brian
Member
crane and tractor has a 41b for sale in columbus ohio.
-
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!
The last FIAT-ALLIS 41b made
- Thread starter fiat41b
- Start date
fiat41b
Senior Member
Thanks Brian i have been there very nice people to deal with bought a engine from them for my fe40 excavator and they gave me all kinds of literature and books left over from the 41 days I will have to check it out.
brian
Member
there was two of them at an auction the shelly company had a couple years ago and they bought one of them.
FatCatGotHot
Active Member
Re: HD41/41B largest dozer record
Hi Deas, regarding the world record for the world largest dozer in the 70ies, the HD41 was substituted by the 620 HP KOMATSU D455 in 1977. BUT, ...
...I stand to be corrected.
Hi Deas, regarding the world record for the world largest dozer in the 70ies, the HD41 was substituted by the 620 HP KOMATSU D455 in 1977. BUT, ...
...I stand to be corrected.
Deas Plant
Senior Member
Old-timer's Disease.
Hi, FCGH.
I theeenk you are right. I had forgotten about 'Kummagutsa's' brief first reign as manufacturer of the world's biggest PRODUCTION dozer with the D455A. I also theeenk it lasted a little under 12 monthsas the Cat D10's hit the market in the spring of 1978.
Hi, FCGH.
I theeenk you are right. I had forgotten about 'Kummagutsa's' brief first reign as manufacturer of the world's biggest PRODUCTION dozer with the D455A. I also theeenk it lasted a little under 12 monthsas the Cat D10's hit the market in the spring of 1978.
FatCatGotHot
Active Member
Komatsu D455A
Dear Deas,
by far it was not my intention to point my finger on your mental chaos. LOL But the D455A is just too interesting to not beeing mentioned here. Let me browse throo ma bookshelf to give us some further details on her:
Unveiled at the BAUMA 1977, the D455A was powered by a 12 cylinder Cummins engine of said 620 HP, followed by two gear boxes of the D355A. In this way, Komatsu combined the use of proven transmission components with the ability of individual driven tracks. Yummie - Sounds quite shmart to me. The weight was about 76 metric tons.
Dear Deas,
by far it was not my intention to point my finger on your mental chaos. LOL But the D455A is just too interesting to not beeing mentioned here. Let me browse throo ma bookshelf to give us some further details on her:
Unveiled at the BAUMA 1977, the D455A was powered by a 12 cylinder Cummins engine of said 620 HP, followed by two gear boxes of the D355A. In this way, Komatsu combined the use of proven transmission components with the ability of individual driven tracks. Yummie - Sounds quite shmart to me. The weight was about 76 metric tons.
Last edited:
Deas Plant
Senior Member
Once again, 'Kummagutsa's' Engineering..............
Hi, FCGH.
I once operated a D455A for about 3 hours. It had 'tunnza'
grunt, especially if you took note of the fact that it DRANK about 20 litres (4 1/2 imperial gallons) of engine oil per 10 hour shift. It had a single shank ripper on the back - so far, so good. It had a U-blade on the front - fine for bulk earthworks - but it was being used to push-load 3 x Cat 660 scrapers - NOT a job for a U-blade. It pushed them O.K. but a U-blade is not exactlt ideal for picking up scrapers quickly and smoothly. I never did get to do any serious earthmoving with that jigger.
Right from the very first 'Kummagutsa' that I ever had anything to do with, a direct drive D60A dozer in 1966, their engineering has let them down. Don't get me wrong. I have enjoyed operating a fair range of 'Kummagutsa' machines over the years. After all, they mostly burn diesel fuel, make noise and move dirt - what's not to enjoy?
How-wevver, along with many, MANY other people, I have noticed that most 'Kummagutsa' machines seem to have only about 2/3 the service life to first rebuild and between any subsequent rebuilds of a comparable Cat machine.
Just my 0.02.
Hi, FCGH.
I once operated a D455A for about 3 hours. It had 'tunnza'
grunt, especially if you took note of the fact that it DRANK about 20 litres (4 1/2 imperial gallons) of engine oil per 10 hour shift. It had a single shank ripper on the back - so far, so good. It had a U-blade on the front - fine for bulk earthworks - but it was being used to push-load 3 x Cat 660 scrapers - NOT a job for a U-blade. It pushed them O.K. but a U-blade is not exactlt ideal for picking up scrapers quickly and smoothly. I never did get to do any serious earthmoving with that jigger.
