• Healthy no nonsense banter. June 06 - 4:50 pm

Help convince CATERPILLAR to offer the D8K and D9H to the customers that ask for them. We need the availability of NEW D8K's and D9H's again.

That is a good idea. I think caterpillar really goofed up when they stopped making the large oval track dozers. I know there are many more people that feel the same way.

Lets go back in time, while we're at it! Those
CAT's were junk when they were built, and they
arn't going to get any better now.Move on.

Looks like someone thinks CAT builds junk.
So your saying the New Hicraps are junk. I have been saying that for years.

Jacky, you keep forgetting we need a low profile dozer. In some places. CAT builds oval small dozers for just that. Only thing that those cats needed is some more metal in them. ie stronger.

So Jeff how are ya??? LOL

Track slappin, sprocket slippin, upsidedown hicraps stink !

I am interested in the recent discussions about the pros and cons of the Cat high drive tracks. It is my understanding that the initial, primary reason for the high drive was to isolate the final drive gears and bearings from ground impact, on the largest dozers, and a secondary reason was to enable the removal of a final drive assembly without removing the track. I can see the merit in this, but like all design features, there are pros and cons. A high drive necessitates a longer track perimeter, fewer sprocket teeth engagement with the track chain, and a higher center of gravity—all undesirable characteristics.

While the merit of the high drive might outweigh the disadvantages on the largest dozers, it seems less likely to do so on smaller units. Even on the larger dozers, the goal of eliminating impact to the final drive can also be accomplished by a skilled operator without the high drive. I have been told that regardless of the objective reasons for the high drive, Cat marketing liked the look, and the symbolism of something new and different, so they wanted it on all the dozers. It’s surprising how much emotionalism and symbolism of marketing and sales can rule the hardcore objectivism of engineering.

Some of the defense of the high drive is based on the assumption that such machines can out perform an oval track equivalent. The problem with such comparisons, however, is that there is no equivalency between production examples of high and low drives. I cannot see how the high drive can have any tractive effort advantage over a low drive, when the systems are compared with two tractors otherwise having the same weight, weight distribution, track footprint, and power train. Considering all of this, I have one question. I would like someone to explain all of the advantages of a high drive over an oval track, when applied to a tractor in the mid size range.

Ron Keagle

There is none. Can I copy your post and repost it on the ACMOC board. Or could you do it?

http://www.acmoc.org

It is just that an image thing. And not a very good one at that. Thank you for this. If you know others that know more about the image aspect of that hideous design please have them post here.

D8Bob-
I tried to post my high track message on the acmoc site, but I could not get on. You may post it there if you would like. I do not know of others who can comment on the style aspect of the high drive, but I have quite a bit more to say about it. But first I am waiting to learn the advantage of a high drive over an oval track, on a mid size dozer.

Ron Keagle

Ron - There are advantages to the hightrack design, and they are not limited to ease of final drive removal, or limiting ground impact to the final drive.
The hightrack design idea came about through the efforts of one man, a Caterpillar engineer named Robert Purcell.
Bob Purcell was convinced the hightrack design was an improvement on the oval track design, and built a single hightrack prototype out of what was basically a ride-behind lawnmower.
This was in 1965, and the little single track unit surprised most people at Cat with its ability to pull a Jeep around the test center.
Bob pushed the idea, and Cat management warmed to it, with a team set up in 1969, utilising an engineering team, a group from Cat Research, with input from customers, Sales, Service, and Manufacturing.
All these groups put forward, ideas on what improvements they wanted to see.
From this, Cat put up goals that the new design had to meet.
These were; Higher productivity; Modular design; Simplified maintenance; High operator efficiency; and Transportability.
In 1970, management was impressed with the teams, initial, totally new design for the new range of crawlers that they decided were going to be needed in coming decades. As a result, management authorised building a test bed machine to examine the hightrack design in action.

