Coastal
Senior Member
Well away on holidays the drive belt on my T-300 broke, my guys couldnt fix it, and its on a site, just wondering whats involved with replacing it when i go out there monday.
-
Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
T-300 Drive Belt
- Thread starter Coastal
- Start date
bobcat ron
Banned
I think it needs a special tensioner tool?
bobcatmechanic
Senior Member
under the air filter box there is a bolt going into a idler tensioner its a 3/4 socket to loosen it this is after you take the drive belt cover off then loosen it up and put the new belt on the old one more than likely balled up around the pump pulley a chain and a come along or another machine and pull on it to get it out put the new one on and tighten the bolt untill it stops also there is a stop that is on the fly wheel housing thats held by a 3/8 bolt take it off before you loosen the other bolt then when it is back together set the stop against the bracket thats all there is to it
Coastal
Senior Member
Thanks so much!
The machine has 1300 hours.
The machine has 1300 hours.
So I must ask. Is direct coupling of the engine and pump such a bad idea. I know what the BC marketing dept. has to say. I just don't believe it. It sounds like a "must do" for mounting their engine sideways, which creates another service point, and a broke right there service point when the belt fails.
bobcat ron
Banned
It's another "stubbornness" factor for Bobcat, what has worked for them for the last 30+ years will keep working for them for the next 30 years.
The only upsides to belt driven is they don't need an engine to rev over 2500 rpm's which gives better fuel economy and lower emissions, but that's only because of their gear pumps.
The only upsides to belt driven is they don't need an engine to rev over 2500 rpm's which gives better fuel economy and lower emissions, but that's only because of their gear pumps.
shane
Well-Known Member
Another statement of hilarity
Bobcat is the first and only that I know of to come out with transverse-mounted engine and belt driven pump, which, by the way, puts most of your maintenance points within easy reach right at the back door. Bobcat has been at it for over 50 years and it's plain to any reasonable person that Bobcat has not sat on any design for thirty years.
True, pulling the engine/pump package can be a pain, but it's not a task one needs to do often with the excellent Kubota engine.
It also allowed bobcat to put more weight lower and to the rear, and is the main reason that such small machines can handle so much more load, relative to the earlier models.
Changing the belt is easy. Pull the cover. On some models it may make life easier to remove the battery first, but that's easy also. Un-loop the spring-tensioned fan drive belt from the pump pulley. Remove the tensioner. Replace the belt. Re-install and adjust the tensioner. Re-install the fan drive belt. Re-install the cover, and the battery if you removed it. 1 to 2 hours if you've done it before, 3-4 tops for a noob. I think the belt is around 50 bucks.
I'm curious, and perhaps BobcatRon knows, what is the procedure for replacing a blown pump coupler on a CAT? Time? Cost?:beatsme
Bobcat is the first and only that I know of to come out with transverse-mounted engine and belt driven pump, which, by the way, puts most of your maintenance points within easy reach right at the back door. Bobcat has been at it for over 50 years and it's plain to any reasonable person that Bobcat has not sat on any design for thirty years.
True, pulling the engine/pump package can be a pain, but it's not a task one needs to do often with the excellent Kubota engine.
It also allowed bobcat to put more weight lower and to the rear, and is the main reason that such small machines can handle so much more load, relative to the earlier models.
Changing the belt is easy. Pull the cover. On some models it may make life easier to remove the battery first, but that's easy also. Un-loop the spring-tensioned fan drive belt from the pump pulley. Remove the tensioner. Replace the belt. Re-install and adjust the tensioner. Re-install the fan drive belt. Re-install the cover, and the battery if you removed it. 1 to 2 hours if you've done it before, 3-4 tops for a noob. I think the belt is around 50 bucks.
I'm curious, and perhaps BobcatRon knows, what is the procedure for replacing a blown pump coupler on a CAT? Time? Cost?:beatsme
bobcat ron
Banned
Another statement of hilarity
Bobcat is the first and only that I know of to come out with transverse-mounted engine and belt driven pump, which, by the way, puts most of your maintenance points within easy reach right at the back door. Bobcat has been at it for over 50 years and it's plain to any reasonable person that Bobcat has not sat on any design for thirty years.
