-
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!
Are there any horror stories about newly purchased dozers, then break down?
- Thread starter chidog
- Start date
OzDozer
Senior Member
A good used 3204 block shouldn't cost $3800 - and there's plenty of engines running just fine with holes in blocks that had block patches installed.
There's some good high-nickel cast-iron electrodes around that produce excellent cast iron repairs.
It simply pays to know your tractors weaknesses, and who ran it, the likely total hours, and what they were like for el-cheapo repairs that were done to sell it, not to keep it.
Both the 3204 and the 3208 are noted for having weak pistons, especially the original 2 ring design of the 70's and early 80's.
The wrist pin bushing is also a weak spot, never use anything but genuine Cat wrist pin bushings and ensure that they're installed to specifications precisely.
Even the conrod bolts are lightweight, and should be replaced when the engine is overhauled.
When the brother and I first started in business in 1964, we were young and green. The brother bought an Allis-Chalmers HD11 that showed 4000 hrs on the electric hour meter.
He was convinced by the salesman that the tractor was a great machine, and the hours were genuine.
We bought it and shortly afterwards, things started breaking right, left and centre.
We broke sprocket centres, broke brake bands, had major torque converter problems (found out later that the dealer had done a torque converter repair and left a big cleaning rag inside the oil lines!! What a mess, it tore up and got pumped through everything!).
Of course, the dealer denied any responsibility and it was impossible to prove the rag was left there by their mechanic.
The engine overheated and the entire cooling system, plus engine, needed to be rebuilt. The worn tracks gave us constant trouble with loose track pins falling out every second day!
Then we found out from a previous employee of the owner, that the owner would disconnect the HD11 hour meter for long periods! The tractor had probably done over 10,000 hours!
The final straw was when the locally-built ripper tore itself off the back end housing of the tractor!!
We spent over a week rebuilding the mounting plate, replacing broken studs, and repairing stripped bolt holes!
That tractor sure was a sharp learning curve, and we knew if we kept it, it would break us.
Part of the problem was the AC transmission design with a high-multiplication ratio, torque converter.
These AC torque converters had a multiplication ratio of up to 6 to 1 - meaning the tractor slowed down a lot under load, and the torque output went through the roof.
At stall, the old HD11 had nearly the same drawbar pull as the current Cat D8H at 1mph.
This meant the HD11 drivetrain from the torque converter back was subject to stresses it was never designed for with a direct drive transmission. We tore the spokes out of track sprockets every few months.
After 18 mths, we'd had enough of doing more wrenching than earthmoving! We had a huge backlog of work to be done, so we traded that PIA HD11 on a new Cat D6C in 1966, and we were in earthmoving heaven!!
The D6C was the most trouble-free tractor we ever owned, and we ended up buying a second new one in 1968.
There's some good high-nickel cast-iron electrodes around that produce excellent cast iron repairs.
It simply pays to know your tractors weaknesses, and who ran it, the likely total hours, and what they were like for el-cheapo repairs that were done to sell it, not to keep it.
Both the 3204 and the 3208 are noted for having weak pistons, especially the original 2 ring design of the 70's and early 80's.
The wrist pin bushing is also a weak spot, never use anything but genuine Cat wrist pin bushings and ensure that they're installed to specifications precisely.
Even the conrod bolts are lightweight, and should be replaced when the engine is overhauled.
When the brother and I first started in business in 1964, we were young and green. The brother bought an Allis-Chalmers HD11 that showed 4000 hrs on the electric hour meter.
He was convinced by the salesman that the tractor was a great machine, and the hours were genuine.
We bought it and shortly afterwards, things started breaking right, left and centre.
We broke sprocket centres, broke brake bands, had major torque converter problems (found out later that the dealer had done a torque converter repair and left a big cleaning rag inside the oil lines!! What a mess, it tore up and got pumped through everything!).
Of course, the dealer denied any responsibility and it was impossible to prove the rag was left there by their mechanic.
The engine overheated and the entire cooling system, plus engine, needed to be rebuilt. The worn tracks gave us constant trouble with loose track pins falling out every second day!
Then we found out from a previous employee of the owner, that the owner would disconnect the HD11 hour meter for long periods! The tractor had probably done over 10,000 hours!
The final straw was when the locally-built ripper tore itself off the back end housing of the tractor!!
We spent over a week rebuilding the mounting plate, replacing broken studs, and repairing stripped bolt holes!
That tractor sure was a sharp learning curve, and we knew if we kept it, it would break us.
Part of the problem was the AC transmission design with a high-multiplication ratio, torque converter.
These AC torque converters had a multiplication ratio of up to 6 to 1 - meaning the tractor slowed down a lot under load, and the torque output went through the roof.
At stall, the old HD11 had nearly the same drawbar pull as the current Cat D8H at 1mph.
This meant the HD11 drivetrain from the torque converter back was subject to stresses it was never designed for with a direct drive transmission. We tore the spokes out of track sprockets every few months.
After 18 mths, we'd had enough of doing more wrenching than earthmoving! We had a huge backlog of work to be done, so we traded that PIA HD11 on a new Cat D6C in 1966, and we were in earthmoving heaven!!
The D6C was the most trouble-free tractor we ever owned, and we ended up buying a second new one in 1968.
1693TA
Senior Member
I have heard stories of the earlier HD-11 series doing just as you have stated with the spokes and tearing up the drivetrains. The series "B" addressed that with a standard 3:1 torque multiplication ratio and solid drive sprockets with segments. I understand it was a very well mannered tractor afterward with these design changes. The same type engineering changes were carried over into the HD-16 and HD-21 series also.
