Ive got scrapers at the yard waiting on go! We too have had pans and i have to agree with you on every point, however T-rex's? Come on Man!!! LOL Well, they are tuff old birds!

I'm not going to sleep tonite, knowing that you are laughing at my old rigs.:D Go ahead and laugh.:D I'll send this thread a video of my worn out units in production; You won't laugh; maybe gaze, but not laugh..:eek:
I'm considering some Kittys but like you stated, "Work is tight right now, and going cheaper and cheaper by the day" Don't think we'll be buying anything else until the work is secured.
Besides, those farmers have to pay their notes, right?...... so when they're finished wearing their farming rigs out, working for the General Contractor, they can say, "This isn't making sense............ I'm still where I was 5 years ago!"):confused:
As far as available work, it's about to start. From Natchez, Ms to Angola. I don't, however, see the market improving until 2011, at earliest. There has just been too much time elapsed where there are more contractors than there are jobs..... everybody is hungry..... cutting each others' throats. It's going to take awhile before the contractors' voracious appetites are sated.... and then the prices will start coming back up. Hang on, if you can.

BTW: If you've been following this thread and my posts, it was LJ Earnest, from your neck of the woods, who had cornered my Dad at a D.O.T.D. bid letting, and in disgust said "Hey Max, Caterpillar has been in the dirt moving business for a hundred years..... Now these farmers/ Menonnites are out here pulling these little Reynolds scrapers, claiming that they can move dirt 800 ft (one way haul) for 30 CENTS/ CY!". This was back in 1984, by one of the most reputable, large-scale contractors in the state. Nuff said.

[bill5362]

Very good discussion guys JASON M, JD9520, JDOFMEMI you all done a very good job articulating your points it has been very informative to read. I learn a lot from the post on here, and sometimes it good to just get some assurance on the ways I view things. Keep up the good posts.

[Abscraperguy]

Yeah JDOFMEMI I like lively discussions lets keep this going.

JASON M I'll dedicate this entire post to discussion on your posts. I've noticed that all of your threads posted so far deal with scrapers. In this you and I are alike, passioned earth movers. I've also noticed that just about all if not all at some place in the post call tractor/pans junk, garbage etc and that is what I want to address.

Conventional scraper hands and owners NEVER make good tractor/pan owners or operators. The mentality is entirely different. Conventional guys can't make it work and don't want to either. With conventional scrapers and push cat most guys load slower and take a bigger bite. With pans you load faster and take a much smaller bite which makes your cut area much smoother so in turn little if any shockloading. Big horsepower and low speeds load scrapers but the higher torque at higher speeds offsets that to some degree. Speaking of speeds I was reading the other day that pulling equipment is more efficient at higher speeds up to 8 mph.

You talk about farmers getting into earthmoving and lowballing jobs when it looks like they are subsidized by the government. Wannabe business men that come in and undercut and then go bust are an irritation in any sector. Now if these "farmers" are quitting farming and starting earthmoving businesses and expanding and doing more jobs its not lowballing. Its the industry finding more efficient ways of doing things. I wish I could remember the name of the dirt company but there's a company in the Midwest who at last count had around 50 Case IH quad tracks pulling scrapers and they weren't farmers either. Somebody can maybe help me remember the name of it.

When I was operating I much prefered scraper/pans versus buggies strictly for creature comforts. I liked the nice big cab that was quiet enough to hear yourself think along with all the stuff like a good radio, cd player and even a coat hook if I wanted to get fancy. On a side note. I worked with a trucker turner scraper guy and he treated his tractor like a truck. Boots came off at the door and parked on a neat little boot mat, he had rug on the floor to much the red exterior and he put stick on chrome wherever he could.

When it comes to DAILY operating economics, as in fuel burn, I've never seen a buggy or buggy/push dozer that can come near the cost per yard as tractor/pans. The reason I say daily is because repair costs vary from operator to operator. It often appears that buggy operators operating pull pans will have more trouble.

Much is made about pull pans not working in rock and for that I have no comment. I have never worked in rock with them. The closest to it is some very rocky and extremely hard clay that was very comparable to the hard pan of the deep south. All I know about that job is we moved 0.2 mil cubes and had no problems and we only ripped it if the big cat wasn't busy which was very rare.

One of the guys I worked for ran big single pans which worked better than anything I had seen yet. Worked year round through ice and rain which brings out another point. Pull pans can operate very well in marginal conditions (with the exception of pure rock and pure skating rink ice) very well. Don't even bother bringing a buggy if the ground is even somewhat soft. That one winter we dug a short deep holding pond. We pushloaded our big singles with the D7H. We were consistently getting 140-150 000 lbs of payload. Yes I know we were hopelessly overloading the tractor and scraper and no 4 years and 7-9000 hrs later nothing is busted.

Your math page was very interesting. I'll just point out a few things.
1. So your two machines combined have 900 total hp. But that power has to be put through 3 tranny's and 3 final drives versus 1 and 1 for the pull pans. You're also putting that power through 1 undercarriage which burns a bit of power as well. In reality how much power is getting to the ground.

2. You say your total gross weight is 170000 lbs. How much of your hp is just spent moving that empty machine around versus some of the new pull pans made of high tensile steel which are as strong but weigh significantly less.

Someone talked about how pull pans are a one ring circus, in other words they are only good in clay. I beg to differ with that. I have used ran them with great success in all kinds of soil. From dry sand that was like driving in sugar and so soft that that we got stuck with the pickups all the time to hard pan with rocks to heavy clay.

