WA600-8 VS 988K OPINION

In market for a production rock loader. What are the advantages /disadvantages/ suggestions to consider? Any problem areas of concern?

would be long boom option.

thanks

What are you loading - trucks, crusher, etc.?
What is the reasoning behind the need for the High Lift configuration.?

775g. 605-7 trucks. Long reach assists in reach also keeps distance back from hazards on working face

Shop the dealer moreso than the machine. New machines are more of a rolling computer than a piece of iron; good technicians and the parts department to back them up are essential.

My experience is mainly with 980s, I've never run the real big stuff. As a rule of thumb, Komatsu is great for operator comfort, but CAT is more durable.

As above. dealer support is probably much more important than the machine itself IMHO.

A Standard Lift 988K would load a 775G, not sure about a 605-7.
The issue with High Lift is that it would take one pass more per truck for a full load. Multiply that up over a year and you would have significant savings in fuel, tyres, GET, and component life.

The business about falling material from the loading face IMHO really should be addressed in the blasting operation, not by using a Band-Aid in buying a loader with a longer boom.

I've had life cycle experience on the older machines but not so much on stuff this new. I've done inspections on both WA600 and 988 G and H loaders since and talked with operators and customers who had few if any complaints. I worked at an operation that used one of each to load 773B trucks and it worked well in tandem loading from both sides of the truck. Both loaders with standard booms were a little short and material had to be thrown out of the bucket to evenly load the trucks if single loading. Material was either shot and dozed or ripped and dozed. Our operation started with Cat 550B artics and the loaders were perfect for that size and height. However the 550B trucks were poorly designed and failed nearly as soon as we received them. That's another story for another time. The trucks were cycled out for the 773B which was much taller and wider to load. Had a long boom been available, it would have been much preferred.

Both machines are very good at moving material. You won't see a lot of difference in digging capability between the standard and high lift in my opinion. Both machines use that configuration in the logging industry to lift fully loaded logging trucks in one pick. They are both monsters at what they do. The real difference over time will be the cost and availability of parts plus resale or trade in value at the end of the life cycle. Caterpillar will hold more value at the end of life than the Komatsu. On the older models, cost of fuel and fluids was about the same. The older Komatsu machines were easier for the operators to run productively. When Cat got to the G models with the joy stick steering and they went to the big six cylinder engines that evened out. The Komatsu machines built in Japan were rock solid and I've seen them with over 40,000 hours with no frame failures and only the usual changes of engines. Quality sucked for a time when production was moved to the United States. The 988 models have had their problems as well over the years. Center hitches are something to watch for on both machines. You will have electrical and electronic issues on both, though the Komatsu doesn't need a lap top and proprietary software to troubleshoot and repair it. I did have a couple of customers tell me of tire wear on the Cat machines but I don't have any fact to back up those statements.

Let us know what you decide.

At the quarry we had a WA600 and it was replaced as main loader with a 988H both have good and bad points but but like others have said dealer support can be a major plus or negative with any machine.

John C. said:

I did have a couple of customers tell me of tire wear on the Cat machines but I don't have any fact to back up those statements.

Click to expand...

I came across issues of tyre wear on 992G/K machines and in every case it was traced to the machine having been bought with No-Spin (Detroit Locker) differentials. A rebuild to conventional differentials and the problem went away.

Nige said:

I came across issues of tyre wear on 992G/K machines and in every case it was traced to the machine having been bought with No-Spin (Detroit Locker) differentials. A rebuild to conventional differentials and the problem went away.

Click to expand...

Interesting, I would have thought that having the locking diff's would have reduced the wear on tires as all wheels would be doing the work and reducing spinning. Have to think of that one a bit.

Every time you turn the machine and travel in an arc you have to blow the lockers apart to make the turn. I hadn't seen Detroit Lockers in a wheel loader though.

I've only seen locking diffs installed on the front axle. We had a couple of Haulpac 50 ton trucks that we had to install the lockers on in the winter and take them back out in the summer because of the tire wear. I think Deere has diffs that you can lock and unlock from the cab.

kshansen said:

Interesting, I would have thought that having the locking diff's would have reduced the wear on tires as all wheels would be doing the work and reducing spinning. Have to think of that one a bit.

Click to expand...

Think turning at almost full articulation angle in reverse Ken. The wheels on the side you're turning towards will literally hop.
Back in the day the 988H & 992G had an option of a rear locking diff. I can tell you now they weren't a good option in dry conditions.
It appears as though that option is still available in the K-Series of both models.

We did have maybe a couple Euclid R-35's with the Detroit Lockers diffs in them and I only recall one or two 966C or there abouts front end loaders what I guess would be called torque proportioning differentials. As I recall they had a set or two of worm like gears in the differential housing.

As I recall the 769C's did the "no spin" deal a bit differently. Those as I recall without going to SIS for systems operations manual had sensors in the rear wheels that if one side got to turning more than a predetermined amount faster than the other the computer would "tap" the brakes on the faster side.

Recall a test procedure where you held a switch on and ran truck a a set speed in a tight turn to right or left and you could feel the brake pulse on and off. Must have been an extra cost option as some trucks had blanking plugs in the sensor holes.