• 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!

Any experience with a 657 Auger scraper

Taylortractornu

Charter Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2003
Messages
481
Location
Iuka, Mississippi
Occupation
Privvate landfill operator/manager
I got a model of a 657 Auger and I was interested in how it dumps does the bowl slide back on the bottom like a regular paddle wheel or does the Ejector move the auger out of the way. I saw some on National Geographic the other night with the auger running. Ive never even got to run a Cat Open bowl other than an off bran conversion with a Hancock bowl. I hear the auger helps in chunky material. Im interested in elevated scrapers of all kinds. My neighbor showed me a picture of a conversion they had on an AC260 that was made by Klien the water wagon folks. It was an elevator chain like most others that attached to the apron mounts when you got to a rock or a stump you raised it up like a regular apron and swallowed it. and when you needed push loading you could also raise it out of the way.
 

alan627b

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
785
Location
Omaha Nebraska
Occupation
Heavy Equipment Operator
The auger is mounted with the ejector, the apron is lifted up and the whole assembly slides forward, like a conventional open bowl to push the dirt out. The auger can be removed to use it like a conventional open bowl.
I got to run a near new 621G auger scraper in Arizona a few years ago, working in scarified fine soil, and in my opinion the auger needed more power. Augers work best in sand and fine soils, I don't think they would do all that great it sticky/slabby like we have here in Nebraska.
Unless Cat has turned the pressure up or otherwise added more power to the auger since then! Hope this helps,
Alan627b

Is that the Norscot 1/87th scale model? It's a 627G. Otherwise, I'd like to see the model!
 

DJR96

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
9
Location
Qld, Australia
I've used a 637D with an Auger. It was the best machine on site and worked well.:D

The auger is fixed to the floor of the bowl, big bearing. The ejector has limited travel so that it doesn't push the auger when unloading. The auger was powered by it's own hydraulic system, a hydrostatic pump like what drives bobcats and all sorts of other machines. Plenty of power, and could be reversed if you did jam it. Very important to always load AND unload with the auger running, and never run it in reverse unless you have to clear a jam. Running in reverse can lift the auger out of the floor bearing, bit of a job to fix then.
It wouldn't always empty cleanly because of the ejector not moving all the way forward. Really the only drawback.
 

surfer-joe

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2007
Messages
1,403
Location
Arizona
Had two 637 auger machines on job I worked last winter. Both had a lot of hours and very poor maintenance from the company I was with. They were broken down constantly and finally the Gen'l Supt had enough and ordered them taken away.

The auger was mounted in front of the bowl and was stationary. As DJR96 mentioned, the bottom bearing seemed to be a major problem with these two, but so were the final drives and hydraulics.

They picked up loose dirt and smaller rocks OK and were fair on eject times, but we would have been better off with higher production rates if we'd had plain 637's. Everything had to be ripped in front of them.
 

pactractor

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
14
Location
So Cal
Occupation
Heavy Equip. owner
We had 1 657B auger it had 2 augers mounted to the floor and the Hyd pump ran off of the rear engine. It was a real pain in the butt when a large rock would get caught behind the augers. Then we had 2 657E augers they have only 1 auger mounted to the floor and the hyd pump is mounted on the front trans., they are really designed to move sand, clay sticks to the augers and the can and ejector, rock is way too hard on the auger.

We were working in a sand mining operation in a 200 to 300 deep pit. When we pushed regular 657's with a D8L they would only fill up to 1/2 a load plus the rails and rollers on the cat would wear out in 5 to 6 months in the sand slurry. But when we bought the Augers thy would self load in 1 1/2 scraper lengths!!!

The only draw back is the cost of the auger drive pump and drive reducer was like having a third engine to rebuild every 2 years..