One thing I hear lots from Cat dealers to old established earthmoving companies is this line, "we've been doing it this way for a 100 years and we know what we're doing". This is why our local Cat dealer doesn't have the greatest following and why old established companies sometimes go under. Like I said earlier I don't think its possible for buggy guys to make the switch. First of all they don't want to and secondly pull pans are operated and managed very different.

I do not mean to say with this that the pull pan is your ticket to the lottery. It is meant to provide a view of the other side. If a person can't keep compete with pull pans ran be some ethnic group in your previously secure business model it may be time to change or look for ways of efficiency.

Ok Jason M, your turn. And show us some pics of your Terex's. I've always had a soft spot for them.

[JD9520]

Jason M., I am just speaking for what I see in Mid-MO. I just see more Cat scrapers on the sidelines and the tractors and pans doing the work. All you would ever see around here is yellow iron and that is not the case in todays market. There will always be people who prefer the tractor and pans to the cat scraper or cats to pull pans. What I see is less support equipment on the job with the tractor and pan combo making it cheaper to move dirt.
As for the comment
My observation is that folks using farm-tractors and pull-pans are really falling into "false economy" I guess they get big federal farm loans to pay for their new tractors and pans, and turn into contractors overnight. They don't know the score; simply turning money over, I call it; low balling jobs. They end up with some worn out junk, almost unfit for use, even on a farm! Smart? Maybe they know something I don't. But that's what I see, here in the Delta. Happens all the time.
I take it you get out bid a lot by you bidding jobs with your Terexs maybe tractors and pans are in your near future

[JASON M]

A very heated debate, indeed. I like that. Let's start with the Farmer/ Moonlighter/Religious contract dirt mover. I don't care work for gov't handouts. If farming is a business in which you cannot make money, then quit. If you are rooted deeply in religion, go to church and become a preacher and open more churches. Lots of these groups buying tractors and pans just hand over "whatever money is made" to their respective churches..... probably getting one heck of a tax break. Conversely, I get hit 38% on my profits at the end of the year! Farmers aren't much different around here. They all drive the big fancy King Ranch Fords, all have big deer hunting leases, etc. but they are all of course, bankrupt. BTW, once upon a time we had a 1500 acre farm with all the trimmings: horses, cattle, soybeans, rice, and milo. And you guessed it, went bankrupt with it; but we never masqueraded as a contractor. I'm really trying to not get personal with this, but it is hard not to; especially when the Reynolds rep invites me over to a "proving show" where they get up on their soapbox and preach to the knowing, and unknowing, about how easy it is to move dirt 800 ft turnaround haul for 30 cents/ CY. I want to throw up when I hear foolishness like this.
And YES, ABSOLUTELY, "I get outbid alot by dumb contractors" It is not stupid to bid too high, but it is stupid to bid to low....... especially when I miss the job that I want to someone whose life-expectancy is less than a year. It hurts everybody. But a lending institution is not a dirt mover. A farmer is not a dirt mover. The art takes people that can not only think well, but have experience also. And if you've never set up scales of a jobsite, or know how to survey and produce cross-sections, you are one lost soul. Your only salvation is what "The Reynolds rep" told you when he was on his soapbox.

And as far as this ludicrous example of being able to work in "soft conditions" with a farm tractor/ pan arrangement, I would submit to you that if conditions are that bad, then you are losing money anyway. Better park that stuff and go get you some big articulated 6 X 6 trucks and a good mass excavator to load 'em. I've already been down that road, with that old idea of lowering the ground pressure and still loading in soft conditions. I bought (2) of the first Case/IH Quad-tracs and Reynolds LGP CS scrapers in La. They didn't impress. Remember the "hat-full-of-dirt" that I mentioned in and earlier post? Well divide those production #'s by 2! Total waste of time. Get some artics, get some loads, and get the job done! As far as a Quad-Track outpulling a round tire, that's b.s. also. The transmissions, when in lower gears, (I think 1 through3) derate the engine's 400 "whatever" horsepower and you don't have SQWAT! The cleats of the track on hard-ground simply don't penetrate and offer no traction advantage. And let me tell ya a little fact, "When a Quadtrack goes down in the mud, you've got yourself a mess!" The tracks will duck-dive under when you start pulling and then you've really got something. FYI, I personally tried to better a JD 8400 on the same exact haul, and it was a toss-up. Which brings me to your claim of a tractor-pan arrangement offering better floatation, so what? especially if it can't load itself! Nor pull itself.
I remember when as a kid, running the first set of Reynolds 14 pans in La., we had ourselves an internal production contest. Our old sup't, who loved TS-14's, and for good reason, against me, the new breed, with my old Case 2870 pulling a pair of Reynolds 14's. My dad, a P.E., was in favor of the new idea of the pull pans; so was I. Eagerly we engaged in our contest, building a Corps of Engr levee in Central La. The TS-14 kicked my azz. More payload, better cycle time, etc, etc.
I was still not believing that the old TS-14's were better than my brand new hardware. Well, on another instance, after a moderate rain, we opted to dig in a drier place. In getting there, the TS-14, w/ it's awesome tractability, dragging his differentials, just took a shortcut, snaking its way to the next spot. Well, I was pissed and was gonna show him....... I backed my rig up as far as I could, put her in 3rd/ 3rd, gapped the throttle wide open and tried to pass him! I didn't make it even TO the bad conditions before I got hung up, the 30.5-32 wheels spinning wildly. I was so upset. Some of the older hands ran up to me, stuck in the mud, and said, "Jason, I know you're pissed that your tractor can't keep up with the TS-14's but there's no point in tearing your dad's eqt up" As I grew older, I accepted that just because my farm tractor had 300 hp, it did not mean that it was the equivalent of a sub-300 hp 1958 model, twin 4-71 Detroit powered piece of ugly iron. The sooner you accept it, you'll be better off also.

