Looking for a track loader

there's SBG (single bar grouers ie dozer pads) DBG (double bar ie loader) TPG (tripple, ie excavator)

width of track comes into play yes but so does length of track on the ground. go to ritchiespecs.com and look at ground pressure.

for the money your wanting to spend and conditions you are working in i wouldnt think about anything other than a 953.

ever tried backing out of a basement or a creek with a loaded bucket with a front engine machine? you'll know the difference trust me

no knocking the old 955's but why would you buy one when you could have a 953..... no comparison

new or used you are going to have breakdowns dont kid yourself if you think you wont.

DMiller said:

Sounds like sealed rail not SALT, bridged segments are fairly common on sit a long time machines, may work out on their own but maybe not. Whatever you do, DO NOT put oil, fuel, anything other than water on them to attempt to free the link pins, oil traps dirt and contaminants, will increase pin/bushing wear, run the machine in the creek a few times(Water) and they should free up.

Click to expand...

sorry to dis-agrree but i dont find anything wrong with lubrricating them at all..... interrnal pin/bushing wear is more important to me than exterrnal bushing wear, i do agree that running them in water will make them quieter but why put water in them when you have the potential to lubricating them,...... the last time i looked water has little to NO lubricity value

pj

He only plans to use it 200-300 hours a year for farm use. There's no need for him to spend big money on a 953 when a much cheaper 955 will get the job done.

Palmer, I would disagree, finding an older 953 , for not a lot more cost will be a much better option in my opinion. The rear mounted engine makes a world of difference over the front engine units. I have had both and would never consider a front engine unit again.

Palmer78 said:

He only plans to use it 200-300 hours a year for farm use. There's no need for him to spend big money on a 953 when a much cheaper 955 will get the job done.

Click to expand...

The 955's are good old machines on solid ground. They tend to be a little nose heavy as all front engine machines are. Also pushing trees they can hook a little hard and break rearend parts if you are hard on them. If you look around 953's and 63's can be had real decent. I picked up a 63 with almost new engine but needing an undercarriage for less than 15,000. For an all around machine a 953 is hard to beat. They stay on top of the ground real good and have good power. Picking one up for 15 to 20,000 and keep it in good shape it probably won't devalue any.

Thanks guys. I had looked at some specs on 953 & 63 and think they would be good units. Powerjoke....thanks for the fatherly advice....gonna have break downs, don't kid yourself. I do appreciate your comments...had just heard about hydrastat drive issues with 43, 53, 63 series and also that the 43 and 53 had sleeveless engines. Come to think of it, there is a 953 down the road from me....second owner uses it on his farm. Maybe I could sweet-talk it away from him.

powerjoke said:

sorry to dis-agrree but i dont find anything wrong with lubrricating them at all..... interrnal pin/bushing wear is more important to me than exterrnal bushing wear, i do agree that running them in water will make them quieter but why put water in them when you have the potential to lubricating them,...... the last time i looked water has little to NO lubricity value

pj

Click to expand...

Oil on tracks does cause an increase in external bushing wear, due to the grinding paste effect. Seen it. Also, the water/mud thing does free tracks up, it works in between the vertical face where the inner and outer links get rusted together. Thee pin/bush interface is lubed on SALT chains, but the actual cast links can still rust together. On the old style dry pins, no oil you throw on the chains will penetrate the pin/bush enough to do any good, but you run in slop or water, it'll find it's way in. Whatever the theory, the tracks usually free off.

IH are we talking about internal p&b or external ? read the post again, we are infact talking about internal as far as i can tell.

you want to talk about paste try cleaning a pond out and then report back to me

again, there is nothing wrong with lubricating the tracks, it will not last long and have vertually no residual effect and i cant imaging the mess of dumping used motor oil on them but diesel or etc. will not hurt a damn thing...... will it ever reach the centter of a p&b ? probably not unless you could submerse them and then it would disapear very quickly. if you have squeeky tracks on a loader that sounds like a flock of birds chasing you, the rails are already dry and theyre definatly on the way out.