I will post a picture later if the 657E augers.
 

mockman

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
16
Location
Omaha
Are the 657B's worth buying today from a parts and reliablility standpoint or would the 637C be a better machine. I understand that they can be repowered, but that is expensive. Also, I always heard the Terex Ts-24B loadrunner would eat a 637's lunch. The 71 series engines were noisy, but very reliable. Terex still builds parts for the 24's but we have never had any dealers here in Nebraska. mclaren ran all geen over in iowa, but only real terex guru, I ever knew of around here. The 14's could not be beat in mud, but never really had the ride or power for the longer hauls. Lot cheaper to run than the 27's though on short to medium hauls they say.
 

mockman

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
16
Location
Omaha
Ts-14's someone asked about the 466 international engine it was used in the TS-14D series 2 Ts-14F and the early G's. It was an international 466 engine with Detroit electronics and called a 40 series Detroit, something went wrong and now they are using Cummins 5.9 engines the last couple years. I thought the 466 was better, at least a bigger engine. Harts in Indiana retrofits the old B's with John Deere tractor engines, you could do the same with the bare 466 international engine. The TS-14 C had the turboed 4-71 along with the Ts-14D, but they went to the funk transmission in the D and later to the 4 cycle engine in the series 2. I think the F model was where they scrapped the cable apron system, for sure in the G which has the side mounted apron cylinders like the Ts-24's. They came out with ride control on the D's and it improved thru the G's. It is just an nitrogen accumulator that lets the bowl cylinders take some of the jolt out. Sort of like Cats cushion hitch, simpler but maybe not as good. Not sure if it can be put on the older B's and A's with no power down bowl, those single acting cylinders, who knows it might work. Think they put two or a bigger one on the G's. Ran one once and it rode pretty good, the seat could have been better. Some guys put air bags on the cab mounts, not sure how that works. The cummins have the same power and torque as the 466, they are just 100 cubes smaller. The G's run about like the old B's with a 6-71 in the front, just alot quieter and alot more complicated to work on. Something like 5 or 6 computers now. I always wondered what the Brazilian made Ts-14B would be like with the 6v-53 in both ends. Looked at a pair in Georgia once, they sounded like top fuel dragsters at 2800 rpm, but don't know how they perform compared to the american 4-71. The 24's from England always had cummins engines KT 19 front, 855 rear versus the american 12v-71 and 6v-71 turboed detroits. The TS-24C with Detroits was running at 825 hp, you seldom see any for sale. Russ Shelton from Arizona had a pair once. Not sure if the Ts-24D with the 60 series detroits really even exists. Have never seen one for sale. People must like them if they have them, they sure don't sell them very often. Now we have all these farm tractors to deal with, too many options, does'nt seem like earthmoving anymore to me. Back in the sixties the Russian made a pretty cool looking scraper, but I could never find out much about it. Think the just have a few brands of Dozers now. Terex had an experimental TSH-15 mining scraper a few years back, all hydrostatic drive with one 550hp series 60 in the back and cuttercrowd technology, like a 623 sliding floor in reverse, it would move forward while loading. They decided production costs were too high and scrapped the project. They used the same hydrostat system from Czechlosovkia that is used in the russian T-90 main battle tank. They built two prototypes and parts for eight. They were offered to me at 100k apiece brand new and I was told they would really dig. not sure who ended up buying them, they were at the old johnson scraper factory in Texas. Cat and Terex both had a falling out with this factory that had built the hind end of Cat's elevator line for years. Saw a 623 all rigged up for duty in iraq as a mine sweeper once. Maybe tanks and pull scrapers would be the way to go, blow the trees out of your way and just haul dirt. Just a joke!
 