[JASON M]

If I can get some of my old VHS footage converted to digital, I'll prove to you what I'm preaching. I'll show you what a load of dirt is supposed to look like, riding in a TS-14/ TS-18

[bell142]

Jason, I completely understand you about the farm machines, it has been a BIG issue around here. Not only do they low ball prices, but "most" dont have a state contractors liscence.
Abscraperguy I think you have said it the best, conventional scraper guys are not good tractor/pan guys, and visa/versa. We started with 621s, bought 6 tractors with pans in the early 80s, HAD to buy 6 more in the late 80s, went slap a** broke with those in the 90s. Back to Cat now and dont want anything to do with a Tractor/Pan. Everyone has experiances and opinions and both options have positives and negatives.

[WabcoMan]

I've never been on an Ag tractor rig with pull scrapers but...............

I started out on track tractors with cable control pans - wasn't even allowed near a motor scraper until I could cut to grade with one of those things.
Then I was allowed on the TS-14's, 627's etc.
I think having an "apprenticeship" culled out all of the cowboys in our team and we had a good bunch of multi-skilled operators.

I have witnessed ag tractor & pans skim over the top of material that conventional scrapers could load easily.
Somebody on this thread also mentioned about these tractor pan combinations not handling ripped material well and again I have to agree having seen them bog down and need to be towed out.

For bulk earthmoving motor scrapers (longer hauls) or track tractor & scraper are the way to go.
However for land contouring, landscaping the ag tractor & pan combination are probably a more flexible option :IMO

[Abscraperguy]

A very heated debate, indeed. I like that. Let's start with the Farmer/ Moonlighter/Religious contract dirt mover. I don't care work for gov't handouts. If farming is a business in which you cannot make money, then quit. If you are rooted deeply in religion, go to church and become a preacher and open more churches. Lots of these groups buying tractors and pans just hand over "whatever money is made" to their respective churches..... probably getting one heck of a tax break. Conversely, I get hit 38% on my profits at the end of the year!

Ok you're not just discussing heavy equipment anymore. You mentioned something about Mennonites in a derogatory manner the other day so I take it they are the butt of your religious tirade. I don't know know where you get your info. Maybe you were thinking of Hutterites, there is a huge difference. I know quite a few different Mennonites and have studied them and these are the facts. If they own something it's theirs and they pay taxes just like you do. There is NO giving of "whatever they make". It's not cool to attack fellow competitors on religious beliefs or ethnicity. If their work is bad and the end result is ugly by all means spread the word.

Farmers aren't much different around here. They all drive the big fancy King Ranch Fords, all have big deer hunting leases, etc. but they are all of course, bankrupt. BTW, once upon a time we had a 1500 acre farm with all the trimmings: horses, cattle, soybeans, rice, and milo. And you guessed it, went bankrupt with it; but we never masqueraded as a contractor. I'm really trying to not get personal with this, but it is hard not to; especially when the Reynolds rep invites me over to a "proving show" where they get up on their soapbox and preach to the knowing, and unknowing, about how easy it is to move dirt 800 ft turnaround haul for 30 cents/ CY. I want to throw up when I hear foolishness like this.

Are you telling me that if I would run pull pans I would be subsidizing my farm? Would I still be farmer if I had no land and no livestock and still used pull pans for my construction company?

And YES, ABSOLUTELY, "I get outbid alot by dumb contractors" It is not stupid to bid too high, but it is stupid to bid to low....... especially when I miss the job that I want to someone whose life-expectancy is less than a year. It hurts everybody. But a lending institution is not a dirt mover. A farmer is not a dirt mover. The art takes people that can not only think well, but have experience also. And if you've never set up scales of a jobsite, or know how to survey and produce cross-sections, you are one lost soul. Your only salvation is what "The Reynolds rep" told you when he was on his soapbox.

You make pull pans to sound like the death knell for any contractor. It takes management just like anything else. I know many successful pull pan operators (and buggy guys as well). I know one young subcontractor guy who bought a brand new tractor and double pan fleet and had it paid off in 2 years.