A D9G was converted to the hightrack design, using a resilient mounted undercarriage.
After two years of actual on-the-ground testing, Cat management was convinced that the design was a substantial improvement over the oval track design, and authorised the building of the first D10 prototypes.
Between 1973 and 1975, 4 prototype D10's were built and then tested at the Cat proving grounds in AZ.
In 1977, 10 pre-production D10's were built and issued to job sites around the U.S. for final, actual-job testing. No tractor design has been as totally tested as this one.

The benefits of the hightrack design, which met the design team goals, were;

1. Improved productivity. This is because the oscillating roller arrangement, allows a smoother ride, plus improved traction.
Traction is improved because the track follows the ground contours better, and the rollers are in contact with the rails more.
Productivity is improved, because the operator is not being jarred as much, as the on the older tractors.
All the pins that the rollers, equaliser bar, and trackframe are mounted on, are rubber bushed, which also reduces impact to operator and tractor. Speeds over-the-ground are higher on a hightrack tractor, because there is no need to slow down for minor humps and bumps.

Of course, impact reduction, is an operator skill, too; but the hightrack design is more forgiving to operators who are a little careless in their lookout for mounds of dirt, or rocks.

The cab design on the hightracks is an improvement on the older tractors, via better layout, lighter controls, better vision, and lower noise levels. A less tired and stressed operator is a more productive operator.

The rams are mounted near vertical, just behind the blade, at a far better angle to supply maximum down pressure and lift pressure, than any previous design. They are mounted in-line with the edges of the radiator/ram support frame, improve visibility over previous models.

The hightrack tractors use the most modern, up-to-date, high speed, engine design; capable of being easily manufactured and improved upon. The oval track tractors used outdated, slow speed diesels that had reached the end of their design life.

The hightrack power transmission system concentrates on high speed, high contact area components, that have a low level of torque loading; as compared to the huge, low speed, high torque, bending stresses of the oval track tractors. Major problems that could not be overcome on the oval track design were major stresses to the final drive and dead axle areas.

2. Modular design. This is where the hightracks are winning hands down. No other tractor built, has the ability to be dis-assembled with so few tools, and in so many simple steps, and so fast, as a hightrack Cat. This is a major saving to owners, which relates back to increased productivity and lower maintenance costs as well.

3. Simplified maintenance. This is because all major components are easily accessible; and removal is simple with basic tools; and even items like the folded core radiator which swings out, all add to ease of servicing. The cab does not have to be tilted to try and get at major underfloor drivetrain components, resulting in major time, and cost savings.

4. Higher operator efficiency. This was covered in 1.

5. Transportability. For the larger tractors, this is addressed in the modular design, which allows for easy dis-assembly of major components, resulting in a smaller basic load. The smaller tractors do not require dis-assembling to move, and offer no major disadvantages over the oval track design.

There are a few people like D8Bob, who refuse to recognise the overall advantages of the hightrack design.
D8Bob keeps spouting rubbish, like; "they are too high; they tip over" - "they have numerous design faults that make them unreliable" - etc., etc.

If such was the case, Cat would be out of the hightrack construction program like a hog that has been hit with a switch.
Instead, Cat are continuing to build thousands and thousands of new tractors of this design every year, (and sell as many as they can make), and continue to add improvements to the design.

D8Bob is coming from a very limited knowledge base. He has never owned a hightrack; he has a very limited amount of operating time on one; and has even less repair time on one.
In short, he is full of crap, and is a "one-note Charlie" who can only repeat a childish mantra that sounds like a broken record.

There is no way that a hightrack tractor is more unstable than an oval track design.
Two major parts of the drivetrain, the engine and transmission, are set very low in the design, to offset the higher position of the final drives, steering clutches and bevel gear.
Add to this, that another major portion of the weight of the tractor is in the mainframe and the track frames, and you see that the design has no major increase in center of gravity, over previous designs. Once you add a ripper and blade, there is no appreciable difference in C-of-G's.

There are major advantages in having the ripper pinned on, instead of bolted, as in earlier designs.
There are major advantages in having a final drive that is above any impact loading with the ground. There are advantages in the dirt falling from the track before it reaches the sprocket, reducing pin, bush and sprocket tooth wear.