alan627b

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
785
Location
Omaha Nebraska
Occupation
Heavy Equipment Operator
Hi Mockman, nice to see another scraper guy from Omaha here. Drop me a line sometime. I work for Sanford and Sons, er, Negus and Sons here in town most of the time.
Alan Hynes AKA alan627b or "Flip"
 

mockman

Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
16
Location
Omaha
Hi Alan, I know Negus and some of their guys. Rick Farrell, Alan Chard, Greg, the late Cal and some foreman I see in the bar once inawhile, he also bids some work just can't think of his name right now. I just was goofing around the other day doing some search on something and found this site. Some of it is kind of interesting. I am always looking at Iron, see Cat came out with an electric drive D7E, their was a guy in Iowa with some old C-pulls that would have been a nice match to those old electric drive scrapers being pulled by these new D7's. Ole McAninch would be green with envy. He probably bought them knowing the 7 was coming. I kind of like cans if the haul is short or small jobs. Not sure on McAninch's scale, but anyway they haul some dirt for sure. No one really makes anything tuff enough to pull with crawlers anymore. Waiting for McAninch to put some 657's behind 9's or 10's so he can really go mudding. Seems like that would be kind of crazy. hell, put two or three behind one. Get the old 3-speeds and gear them down to crawler speed. He is using challengers now with 9's pushing, throw a 37 behind them and push and pull :) Who knows it might even work. Ron
 

alan627b

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
785
Location
Omaha Nebraska
Occupation
Heavy Equipment Operator
Right now the hall has me out at Midlands Hospital in Papillion, running a Cat 420D removing spoil, for an outfit from Illinois, Blackhawk Foundations. Dirt hasn't gotten going yet, and I needed the work/money. I've been off since late July 08 due to a torn rotator cuff. They are boring pilings for the building foundations.
I got released for work just in time for winter layoff...
It beats unemployment but I'll be glad when i get back to my regular gig, I have never been too thrilled working on building jobs, I'd rather be in the dirt.
I also really suck at a backhoe, since I have very little experience on one, I just hope I can pick it up quick enough to do some good. It's very frustrating.
RE Negus...
I know the guys you mentioned, I'll bet the foreman you know is Paul Polk, as he's the only boss I know who also bids jobs.
I've been there since 1992. It's an, um, interesting place to work.... just hope they get enough work to keep me busy this year.
Or maybe the pipeline will come through...
Big Mac runs 631 pans behind 9's, and 641 pans behind 9's and 10's. They have 651 pans behind their D11's. I don't know if you could run a self propelled scraper behind cats, it think it would overwhelm a crawler, not to mention having to hang an air compressor off the cat for the rear throttle, or work out some other control system.
I wonder if anybody ever tried multiple pans behind a crawler tractor, since the 1950's anyway...a wagon train indeed!
alan627b@hotmail.com

Alan
 
Last edited:

pactractor

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Messages
14
Location
So Cal
Occupation
Heavy Equip. owner
657B engines are a real pain the D346 in the front will only live 5000 6000 hours if you are lucky. The D343 in the rear is a little better they can last longer but they are hard to keep dried up after they get a few hours on them.

The best solution for the 657B is to repower them with 2 Cat C-15's that repower solution is the real savior for those old diggers.
Also the older engines have a real problem running the new ultra low sulpher fuel we get here in Calif. In the last years that we ran them we had a real problem with them siezing pistons due to the lack of lubrication because of the lack of sulpher in the fuel.

Hope this helps....
 

DonZX14

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
16
Location
Grande Prarie Alberta
Occupation
Operator/Foreman
I used to run 657E's with the auger . Sureway Const. out of Edmonton had a bunch of them . Nice machine , only drawback was trying to work in clay that was too wet , that would turn the auger into a "tube" . Couldnt beat them in the sand . Used to just smoke on by the push/pulls hoppin and jumpin in the sand ( not that bad but you know what loading in silty sand is like ) Had to only run the auger when you were loading/unloading as it would take out the floor bearing if you left the auger on while travelling . And they dont like to use the whole cutting edge , worked best if you took a 3/4 cut , at least put your left tire on the last cut.With the teeth on the cutting edge ( 18 of them ) they made short work of frozen ground too .
 

Frenchy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
55
Location
Montréal, QC
Occupation
Grader operator Snow Removal
I used to run 657E's with the auger . Sureway Const. out of Edmonton had a bunch of them .

Two of them take in picture in Acheson Industrial Park ( west of Edmonton ) last summer.


657EAuger3.jpg



PICT0288.jpg



Frenchy:canada
 
Top