Right from the very first 'Kummagutsa' that I ever had anything to do with, a direct drive D60A dozer in 1966, their engineering has let them down. Don't get me wrong. I have enjoyed operating a fair range of 'Kummagutsa' machines over the years. After all, they mostly burn diesel fuel, make noise and move dirt - what's not to enjoy?
How-wevver, along with many, MANY other people, I have noticed that most 'Kummagutsa' machines seem to have only about 2/3 the service life to first rebuild and between any subsequent rebuilds of a comparable Cat machine.
Just my 0.02.
dieseldave
Senior Member
I wouldn't have imagined there were this many 41's running at once 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_DQYcD11w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ_DQYcD11w
Deas Plant
Senior Member
Is this the perfect dozer for 'low-lifes'? LOL.
Hi, Folks.
Found this little jigger on YouTube too. Is it the perfect dozer for 'low-lifes'? LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ljO7xZo6HA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqBkDsQV0rU&feature=related
Hi, Folks.
Found this little jigger on YouTube too. Is it the perfect dozer for 'low-lifes'? LOL.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ljO7xZo6HA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqBkDsQV0rU&feature=related
Deas Plant
Senior Member
'Largest' dozer.
Hi, Fiat41B.
There are a number of criteria for assessing the 'largest' dozer ever built. The jigger that you mentioned with two 41B's and the 65-foot Rockland blade is quite probably the widest blade ever made.
The most commonly used criteria are weight and horsepower and that jigger doesn't measure up in either of those categories. There are in fact 3 machines both heavier and more powerful than that combination and all 3 are or were single machines, not tandems or doubles. The 3 machines are:
Komatsu D575A Super dozer.
Acco dozer.
Western 2000 dozer. (No longer with us, unfortunately.)
I grant you that none of them were wider but I suspect that at least 2 of the 3 would have pushed the 2 x 41B's backwards. How-wevver, much as it might have been interesting to watch such a contest, I doubt that it can ever be arranged due to some of the required elements being unavailable.
Does anybody have a computer program that can simulate such a contest? Just for chuckles of course. LOL.
Hi, Fiat41B.
There are a number of criteria for assessing the 'largest' dozer ever built. The jigger that you mentioned with two 41B's and the 65-foot Rockland blade is quite probably the widest blade ever made.
The most commonly used criteria are weight and horsepower and that jigger doesn't measure up in either of those categories. There are in fact 3 machines both heavier and more powerful than that combination and all 3 are or were single machines, not tandems or doubles. The 3 machines are:
Komatsu D575A Super dozer.
Acco dozer.
Western 2000 dozer. (No longer with us, unfortunately.)
I grant you that none of them were wider but I suspect that at least 2 of the 3 would have pushed the 2 x 41B's backwards. How-wevver, much as it might have been interesting to watch such a contest, I doubt that it can ever be arranged due to some of the required elements being unavailable.
Does anybody have a computer program that can simulate such a contest? Just for chuckles of course. LOL.
fiat41b
Senior Member
Deas I see where your going however the tractor was called big daddy and also an angle dozer i know that you have heard or seen pictures of 2 d9's attached to an angle blade that was called the double dude and they recorded a performance of 14,000 yards per hr. Im not for sure what the big daddy's performance really was it would have to be much greater than 2 d9's although one book says it was to akward due to its size the 1710 cummings engine is again set at a (conservative 525 hp rating)as stated in the fiat book my engine in my machine has 675 hp. probably gross hp. a 455 kamatsu same tractor weight they copied using the same engine and cranked it up to 620 hp. you can get 800 hp easily out of a 1710 cummings with minor changes but if your gearing is set up to where you spin your tracks with maximun load the extra hp is not really necessary
there is a thing called coefficent traction with a crawler tractor. NO
tractor is going to push a load in front of it that weighs more than the tractor this has nothing to do with hp. i dont think your super dozers would push 2 41's or 455 kamatsu's that would be 164 tons
there is a thing called coefficent traction with a crawler tractor. NO
tractor is going to push a load in front of it that weighs more than the tractor this has nothing to do with hp. i dont think your super dozers would push 2 41's or 455 kamatsu's that would be 164 tons
Deas Plant
Senior Member
164 tons???????