The argument that there is far less sprocket teeth in contact with the track is a total fallacy, proven over 25 years of tractor production, and preceded by nearly 8 years of design refinement and testing.
At no time, on ANY track drive system, is there any more than 3 to 4 teeth, or bushes under load. You can grab the track under forward load, on an oval track tractor, above the sprocket hub level, and you will find it is only loosely held in the sprocket.

The track IS longer on a hightrack, and the extra cost has been a bone of contention for some time, amongst some people; but Cat are continually reducing undercarriage costs, and the slightly extra overall undercarriage cost is outweighed by cost savings elswhere on the tractor; particularly in overhaul costs.

Remember that this design, was not a design that was foisted on an engineering team by sales and marketing.
It was a design carefully crafted and modified over eight years in its initial development, and another 25 years in continous improvement; a design, that the engineering design team, initially, actually had to SELL to Cat management!
Cat management took some convincing, but eventually saw the OVERALL advantages of the design; one of which, was also easier, and less costly production methods, over previous designs.

This design was a "clean sheet" design; as compared to the oval track design, which was an "evolutionary" design, which had reached the end of its life, as far as improvements went.

Be assured, that there is no call for the old design, as D8Bob would have you believe, with his one-note song; and that the hightrack design is here to stay, and be improved even further in the future.
Cat is THE dominant player in tractor design and sales; has been for over 75 years; and will remain so, for many years yet - with the hightrack design!

That is the typical response, to an engineering blunder. You can see since Komatsu has kept the conventional oval design that it works just great.
And as far as ride and cab design etc. All the same modern improvements still work with the oval design. He had said how the design is not unstable. Yes it is. CAT even admitts a higher center of gravity. I have run the smaller hitrack machines the most. And if the sprocket shows the slightest amount of wear, it will slip. Many of the supporters of the hitrack design I run into on the net here. Have vested interest in supporting and saying how great the high drive system is. The ease of removing the parts should make a reasonable person wonder. If CAT thought it was so desireable to raise the finals and make smaller transmission components. And then say you will get more life from these items. There should be no reason to make them so easy to fix. First hand experience tells me other wise.
Cat has become the dominate dozer manufacture on the back of the good old oval design. And the reason sales of the hicraps is continuing is because of course there is no other choice in the matter. It is all you can get. You can't go order a new D8K or D9H. So if you want CAT your stuck with the hicrap.
The Track man copied most of what he said out of a book.
He mentions track engagement on the pins. You can try it for your self if you have a chain hoist. Make sure its loaded good. And try the same engagement that the hitrac has, then wrap it like the oval. Simple way to prove the illogic of what he said. And why they will slip.
And notice how he attacks me personally. This is the typical tactic of the CAT sponserd internet cruisers. As show on a 60 minutes like show. Showing how big corporates pay people to make sure no one bad mouths their products.
And with all the BS about how good the hicrap is. Isn't it funny that cat still makes a Small oval track dozer line? So tell me why would some one say it isn't all that great(the oval)? CAT supporters only say the hitrack is the best because it is a cat deal. If it was a design that say Komatsu or International came up with then what would cat say? As another note. The hidrive is not new like Trackman wants you to believe. It was invented by Cletrac and offered on their tractor in the 1920's. Yeah another LIE clean sheet design.
What a laugh.
I would love to hear more about the image deal.
Must be kinda similar to the new logo they invented not long after the introduction of the New track design.

Ron sure would like to hear what else you have to say.