And as far as this ludicrous example of being able to work in "soft conditions" with a farm tractor/ pan arrangement, I would submit to you that if conditions are that bad, then you are losing money anyway. Better park that stuff and go get you some big articulated 6 X 6 trucks and a good mass excavator to load 'em. I've already been down that road, with that old idea of lowering the ground pressure and still loading in soft conditions. I bought (2) of the first Case/IH Quad-tracs and Reynolds LGP CS scrapers in La. They didn't impress. Remember the "hat-full-of-dirt" that I mentioned in and earlier post? Well divide those production #'s by 2! Total waste of time. Get some artics, get some loads, and get the job done! As far as a Quad-Track outpulling a round tire, that's b.s. also. The transmissions, when in lower gears, (I think 1 through3) derate the engine's 400 "whatever" horsepower and you don't have SQWAT! The cleats of the track on hard-ground simply don't penetrate and offer no traction advantage. And let me tell ya a little fact, "When a Quadtrack goes down in the mud, you've got yourself a mess!" The tracks will duck-dive under when you start pulling and then you've really got something. FYI, I personally tried to better a JD 8400 on the same exact haul, and it was a toss-up. Which brings me to your claim of a tractor-pan arrangement offering better floatation, so what? especially if it can't load itself! Nor pull itself.
I remember when as a kid, running the first set of Reynolds 14 pans in La., we had ourselves an internal production contest. Our old sup't, who loved TS-14's, and for good reason, against me, the new breed, with my old Case 2870 pulling a pair of Reynolds 14's. My dad, a P.E., was in favor of the new idea of the pull pans; so was I. Eagerly we engaged in our contest, building a Corps of Engr levee in Central La. The TS-14 kicked my azz. More payload, better cycle time, etc, etc.
I was still not believing that the old TS-14's were better than my brand new hardware. Well, on another instance, after a moderate rain, we opted to dig in a drier place. In getting there, the TS-14, w/ it's awesome tractability, dragging his differentials, just took a shortcut, snaking its way to the next spot. Well, I was pissed and was gonna show him....... I backed my rig up as far as I could, put her in 3rd/ 3rd, gapped the throttle wide open and tried to pass him! I didn't make it even TO the bad conditions before I got hung up, the 30.5-32 wheels spinning wildly. I was so upset. Some of the older hands ran up to me, stuck in the mud, and said, "Jason, I know you're pissed that your tractor can't keep up with the TS-14's but there's no point in tearing your dad's eqt up" As I grew older, I accepted that just because my farm tractor had 300 hp, it did not mean that it was the equivalent of a sub-300 hp 1958 model, twin 4-71 Detroit powered piece of ugly iron. The sooner you accept it, you'll be better off also.

I'm not a huge fan of Quadtracs myself. I also don't like pulling two pans. One big pan works much better. With two smaller pans the back pan pulls like a dead cow in soft conditions. I have loaded pans in conditions that pickups had a hard time driving in never mind artics. Ok so you can't get a full 120000 lbs of payload but it worked better than anything I've ever seen. With the big singles and the new style hitches you get tractive weight on both axles. The more it fills the more weight you get. If your impression of pull pans is a Case 2870 with tiny rubber I don't blame you for your opinions. That would be like a bicycle on a skating rink.

Back to you Jason M

Oh and by the way you probably don't watch hockey but your American team just beat the Canadians in the World Junior finals. I was hoping Canada would make it 6 in row. Congratulations.

[JASON M]

I agree Wabco. When laser leveling hit the scene, we were on top of that also. Had one of the first rotating lasers; a Gradoplane unit made by AGL. Big ugly white robot looking thing transmitter; Thought we were gonna get rich working precision grade land-leveling with our farm tractor pulling one of the first automated blade control systems. Junk never worked back then; though now the eqt has gotten very good. Long story short, we didn't hit the lottery with that idea. There's no money in doing "0" grade work for farmers. A bunch of those azzholes asked us to go precision level bunches of tracts of farmland for them; We did. Then never got paid. Now, I get to see 'em often; parading around adjacent levee projects, working for a General Contractor, with their broke azzes that are about further "in the hole" and not even knowing it....... with those silly Wal-mart farming rigs, made out of 1/4" thick plate steel. I ought to go take some digital pics of that junk. I have my own collection of it parked on my back lot to illustrate my point. Then I'll take some pics of my old Terex units with "God knows how many frame hours on 'em" .......... Still moving dirt with their noses in the breeze since 1958.

BTW, to answer the question about, "How come Cat bought that "whatever" pull scraper company?" My only guess is that Caterpillar is a company, and the intent of a company is to make money. As long as folks like you are buying them, they will build them. Pretty simple. It doesn't have to offer a better cost/ CY than their other stuff, but it looks nicer, it's the new thing, it's comfortable, it has a cd player and an air conditioner for the 16 year old adolescents that require an air conditioner (so they don't melt) and a cd player so they can listen to the latest hit from Rage Against The Machine, and other important stuff to production. That's just me guessing; I have no concrete proof.

[JASON M]

Abscraperguy, "Where is Grand Prairie, Ab?"

[JASON M]

BTW, Abscraperguy. My 2870 scenario was just an example. That tractor ballasted out to, if memory serves me correct, around 30000 lbs. A heavier example, say a JD9500 series, pulling the same Reynolds pull-pans would not fare any better trying to traverse soft ground.......... probably worse.

[JASON M]

The best you ever saw??????? A tractor/ pan arrangement was the best equipment that you ever saw in low soil bearing conditions?? A farm tractor/ pan arrangement can't follow a TS-14 ANYWHERE in the mud!! much less a good articulated 6 X 6 in the mud.
Wanna know why? Here it is. Both a TS-14 and an articulated truck have all wheels that touch the ground contributing to the forward vector, aka PULLING. I'm sure you've seen this.

[alco]

I've never run tractor/pan combinations, but they seem to work pretty well in certain conditions. Now, down where Jason is, it sounds like they don't work well at all. But one thing to remember, ground conditions are different all over the continent, so there may be sets of conditions where they excel that Jason just hasn't encountered yet. To come out with a definitive statement that they are junk, garbage and don't work at all is really pretty foolish. I doubt that anybody here has seen every ground condition that there is to be seen.

[Abscraperguy]

The best you ever saw??????? A tractor/ pan arrangement was the best equipment that you ever saw in low soil bearing conditions?? A farm tractor/ pan arrangement can't follow a TS-14 ANYWHERE in the mud!! much less a good articulated 6 X 6 in the mud.
Wanna know why? Here it is. Both a TS-14 and an articulated truck have all wheels that touch the ground contributing to the forward vector, aka PULLING. I'm sure you've seen this.

