Best mobile crusher for recycling concrete

I don't know much about crushers but I have worked around several different mobile crushing outfits that work for the timber companies making rock in their pits that we use. The outfit that had the least amount of down time crushed for 8 hours and then shut down and did maintenance on the machines for 2 hours every day. I never saw them broke down during the day, alot of the other outfits crush hard all day then spend 2 or 3 days broke down it seems on a regular basis.

If I was 20 years younger, I would be in the concrete crushing business. The last crusher I bought was in 1994, and it was an old Pioneer all-in-one plant, that was powered by a diesel engine and loooong belts. I think if I were to get into this now, I would look for an inexpensive setup, that is easy to move, and will come close to doing what you want, with a little modification. I hate to say it, but Cedar Rapids and Pioneer built some nice all-in-one plants for the military back in the 50's. Yes, they are hard to find now, and yes, they may require a lot of work to get up and running. However, these old plants can sometimes be found cheap, and would be an inexpensive way to get into the business and try it. An old jaw/roll or jaw/impact plant might get you started. Just add a magnet belt and you are up and running. Just a thought.
Jeff

Back to your original post CM , I've never been around an impactor because the glacial till here is too hard for them but in my mind you would want to go with a jaw. One of the things I found out was the more distance one would have from the bottom of the jaw to the conveyor belt the better off you'd be. I can't imagine you cramming anything longer than 5 ft ( meaning the length of the rebar you would have to contend with) but when the rebar comes out of the jaw it goes to the under conveyor if the chunk of rebar is still in the jaw, it snags the belt.

Jaws will take anything you put in them, you may break a toggle plate but they are made to break if you get something bad in them. A jaw you could set down to 3 inch opening and it would eat concrete like it was butter. Of course a screen would be needed to make the products you mentioned. Also a lot of dust is generated crushing concrete , a watering system would have to be added at some point.

I hope you decide to go after your dream. After all, when life is over you can look back and say " I LIVED MY DREAM ".

Besides that , it would make interesting reading for me following you!

Continuing from Grandpa's comments above, if you go for a jaw crusher (which I think you should), go for a double toggle rather than a single toggle because they vibrate far less. Your requirement is for something mobile. I would go with tracks rather than wheels personally. Moving from one job to another will require a lowboy but at least you can self-propel it anywhere within the confines of a particular job site. I've seen major structural (basically the semi-trailer chassis) cracking on wheeled crushers that sit on "legs" while operating because of the imposed vibration of the crusher. Tracked units seem to suffer much less in this regard.
We had a 3-piece Sandvik set (jaw primary, cone/vibrating deck screen secondary, and a stacking conveyor) in the DR and the primary was the one that gave the least trouble. That was a hard rock crushing application though.

For your summer climate ask about high-ambient temperature options if the seller doesn't mention them. On our setup it wasn't ordered and we rapidly found that we needed it even with ambient temps around 90-ish, so it was retrofitted PDQ.

I would also consider some sort of angled chute below the crusher outlet so that if any long pieces of rebar go through the crusher it would be impossible for them to rip the belt and very difficult for them to even leave the crusher. Something above the crusher to act as a "rebar extraction tool" would also be necessary.

JPV said:

The outfit that had the least amount of down time crushed for 8 hours and then shut down and did maintenance on the machines for 2 hours every day. I never saw them broke down during the day,

Click to expand...

This. Crushers vibrate and time spent on maintenance is not time wasted, it's downtime saved IMO.

And YES the do vibrate, cracking and steel fatigue failures are more common than erosive wear, from watching the maintenance guys in the quarries there is a indifference to the vibrating but they do inspections daily. Capital Quarries here uses Cone type Gyratory portable crushers, they do not leave a crusher at any given rock farm, they move site to site as needs require. Concrete recyclers here have come and gone in large volumes I PRESUME due to maintenance and equipment replacement costs, not seen one around in a few years where the busted materials end up landfill.

Continuing on with the screening side, are there any mobile trommel-type screens on the market these days.? That would address the vibration issue with the screening side.

Trommel screening is considered too slow for most high throughput operations. Everyone is pushing vibrating screens. There's low angle high amplitude, and multiple frequencies high angle low amplitude and everything in between. I set up a PTSC2624 high angle variable frequency screen for an asphalt reclaimer. In spite of the sticky nature of the asphalt, it screened an amazing amount of material, and we were screening ⅜ and ¼.
And the 2650 jaw, by the way uses a hydraulically controlled toggle with tramp iron relief in case you get side loaded rebar or entire manhole covers. It doesn't mean it's built to eat it, just survive it.