Bob are you going to post Trackmans response on the ACMOC site as well? Have you ever operated a large Komatsu or HiDrive dozer because I can tell you that the Cat is far superior in both visibility and operator comfort. Even though Komatsu have copied the bogie roller system off Cat they still can not duplicate the smooth ride because they still have the final drive in direct contact with the ground which leads to the bone jarring ride which not only shakes the operator to pieces but the machine as well, on the Cat the idlers pivot with the bogies so it has a cushioning effect every time you run over a rock etc, also because the final drive is'nt getting all the shock loading from carrying the weight of whole machine the componentry of the final drives only need to be half the size of an oval to do the same job, this would make them cheaper to rebuild as well.
Trackman The lenght of track would'nt make any difference to cost would it? because for each full revolution of the track ie 1 contact of each plate to the ground and 1 contact of each bush to sprocket tooth [the only wearing points]the longer track would travel the equivalent longer distance, in my eyes the longer track would out last a shorter track balancing out the initial higher price

None of the large ovals have the sprocket in contact with the ground. It is closer to it than the hidrives. But if you see one on pavement you'd see it is up some inches from the ground.
The hidrives offer more loading on the main frames, and extra hp losses in dragging a track chain over more obsticles. And lack good solid sprocket to chain engagement. There is no bone jarring ride well anymore than the hidrive has. Last time I was on a D8 hitrack the panel with all the lights fell out from all the vibrations.
It was as bone jarring as any other tracked vehicle. You have to remember CAT still offers an oval track dozer. So all arguments against are mute.
In a push or ripping look at the forces on the hitrack. The forces tend to pull down on that final drive. On the oval in a push the forces cancle. The main frame on the oval is not loaded in a push. Cyclic loading can produce fatique.

Thanks for your response Trackman. I need to clarify that I am not implying a comparison of actual Cat products to anything. I am interested in the apples-to-apples comparison of the two basic track principles. Most of the advantages of the high drive that you cite are advantages of the current Cat tractors, which are more advanced in many ways than their predecessors, as well as the products of their competitors. Improved cab design, better controls, oscillating rollers, easier maintenance, better engines and transmissions, improved ripper mounting, lower noise, rubber bushings, near vertical rams—you mentioned several of these features as advantages of the high drive over the oval track. Yet these are really attributes of current Cat products, which happen to be high drives, rather than fundamental advantages of the high drive principle itself. All of these attributes could be equally applied to an oval track dozer as well, so they are not part of the argument.

A high drive sprocket is a smaller diameter and has less sprocket wrap than does an oval track sprocket. Therefore, a high drive sprocket engages fewer teeth with the chain than does an oval track sprocket. I understand your point that there are only a few teeth pulling the chain with either sprocket system, but there is another issue with the lower number of engaged teeth. In order for any sprocket to slip, it has to displace all at once, all of the bushings that are engaged with teeth. Thus the greater the number of engaged teeth, the more total slack must be available in order for the sprocket to displace the teeth and slip. So, fundamentally, with any given amount of slack, a sprocket with fewer engaged teeth will slip before one with more engaged teeth.

I understand your argument about the oscillating rollers improving the ride. This feature is nothing new, having long been used on military tanks where ride is a greater issue because of the higher ground speed, as well as on steam locomotives, starting around 1850. The issue for the application of such suspension features to dozers is the tradeoff between a smoother ride, and the added cost of the extra parts and wear points. For over a century, dozer manufacturers mostly decided that the ride benefit was not worth the cost since such low ground speed was involved. But a lot of people like a smoother ride regardless of the speed, and if they are willing to pay for it, fine. Moreover, with the recent advent of the largest dozers, the smoother ride might also justify itself in terms of reducing damaging shocks to the tractor besides improving operator comfort. However, tractors in the small-to-mid-size range are less vulnerable to shock damage than are the very largest.

It is true that the oscillating rollers better conform the track to the ground, and thus improve traction. However, it seems to me, that this potential advantage would rarely come into significant play. It would be a significant advantage if you were pulling a ripper over hard, irregular ground, but in dozing, the tracks are usually running on a flat surface. In any case, whatever the advantages versus the cost, the oscillating rollers are not fundamental to the high drive principle. They could just as well be applied to an oval track. Many of the very early crawlers had variations of the oscillating roller suspension, but the art was mostly supplanted by the “hard bottom” track design in use today.
I am not convinced by the “clean sheet” versus “evolutionary” design argument. The high drive concept is as much a part of the “evolution” of track design as the oval track is. There have been lots of track designs, with lots of features that are directed to a wide variety of specific objectives. And all of this evolution goes back well over a century, to the likes of the steam log haulers of the Lombard Company. The 1913 BEST Model 30 had a high drive track.