True, pulling the engine/pump package can be a pain, but it's not a task one needs to do often with the excellent Kubota engine.
It also allowed bobcat to put more weight lower and to the rear, and is the main reason that such small machines can handle so much more load, relative to the earlier models.
Changing the belt is easy. Pull the cover. On some models it may make life easier to remove the battery first, but that's easy also. Un-loop the spring-tensioned fan drive belt from the pump pulley. Remove the tensioner. Replace the belt. Re-install and adjust the tensioner. Re-install the fan drive belt. Re-install the cover, and the battery if you removed it. 1 to 2 hours if you've done it before, 3-4 tops for a noob. I think the belt is around 50 bucks.
I'm curious, and perhaps BobcatRon knows, what is the procedure for replacing a blown pump coupler on a CAT? Time? Cost?:beatsme
I couldn't tell you, but I can look in the really well drawn out manual they gave me, but trust me, that's not an issue as it's all shaft driven. I do like the transverse system, but direct allows for piston pumps which give higher pressures, but I can't go on and on about the differences, so here's some Cat guts, much, much easier to work on than Bobcat's:
Attachments
shane
Well-Known Member
He he...the last time I heard someone saying "trust me" he was trying to sell me a new car.
By "shaft driven", you mean, of course, the shafts of all the pumps in a stack that are coupled, as is Bobcat. But there is a coupler between the engine and the shaft. Are you saying this will never fail in a CAT?
As far as "shaft-driven" being the prerequisite for piston pumps, which "give higher pressures", as you state, not true. All Bobcats, whether direct-drive or belt-driven, have "piston pumps." They power the drive!
I believe you are referring to the load-sensing variable-displacement hydraulic system on a CAT? Bobcat has an open-center fixed-displacement hydraulic system but I'm sure if they saw a benefit they could design in such a pump on the end of the stack, along with all of such a system's complex plumbing and controls, and being belt-driven would not be a limiting factor. Bobcat is already pushing towards 4000 psi in their large-frame loader hydraulics with a gear pump. How much do you need? How much HP you got?
Bobcat's belt-driven pump, because of pulley size, is spinning faster than the engine. It allows for relatively lower-diplacement gear pump to provide adequate flow. Flow is what you need for cycle speed. Pressure is what you need for force. Force is usually equal to or slightly higher than the load. A gear pump is adequate and simple, and keeps unit cost manageable. You do not need fancy equipment and procedures to repair or calibrate an open-center hydraulic system.
The pictures look to me like Bobcat's technology two generations ago.
Even so, make and model preference is surely a personal thing.
By "shaft driven", you mean, of course, the shafts of all the pumps in a stack that are coupled, as is Bobcat. But there is a coupler between the engine and the shaft. Are you saying this will never fail in a CAT?
As far as "shaft-driven" being the prerequisite for piston pumps, which "give higher pressures", as you state, not true. All Bobcats, whether direct-drive or belt-driven, have "piston pumps." They power the drive!
I believe you are referring to the load-sensing variable-displacement hydraulic system on a CAT? Bobcat has an open-center fixed-displacement hydraulic system but I'm sure if they saw a benefit they could design in such a pump on the end of the stack, along with all of such a system's complex plumbing and controls, and being belt-driven would not be a limiting factor. Bobcat is already pushing towards 4000 psi in their large-frame loader hydraulics with a gear pump. How much do you need? How much HP you got?
Bobcat's belt-driven pump, because of pulley size, is spinning faster than the engine. It allows for relatively lower-diplacement gear pump to provide adequate flow. Flow is what you need for cycle speed. Pressure is what you need for force. Force is usually equal to or slightly higher than the load. A gear pump is adequate and simple, and keeps unit cost manageable. You do not need fancy equipment and procedures to repair or calibrate an open-center hydraulic system.
The pictures look to me like Bobcat's technology two generations ago.
Even so, make and model preference is surely a personal thing.
bobcat ron
Banned
There is a spline shaft that connects the pumps to the engine, other manufacturers use a universal joint, but I saw it in the exploded view.
I wish I had a scanner, man I could post some "trade secrets"!!
I wish I had a scanner, man I could post some "trade secrets"!!