If'n I had my druthers and were looking for a used tractor it would be a D6C, or D6D as I think their power to weight ratio is just about right and the parts availability is still good. However, this current infection of my A-C HD-11 Series B tractor will have to do for now as I really do like it.
If'n I had my druthers and were looking for a used tractor it would be a D6C, or D6D as I think their power to weight ratio is just about right and the parts availability is still good. However, this current infection of my A-C HD-11 Series B tractor will have to do for now as I really do like it.
Last edited:
OzDozer
Senior Member
The AC HD-11 the brother and I owned was a '62 model HD-11 EC - torque converter drive coupled to a 3 speed gear drive transmission. It was nothing but trouble.
But the guy the brother worked for previously owned (late 1950's) HD-11 B's (direct drive with clutch and countershaft transmission) and they were good little tractors - even if they were light in the undercarriage, like all A-C's.
A local contractor we used to work in with, bought a new HD-11 EP, the powershift version, around 1968 I think it was, and that was a far better tractor than the HD-11 EC.
The A-C's were well-engineered in many ways, with simple disassembly and assembly techniques (no special tools or pullers, unlike Cat), and good steel in their components - but they didn't have the massive inbuilt strength of the Cats - and their track rollers with roller bearings were a constant PIA, they were always fracturing bearings.
The Cats with their bronze bushed track rollers were far more reliable, even if they didn't have the rolling efficiency of the A-C rollers.
The A-C's were always good performing machines, they would outpush any Cat - but they couldn't keep it up without something breaking.
Not a lot of people would recall that A-C actually invented and produced the sealed and lubricated track before Cat - in the late 1960's.
But A-C couldn't make it reliable, the seals would chew out rapidly on their SALT undercarriage.
However, Cat woke up to the need for a thrust washer to prevent the seal damage, and they succeeded with SALT where A-C failed.
But the guy the brother worked for previously owned (late 1950's) HD-11 B's (direct drive with clutch and countershaft transmission) and they were good little tractors - even if they were light in the undercarriage, like all A-C's.
A local contractor we used to work in with, bought a new HD-11 EP, the powershift version, around 1968 I think it was, and that was a far better tractor than the HD-11 EC.
The A-C's were well-engineered in many ways, with simple disassembly and assembly techniques (no special tools or pullers, unlike Cat), and good steel in their components - but they didn't have the massive inbuilt strength of the Cats - and their track rollers with roller bearings were a constant PIA, they were always fracturing bearings.
The Cats with their bronze bushed track rollers were far more reliable, even if they didn't have the rolling efficiency of the A-C rollers.
The A-C's were always good performing machines, they would outpush any Cat - but they couldn't keep it up without something breaking.
Not a lot of people would recall that A-C actually invented and produced the sealed and lubricated track before Cat - in the late 1960's.
But A-C couldn't make it reliable, the seals would chew out rapidly on their SALT undercarriage.
However, Cat woke up to the need for a thrust washer to prevent the seal damage, and they succeeded with SALT where A-C failed.
1693TA
Senior Member
Thank you for your honest, unbiased interpretation. Don't really get that much anymore; and I agree wholeheartedly. The series "B" tractor(s) were an improvement to many of the things mentioned including upgrading the undercarriage. I have two friends still living that built them up and another that built finals and we converse fairly regularly.
I was aware that A-C pioneered the use of the SALT track and believe it or not, have met the gent that either came up with, or worked to implement the track system. He was a department head back when I was there, and a nice guy to talk with. As far as I know, the Series "B" tractors all used the bronze bushed roller system as was proven much stronger and durable than the roller bearing style as you mention. Never seen any of them apart as they came in a shipping crate containing 24 and I staged such items at assembly stations with a forklift. My ability to operate a forklift got me in the door, but they were in such a quagmire with Fiat in the mix, nobody was getting hired permanent.
Like you mention, common and easily available tools to work and maintain them. Everything hydraulics was off the shelf available and OTC was the primary vendor.
I was aware that A-C pioneered the use of the SALT track and believe it or not, have met the gent that either came up with, or worked to implement the track system. He was a department head back when I was there, and a nice guy to talk with. As far as I know, the Series "B" tractors all used the bronze bushed roller system as was proven much stronger and durable than the roller bearing style as you mention. Never seen any of them apart as they came in a shipping crate containing 24 and I staged such items at assembly stations with a forklift. My ability to operate a forklift got me in the door, but they were in such a quagmire with Fiat in the mix, nobody was getting hired permanent.
Like you mention, common and easily available tools to work and maintain them. Everything hydraulics was off the shelf available and OTC was the primary vendor.
A neighbor and local dirt contractor purchased a new 2022 Cat d6. He has two or three d6t's. New d6 motor puked at 400 hours. Cat picked it up and put a new motor in it under warranty. He said it took about three months to get the unit back. Cat put a 'new' reman motor in it with full warranty. Neighbor said in the area of $50-$60K if no warranty, but his guys would have probably rebuilt it for a whole lot less if block, crank, and cam still ok. I don't know why the engine failed.
In too deep now. Jasper engine had no numbers on it and the set up seems odd. Pistons have insert in the tops. Non rod style injectors. Does cat have multiple head styles for the 3204? Will any DI 3204 interchange and bolt up to the transmission? The engine i purchased is 3204 DI 45V22532 / AR 7n5139
Attachments
Nige
Senior Member
Probably not. What was the Arrangement Number of the failed engine.?
Edit: It might pay you to start a new thread for this issue.
Last edited:
Will do
Cat 931 engine mystery....
Starting a new thread as advised. Purchased a Cat 931 without doing due diligence and now I have a bucket of questions that need help sorting out. I have been unable to find a serial number on the machine bevel gear housing will be my last try in the morning. The machine had a jasper engine...
www.heavyequipmentforums.com