The higher operator position that is fundamental with a high drive has been cited as offering better visibility. One minor point to consider is that, while the view improves with elevation, the higher the operator position, the more distance he travels side-to-side as the tractor pitches side-to-side.

Much has been said about stability of the high drive. Fundamentally, the center of gravity must be higher with a high drive than it would be with the same tractor in an oval track configuration, yet it is possible to compensate by redistributing weight elsewhere. You could even add ballast, low on the machine. So I have no idea of what the actual C.G. or tip over specifications of the Cat tractors are. Therefore, I would not conclude that they would be less stable just because they are high drives. They could very well be made as high drives that have a lower C.G. than a comparable oval track if there was adequate weight compensation. However, you did seem to suggest that the actual C.G. was slightly higher in the high drives, but it would be lowered to a comparable level by the addition of a blade and ripper. How does the C.G. compare between a high drive and oval track, in a mid-size dozer with a P.A.T. blade and no ripper?

You cited the ease of teardown for repair or transport, and the shock isolation of the final drive components. These certainly apply to the largest dozers that pose the largest teardown task, need to be disassembled for transport, and often work on rock. Together, these advantages alone might totally justify the high drive on the largest dozers. But my question focuses on the justification for the high drive principle as applied to small-to-mid-size tractors. If you remove the issues of improved Cat features unrelated to the high drive principle, and if you remove the teardown and shock isolation advantages mostly pertinent to just the largest machines, then I still don’t see why a high drive should be superior to an oval track, on small-to-mid-size tractors.

Your account of Bob Purcell is interesting. When he built his prototype with a lawnmower, what was he intending to demonstrate? What size machines did he intend the principle be applied to, and for what reasons? What do you mean when you refer to his prototype as a “single track unit?”

Thanks for your input, and I look forward to hearing more of this discussion.

Ron Keagle

Ron, you seem to know what your talking about.
Are you an engineer? Its sure refreashing.

Thanks

I have been following this arguement for along time on both these sites. I have to agree with ole D8Bob. I have seen some weird attacks on him on the acmoc site. And now I got to agree with what he's been saying about those factory guys. The way its going for him. I'd say he's right on.

Now THIS is interesting- an intelligent, informed debate on the hi vs low track design. Wish you guys (Ron K and The Trackman) would go over to ACMOC and inject a bit of sense into the debate raging over there.

D8Bob, Did you ever post my 5/14 message on the ACMOC site? I don't see it there, but maybe I'm not looking in the right place.

Ron Keagle

Ron , you have based all of your assumptions on what you see and theory, the hi-drive has been in the market for 25 years so has proved itself to be more reliable, needing less major maintenance and producing more per dollar than a conventional oval machine. Your assertion that the smaller machines gain nothing from the Hi-drive principle is also incorrect as anyone who has ever run a D4D, D5B or D6D will tell you when they have also run the hi-drive as well. I can't quite work out how you would mount the sprockets on a machine with them in the traditional place if you had oscillating bottom rollers? Like it or not the Hi-Drive concept is here to stay, it is far more adaptable and kinder on the drive train than a conventional and will be the shape of Komatsu in years to come.

D8Bob's response to my post indicates that he is lacking in knowledge and experience in many areas.
To say that "that is the typical response to an engineering blunder" shows that D8Bob has no ability to refute facts with alternative facts. He wouldn't last five minutes in a courtroom debate where facts must be established without reference to opinions. D8Bob obviously cannot distinguish the difference.

The facts are, as stated; that the highdrive concept was worked out, over a period of over eight years, by a comprehensive design team, tested by thousands of hours of proving ground work - (and if you have been to Cat's proving ground and seen their testing methods, you will understand what proper testing is) - and then proven again with another 25 years of purchaser use and satisfaction.
D8Bob, with his single opinion, and no facts, and limited knowledge, obviously thinks his opinion is better than the combined knowledge, experience and ability of the thousands of people at Cat who designed the tractors. If I were a Cat employee (which I'm not), I would be highly offended by his attitude.