74inchShovel
Well-Known Member
One might be able to make a case for the belt drive to the pumps, but the tapered pin in the loader arms is a Bobcat "exclusive" I will never understand. Friends got a T 300, under 1000 hrs, and the pins worked loose like their apt to do leading to a large repair bill. Bobcat is aware of this, and have repair kits at the ready. Hmmmmm, maybe I do understand.
bobcat ron
Banned
Yeah those pins I will never understand, but they have finally changed the lower loader arms where the tilt pins are in to a solid arm rather than the hollow design, I had my arms crack twice on my old T190, it's nice to see they are making some (if any) changes slowly, but it's just not fast enough.
He he...the last time I heard someone saying "trust me" he was trying to sell me a new car.
By "shaft driven", you mean, of course, the shafts of all the pumps in a stack that are coupled, as is Bobcat. But there is a coupler between the engine and the shaft. Are you saying this will never fail in a CAT?
As far as "shaft-driven" being the prerequisite for piston pumps, which "give higher pressures", as you state, not true. All Bobcats, whether direct-drive or belt-driven, have "piston pumps." They power the drive!
I believe you are referring to the load-sensing variable-displacement hydraulic system on a CAT? Bobcat has an open-center fixed-displacement hydraulic system but I'm sure if they saw a benefit they could design in such a pump on the end of the stack, along with all of such a system's complex plumbing and controls, and being belt-driven would not be a limiting factor. Bobcat is already pushing towards 4000 psi in their large-frame loader hydraulics with a gear pump. How much do you need? How much HP you got?
Bobcat's belt-driven pump, because of pulley size, is spinning faster than the engine. It allows for relatively lower-diplacement gear pump to provide adequate flow. Flow is what you need for cycle speed. Pressure is what you need for force. Force is usually equal to or slightly higher than the load. A gear pump is adequate and simple, and keeps unit cost manageable. You do not need fancy equipment and procedures to repair or calibrate an open-center hydraulic system.
The pictures look to me like Bobcat's technology two generations ago.
Even so, make and model preference is surely a personal thing.
I am not looking for an arguement but will point out that I find nothing excellent about the Kubota engine. Also that engine will soon be replaced. Low torque being the issue. HP of course is not the driver in this application, granted the torque rating is not as low as CAT but you can see it from there. BC just recently was able to coax around 40 gpm on their high flow however I continue to hear of cooling issues when running hard on such attachments as large asphalt planers. Also I believe they are running about 3300 psi, that is closer to 3000 than 4000. It may only take a couple of hours to change but when it unexpectedly goes it goes. I don't have that issue and neither does anyone else but BC.
shane
Well-Known Member
1. KSSS-I stand corrected. I got looking around and you are correct, system relief is designed between 3250 and 3350 psi, or 3300, which is closer to 3000 than 4000. Thank you. I concede that Bobcats hydraulics do run on the hotter side, but short of overheating, what's the problem?
2. KSSS-The excellency of the Kubota engine is relative, and we'll have to agree to disagree on that issue, although you are the first I've ever heard who does not think so. You're probably not alone, but neither am I. I am interested in your statement of the Kubota engine's imminent replacement. What is your source?
3. I had only "heard" that the CAT has a closed-center hydraulics, and BobcatRon's photos show what appears to me to be a gear-pump open-center system, in-line direct drive setup, like Bobcats of yesteryear. Is that a gear or piston pump on the end? That got me looking around and I found CAT's website with many interesting facts on the model comparison pages in reference to rated capacities, tip loads, machine weights and engine HP, not just against Bobcat but many popular brands. Good reading. Given the published data, I'm surprised at CAT's openness with them.
4. Though it doesn't specifically show it, based on what BobcatRon said and the pictures on the website showed, CAT has what appears to be a flex-plate spline coupler set-up similar to the coupler on a towed air compressor. Tell me they don't fail and I laugh myself to incontinence. Unless there is some magic trick I can't think of, such a failure involves engine removal, like Bobcats of yore. I could have an old-school Bobcat engine out in 20 minutes. The CAT appears somewhat more complex, IMO of the website photos.
5. The original prompting of my response was the statement that direct-drive allows for piston pumps which belt-drive does not, and that a belt-drive system is inferiorior to direct-drive setup from a repair standpoint, and I refute both statements.