CM you have about a million different ways to do a recycle yard and everyone you ask will tell you something different (lol)

We have a Powerscreen Premiertrack 300 with hyd release and rebar deflector. The hyd release will hydraulically open the jaw if an uncrushabke gets in there. If for some reason the belt gets overloaded the computer will stop the jaw whether its full or not. The hyd release will also let you open and close the jaw crushing the material instead of unloading it by hand. Works good! We also got the rebar deflector for under the jaw. It also works good. As for rebar you can put 2 foot pieces in with no issues. If one gets caught down in the belly in can start a birds nest so the less rebar that goes in the better.

We dump into a Powerscreen Warrior 1400 with 1.5 inch mess on the upper deck. That gives us our base material and the overs are 1.5 to about 3 inches. We keep our jaw closed tight on the concrete but still get overs. We actually sell a lot of the overs bur do not need all of them so every so often we will bring several loader buckets back to the hoe and put them back thru the crusher.

Crushing non pulverized material we do 70-90 tons per hour of base plus the overs. Pulverized material crushes faster. When we pulverize we use the 350 to pulverize and we have a magnet on the 160 to pick the rebar. That is the fastest and safest way to do it. We have a Moley Magnet that runs of the alternator. Works great. 36 inch magnet will pick up 750 pounds of turnings and a 10k sheet.

A friend of mine say an impactor is like a grinder 1 second away from a catastrophic event (lol)

Whatever you do don’t put a belt scale on a crusher. If you did a belt scale put it on a stacker. The less bouncing and vibrating the better the scale will work. I’m not a fan of them. We have Loadrite scales in both our Volvo loaders. They work great for stockpiling and loading. We have printers in both machines as well for printing tickets.

Thanks for all the replies, really appreciate the real world info. Wife and I were away at Auburn for the first home football game this weekend and just logging back in.

FWIW Nige they do make tracked trommel screens.
https://www.screenmachine.com/equipment-lines/trommel-screens/

Grandpa if I can make it work crushing concrete might start up an international branch in Costa Rica crushing river gravel so you can come down to visit and write it off. No MSHA in CR.

Seems the consensus is a jaw which is what I've always leaned towards. Just seems like an impactor is waiting to destroy itself.

LC - As the venture progresses the boss (AKA the owner otherwise known as wife) and I will be heading north on 85 to come visit. Your setup is exactly what I'm thinking about. Tons of information in your post, thank you for sharing.