Hi, Fiat41b.
I am aware of traction coefficients, etc.. I can't quote exact figures 'cos I don't have them but I always thought the AC HD41 was only about 64 - 65 tons 'wet' working weight and the F-A 41B was only a couple of tons heavier. Give that the 41B is 70 tons x 2 is only 140 tons. The 'Kummagutsa' D575a-3 Super dozer comes in at about 153 tons and 1150 hp, both of which are somewhat more than the combined weight and horsepower of 2 x standard HD41's or 41B's.
The Acco dozer is 183 tons and has 2 x 675 hp Cat V8's - total, 1,350 hp. Do you think it might stand a chance of sorting out your paired 41B's?
Even the Western 2000 at 1,600 hp and 170 tons - while it was around - had those paired 41's beat for both hp and weight but may not have had the traction to get its grunt on the ground, being as it was 4wd, not on tracks.
Just for the record, I once saw 2 x early D6C's at, I believe, 120 hp each, put blades to blade with an early Cat D8H at 235 hp and the D8H won. Two Cat D6C's going backwards, scratching dirt and not giving up but not winning either. Mind you, there was a fair bit of track slip from the D8H too but it wasn't the one - or two - going backwards. Wunna those times when I shoulda dun had a camera and didn't. There was a bit of free beer flowing in the pub that night too.
Hi, Fiat41b.
I am aware of traction coefficients, etc.. I can't quote exact figures 'cos I don't have them but I always thought the AC HD41 was only about 64 - 65 tons 'wet' working weight and the F-A 41B was only a couple of tons heavier. Give that the 41B is 70 tons x 2 is only 140 tons. The 'Kummagutsa' D575a-3 Super dozer comes in at about 153 tons and 1150 hp, both of which are somewhat more than the combined weight and horsepower of 2 x standard HD41's or 41B's.
The Acco dozer is 183 tons and has 2 x 675 hp Cat V8's - total, 1,350 hp. Do you think it might stand a chance of sorting out your paired 41B's?
Even the Western 2000 at 1,600 hp and 170 tons - while it was around - had those paired 41's beat for both hp and weight but may not have had the traction to get its grunt on the ground, being as it was 4wd, not on tracks.
Just for the record, I once saw 2 x early D6C's at, I believe, 120 hp each, put blades to blade with an early Cat D8H at 235 hp and the D8H won. Two Cat D6C's going backwards, scratching dirt and not giving up but not winning either. Mind you, there was a fair bit of track slip from the D8H too but it wasn't the one - or two - going backwards. Wunna those times when I shoulda dun had a camera and didn't. There was a bit of free beer flowing in the pub that night too.
fiat41b
Senior Member
Deas i ran a d6d at hurricane Andrew in Miami Florida for a while and my buddy was on a d4h wide track we had a push off i lost the 4h push me backwards easy i know the
d4h is smaller and less hp but he had traction as far as weight for 41b's and even the
FD50 which was the same dozer with a few up grades the books say max weight of 161,594 lbs add the extra weight for options like the 3' wide pads and it does come close to 82 tons if you have not noticed the Acco dozer has a little buddy its a Fiat 41they have been parked side by side for years and years along with a bunch of other fiat-allis equipment at Acco's yard, yes the Acco is one bad dude it wold be interesting to compare such machines but how could you compare a huge crawler w/huge strait u blade to a huge angle only blade with two large crawlers.
For instance digging 400'x100'x10' area = 14,800 cubic yds thats the kind of numbers they said the 2 d9g's or double dude could do but they are side cutting or windrowing a strait dozer pushes strait that would be one hell of an area cut out in 1 hr. so how would you compare the two different machines i know you wont tell me that the other will do it in 1/2 hr time.
d4h is smaller and less hp but he had traction as far as weight for 41b's and even the
FD50 which was the same dozer with a few up grades the books say max weight of 161,594 lbs add the extra weight for options like the 3' wide pads and it does come close to 82 tons if you have not noticed the Acco dozer has a little buddy its a Fiat 41they have been parked side by side for years and years along with a bunch of other fiat-allis equipment at Acco's yard, yes the Acco is one bad dude it wold be interesting to compare such machines but how could you compare a huge crawler w/huge strait u blade to a huge angle only blade with two large crawlers.