That's right but you don't need all the wheels driving if you're not pulling 100000 lbs of just empty machine. I agree that a double pan setup will not work. Put me in a 28-38 yard single I'll do it for you. There also is the factor of better floatation. I like rigs to be setup with 710 duals on the tractor and 4 23.5 x 25's on the scraper. If your equipment isn't sinking in 2 ft it takes significantly less power.

Abscraperguy, "Where is Grand Prairie, Ab?"

Yeah Grande Prairie is up in northern Alberta. Lots of oil field activity around here. Come up some time and we'll go fishing in one of the many fine lakes around here.

I agree Wabco. When laser leveling hit the scene, we were on top of that also. Had one of the first rotating lasers; a Gradoplane unit made by AGL. Big ugly white robot looking thing transmitter; Thought we were gonna get rich working precision grade land-leveling with our farm tractor pulling one of the first automated blade control systems. Junk never worked back then; though now the eqt has gotten very good. Long story short, we didn't hit the lottery with that idea. There's no money in doing "0" grade work for farmers. A bunch of those azzholes asked us to go precision level bunches of tracts of farmland for them; We did. Then never got paid. Now, I get to see 'em often; parading around adjacent levee projects, working for a General Contractor, with their broke azzes that are about further "in the hole" and not even knowing it....... with those silly Wal-mart farming rigs, made out of 1/4" thick plate steel. I ought to go take some digital pics of that junk. I have my own collection of it parked on my back lot to illustrate my point. Then I'll take some pics of my old Terex units with "God knows how many frame hours on 'em" .......... Still moving dirt with their noses in the breeze since 1958.

Yup as soon as you get them TRex pics posted I'll look at them. My first scrapers operating I saw were them green beasts. Big contractor built a road close to my Dad's place and as a little kid I loved them. Big and green and screaming like mad I was impressed. And back then as soon as the job was done well they just screamed done the road to the next job.

BTW, to answer the question about, "How come Cat bought that "whatever" pull scraper company?" My only guess is that Caterpillar is a company, and the intent of a company is to make money. As long as folks like you are buying them, they will build them.

Ar-ar-are you calling a bunch of us guys d-d-dumb?:eek:

Pretty simple. It doesn't have to offer a better cost/ CY than their other stuff, but it looks nicer, it's the new thing, it's comfortable, it has a cd player and an air conditioner for the 16 year old adolescents that require an air conditioner (so they don't melt) and a cd player so they can listen to the latest hit from Rage Against The Machine, and other important stuff to production. That's just me guessing; I have no concrete proof.

Yeah I'm a purist as well, gotta have diesel smoke in the face and dust in the hair but not everbody appreciates that. Keep employees comfortable and they'll stay longer and perform better.

[farm_boy]

I've never run tractor/pan combinations, but they seem to work pretty well in certain conditions. Now, down where Jason is, it sounds like they don't work well at all. But one thing to remember, ground conditions are different all over the continent, so there may be sets of conditions where they excel that Jason just hasn't encountered yet. To come out with a definitive statement that they are junk, garbage and don't work at all is really pretty foolish. I doubt that anybody here has seen every ground condition that there is to be seen.

This is a great point alco :drinkup. I think more and more contractors around North America will tell you that no matter who the competition is, be it bankrupt farmers or real honest to goodness contractors that can really move material cheaper...there are more and more people bidding jobs today because there are less jobs to be had. Its been said here time and time again that there isn't just one way to move dirt. The contractors that have figured this out and know the cheapest way to move dirt based on the material have embraced ALL methods. Not to drop names, but look at the Peter Kiewits, Ames, TJ Lambrechts or the Ryans of the world. These companies are all successful, all have plenty of work through these tough economic times and all utilize multiple methods of moving dirt.

I think that there is a distinct difference in blaming a localized situation on a scraper tractor/pan system and painting a broad stroke for all situations that the system is "junk" and "garbage". I have seen with my own eyes situations where scraper tractors and pans DO in fact have a lower cost per yard than any other system available. And yes there were scales on the job and tonnages was measured. Other times...not so much. Its all about using the right tool for the right job. I can tell you that a TS-14 isn't always going to be the best tool, but it may be the only tool available to use. Expanding on this thought for a moment, the same can be true for scraper tractors. The reason that so many folks have went out of business while using scraper tractors is that they tried using them for everything, like they did in the past with self propelled scrapers. The problem with this is that the places to economically use scraper tractors are fewer than self propelled units, thus the reason so many have went out of business.

[JASON M]

I never said that they (farm tractors and pull-pans) COULD NOT move dirt. They can. But, here in La, and apparently in the mountainous areas, they cannot achieve a lower cost/ CY than a good, old-fashioned open bowl twin scraper. I've pointed out other problems, outlining "why" they could not do it as effectively. Draw your own conclusions.

And let's address my "junk" and "garbage" statements. Try this. Go to your local hardware store, buy a cheap gardening shovel from (1) aisle; then buy the most expensive one you can find from another aisle. They can both dig a hole. The tie-breaker is that one shovel can dig holes for a weekend project, and one shovel can dig holes FOREVER!! (Probably attributable to a stronger structure, thicker steel, and a handle that can absorb more compression and tension) There is a convincing parallelism between farm tractor/ pull-pan arrangements and push-cat twin-scraper arrangements and garden shovels. And to add salt to the wound, "A good, used operable twin scraper can be bought for under $50000 and run indefinitely (excluding a complete $35000 repower). That same money ($50,000 will barely buy a good, single, well operating pull-pan, much less an operable scraper train.
So, one is disposable, the other is not. I'm going to devote the rest of my day taking digital pics to illustrate. You should be witness to all of the reinforcing and gimmicks that we've tried on tractor-drawn pull pans. I remember making contact with Reynolds Mfg. for suggestions about limiting stress risers and cracking, and they would ask me what I thought would remedy the problem.