No problem. More than happy to help out if I can and give you the grand tour

This is a great thread!
I'm not sure I'll remember everything I'd like to comment on but I'll try.
I see that you've commented that you are not particularly fond of the Terex brand. If I recall correctly CM the Screen Machine brand falls under the Terex brand of companies. I live in a place where there is a lot of on-site crushing going on and I have spent some time researching things (you've seen some of my threads) and doing some crushing myself. Some of my info is second hand but comes from what I consider to be reliable source/s. My experience is limited to track mounts and (as you know) bucket crushers.
I have direct experience crushing hard rock and concrete too. Concrete, brick, and block go through the crusher fast. You should get lots of TPH if your feed is clean. The downside is that these materials can have more of a "sandpaper" effect than many hard rock materials. This equates to faster wear on your dies (blow bars and curtains if you go with an impactor). Keeping dirt out of a jaw crusher will increase production and decrease wear. Fortunately most modern track mounts will separate fines prior to the crushing chamber. They will also give you the option to allow those fines to drop to the main belt (should you need more fines in your output) or send thme out on a separate conveyor/discharge.
I recently rented a Powerscreen PremierTrack 330. This is a smaller unit (only weighs about 75k#) so it takes less axles to move. I would think it the newest generation of LC's 300 (his spread looks to me to be Powerscreen). It only had about 60 hours on it so everything worked like new. It is NOT Duetz powered (as was mentioned as possible in a previous post) but was Cat powered and employed hydraulic drive to all components/systems. The jaw could be "burped" if jammed (run backwards for a rotation or two-never had to use this feature), and had hydraulic adjustment of the closed side of the jaw, hydraulic drive of the belt drives, feed hopper extensions and vibration/feed rate. What a joy it was to run. One of the early posters said he looked into crushing but was going to use a 30 ton excavator and a 980 loader to work with the crusher. In my experience one doesn't need that big of machines to support a crusher. Obviously the size of the crusher, how far the material needs to be shuttled, etc., matter when choosing size of support machines. In my case I loaded the crusher with my Cat 315 and used my 544j loader to handle the out put. We were feeding around 18-24" minus shot rock into the crusher to produce the 3" minus (the machine could have reduced it even farther!). My son fed the machine from an elevated platform (of the feed material) and I ran the loader to shuttle material to stock pile, clean up the pit and shuttle feed material to my son to keep enough feed withing his reach. Needless to say the loader was busy but I was able to get this done while producing about 475 tons (about 715 tons) in an eight hour day. The little trackhoe was able to keep the hopper full at the rate we were crushing. I may have been able to push the crusher harder but this was our first dance with the PT330 so we didn't push our luck and just stuck with a good steady feed rate and I had no complaints about the production rate. Setting the crusher at the proper location, and setting up your "quarry" (feed material, finished product piles, crusher locations, etc.) are important factors of production too. Part of the point here is that you can use support machines that are less expensive to own and operate (let alone transport if you provide a mobile crushing service) and still get production. Powerscreen is definitely a Terex brand but they seem to have good support across the US. I have been recently considering purchasing and looking for a MetroTrack (slightly smaller than the PT and with a few less features) and one can find them in the used market with a couple thousand hours. Probably looking at around 250-280k to buy. I was quoted $437k for the PT330 earlier this year.
I have intentionally stayed away from the SMI because of a couple reasons. First is that I'm trying to crush down to 3" minus and the unit that is in my area (JHT2650) does not do well to that size. It does well enough making 4" minus (or bigger) but it won't close enough to get to the 3" minus with consistency. The local shop that rents/sells them said that they had "special" jaw dies (as in thicker?) made to get to 3" minus but that only works until they begin to wear. There was also a major clutch issue (required a new clutch) one of my competitors had during a rental and it took several weeks to get one shipped from over seas. They had another machine come available but that still took 2 weeks. This episode happened long before the shipping/freight issues of the "post-covid" world. I know you have a good thing going with your Cat dealer but I would suggest (at a minimum) you talk to a few local customers before you drink the cool-aid on the SMI. I have had (2) fellow contractors (both with direct experience with SMI jaws) recommend staying away from this brand. I had the salesman quote me on a used JHT2650 (from their rental fleet) and I decided not to buy. On the plus side this machine was a 2015 model so no DEF, or other emissions stuff, no electronics, etc. but I needed 3" minus and had guys suggesting that I stay away.
The local Cat dealer sells Metso crushers and screens. I have had (2) people tell me that the Metso is a good brand. One guy his local the other is my brother who does custom crushing for timber companies in the PNW (he also says his Terex-Pegson MetroTrack does well but not as nice, nor as productive as the Metso -but was bought for less than 1/2 the cost of the Metso).
I've heard nothing but good things about the KPI-JCI brand (includes Pioneer). These are sold by my local Komatsu dealer so they are priced way too high (those guys are always priced high on everything!...not sure why).
BTW, I've also heard stellar reports about Komatsu track mount crushers but they are no longer sold in the US (not even sire if they make them anymore).
If you are considering anything built somewhat recently you will have to deal with emissions systems, and computers/electronics for the control systems (which don't seem to like dust and/or vibration) and lots (LOTS!) of panic buttons all over the machine.
If I wanted to further reduce overhead I would consider a 60' stacker (can be moved with a pick-up) to reduce, or even possibly eliminate the need for the loader to stockpile out put material.
If you are only going to crush concrete I would suggest looking at the Rebel crusher as well. When I looked into them I felt as though they were knowledgeable and they flat told me that their product, though it would do the job, was not the best option for hard rock crushing. I liked that as most salesman simply tell you whatever they think will sell the product. On the plus side the Rebel is only about 40K#, comes with screens (will also return oversize to the crusher), can be had as an impactor or a jaw (not many jaws out there with screens attached), and will cost about 200k less than "main stream" track mounts. I can not speak to their ability to provide support and/or service. I would think that you may have more success with service since you are much closer to where they are made than I am.
If you go with any of the crushers you've mentioned thus far (as a jaw) you will likely have to screen to get the products you have stated that you want to make. This is an area that I have only dipped my toe into and can have a greater impact on cost and production than the crusher can (the crusher will likely crush as fast as you can load it-depending upon how small you will crush to of course).
As it relates to rebar, I usually hammer to remove the bar. A processor might be faster but you already own the hammer. Plus it makes you feed size smaller which can increase production. I charge money to dump at my place and, while rebar is okay, I don't take any woven wire because its a tire killer for anything less than loader tires. If I had a magnet I would have no problem with the wire. I've seen guys park a trailer under the magnet belt so that they don't have to handle the metal twice. Just let the trailer fill and then go dump it at the recycler.
Below are some pictures showing delivery day of the PT330.