For instance digging 400'x100'x10' area = 14,800 cubic yds thats the kind of numbers they said the 2 d9g's or double dude could do but they are side cutting or windrowing a strait dozer pushes strait that would be one hell of an area cut out in 1 hr. so how would you compare the two different machines i know you wont tell me that the other will do it in 1/2 hr time.
gaboon1950
New Member
As someone who operated an Allis 41B for several years and then moved on to d-10's, I wish I had the old 41's back. They are a dirt moving mother and with the width of the tracks, and the extreme horsepower, I've had one stuck but have never powered one out. In my opinion, the 41 outshines the 10's all day long. Hans
fiat41b
Senior Member
Thanks for the replie gaboon1950 I just moved my 41b last week to a new coal mine job
we are building a new mine I am working with Vecellio & Grogan from West Virgina
this is a very large project they just moved their 5110 CAT excavator in also last week
it has a 10 yd rock bucket I will be taking progress pictures so i may post a few hope all goes well.
we are building a new mine I am working with Vecellio & Grogan from West Virgina
this is a very large project they just moved their 5110 CAT excavator in also last week
it has a 10 yd rock bucket I will be taking progress pictures so i may post a few hope all goes well.
CatSkinner77V
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2007
- Messages
- 228
- Location
- Sperling, Manitoba, CANADA
- Occupation
- Earthmoving business owner
my uncle ran a HD 41 near calgary alberta years ago on the Old man River dam project. He said it was good machine, but didn't stand up in the rock like the Caterpillars did.
QuAD
Active Member
Here the only pics i ever saw from the 2 HD41 with the 65' blade.
This photos are on a old 16mm film I have from the Caterpillar D9 SxS Double-Dude 48' blade.
This photos are on a old 16mm film I have from the Caterpillar D9 SxS Double-Dude 48' blade.
heavy hauler
New Member
heavy hauler
Nice photos, Thats a pushing machine. Iam trying to find weights on the 41b. stripped down with out a ripper, blade and draft arms. I am going to haul this machine for a new owner and am curious what the weights are. any ideas? thanks.
Nice photos, Thats a pushing machine. Iam trying to find weights on the 41b. stripped down with out a ripper, blade and draft arms. I am going to haul this machine for a new owner and am curious what the weights are. any ideas? thanks.
AtlasRob
Senior Member
I am pretty sure if you go through this thread that it is mentioned or the figures are there if you do the maths.
The other option is to drop a PM to fiat41b
ON EDIT
I knew I had read it, copied from post 11
Well this particular tractor came new with all the options 36" track pads,cab 3 counter weights at over 5000 lbs full u blade but when it was brought back home they got the blade off the other 41b a semi u .The company that bought the 41 back in 1985 purchased 2 of the 13 made in 1982 the 1st one #751 and this one #764 the 41b tractor standard weight no cab/rops, attachments or hydraulics with standard 32" pads was 112,000 lbs the older A-C HD41s were around 101,000 bare tractor.
Weight if fully dressed is over 80 ton 164,000 lbs however metal varys
My semi u blade is bigger than that Cat d10n taller and wider 17.5 width
7.5 tall
Last edited:
Neil D
Well-Known Member
Thanks
fiat 41b
Great to see pictures of your machines-they are truly magnificent machines.
Its a pity the italians are not providing the spares back up for these older machines, a very stupid move I think because people who want to buy the new machines from fiat are gonna be put off by the perceived lack of interest once the thing has rolled out the dealership gates!
Neil
fiat 41b
Great to see pictures of your machines-they are truly magnificent machines.
Its a pity the italians are not providing the spares back up for these older machines, a very stupid move I think because people who want to buy the new machines from fiat are gonna be put off by the perceived lack of interest once the thing has rolled out the dealership gates!
Neil