And as said by Abscraperguy, I am passionate about earthmoving and the months of Dec, Jan, and Feb are our worst months for dirt-work here in La.... I've got the time. And I might learn something. Convince me that I'm incorrect; there is a plethora of experience out here.

[farm_boy]

I find it very interesting that you always use Reyonlds as an example of how light duty scraper pan are. If this is your only experience with scrapers then I can understand why you feel this way. Almost every user of Reyonlds pans I have talked with has said the same thing you have....that they are JUNK. I have heard story after story about pulling tonuges apart, pulling the whole scraper in two and wheels falling off. Maybe this is why they are no longer in business!! Try looking at a current production Cat (Eject), Deere or Ashland pan. Much different from the picture that you paint.

As for running a piece of equipment forever...well that's a management thing. If your philosophy is to run a piece for years upon end and keep throwing rebuilds at it then scraper tractors are probably not for you. I will say that there are a ton of contractors across North America that don't submit to that fleet manangement style and will trade/upgrade every few years...no matter what the type of equipment. I will grant you that scraper tractors probably don't have as many "lifes" in them as a self propelled scraper. Does that make it a light piece of useless junk? I would say otherwise.

I'll give you an example of how a scraper tractor became an invaluable part of an earth moving "system". I was on a large scale resevoir project moving sand. The haul was about 3 miles....one way.... and the main method of moving material was on road belly dumps being top loaded by a 385. Thrown into the mix was two 9630's...one pulling twin 2112's and another pulling twin K-tec 33's. These tractors were hauling the what equalled two belly dump loads each round and returned a lower cost per yard because the on road trucks were getting the sh*t beat out of them. The scraper tractors were there day after day, load after load while there was always a yard full of broken down on road trucks sitting in the yard.

My point...don't discount scraper tractor's value just because you have chip on your shoulder about what is happening locally in your area.

[DPete]

Farm Boy, What's your practical travel speed loaded? Also did you load those scrapers or did the hoe? One of the things I don't care for is the way the loaded weight is distributed, it looks like 50% or more is on the tounge. I suppose to increase traction on the tractor wheels.

[JASON M]

Farm boy, that is a good post. I agree that the 9400 or 9500 pull-pan set-ups would outproduce what I see in those pics, and this is "why" You mentioned management. What I see in those photos show Mis-management. Just look at the belly-dump trailer in that soft, rutted ground. There is no way that the truck would be able to take off nor shift gears to gain speed in that arena. I'd bet that you didn't employ a small dozer to get the bottom dumps moving either, eating the clutches and drivelines. (I own 6 brand new bottom dump rigs)

And as far as the cost/ CY issue, I can run that bottom dump over the road rig for less than 1/2 the cost of the tractor-pan set-up................ and I'm sure that the loads that I see in those Ashland pans were not self-loaded; they were loaded by the same Cat mass X. So what's your point? The cost/ cy would be lower, ABSOLUTELY, with the bottom dumps if the jobsite management were better.:)

[JASON M]

............ and one more thing, Farmboy. Next time, count the amount of cycles that the excavator has to make to top off the loads. I think you'll be surprised.
On my last mass job, (1.8 million cy), I was toploading my CPS bottom dump trailers with a Cat 330C wearing a 345's bkt. (I won't argue capacity of the bkt because it doesn't matter for this comparison) I was toploading both Reynolds 17 cy pans and CPS SBD240 bottom dump trailers. The Reynolds 17 cy pan (the single pan) couldn't take more than 3 bkts, and then it was difficult to put 3 full excavator bkts into it. The CPS units were heaping at 7 bkts, trailer.... and I'm not exaggerating.
The bottom dumps were renting for $65 hour. The Reynolds units pulled by a 9520 was getting $150/ hour. I actually had good hard, shiny, earthen haul roads that I built, as I know the importance of them. The rest of the math, you can do.

[farm_boy]

YouTube - Miskin Construction Scraper 1of5 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XL6ma_trPZU)should generate some more lively conversation:D :stirthepot

[JASON M]

You are definitely stirring the pot, Farm Boy.... and that was excellent sales propaganda. I particularly liked watching the excavator and front-end loader load the units. I wonder why?
It amuses me that they've got that old salty jobsite sup't preaching the word of pull-pans for Miskin. He should work for them; maybe he does. Only problem with his lecturing is that he is 26 years behind in his sermon and doesn't have enough hours put on his units yet to see the difference in longevity. Reynolds started it all back in the early 80's or maybe even late 70's. And that old dude's company must be non-cognizant of new ideas and concepts, but that's neither here nor there.
But I will admit, newer pull-pans, the JD 1814's come to mind, as well as others that look like them could fill a niche where building of haul roads would prove impractical. Only flaw that I've seen in the operation is that I'd be pulling 3 or 4 of those Ashlands, JD's, or whatever big-tire, big-bearing heavy made pull-pan that I could find if I were forced to topload, but you will be hard-pressed to lower the cost/ CY by pulling only (2) of them. The rental rate is just too high. I'm guessing that a rolling rig that I'm describing would cost over $550,000/ scraper train. That's lots of dough, for the tractor will not make many hours pulling that kind of load. Other than that, on any haul greater than, say 3000 ft, give me a bottom-dump trailer and a good Bulldog w/ a real driver in the seat; not a steering wheel holder.