Computer control systems
At this location we handled the out put with a skid steer (we didn't go very far with it and didn't have but maybe a thousand yards to crush here).

Edit for last post:
I meant 475 yards (715 tons as our material is about 1.5 tpy).
As I think about it there was something else that you posted (CM) that I think may be incorrect, and have a significant impact on your cost and profit margin calculations. Here is what I'm talking about:

CM1995 said:

The large 280 at 220 TPH gets close on production. That's roughly 6 -8 tri-axle loads of normal processed (with a hammer and hoe) tri-axle loads due to voids in the bed. A load of crushed rock is 25 tons per tri so 5 loads of crushed product.

Click to expand...

Since nobody else has commented on it I worry that I may be wrong about this but will throw it out there anyway. In my experience 1 yard of my feed material will become about 1.2 yards after crushing. Sometimes even more swell than that. I am using mostly shot rock/hammer fodder but I would think that the same thing would apply to concrete, etc. I know that when I initially started looking into this I thought that it would be a reduction as well. If you think about it though, 1 yard of insitue bedrock will be about 1.5 to 2 times that once disturbed (blasted or hammered). That's because there are now gaps between each particle as before there were none (theoretically anyway). If you then take those somewhat large particles and then reduce the size them again (i.e. run them through a crusher) there will even be more particles to have gaps between. This is the primary reason that weight is the measuring standard that is primarily used at quarries (Probably goes without saying). If you look at it another way 1 yard of bedrock might be 1.5 tons in weight. When you crush it it won't be less weight but it will be more yards (again, because of the gaps). If there were a reduction some of the material would have to disappear and we don't loose that much in dust floating off of the crusher. If we apply that to your quote above your 6 to 8 loads of import should become (at least) 7 to 10 loads of material that you would sell. It would jump up to 9 to 12 loads of your material expands 1.5 times. The amount of swell will depend upon how much you reduce the feed material. This is the world I work in as we don't use scales. Everything is by the yard.
If you stick with weight then tons in = tons out in a perfect world.
If your feed material deliveries are light (due to the voids -as you put it) then I still think that you might be over estimating how light they will be but I always err on the side of caution when vetting things out as well.

I was referring to the demo/disposal aspect of concrete not virgin rock. As you know when you load chunks of concrete in a truck there are voids that creates volume and it's not the same tonnage as say a load of sand. What I'm looking at is how much it cost per tri-axle load of demo concrete to dispose off site compared to what it costs to crush the same load on site and re-use the material on-site. A good demo of the machine at our dump with a couple of 100 tons of concrete to crush could tighten those numbers up.

No desire to crush natural stone unless it's a byproduct of a construction project as it gets into mining both at the state environmental level and MSHA. Natural rock from a construction site is waste that falls under recycling as far as the state enviro rules go.

Totally get the virgin rock comparison just not what I'm looking at this time.

DGODGR said:

This is a great thread!
I'm not sure I'll remember everything I'd like to comment on but I'll try.

Click to expand...

Great real time info DG! Thanks for sharing!

Screen Machine is SMI and not a Terex brand. Powerscreen is Terex and I'm not letting the fact it's under the Terex umbrella disqualify it as Powerscreen seems to have a very good name worldwide in the crushing screening business. Not a fan of CoolAid however after O&O'ing equipment for 20 years the support after the sale is more important than purchase price.

With that being said I don't know where our Powerscreen dealer is actually located. The Alabama dealer is Powerscreen Crushing and Screening LLC out of KY as far as I can tell.

https://powerscreensales.com/

On the PS website dealer locater it shows a physical location about 1.5-2 hours south of me. The pin on the Google map is in a field in Central AL.

The PS PT330 is packed with features geared towards concrete/C&D crushing. LC is that the same crushing you guys are running? It has a Cat engine with a non-Tier 4 Deere option on the brochure.