6. And finally, in response to the new Bobcat-bashing facts that appeared, the boom-end tapered-pin bosses have to my knowledge always been solid steel. Cracking is due to abuse, or perhaps running a breaker, damage to which any machine is not immune. The issue with pins working loose is because of paint in the bosses, quality control issues of a manufacturer in a rush, IMO. Bobcat just can't build them fast enough to keep up with all the demand of enlightened yellow-colored machine trade-in customers.
I concede that Bobcats hydraulics do run on the hotter side, but short of overheating, what's the problem?2. KSSS-The excellency of the Kubota engine is relative, and we'll have to agree to disagree on that issue, although you are the first I've ever heard who does not think so. You're probably not alone, but neither am I.
I am interested in your statement of the Kubota engine's imminent replacement. What is your source?3. I had only "heard" that the CAT has a closed-center hydraulics, and BobcatRon's photos show what appears to me to be a gear-pump open-center system, in-line direct drive setup, like Bobcats of yesteryear. Is that a gear or piston pump on the end? That got me looking around and I found CAT's website with many interesting facts on the model comparison pages in reference to rated capacities, tip loads, machine weights and engine HP, not just against Bobcat but many popular brands. Good reading. Given the published data, I'm surprised at CAT's openness with them.
4. Though it doesn't specifically show it, based on what BobcatRon said and the pictures on the website showed, CAT has what appears to be a flex-plate spline coupler set-up similar to the coupler on a towed air compressor. Tell me they don't fail and I laugh myself to incontinence.
Unless there is some magic trick I can't think of, such a failure involves engine removal, like Bobcats of yore. I could have an old-school Bobcat engine out in 20 minutes. The CAT appears somewhat more complex, IMO of the website photos.5. The original prompting of my response was the statement that direct-drive allows for piston pumps which belt-drive does not, and that a belt-drive system is inferiorior to direct-drive setup from a repair standpoint, and I refute both statements.
6. And finally, in response to the new Bobcat-bashing facts that appeared, the boom-end tapered-pin bosses have to my knowledge always been solid steel. Cracking is due to abuse, or perhaps running a breaker, damage to which any machine is not immune. The issue with pins working loose is because of paint in the bosses, quality control issues of a manufacturer in a rush, IMO. Bobcat just can't build them fast enough to keep up with all the demand of enlightened yellow-colored machine trade-in customers.
bobcat ron
Banned
There is 2 piston pumps, the bigger is the drive (closed loop) and the smaller is the loader and there is a main gear pump for the auxiliaries, on the end of that one is a smaller gear pump that is called the charge pump, it runs the fan, circulates oil in the tank/cooler and keeps the pumps and valve banks charged with oil, Bobcat requires a separate valve and filter for their fan system which robs power big time, where as the Cat only has 5 GPM and 600 psi running through their fan motor and cooler.
bobcat ron
Banned
6. And finally, in response to the new Bobcat-bashing facts that appeared, the boom-end tapered-pin bosses have to my knowledge always been solid steel. Cracking is due to abuse, or perhaps running a breaker, damage to which any machine is not immune. The issue with pins working loose is because of paint in the bosses, quality control issues of a manufacturer in a rush, IMO. Bobcat just can't build them fast enough to keep up with all the demand of enlightened yellow-colored machine trade-in customers.
Actually, hollow from the bushing on up, now the 2007/2008 models have been changed to all solid steel (like Cat, go figure) I praise Bobcat for that as I cracked my loader in that area twice.
shane
Well-Known Member
I cannot even begin to imagine what you are talking about. I would very much like to see a schematic of the system. Are you saying that one piston pump powers the drive, both left and right sides? And the other of the two powers the hydraulics? Is there then a control valve for the drive? There would have to be if one pump powers the drive. Do you know this?
On a Bobcat K-series, the separate valve and filter you refer to is for control of fan speed which actually reduces power loss by only allowing the fan to spin fast enough to maintain operating temperature, which you continually dismiss as too hot. It's a technological advancement, call it good or useless, but it's all about efficiency. The filter protects the system from the fan motor, never a bad idea.