Ron - All I can say to your assumption that less track wrap equals easier slip, is that yes; in theory that may be true; but in practical application and testing, track slip has never posed a problem with highdrive tractors. I have not known any contractors who have mentioned this as a problem, nor known it mentioned amongst dealer staff - and I know plenty of contractors and dealer staff. I do know that even oval track designs will slip when seriously worn.

Your assumption that there is little difference in shock damage between the highdrive tractors and oval track designs in the small to medium range is incorrect. They are just as vulnerable, because the components are smaller and designed for minimum weight. There is more inherent strength in larger designs to resist shock loading.
Your assumption that oscillating rollers pose no advantage because of your quote -"but in dozing, the tracks are usually running on a flat surface" - is also incorrect, in that you are considering only one use of a tractor - flat running. The number of tractors used in flat running, agricultural type applications has declined substantially since WW2, and the bulk of tractors nowadays are used with implements such as blades and rippers or winches, and are used to shift dirt, in the form of general earthmoving. Flat running is not a major feature of these applications - but undulations, windrows and rocks are. Hence the advantage of oscillating rollers.

The highdrive concept is a clean sheet design in that it was not based on a previous production design, which was upgraded. The current highdrive tractors owe no more to Lombard or Best Model 30's than the current Cadillac owes to a 1914 Cadillac. Engineering ideas have been in use for thousands of years and constantly resurface in improved forms.
The current highdrive uses a total number of concepts, never used before in one tractor, and can be regarded as a totally new design - in the same way that, although Lombard accused Ben Holt of "stealing" his design - Ben Holt actually took a number of ideas, including some of Lombards, and combined them to produce an effective total design.

The C of G question is of no major concern. As previously stated, thousands of hours of stability testing of highdrives, to meet design parameters, has resulted in an acceptable product to Cat engineers, management, owners and operators.
As you have stated, ballasting is a tool that Cat use, to correct weight imbalances, and ballasting has been, and is used, on both highdrive and oval track tractors.

Do you honestly believe that, in our litigious society, that Cat would release a design that suffered from a serious C of G problem that affected stability?
The lawsuits would be horrendous, and put Cat out of business. The lawsuits involving the Isuzu Trooper stability cost GM vast sums of money.

To date, I have never seen a specific lawsuit that argues that Cat produce a defective product in the highdrive stability area.
Maybe if D8Bob is so convinced that highdrives are unstable, he could launch a suit against Cat, and win enough to purchase as many oval tracks as he desires - but I think his case would not get past first base.
Some have tried to argue this stability factor in court, - with oval track Cats - and every time, it has been disclosed that operator carelessness is the major problem area.
No matter what you build, someone will have the ability to turn it over.

The advantages of highdrive apply equally to small to medium size tractors used in earthmoving - but the advantages are lessened if the tractor is used purely for agricultural towing purposes.

Bob Purcells, single oscillating bogie, highdrive prototype is pictured, to clear up any questions.

His prototype was designed to prove up the superior tractive ability of the design.

Image courtesy of the Bob Purcell collection.

I'll try that pic again -

I'll try that pic again -

I'll try that pic again -

Nope, the pic just won't load - I keep getting a message that I have a file information mismatch - but I have done everything right, that I can see.