Going to have to look into the jaw settings on any machine in addition to SMI because I'll need a 3" minus product in order to screen 3 products - #24's, #57's and #8910's. Those 3 sizes are the most popular in my area. #24's for construction entrances and bridging soft soils, #57's for everything from under slab drainage to pipe bedding and #8910's for trench backfill in improved areas.

A 3 product screen is a must for producing a usable product and I also see a stand alone screening service without the crusher.

Thought about the Rebel Crusher but I think it's just too small. I know it's not the same part of the industry however a partner and I started a hook-lift business in the mid 2000's and started off with a single axle and 10-15CY bins. Met with one of the dumpster fabricators in South Carolina and they told us you'll soon be back to buy 20's and 30's because that's where the money is at. It wasn't a year later we purchased a Dual Lift truck and a bunch of 20's and 30's because that's where the money is at for that aspect of the roll off business. There is a thread somewhere in the bowels of HEF on that truck. At this point I think the money is on a larger crusher that's still easy to transport, I might be wrong though.

Not really worried about transport for anything less than or around 100,000 LB as we utilize lowboy services that have the trailers and permits to move them. Mob cost is a line item on a proposal or bid.

There is a lot of information to roll in and put together when looking at a $1M investment for a crusher and a screen, I thank Currently have 2 hoes one with the Cat field trial QC which would make swapping from bucket to hammer ideal for recycle work. Also have 2 - 279D's for utility work and would probably buy a used wheel loader as the only support machine we don't already own. We could use our 953C in the beginning until the venture got off the ground, not ideal but not a new loan either.

As it relates to the bedrock example I used that to make my point because I think it will apply to any material being crushed -including concrete. I do understand why you did your calculations the way you did and will emphasize (again) that I always prefer to err on the side of caution (as you might also) when calculating a "new" venture with a rather large buy-in. I'm sure this isn't your first foray into this type of process but I felt it might be worth mentioning.

CM1995 said:

Great real time info DG! Thanks for sharing!

Screen Machine is SMI and not a Terex brand. Powerscreen is Terex and I'm not letting the fact it's under the Terex umbrella disqualify it as Powerscreen seems to have a very good name worldwide in the crushing screening business. Not a fan of CoolAid however after O&O'ing equipment for 20 years the support after the sale is more important than purchase price.

The PS PT330 is packed with features geared towards concrete/C&D crushing. LC is that the same crushing you guys are running? It has a Cat engine with a non-Tier 4 Deere option on the brochure.

Going to have to look into the jaw settings on any machine in addition to SMI because I'll need a 3" minus product in order to screen 3 products - #24's, #57's and #8910's. Those 3 sizes are the most popular in my area. #24's for construction entrances and bridging soft soils, #57's for everything from under slab drainage to pipe bedding and #8910's for trench backfill in improved areas.

Click to expand...

The SMI JHT2650 that I was quoted is a 100k# machine. I would bet that SMI has a smaller crusher that will likely meet your size requirements. I haven't looked at them lately but the one that I was quoted was a manual adjustment for the closed side of the jaw, not hydraulic.
As with your Cat machines, in fact even more so, the support (the ability to keep the crusher running) will be paramount, in my opinion, when choosing the brand. That said the hydraulic jaw setting, the ability to "burp' the jaw, and the things that LC mentioned as feature for his crusher can be real time savers and actually be more safe for the help.
Speaking of such, LC please tell us more about how the hydraulic and rebar deflectors work.

CM1995 said:

A 3 product screen is a must for producing a usable product and I also see a stand alone screening service without the crusher.

Click to expand...

You might be able to run a much less expensive 2 deck (like a Reed Screen-All) to get started. Even if you have to re-run some of your material after changing screens. Not ideal but might help with initial buy-in.

CM1995 said:

Thought about the Rebel Crusher but I think it's just too small. I know it's not the same part of the industry however a partner and I started a hook-lift business in the mid 2000's and started off with a single axle and 10-15CY bins. Met with one of the dumpster fabricators in South Carolina and they told us you'll soon be back to buy 20's and 30's because that's where the money is at. It wasn't a year later we purchased a Dual Lift truck and a bunch of 20's and 30's because that's where the money is at for that aspect of the roll off business. There is a thread somewhere in the bowels of HEF on that truck. At this point I think the money is on a larger crusher that's still easy to transport, I might be wrong though.

Click to expand...