In earlier posts, you implied that all of the circulating oil goes through the cooler, that's why it runs so cool, etc., and now you're stating that oil moves through the cooler at 5 gpm via the charge pump. Which is it for Pete's sake?
While it's certainly true that I don't know as much about CATs as I do about Bobcats, I believe I know more about Bobcats than you, and I'm beginning to feel that you don't know as much about CAT's as you want others to think you do, and that all your ranting about the CAT's superiority and your constant degradation of anything except CAT is mostly hype and nonsense. I thought you were a digger rather than a rabid CAT salesman.
And, trust me, I still like your website.
The source of the Kubota engine replacement is rumor and nothing more. However, especially with Kubota entering the skid steer/CTL market soon I don't see BC using them as they will be a competetor. Even more than that however is that I don't see the Koreans using a Japanese motor. Doosan has access to their own powerplant. I will say that of all the powerplants BC has used the Kubota is there most successful choice although I think that they seem fairly durable, they have little torque reserve and a powerband that does not seem well matched to the machines. These are my observations compared to the Cummins and Inveco motors that I am used to.
As far as the CAT website. If you find CAT's torque specs on their site I will buy you and yours a meal at Rodizio steakhouse. The number on their biggest machines is 217 foot pounds. Thanks to a destroking pump on their antiwork feature the engine cant really pull down or stall but it will cease to move the tires (C series). I could not even get the CAT salesman to give me the spec. or he really couldn't find it, not sure which is true. As I wrote on another site after a 256 C demo, the machine although comfortable is really not capable of the same productivity that I am used to. You cannot get anymore work out of the machine that what is programed into it. It was not able to lift a loaded bucket out of a pitrun pile without first backing out. It had a ROC of 2500 pounds and it would not lift 2501 pounds. I am getting off track. As far as CATs hyd system, I cant speak about it intelligently as I don't know enough about it.
As far as the pros and cons of direct coupling or a belt, I cant speak of ease of replacement. I just believe that there is less parastic powerloss and less upkeep with a direct couple system.
As far as loader arm issues with Bobcat they have historically had problems as can be attested by the various design changes. There is set of loader arms sitting in the scrap pile here at BC off of what appears to be a S250. The lower bosses have been welded several times as it appears, apparently someone go tired of welding. Whether it is abuse I don't know but I am surprised BC has not got rid of the loader arms. It is the equivilent of doctor having a dead body hanging in his back yard.
As far as BC hyd. running hotter, I believe it is due to not having enough fluid in their larger machines. Example the CASE 465 has 17 gal capacity and the BC S300 has 13 gal. Thats pretty significant.
Well at least we agree on the fact that BCron fell out of the CAT tree and hit every branch on the way down.:beatsme
As far as the CAT website. If you find CAT's torque specs on their site I will buy you and yours a meal at Rodizio steakhouse. The number on their biggest machines is 217 foot pounds. Thanks to a destroking pump on their antiwork feature the engine cant really pull down or stall but it will cease to move the tires (C series). I could not even get the CAT salesman to give me the spec. or he really couldn't find it, not sure which is true. As I wrote on another site after a 256 C demo, the machine although comfortable is really not capable of the same productivity that I am used to. You cannot get anymore work out of the machine that what is programed into it. It was not able to lift a loaded bucket out of a pitrun pile without first backing out. It had a ROC of 2500 pounds and it would not lift 2501 pounds. I am getting off track. As far as CATs hyd system, I cant speak about it intelligently as I don't know enough about it.
As far as the pros and cons of direct coupling or a belt, I cant speak of ease of replacement. I just believe that there is less parastic powerloss and less upkeep with a direct couple system.
As far as loader arm issues with Bobcat they have historically had problems as can be attested by the various design changes. There is set of loader arms sitting in the scrap pile here at BC off of what appears to be a S250. The lower bosses have been welded several times as it appears, apparently someone go tired of welding. Whether it is abuse I don't know but I am surprised BC has not got rid of the loader arms. It is the equivilent of doctor having a dead body hanging in his back yard.
As far as BC hyd. running hotter, I believe it is due to not having enough fluid in their larger machines. Example the CASE 465 has 17 gal capacity and the BC S300 has 13 gal. Thats pretty significant.