[Abscraperguy]

Jason M maybe these guys would suit your fancy. They're not pulled by farm tractors and the machine thats pulling them says CAT on it. Or you could paint it green to match your fleet of Terex's.

[bell142]

This is the senerio that works for me. Like i said, ive had both, however most people think that i have now lost my mind because i have gone to 613s. My average job is 30,000 cy, i run 4 613s, but for this example i will base it off of 2 613s vs 1 double 17cy pan. Ave haul 600 ft one way. LA, East TX, sands and clays. Base prices for machines
new trcr/pans $350000, good used latemodel 613 $175000 each.


613 11cy heaped 9 Bcy (banked) 20% loss (elevator helps consolidate material
pan 17cy heaped 12.75 Bcy 25% loss (relies on horsepower to fill)

Cycle times
613 40sec load, 10sec manuver, 60sec travel, 45sec man,dmp,man, 55 sec return
210 sec or 3.5 min Ave.

pans 130sec load,raise,drop,load, 15sec man, 80sec travel 130sec man,dmp,man, 75
sec return 430sec or 7.1 min lets say 6 min.

613 60min/3.5 = 17.14 rounds * .83 (50min efficiency)= 14 rounds * 9bcy=128bcy/hr * 2 (running) = 256 bcy/hr

pan 60min/6 = 10 rounds * .83 (50min eff.) = 8.5 rounds * 12.75 bcy = 108.5bcy/hr *
2 pans = 217 bcy/hr.

613 fuel 66 gal 10hr day * 2 132 gal day * $2.50 = $330 day
pan 150 gal day * 2.50 = 375 day

labor 613 oper. $130 * 2 = 260
pan 130

The beauty of "MY" system is if one 613 goes down im still moving with the other, if the pan goes down you are down. downtime is inevitable!

Mobilization for a 613 is " load up in 10 minutes and roll anywhere in the U.S. no permits needed.

Need to move 3000 cy for a house pad, no problem.
Need to turn around on a 25ft wide street no problem.
Need to cut 4:1 street ditchs no problem.
Picks up wind rows when finishing out.

Mainitence on chains do have a cost of about 6000.00 per year.

anyway, It WORKS WELL FOR ME!!!

[DPete]

Scraperguy, with all due respect that thing is butt ugly IMO

[Abscraperguy]

Scraperguy, with all due respect that thing is butt ugly IMO

I've actually never seen one. A buddy of mine just forwarded these pics to me. The ISO rating on these machines is 54 cy so if they made me money I wouldn't care what they look like. If they made huge money I would want the competition laughing they're heads off at their ugliness. That way they wouldn't buy them and prices would stay high.
:D:D

[DPete]

Tell ya what, take your rig and put it in with a fleet of older 651's, throw a couple D10's behind it and see how it does. Yardage is only a part of it.

[JASON M]

Abscraper guy, I've been on K-Tecs mailing list already; and therefore have already seen their stuff. I haven't seen their stuff run, but I like what I see. Note what's pulling the 54 cy pan, however; not any farm tractor, but a Kitty, Baby!;) But then again, I don't fully subscribe to that method.
If big capacity in a single pan is what you're looking for, I'd copy Mc Anninch's lead; just cut an old 651 Cat in (2), pull it with something that is both tractable (weight and tracks) and has enough meat & cornbread (horsepower) under the hood and then you'd have something that is structurally solid and battle-tested. I don't know of a mass-produced farm tractor that could fully load it. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure that a Cat 740 Artic can fully load it; not even close. Wanna know why?:) Here it is again: Not enough weight and horsepower! The tare wt on a Cat 740 is still only 72,000 lbs + the added drawbar weight of the hitch; nowhere close to the tare wts of a twin-scraper and a good push-cat. Still need a big Cat push-cat to get the job done.:cool: Or, start loading it with a mass X-cavator, so I'm not sure of what you've accomplished.:rolleyes:
BTW: I'm not married to Terex's and green paint; I could just as well have some Cat 627's or 637's with a 90,000 - 100,000 lb push-Cat; doesn't matter about the brand; just has to have some iron tracks with a significant grouser depth, weight, and horsepower to get the wagon loaded.... FULLY.:eek:

And please somebody, inform this forum as to the maximum weight of the largest, mass-produced farm tractor?? I mean with all of the tires at 80% full of water and a full appendage of counterweights.:Banghead

[JASON M]

Upon second look at that K-Tech unit..... I don't like the rear wheel bearing assy.... looks like that could tear away pretty easily. I'm still more comfotable with Caterpillar's engineers' work of 50 years ago!..... the 651 pan.

I don't know how much $ the unit pictured would cost, but I guess right at $600,000, ready to work at the jobsite. There would really be some azz-scratching going on when the rear axle assy vacates the frame.

[Burnout]

I was havin the discussion of tractor weights the other night.

Deere 9630 runs 530hp and base wt. is 37500lbs, max weight is no more than 57 000lbs

That big Challenger MT900C or whatever its name is, has 585hp base wt at 39 000lbs max weight no more than 60 000lbs

This thread is getting interesting. Seems like its Alberta vs. the Deep South. Can I add some fuel to the fire? pleeeease?:drinkup

[JASON M]

This is the senerio that works for me. Like i said, ive had both, however most people think that i have now lost my mind because i have gone to 613s. My average job is 30,000 cy, i run 4 613s, but for this example i will base it off of 2 613s vs 1 double 17cy pan. Ave haul 600 ft one way. LA, East TX, sands and clays. Base prices for machines
new trcr/pans $350000, good used latemodel 613 $175000 each.