This is part of why I didn't go that route. Even though it is smaller it is still too big to work on most of my sites. Furthermore I feel as though the reason that most track mounts are so heavy is because they need to build things very beefy to stand up to the riggers of hard rock crushing. That said, the demands of recycling concrete are much less (3,500 psi material vs 20,000 psi plus), and it comes with a 2 or 3 deck screen already in place. If I was only looking to recycle I would give them a closer look. The one thing that you can't get away from is the reduced production of the smaller jaw (or impactor if you bought one like that -they come in both). That said it looks like you could support one of those with a mini and a skid if you so chose to (=much reduced overhead so one wouldn't necessarily need the higher production to make money at it).
To further be devil's advocate, if you are looking at Federal work it might behoove you to stick with something that would crush rock. There can be a lot of remote quarry work for the Feds if you are a (as you said) DFBE, especially if you are Hub Zone as well. Food for thought.

CM1995 said:

Currently have 2 hoes one with the Cat field trial QC which would make swapping from bucket to hammer ideal for recycle work.

Click to expand...

Are you demoing one of those "oil-quik" couplers (don't require getting out and connecting hydraulic hoses)? That would be very nice to be able switch between my hammer, ho-pac, crusher bucket, etc. without having to mess with the hoses. Not so sure it's worth the price of admission though. I'd love to hear more about it.

CM1995 said:

We could use our 953C in the beginning until the venture got off the ground, not ideal but not a new loan either.

Click to expand...

Agreed about the additional iron purchase. WAY less than ideal for track undercarriage working on a rocky floor and especially if you are tramming the output material a fair distance....Not to mention the extremely poor ride quality if on a rocky floor. On the plus side you wouldn't have to worry about those pesky sharp edges, and (worry much less about) rebar, that your feed material might entail dealing with.

DGODGR said:

Are you demoing one of those "oil-quik" couplers (don't require getting out and connecting hydraulic hoses)? That would be very nice to be able switch between my hammer, ho-pac, crusher bucket, etc. without having to mess with the hoses. Not so sure it's worth the price of admission though. I'd love to hear more about it.

Click to expand...

Actually the oil quick is a Cat field trial. Our rep from Cat has one in Missouri and Virginia in addition to the one we have.

Posted about it my other thread -
https://www.heavyequipmentforums.com/threads/a-few-projects-i-have-done-recently.27942/page-100


So far it's worked fantastic. Depending on what Cat want's for it at the end of the trial we may buy it.

CM1995 said:

Actually the oil quick is a Cat field trial. Our rep from Cat has one in Missouri and Virginia in addition to the one we have.

Posted about it my other thread -
https://www.heavyequipmentforums.com/threads/a-few-projects-i-have-done-recently.27942/page-100

So far it's worked fantastic. Depending on what Cat want's for it at the end of the trial we may buy it.

Click to expand...

That's slick!
I would prefer it if one could eliminate the hoses on the side of the hammer.
It looks like the hydro interface sticks out the back of the coupler when using the bucket. Do you have to be concerned about dirt, or mud (thinking about the times I've had to bail muddy water from a tie-in hole or when something leaks when you don't want it to) or dust that might foul the coupling of the hydraulics? I would assume that one would also have to buy a special top cap (for each hydraulically powered attachment) as well.
I sure would LOVE not having to get out and mess with 5-6' long 1" hoses when I mount/dismount the hammer.
We use Stucchi couplers (for the hydraulics) and even those are often a source of problems for me. I just spent a couple grand on a new set of them (these are claimed to be specially made for hammers (high impulse/high vibration attachments) which means they cost more. If these don't hold up I'll probably just go back to screwing together JICs again (a hassle but reliable). I've been threatening that for a while now

Cat put a new " QC manifold" for lack of a better term on our hammer that mates up to the oil quick. We had concerns with mud and debris however we haven't had an issue but that may have more to do with professionals operating it.

If you haven't swapped the bucket to hammer in a day or more we get out, check and wipe the fittings to make sure there is nothing there. If you're swapping in and out during the day you can roll the coupler up towards the cab and make sure it's clean.

Local Cat house re-routed the hoses on the hammer as the hoses rubbed our thumb bracket when you rolled the hammer fully in to set the QC.

Ha! I've got a set of Stucchi's for this machine I ordered right before Cat offered a field trial. Guess they're plan B now.

The more research I do the more I like the Powerscreen that LC is running. The PremiereTrack 330 jaw is packed with recycling focus features and it comes in around 77K lbs.