Well at least we agree on the fact that BCron fell out of the CAT tree and hit every branch on the way down.:beatsme
shane
Well-Known Member
I've been wondering about the Kubota/Bobcat relationship myself lately, given the changes in ownership and other things.
What I had always understood was that Bobcat was Kubota Power's number one customer, and that although Kubota offers a mini-ex, they agreed to stay out of the American skid-steer market, to which Bobcat agreed to stay out of the small tractor market which Kubota is heavily into.
Since Doosan bought I/R Utility Division, Bobcat included, and is now offering a small tractor with a Bobcat paint job, it probably will be an issue when the current contracts expire. I wonder if a breach hasn't already occured, but those are large, proprietary issues guys like me can only ignorantly speculate about.
Another interesting thing to me is that this Bobcat Tractor has a Kubota knock-off engine. From three feet you can't tell it's not a Kubota engine.
I wonder if they'll knock off all the Kubota engine models and start building them into Bobcats at the plant, but what I've heard from folks who are in more authoritative positions is that Doosan will simply leave Bobcat alone.
I didn't realize that until you wrote it that the engine torque specs weren't published. This is an area that I'm not well-versed in, but I don't really see the value in placing a lot of emphasis on torque specs when designing a hydrostatic/hydraulic machine powered by an engine that runs at relatively constant rpm. HP available at given rpm, pump displacement, and pressure capabilities and relief settings give the performance of the machine, working together with cylinder size, lever geometry, and weight distribution. I am in need of some enlightenment in this area-the relevance of torque ratings in this application.
I agree that the belt drive system has more friction and mass to move than a direct-drive set-up, and therefore less efficient. However, given the stated benefits of allowing a transverse mounted power-package to be moved rearward in the frame, and allowing access to the coupler system without major disassembly, which increase ROC without increasing machine weight, and simplify maintenance, are benefits which IMO far outweigh the small price to pay in coupler efficiency. I concede that snapping a belt in the middle of a job does not seem a small thing to an owner or operator at the time, but stripping a splined coupler or experiencing a u-joint come-apart is a much bigger issue, and certainly does happen.
I know folks complain about Bobcat loader arms, pins and bushings. Having worked at the dealerships for quite awhile, I can only say that the vast majority of worn out Bob-tach pins and bushings, cracked booms and things of this nature are most obviously due to neglect and abuse:
Specifically-failure to grease pivot points, failure to slap wrench on a loose bolt, using the machine in some kind of battering-ram application. A close second is a machine which is primarily used with a breaker, which is hard on any manufacturer's machine.
The constant redesigns you speak of are IMO the manufacturer's attempts to do what they reasonably can to guard against and/or react to neglect and abuse, as the machines are seemingly well-designed initially to perform under normal conditions. When designing a machine, it is impossible to anticipate all potential failures and flaws. Some manufacturers do a better job at this than others. It all comes down to how much R&D goes into the new models before release. R&D costs big bucks, and is reflected in unit price. This is true for all manufacturers and I feel Bobcat does pretty well in this area, and have been at it for more than fifty years. It is for this very reason that it is economically impossible for me to go an buy a 2400-pound hunk of aluminum, steel and plastic that is called a Cessna 182. Any skid steer that was subject to such stringent design standards and quality control as an airplane would cost much more than the prices folks are already moaning about anyway.
And finally, again, the Bobcat loader hydraulic cooling system. "Hot" is relative. "Overheat" is absolute.
I'll say it again-the more efficient the cooling system, the less voluminous the resrvoir needs to be. That's an engineering fact.
I may indeed be able to jump out of a CAT after hours of planing, drop trou and lay my little wee-wee on the hydraulic couplers, go home and still service the old lady, whereas such a stunt with a Bobcat would surely burn off what little I still got. It's HOT! Is it overheated? No. Is it within the rated operating temperature range? Yes. Should one want to touch the couplers? Not me. Go ahead if you want to.
Someone else stated the benefit of a large reservoir's ability to sustain a prolonged leak without attention-I find this both hilarious and ridiculous. I wonder how his customer with the new concrete driveway feels about that!
Please remember and pity my soul-I am anything but a digger. My perspective and opinions on all this is from a repair standpoint, and what info I have gleaned from performance data and self-taught engineering principles. I don't have as much experience operating machines, and it is not my intent to offend anyone.