Sorry to dissapoint you track man. But they do slip. I have been on them and they slip much worse than on the conventional tractors. Because it doesn't take alot of tooth wear to cause them to jump. I have mentioned why they continue to sell, it is simple the customers have no other choice. And with your feverent pitch, just like a high pressure salesman. You do fill the bill as a CAT internet clean up man. As shown on a TV show. You make sure, like the many others that come to these websites, that no one is bad mouthing a CAT product. For all I know you are the same guy with many different IP addresses, and names.
I have many times explained the problems with the hightrack design. And it is always battled.
Its only advantage is to the manufacture. It is easier to manufacture. The finals do get a pounding only its the track that is feeding the stress and not a direct contact with the ground.
I have mentioned the whipping motion of the track, when trying to do finish blade work. That is a very agravating thing. I have shown photos of the tin bent by small stumps. That sneak up the rear angle of the track, being stuck in the shoes. If you run a dozer Trackman, you would know Ron to be correct about the tracks running on flat. He mentioned unless it where rock. If I remember it. Anyway, as the dozer pushes the tracks eat at the ground and seek their own level ground by digging in at it, wearing into the surface as it moves. You see it especially in soft dirt.
So Ron is correct. You are wrong.
I have mentioned why you would never see any published information of law suits over the stabiliy problems. Because a multimillion dollar conglomerate can pay the hush money to keep it outa public eye. Any such thing would be sealed by the court.
The high drive concept is of no use where low clearances are involved. That is why CAT still offers oval machines. So why would a devout CAT person argue against the oval design?
There are many inherit design flaws with the hitrack design. Since you have the power source up so high. The torque on the system (whole tractor) is to tip the rear into the ground, and lift the front end up. I have seen it on many of the ripping pictures. Cat had to attempt to fix that by extending the rear of the track frame back more. It is the same stupid design it was in 1920. If it is as great as ya all think it is. Then as I have said it should be on every track machine CAT makes. Why did they have to screw up the dozers with it? If you would honestly sit down and draw some force vectors and look and see what is going on with the design maybe you would have some second thoughts. The main frame carries tremendous stress in that design. You have the weight of the tractor on the pivot shaft, you have the weight of the load and track shock on that pivot area. And then theres the lie about getting the brakes and cluches outa all that stress from the ground impacts the ovals supposedly got. Everyone must be forgetting that the final on a D8H or K was isolated by the gear set, to the brakes and clutches. And besides it never caused a problem. I have beat the heck outa D8H finals. I had never had a problem in over 10 years of wrenching and operating with a final on one. Had the typical pinion seal leak but thats it. I have had problems on a D5H final though.
Hightracks do not have superior tractive force. That is a CAT advertizing hype, lie. Put your largest CAT hitrac blade to blade with a 575 Komatsu. I bet the D11 goes back wards.

Track slappin, sproket slippin hicraps stink !

Same old crap as on the other board Bob, if you are so clever, how come you're not a design engineer?

Oh Catsilver sounds like jelousy. LOL

Bob , you sure did open up a can of worms here over the high track thing. Hee Hee!!!!!!!!

Because his thoughts go in circles Catsilver, just like his discussions. Bob practices selctive logic, when he says an unfair comparison is a D9H to a D10, yet in the next breath says put a 575 up against a D11, you know he is dealing with half a deck, and from the bottom to suit his own purpose.

Sounds about right JoeG, even looks as if he is using 2 names, 'need a new cat' seems to speak the same language and I think Ron has gone away to rethink things a bit. He's gonna sit down and draw some Vector's now, I don't see how that will make any difference to 25 years of successful sales and use!

Ah yes this is good stuff. Not sure if this debate will ever really come to a conclusion where everyone agrees. Almost like talking pickups, ie ford vs chevy vs dodge....
This one was beginning to get interesting.
Hang tough Bob.
-Bud

btw, anyone else having trouble getting on ACMOC BB lately?

Looks like Ron puts his real name on here. I don't. Yeah its only fair to do comparisons if the CAT hicrap comes out on top. According to you guys. Bud the more this goes on. The more I see that CAT is really worried about the bad image I make of their pride and joy. They must have some guilt. So to say. They must be seeing a move towards the ovals. Since it seems that is the most popular tractor that the dealer here seems to be selling. D3's to D5's.

Yeah looks like the ACMOC board is down again.
Wish it had that mirror site.

Down because you swamped it with so much B-S Bob,have you drawn your 'vectors' yet or is it just another new term invented on your other planet? Cat don't have a a bad image Bob but the more you rant on the more ridiculous your arguments become.