there is several post on how to measure internal p&b wear just do a little searching OP and good luck in your machine hunt. i stand by my previous post ditch the 955 idea and look for a 953 they are not that expensive hell they started making them in '84 if i remember right. I've bought older mechanically sound 953's for as little as $7500 before and you know as well as I do that a decent skiddy will cost at lest twice that much. dont be affraid to have one shipped in from a distance normally i have just paid for a 3rd party inspection ~$300-500 but I have had a guy from pocahontus arkansas (wont name names as he is a memeber here) give a totally **** poor evaluation and outright lie to me so just make sure you check out who you hire

on a side note, in a link siezure the "Vertical" rail faces are not as much of a culpret as internal P&B in my opinion

edit: 53's are very reliable good old machines in my book..... some had problems with heads and head gaskets but they updated to a radiator with an extra core in in and kept the heating problem better under control, the main thing i look at when testing an old hydro machine is running at full throttle without changing the speed travel lever lower the engine RPM and if the machine speeds up a lot you have a little problem in the hydrostat, normally an underspeed valve out of adjustment or some internal leakage. my guess is that there is just as many if not more used parts out there for a 53 as a 55 as there's been many of the scrapped in the last few years.....that itself should tell you something

i dont care which loader you buy im just giving an opinion and opinions are like a$$holes, everyones got them and they all stink lol

pj

Fr a number of years I had a JD 455D with a 4 in 1 bucket that I interchanged with a tree shear. It had dozer style grousers pads on it. At the same time I had a 955K with street pads and a general purpose bucket. They both could do the same amount of work although the 955 loaded faster as the bucket was bigger. The JD was a lousy gravel loader with the grousers but it worked great in the aspen cutting and bunching trees. It also worked great for clearing and grubbing. the 4 in 1 made a big differance. The 955 was nose heavy. The 455D had a decent sized rear counter weight and balanced put nice wih a load. Both had woods protection packages and were cumbersome to work on. Any of them in reasonable shape will do your job with a bit of patience.

I strongly agree with what powerjoke stated earlier about backing out of a creek or basement with a bucket full on a front engine machine. I have sunk my 455g a couple times doing just that. quite a bit of difference in a front engine and rear engine machine.

also my 2 cents on soaking tracks. run the machine for several hours and get the tracks warmed up. then drive into the creek, submerging the tracks. the cool water should be sucked into the pins/bushings and should work as well as anything else.

Thanks for all your help guys.

powerjoke said:

IH are we talking about internal p&b or external ? read the post again, we are infact talking about internal as far as i can tell.

you want to talk about paste try cleaning a pond out and then report back to me

again, there is nothing wrong with lubricating the tracks, it will not last long and have vertually no residual effect and i cant imaging the mess of dumping used motor oil on them but diesel or etc. will not hurt a damn thing...... will it ever reach the centter of a p&b ? probably not unless you could submerse them and then it would disapear very quickly. if you have squeeky tracks on a loader that sounds like a flock of birds chasing you, the rails are already dry and theyre definatly on the way out.

on a side note, in a link siezure the "Vertical" rail faces are not as much of a culpret as internal P&B in my opinion.
pj

Click to expand...

I think we're talking about seized tracks in general, and the rail faces are a factor in some, not all, cases. For the amount of lubricity in diesel, you'd do more good relieving yourself on the tracks, though in my case, on a Sunday morning that would probably lift the paint. On the older IH, Case, and Cat machines I started on, they squawked away whatever conditions you worked in, but were a long way from worn out.

As for pond cleaning, how many do I need to have done before I report in, son?

I agree about the 955 being nose heavy, I always found the 41's, 51's and 55's to be a little on their toes facing downhill with a full bucket compared to the small Internationals and the hystats.

talk about drifting off topic but oh' well.....

first of all I ain't your son, nor an ammeture or an idiot so don't go there and we won't have a problem. we all learn everyday none of us are immune to that, infact that's probably what drew a lot of us together on this great site in the first place. either we had a problem and needed help or to share our experiences with others..... as my dad (not you by the way) always said, you better learn from everyon else's mistakes because you will not live long enough to make them all yourself

short of sand there is nothin i know of that is more abrasive than sticky pond muck, we get about 3k out of rails on 63's that's why i have one machine thats dedicated to such task. you say that the old machines squeaked badly on older machines..... how long did bottoms last back in those days? would you agree that components last longer nowadays be it from technology in metals or lubricated tracks ?

again. chain seizure is more likely from moisture causing rust internally rather than link faces. is it something to be concerned with? no most will limber up on there own. and i never said to smear gun grease on everything to let the dirt stick to them in the first place, i dont know why you jumped to that conclusion



pj

Ditto on the posts calling for a rear engine loader if possible vs a frount engine loader.....rear engine loaders are miles ahead of the older frount engine units.....and a 953 is about as versitile as it gets

PJ, don't believe I called you an idiot or an amateur, or mentioned grease, but you were the one who mentioned reporting in, whatever that was supposed to imply. I'm definitely not an amateur, or, I hope, an idiot, but I'll let others draw their own conclusions on that. Whatever, let's call it 50/50 and get back on topic.