What I had always understood was that Bobcat was Kubota Power's number one customer, and that although Kubota offers a mini-ex, they agreed to stay out of the American skid-steer market, to which Bobcat agreed to stay out of the small tractor market which Kubota is heavily into.
Since Doosan bought I/R Utility Division, Bobcat included, and is now offering a small tractor with a Bobcat paint job, it probably will be an issue when the current contracts expire. I wonder if a breach hasn't already occured, but those are large, proprietary issues guys like me can only ignorantly speculate about.
Another interesting thing to me is that this Bobcat Tractor has a Kubota knock-off engine. From three feet you can't tell it's not a Kubota engine.
I wonder if they'll knock off all the Kubota engine models and start building them into Bobcats at the plant, but what I've heard from folks who are in more authoritative positions is that Doosan will simply leave Bobcat alone.
I didn't realize that until you wrote it that the engine torque specs weren't published. This is an area that I'm not well-versed in, but I don't really see the value in placing a lot of emphasis on torque specs when designing a hydrostatic/hydraulic machine powered by an engine that runs at relatively constant rpm. HP available at given rpm, pump displacement, and pressure capabilities and relief settings give the performance of the machine, working together with cylinder size, lever geometry, and weight distribution. I am in need of some enlightenment in this area-the relevance of torque ratings in this application.
I agree that the belt drive system has more friction and mass to move than a direct-drive set-up, and therefore less efficient. However, given the stated benefits of allowing a transverse mounted power-package to be moved rearward in the frame, and allowing access to the coupler system without major disassembly, which increase ROC without increasing machine weight, and simplify maintenance, are benefits which IMO far outweigh the small price to pay in coupler efficiency. I concede that snapping a belt in the middle of a job does not seem a small thing to an owner or operator at the time, but stripping a splined coupler or experiencing a u-joint come-apart is a much bigger issue, and certainly does happen.
I know folks complain about Bobcat loader arms, pins and bushings. Having worked at the dealerships for quite awhile, I can only say that the vast majority of worn out Bob-tach pins and bushings, cracked booms and things of this nature are most obviously due to neglect and abuse:
Specifically-failure to grease pivot points, failure to slap wrench on a loose bolt, using the machine in some kind of battering-ram application. A close second is a machine which is primarily used with a breaker, which is hard on any manufacturer's machine.
The constant redesigns you speak of are IMO the manufacturer's attempts to do what they reasonably can to guard against and/or react to neglect and abuse, as the machines are seemingly well-designed initially to perform under normal conditions. When designing a machine, it is impossible to anticipate all potential failures and flaws. Some manufacturers do a better job at this than others. It all comes down to how much R&D goes into the new models before release. R&D costs big bucks, and is reflected in unit price. This is true for all manufacturers and I feel Bobcat does pretty well in this area, and have been at it for more than fifty years. It is for this very reason that it is economically impossible for me to go an buy a 2400-pound hunk of aluminum, steel and plastic that is called a Cessna 182. Any skid steer that was subject to such stringent design standards and quality control as an airplane would cost much more than the prices folks are already moaning about anyway.
And finally, again, the Bobcat loader hydraulic cooling system. "Hot" is relative. "Overheat" is absolute.
I'll say it again-the more efficient the cooling system, the less voluminous the resrvoir needs to be. That's an engineering fact.
I may indeed be able to jump out of a CAT after hours of planing, drop trou and lay my little wee-wee on the hydraulic couplers, go home and still service the old lady, whereas such a stunt with a Bobcat would surely burn off what little I still got. It's HOT! Is it overheated? No. Is it within the rated operating temperature range? Yes. Should one want to touch the couplers? Not me. Go ahead if you want to.
Someone else stated the benefit of a large reservoir's ability to sustain a prolonged leak without attention-I find this both hilarious and ridiculous. I wonder how his customer with the new concrete driveway feels about that!
Please remember and pity my soul-I am anything but a digger. My perspective and opinions on all this is from a repair standpoint, and what info I have gleaned from performance data and self-taught engineering principles. I don't have as much experience operating machines, and it is not my intent to offend anyone.