Yair . . . td25c
Interesting what you say about the build of the machine. The only excavators that I had a little bit to do with were early Seventie's Kato's and once we got over some initial problems with cracking around the ram bosses on the sticks they went very well and were well built strong machines . . . chain drive though which could be a head ache.
I posed the question because it seems to me that much of the touted improvements in "production" of later machines may be all well and good on paper but in the real world not so much.
I have always been a bit conservative in my ideas on moving dirt. Even in my hey day I could never see the point in having an extra push cat loading scrapers to gain a few seconds a load. Same thing with excavators loading trucks or trenching. It should be built into the rate or bid.
If, within reason, those few extra cycles a day are going to make or break an operation, management need to take a look at their methodology and get back to basics.
I guess what I am espousing is the dinosaur view of the world, that is to say, the production potential built into a modern machine by way of complexity and cost is in fact not always used.
I am way out of my field now but I would go as far as to that on general subdivision work a machine such as yours with a skilled operator who knows how to feather a hydraulic control for placing pipe and so on would more than hold its own.
It seems to me that many of the improvements to machinery have been made to maintain production with higher levels of operator comfort and lower levels of skill . . . I hasten to add that I am in no way being derogatory, that's just as I see it and good luck to folks out there, I wouldn't have minded a bit of A/C and a decent air ride seat. (Big Grin)
Cheers.
