Cat 963 vs 973 vs 983, Which to Purchase?

[Zembo]

I’m in the market for an old track loader and hoping to get one home with a complete filter and fluid change around $30k. I have a few bookmarked yet being new to heavy equipment I would appreciate any advise you care share between the different models.

For example, on a hill, which will have the best stability?

Will the 983’s mass, help it hold traction or increase its likelihood to slide down the hill?


963 - Will transport the easiest. I expect it will preform similar to my D6D. Which I’m thinking maybe I should have purchased a D7.

973 -

983 - Most expensive to transport. But once on property not a big deal. I expect the oil changes to have crazy volumes. The fuel cost must surely be high but I expect it can move a mountain.

Please add in where you can.

Thanks
Steve Z.

 

[Nige]

For example, on a hill, which will have the best stability?

Track loaders are not really designed to work on significant slopes. They are not usually equipped with tall grousers on the track shoes unless you buy one with dozer shoes on it. The double or triple grouser shoes are designed not to tear up ground rather than for traction.

Will the 983’s mass, help it hold traction or increase its likelihood to slide down the hill?

Again it all depends on what track shoes are on it.

You do realise that a 983 is effectively the size of a D8 with a loader bucket on it.? Do you need anything that big.?

 

[farmerlund]

I have an older 963 and a 2002 973. the older 963 I mainly use as a gravel pit loader. works good and will move plenty of dirt.
The 973 I use for demo and trees mostly. sometimes for stripping top soil for building sites. The 973 is a beast will do alot of work in a day. I cann't imagine that a 983 would be nessesary unless you are in a big production job. Maybe a newer 973 is the same as an old 983? I am not sure how they size up. I have a 1974 D8H, and the 973 I have are pretty much the same size machines.

They are both very ackward on hills and slopes, kind of narrow and tippy when you raise the bucket. You didn't say what kind of work you are doing.

 

[IceHole]

Have a 977L with dozer tracks and winch. Works well, though definitely tears up the ground if using it as a loader.

 

[Zembo]

I’m down to looking at a 2000 973 made in Japan vs a 1983 983 made in USA. First project is cutting down this remaining hill, trees, etc. for a pad 120 x 80 Garage Workshop. The 983 owner is really selling his fathers machine. Bragging a bit how good it is. The other guy is saying he doesn’t know much about the 973. The video he sent me on the 973, it started right up, looks clean. The 973 is a little more money. Both are affordable. At this point it really isn’t about the money. Is Japan made going to be a problem? My Cat dealership said he could not pull up the engine using the serial number .. ?

 

[CM1995]

Why do you need or want such a large loader?

A 983 hasn't been made in what 30-40 years? Can only imagine what parts are going to cost for a large machine of that age where not many units were made compared to other models of the same vintage like 955's and 977's.

Comparing a 983 to as 973 is like comparing an 1982 Olds Delta 88 to a 2005 Lexus LS 500. I wouldn't hesitate to take the 973 over a 983 if the tractors were equal in condition and price.

Without knowing anything about the two machines it's hard to give much more advice. However the Cat iron I've owned over the last 20 years, the Japanese made models were the most reliable.

 

[Zembo]

I don’t. It would be an oversized tool. I’m shopping at the bottom of the market. Semi retired with limited income, looking for some projects to tackle. If I could get a couple years of light use out of either, I would be happy. Interesting comment on the Japanese reliability. Thanks.

 

[Nige]

What’s the Serial Number of the 973.?

Like CM I’m still struggling to understand why you need that big of a machine.

 

[Zembo]

The 973 is 90L00600.
Asking $35K.

The 983 is 88K802.
Asking $25K.

 

[Nige]

Back in those days data entry was spotty. In your case I looked at a range of Serial Numbers around 90L600 and found nothing regarding engine numbers for about 50% of them so the machine you are interested in is nothing unusual in that respect.

Let me point out here that the 973 has a hydrostatic transmission which can be extremely expensive if it suffers a failure, something common with all the later models in the track loader line.

Do you mean Serial Number 38K802 for the 983.?

 

[Zembo]

On the 983, I copied it as he sent it. He didn’t send a pic of it.

 

[OzDozer]

The 983 came in 2 S/No prefixes - 38K, built from 1969 to 1978. The next S/No in the 983's was the 983B, which was 58X S/No.

The 38K machines used the D343 engine, engine prefix number 52K.
The 58X machines used the 3406 engine, engine prefix number 70V.

A 983 with a S/No of 38K802 would be a 1973 year of build.
A 983B with a S/No of 58K802 doesn't exist, Cat only built 594 of them in total, so the highest 983B S/No is 58K00594.
A 973 with a S/No of 90L00600 is a 1984 year of build.

The 983 is 275HP, the 973 is 200HP.

The D343 is an old technology engine and they're an expensive and complex engine to operate and maintain.
The 3406 on the other hand is a great engine, simple and reliable, and much cheaper to operate.

The 973 uses the 3306 engine, also a great engine and very reliable and cheaper to operate and maintain.

