Is anyone having any problems with the new Cat 285/275 CTLs?

[Nige]

The TC says that it only hits under a side loading event and Cat advises that it should never be put under a side load.

So following that logic the machine can only be operated on perfectly flat ground. Anything other than that would put a side load on the loader linkage simply by the angle of the ground, whatever that might be. I thought the whole purpose of a CTL was its ability, if necessary, to work on uneven and/or sloping ground.?

 

[KSSS]

Does Cat say it shouldn't be side loaded in writing in the TC only or is that written in the operators manual somewhere? If that information is not in the operators manual somewhere and just recently came out in a technical communication, I think that is " the easy out" button of that machine. You certainly would not have bought it, having known that information. I can't believe anyone would pay that kind of money for a big azz machine knowing that side loading causes the arms to hit the steps. Of course, no one wants to make a habit of side loading, kinda like backfilling or moving material with an excavator with the side of the bucket while swinging. Sometimes you have to do it.

As we have seen in this thread, Cats specs are "loose" to say the least, offering the most latitude possible. So loose that it would make the machine unworkable for tight grading work if your machine is built on the far end of the loose scale. Stating you can't side load the machine is equally as unbelievable as their build specs for loader arm tolerance.

I really suggest demoing a DL550 Minitour. I run a GPS system on a GB128 Sharp Grade grader attachment pushes a full blade with ease. The machine is super heavily built (it weighs around 18K). Demo it, if it aint your gig so be it, but no one needs to be saddled with a machine that can have 1" variance in the bucket level, or a machine you cant side load. I am really surprised CAT is having these issues with this machine, and I am equally surprised they are not addressing it. Software issues or something similar I can get, but these build quality issues, that surprises me.

 

[Tones]

55yrs ago a contractor I knew of had a huge problem with the track wear on a D9g. Same bs from Cat about operator abuse, turned out it had 2 different track frames and were misaligned. Cat refuse to fix under warranty. At that time the contractors equipment was 100% Cat and was on a job that had a 5 year time span. He went Euclid and so did many others on that site, must of cost Cat a **** load.
A similar story with a E240 Cat excavator that bent the boom and 1 of many in a Cat fleet. It had been ordered with hammer piping but the dealer didn't plate the boom as required by Cat and refused the warranty claim. About a month went buy then some Hitachi EX220 arrived and the Cat disappeared. Next thing 2 Komatsu 375 dozers arrived while the Cat rep was on site.I have seen other bad **** from Cat but strange thing is their inability to rectify genuine complaints over the years weither it's large or small machines owned by large or small businesses.

 

[KSSS]

Years ago, Takeuchi ran an ad that I have never forgotten the gist of. To the effect of "Sometimes the power of the name is more powerful than the equipment that it represents". I think it can be a correct and powerful statement at times. The green tractor guys can also fall into this as well. I think its easy for company that has such a powerful name and presence in the market to not do the right thing, simply because they don't feel they need to. There are probably many customers that can point to the times that they did do the right thing. However, as it is said, a mistake can erase a lot of good that you have done. These OEM's I believe look at the cost of fixing an issue like this and make a cost analysis of the issue and decide if it's worth it. While certainly with social media word spreads in ways it never could before, but when you are as big as Cat is, they can absorb a lot of bad press regardless. Most dedicated customers likely wont stop their buying decisions anyway even if they were treated poorly. So it becomes easier, I think, to put lipstick on the problem and move on. When your an OEM with that kind size and presence, it is hard for a customer (especially smaller ones) to fight them effectively to get them to do the right thing.

 

[Welder Dave]

Like Ford deciding it's better to pay off (many) claims than address the Pinto gas tanks exploding in rear end accidents.

 

[Tones]

Like Ford deciding it's better to pay off (many) claims than address the Pinto gas tanks exploding in rear end accidents.

Or Ford blaming Firestone for the steering problem in the Bronco debacle.

 

[blacktopper]

Does Cat say it shouldn't be side loaded in writing in the TC only or is that written in the operators manual somewhere? If that information is not in the operators manual somewhere and just recently came out in a technical communication, I think that is " the easy out" button of that machine. You certainly would not have bought it, having known that information. I can't believe anyone would pay that kind of money for a big azz machine knowing that side loading causes the arms to hit the steps. Of course, no one wants to make a habit of side loading, kinda like backfilling or moving material with an excavator with the side of the bucket while swinging. Sometimes you have to do it.