613 11cy heaped 9 Bcy (banked) 20% loss (elevator helps consolidate material
pan 17cy heaped 12.75 Bcy 25% loss (relies on horsepower to fill)

Cycle times
613 40sec load, 10sec manuver, 60sec travel, 45sec man,dmp,man, 55 sec return
210 sec or 3.5 min Ave.

pans 130sec load,raise,drop,load, 15sec man, 80sec travel 130sec man,dmp,man, 75
sec return 430sec or 7.1 min lets say 6 min.

613 60min/3.5 = 17.14 rounds * .83 (50min efficiency)= 14 rounds * 9bcy=128bcy/hr * 2 (running) = 256 bcy/hr

pan 60min/6 = 10 rounds * .83 (50min eff.) = 8.5 rounds * 12.75 bcy = 108.5bcy/hr *
2 pans = 217 bcy/hr.

613 fuel 66 gal 10hr day * 2 132 gal day * $2.50 = $330 day
pan 150 gal day * 2.50 = 375 day

labor 613 oper. $130 * 2 = 260
pan 130

The beauty of "MY" system is if one 613 goes down im still moving with the other, if the pan goes down you are down. downtime is inevitable!

Mobilization for a 613 is " load up in 10 minutes and roll anywhere in the U.S. no permits needed.

Need to move 3000 cy for a house pad, no problem.
Need to turn around on a 25ft wide street no problem.
Need to cut 4:1 street ditchs no problem.
Picks up wind rows when finishing out.

Mainitence on chains do have a cost of about 6000.00 per year.

anyway, It WORKS WELL FOR ME!!!


Well, that certainly is a different method of getting the job done. I have only one old Cat 613 elevator scraper and use it for "finishing work" only; picking up windrows behind my Cat 14G/ 12G patrol.
Back in the 80's, I tried to run it (613B) w/ my TS-14's............. didn't work out too well. But, if you're scarifying ahead, in the cut, maybe it would work out, but I'd never attempt it.

[JASON M]

I was havin the discussion of tractor weights the other night.

Deere 9630 runs 530hp and base wt. is 37500lbs, max weight is no more than 57 000lbs

That big Challenger MT900C or whatever its name is, has 585hp base wt at 39 000lbs max weight no more than 60 000lbs

This thread is getting interesting. Seems like its Alberta vs. the Deep South. Can I add some fuel to the fire? pleeeease?:drinkup


Add the fuel; add all the fuel you like............ that's partial proponent of my argument all along. Horsepower requires fuel. A local Deep South cliche applies: I never minded feeding a mule, as long as she was pulling!

BTW: The most fuel that I ever recorded (measured w/ a jobsite flowmeter) from one of my TS-18's was 180 gallons/ day, and this was toting (2) loaded 17 cy pans BEHIND IT!!..... Anyway, about the same fuel consumption as one of the big J.D. 9630's or equivalent Steigers. I think that most of the reason for the parity is that newer emission-type engines (new eqt, no matter the brand) have to be run much too clean (HOT).

Burnout, "Are you a drag-racer, as I am?"

[Burnout]

Burnout, "Are you a drag-racer, as I am?"

No I am definately not a drag racer. I just work for a company that has 2 or 3 large scrapers. They are rather partial to the twin engine units.

YouTube - A few 657's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYkPf1UN9MQ)

I just like the topic in here. I run scraper every once in awhile but not too often. Mostly just when I need some dry dirt for my side of the operation. Pretty sad that the most comfortable units to me are the B's. Still haven't had much seat time in an E or a G.

[JASON M]

Now that's what I call a Scraper Spread! Lots of coins out there... and I see the farm tractors are pulling what they pull best.:D

[WabcoMan]

Oh my !
Good for the soul to see that many proper scrapers
More please:waving

[DPete]

Yup, that's the real deal, not a wannabe among em. Nice spread, now don't you think that Ktek hooked to a truck would ruin that pic? :D

[JASON M]

I've got video of my Jolly Green Giants and small push-cat (D8R) working...building a new section of levee in East-Central Louisiana. Just got the old VHS tape converted to CD... but the video is just too long. I'm gonna have to chop it up into a manageable piece, then send it out here. I would have liked to include the Quad-Tracs and J.D. units pulling 17 cy pans, but it wasn't impressive enough to make video of; I had moved that operation (farm tractors & pull-pans) to another section of the same job, as they were producing only about 40% the production of the Green Giants operation and hence would have just "been in the way"

[bill5362]

Jason you can post a pretty long video segment on youtube then attach the link....

[nkh111]

Here is a picture of Dave Kolb Grading from 67 highway in southeast MO.

[nkh111]

Here are some more pictures from the same job. It's impressive seeing them work but they have to be burning thru cutting edges, I know we were just a fews miles north of this job and we where using D9's pulling 631 pans.

[EGS]

nkh111 those are some interesting tires on those Deere's.

Are those tires common down your way?

BTW nice pics too!

[nkh111]

Dave Kolb Grading is the only contractor I have ever seen with those type of tire. They are regular tractor tires with some type of wrap around metal track that looks just like an oversize crawler track, I'm assuming for extra traction.

[EGS]

Dave Kolb Grading is the only contractor I have ever seen with those type of tire. They are regular tractor tires with some type of wrap around metal track that looks just like an oversize crawler track, I'm assuming for extra traction.

That is what I was thinking, some type of wrap around crawler track. I was thinking that might be hard on the tranny.

I like your pics very interesting!