I've driven a 973 for a while, it was a very nice machine. As Nige says, the hydrostatic transmissions can be expensive if they blow up.
They are usually fairly reliable, if the oil has been kept clean, the correct oil used and no water has ever got into the transmission.

I've operated quite a few traxcavators, the 973 is better balanced than the styles with front-mounted engine.
They are designed for digging and loading, and they don't like slopes - they're designed to operate on level floors. You can get into trouble quickly with a traxcavator with a raised bucket on a slope.

The 983 is a beast, but an old and costly-to-run beast. It will cost a whole lot of money to move around, and burn a whole lot of expensive diesel.

The 973 is a very capable and pretty modern machine, it will cost less to move around, and you can't really compare the 973 and the 983, it's comparing apples to oranges.

Absolutely nothing wrong with Japanese-built Cats, they've been building Cats since about 1964, and I was buying Japanese-built Cats in the late 1960's, and they were superb machines.

Only difference is, some of the Japanese built Cats used Mitsubishi electrical components rather than Delco Remy, as it was cheaper for Cat to do that, and possibly could have also been related to the Japanese Govt demanding a percentage of local product in the build.

The Japanese-built Cats were the product of a Joint Venture between Mitsubishi and Cat, Mitsubishi had a spare under-utilised factory, and this was also a way for Cat to penetrate the Asian market more easily.
You quite often find "Mitsubishi" stamped or cast on a lot of the components in a Japanese Cat.

Remember that bigger tractors have parts and components that are a lot heavier than smaller tractors, and lifting equipment is usually needed when working on them.

 

[Zembo]

Thank you for the input. Seems both of these sellers may not have their facts right. Instead of spending the day in my car driving to see these, I’m going to work in my yard. It will be much more satisfying. Again thanks.

 

[Nige]

TBH I think that you need to seriously ask yourself "do I need a track loader for this job?". I dunno, maybe a track dozer might make more sense.

Can I suggest that you post some details, with plans if possible, showing what/how much need to move and from where to where.? There are some sharp earthmoving people here in HEF who make a living out of doing this. They would be the ones to advise you on the most efficient way of doing it.

 

[sawmilleng]

I'm coming a little late to the party, but Ozdozer and Nige make a subtle point that I can't help but say a bit more on: The hydrostatic drives on the newer crawlers.

Since the whole driveline consists of two hydraulic pumps and two motors that are very advanced and costly, it behooves you to get oil samples taken and a reading on the case drain flows before you consider buying any of these machines. It seems to me that one pump can cost $15K+ and if you have contaminated oil you may be facing rebuilding all 4 items. So paying a 3rd party mechanic to take a sample and check bypass flows would be cheap before laying your money down. I understand they run pretty high pressures--(someone will have to help here--5,000 to 7,000 psi?) so any contamination will cause havoc.

(I'll probaby be scorned by some): but I will say that I believe if you want to run a machine that you can buy with lower $ a machine with a torque converter and "conventional" powershift transmission is probably a better choice. This is because those older transmissions are a little easier to fix and as a result a repair or rebuild can be a lot less money.

Jon.

 

[crane operator]

Semi retired with limited income, looking for some projects to tackle. If I could get a couple years of light use out of either, I would be happy.

If I was semi retired and had a limited income, I'm not sure I would be purchasing either of those machines. I guess I would want to know if you could handle a $20,000 repair bill, on top of the purchase price, for either machine, and if you can't, you probably shouldn't buy either one.

If you are handy (retired mechanic/ able to work on it yourself) that would make a big difference on repair costs.

You state in your first post that you are new to heavy equipment, so I'm going to guess you are new to heavy equipment repair, and the associated costs. There were very few 983 made, and very few are still kept going, simply because of the economics of them. If you tear up a final drive its going to get expensive in a hurry.

If you buy either one, and have a repair that you can't afford, they become a large paperweight.

 

[crane operator]

They are both very ackward on hills and slopes, kind of narrow and tippy when you raise the bucket.

Where did you find a hill? Or a slope? Or did you just drive one track in the road ditch?

 

[MG84]

I’d have to agree with the others. I think you are WAY overestimating the size of machine you need for your projects. I have zero desire to own a machine the size of a 973 or 983 unless it was literally the only thing that would do the job. When equipment that size breaks it can be the things that nightmares are made of. I’m guessing a 953 or even an older D6 would be more than adequate.

 

[ippielb]

As someone who has operated both a 963 and own and operate a 973, you do NOT need a 983. There is nothing that the 983 can do that the 973 cant do, faster, and better.

For you, i would say the 963 would be your better option. Everything on it is cheaper, fuel, servicing, parts. And since you're only doing your own projects, your time is "Free" and doesn't cost you anything if it takes a little bit longer.

Save yourself money on float, fuel, maintenance, parts and just get the 963. Unless the 963 is double the price of the 973.

 

[CM1995]

Since OP is in GA I would say a 953 is the cheapest and best option on fuel, parts pricing, parts availability, mob, etc. If there is no hard schedule to complete the projects then there is no real reason to buy such a large machine.

Bought a 953C new in 2003 and still have it. Personally I wouldn't own a larger track loader for what we do. YMMV.