As we have seen in this thread, Cats specs are "loose" to say the least, offering the most latitude possible. So loose that it would make the machine unworkable for tight grading work if your machine is built on the far end of the loose scale. Stating you can't side load the machine is equally as unbelievable as their build specs for loader arm tolerance.

I really suggest demoing a DL550 Minitour. I run a GPS system on a GB128 Sharp Grade grader attachment pushes a full blade with ease. The machine is super heavily built (it weighs around 18K). Demo it, if it aint your gig so be it, but no one needs to be saddled with a machine that can have 1" variance in the bucket level, or a machine you cant side load. I am really surprised CAT is having these issues with this machine, and I am equally surprised they are not addressing it. Software issues or something similar I can get, but these build quality issues, that surprises me.

I looked through the operators manual yesterday, I cant find anything discussing side loading. This also poses a problem as mentioned in a previous post when running a grader blade attachment. I also tried to find some cat youtube videos of the machines in action to see if they may be guilty of sideloading. No luck so far.

 

[blacktopper]

So just to add a little fuel to the fire. While we were looking the new 275 loader arm issue over yesterday we discovered that when the bucket roll cylinders go all the way out to the stops the cylinders continue to push with enough force to flex the cylinders and twist the loader arms outward noticably (.5" guessing). Now I realize that rolling the bucket to the stops and continuing to push is a bad idea but in the real world its going to happen some. it seems that maybe the cylinder is just a little too long. I also realize we are picking at this machine now and the more we pick the more we find wrong. Poor welds, rust, silicone caulking in cracks where I feel like welds should be (never seen this before ever). We have a decent amount of cat equipment but this machine is very dissapointing. It has some positives, but overall the build quality seems to be terrible.

 

[HarleyHappy]

What they want to happen, is to have you suck it up enough, that sooner or later, you trade the machine in and lose your ass. Whether it’s at Cat or not doesn’t really matter, as long as that machine is in the rear view mirror.
That and hopefully memories fade and one day, you might buy a Cat again.

 

[KSSS]

If Cat blames it on side loading, in a sense making it the customers fault, I would direct them to the operators manual and ask them to show where it states you can't at all side load without damaging the machine. Next obvious question to them would be, if its not in the operating manual how are you to know that, and had that been known, you would not have bought it. I think that would set you up nicely to get a 275 that doesn't have that issue (assuming they make one) or getting Cat to take it back.

 

[blacktopper]

Agreed, I think pushing material while turning is a standard practice for CTL's and they should be able to do it without damaging the machine.

 

[AMBMike]

Not to be a downer but if you look at this photo and others I posted in post #30 in this thread you can see the arms simply rest on a stop on the chassis with nothing to prevent any side to side movement. The step is literally the first thing the arms will contact when they move.
Looking at it it could be assumed the engineers thought the step would act as a stop when the arms move that far.

 

[KSSS]

I missed the part of it doing it while pushing and turning with a load. I was envisioning it flexing while side loading during the loading of the bucket out of a pile. Yes, that is certainly a common practice and if it's bad now, imagine after a couple thousand hours.

Yes, the pic makes it all make sense. The arms are not pinned to the frame in anyway to stop the side to side movement. They need a stop on the frame that extends to the inside side of the loader arm that would prevent the arm from shifting left and right. Doesn't look like it would be a hard thing to fix honestly.

 

[blacktopper]

Absolutely agree, but I find it unacceptable.

 

[KSSS]

This is the stops on the DL550. Notice the stops on each side of the silver bolts that pin and rotate the cab. Cat needs something like that to stop the side to side movement.

 

[KSSS]

It is unacceptable, I don't get how this could go through a product testing phase, and not get addressed.

 

[blacktopper]

This is the stops on the DL550. Notice the stops on each side of the silver bolts that pin and rotate the cab. Cat needs something like that to stop the side to side movement.

Cats earlier series ctls had saddles that the arms sat in and limited side to side motion

 

[KSSS]

That I guess makes it even more unacceptable. How does something like that get missed, and CAT fight so hard denying it? If they blew it on that, acknowledge it, at least step up and make it right. That would go a lot farther with customers and those that don't run Cat. It would show that the name means what you always thought it meant.

 

[JaredV]

It is unacceptable, I don't get how this could go through a product testing phase, and not get addressed.

I have no evidence, but the more I hear and see about Cat equipment, the more I get the feeling that the customers are the testers and time on the proving ground is a thing of the past.

 

[KSSS]

It certainly appears to be the case with this machine. Had they wrung this machine out before they released it, they would have found this issue and addressed it.