Chains do last a lot longer nowadays, I'd say if we had new chain technology on the older machines you'd see a lot of benefit. The new machines put so much more power down through the tracks that it's easy to abuse the undercarriage. I wouldn't complain about 3000 hrs on 963 tracks, I had responsibility for one machine that killed a set of SALT tracks in under 1000 hrs. Again I had one set of chains (non SALT) where the link faces were caked with rust to the extent the machine would hardly move. Took a pounding with a 14 pounder to get the last kinks out. It had been working in salt water then left to stand a few months without being washed. Maybe you haven't seen this, but then as you say, none of us have seen it all.

Well, I guess I'm getting steered to the 43, 53, 63....you guys are the best. Seems to be a ton of 963 out there and I'm sure for good reason. Did a little research into engines...3204, 3304 and 3116. -Can't say that I get the warm and fuzzies but of course, a lot of times guys are on these sites with PROBLEMS so I may not be hearing the GOOD stories. Seems to be a lot of 953 and 963 out there in the 10k - 15k hour range. Assuming that the UC has had work done a few times already at those kind of hours, what should I be looking at for engine work? What's the typical life of a 3116 (which is I believe what they put in the B series)? How about the 3204 and 3304? I think I would like to avoid the C series because of increased electronics...please advise.

ih100 said:

Whatever, let's call it 50/50 and get back on topic.

Click to expand...

That is a great idea.

I have 4K hours on my factory original '53C's rails, turned at 3800 and I expect to get 5500-6000 out of the rails. Operating conditions are as varied as operators and opinions. :cool2

jcg said:

thanks for all of your help guys. -Was just looking at a 1978 955L on machinery trader at Michigan CAT, $12k I believe. Even has 17" wide track shoes from what they are saying....seems to be a bit wider than most. Did those units have the sealed and lubricated tracks? they say a few links are seized up??? Feel free to chime in with some more opinions. Anyone familiar with michigancat?

Click to expand...

That would have come from the factory with SALT. I think all 955L's with the D6 sized undercarriage were SALT.

I have a 953C with 5000 hrs and am just now replacing the original rails and pads, it also has a 3116 engine. SO far I have not done anything to it except service it timley and replace batteries. The engine will start at 0 degrees with out being plugged in anytime, the electronics have never gave me any problems but I am sure they will surface with more hours.

jcg said:

Well, I guess I'm getting steered to the 43, 53, 63....you guys are the best. Seems to be a ton of 963 out there and I'm sure for good reason. Did a little research into engines...3204, 3304 and 3116. -Can't say that I get the warm and fuzzies but of course, a lot of times guys are on these sites with PROBLEMS so I may not be hearing the GOOD stories. Seems to be a lot of 953 and 963 out there in the 10k - 15k hour range. Assuming that the UC has had work done a few times already at those kind of hours, what should I be looking at for engine work? What's the typical life of a 3116 (which is I believe what they put in the B series)? How about the 3204 and 3304? I think I would like to avoid the C series because of increased electronics...please advise.

Click to expand...

jcg said:

Well, I guess I'm getting steered to the 43, 53, 63....you guys are the best. Seems to be a ton of 963 out there and I'm sure for good reason. Did a little research into engines...3204, 3304 and 3116. -Can't say that I get the warm and fuzzies but of course, a lot of times guys are on these sites with PROBLEMS so I may not be hearing the GOOD stories. Seems to be a lot of 953 and 963 out there in the 10k - 15k hour range. Assuming that the UC has had work done a few times already at those kind of hours, what should I be looking at for engine work? What's the typical life of a 3116 (which is I believe what they put in the B series)? How about the 3204 and 3304? I think I would like to avoid the C series because of increased electronics...please advise.

Click to expand...

FWIW

943....#25k
953....#30k
963.....#40k

963 is significantly heavier than your wish list 30K# machine....but ground pressure between all 3 machines is similar

good 953bs are hard to find just for the reasons you listed (i will buy the next good one i see localy)

my brother in law keeps a 953c around his farm and they abuse the heck out of it and its still going strong...but like you i would hate to deal with the electronics if they ever fail