You make no sense bob, D9H and a D10 are both cat products so any comparison there would mean CAT wins, your response to my post was sensless and shows that you just like to snipe away. heh heh. By the way, saw your "engineering forum" and wondered where your degree came from as you registered as a mechanical engineer, just curious is all.

Who said anything about getting the brakes and clutches away from ground impacts Bob? except you that is, as usual drawing attention away from the real point. The nearest you ever got to engineering was checking oil levels.

AH! wondered where you had all gone lol!
Nice to see a new discussion going on, on a subject not discussed before!...Who's winning then? LOL!

Hi Yellowiron, not a clue who's winning, how are you getting on with the liners for that D2? Let me know if you get stuck for parts.
I think Bob clogged up ACMOC with too much logic and too many 'vectors'( I think they're some kind of self regenerating inter Galactic transport)!

Yeh them high drives are dangerous, I had to stop to let a D6 hi-drive cross in front of me at the Holt shop in Stockton. Better than getting stuck in the grosers. Man that thing is big compaired to the standard old D6 of yester year. I dont know much about tractors, have run JD350C and JD450C , Cat22 , TD9 and a small Case dozer. I sure learn a lot form the ACMOC and this board. Thanks every one.
Frank Fox Sacramento, Ca.
foxaero@frontiernet.net

Thought I'd try this board since the cat club board is down. Also been learning some terms from the internet dictionary (with the help of the kids). It seems that some things are the same on this board as the caterpillar board. These are taken as they were found in the online internet dictionary I have been reading. Seemed somewhat appropriate and humorous (to me anyway).
An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and upset people.Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility. Perhaps this sounds inconceivable. You may think, "Surely there is something I can write that will change them." But a true troll can not be changed by mere words.
troll-o-meter n. Common Usenet jargon for a notional instrument used to measure the quality of a usenet troll. "Come on, everyone! If the above doesn't set off the Troll-O-Meter, we're going to have to get him to run around with a big blinking sign saying `I am a troll, I'm only in it for the controversy and flames' and shooting random gobs of Jell-O(tm) at us before the point is proven." Mentions of the Troll-O-Meter are often accompanied by an ASCII picture of an arrow pointing at a numeric scale. Compare bogometer. bogosity /boh-go's*-tee/ The degree to which something is "bogus" in the hackish sense of "bad". At CMU, bogosity is measured with a bogometer; in a seminar, when a speaker says something bogus, a listener might raise his hand and say "My bogometer just triggered". More extremely, "You just pinned my bogometer" means you just said or did something so outrageously bogus that it is off the scale, pinning the bogometer needle at the highest possible reading (one might also say "You just redlined my bogometer").

Well the troll's here are all the ones that come to do battle against me about the hicrap(hightrack) issue. I have shown the logic over and over. But since Cat can do no wrong. The sales hype continues. Catsilver, that clutch and brake statement is from a D8L brochure. You know the same hype, like in the D8R brochure about those "CROWN SHAVED GEARS" Like only Cat does that. I gave you that vector information along time ago. I was hopping you would give me the numbers so I could see if they are close. I'm sure some place in the engineering dept they would have them.
Farmer whats all that got to do with tractors?
And JoeG here you are using my logic back to me.
But I'm not like you, I will admitt CAT can do wrong. LOL I don't support them in the design of that hideous hicrap at all. I ask them to cater to the customer, and offer the D8K and D9H.
And CAT can check for them selves, JR Hayes and Sons in Maple Valley WA. Will not own a Hicrap. And they are a Large Multimillion dollar company. And do lots of Business with NC Machinery in Tukwilla. Check those CAT computers and find out for your self. And see how they rebuild the D8K's and D9H's. They have to go to Pac North and buy Komatsu's when they want a new dozer.

http://www.jrhayes.com

Hey D8Bob, you are rite about the sprokets, sliping. I ran a D8L some years back. And the traks whernt wore alot and where just set by the cat deeler. I tryed ripping some glacertil and both sprokets would jump like crazy. That has to be the badest desine that cat ever made. Please forgive my speling. Im new to computors.Its Not like driving a cat.

Bob your so thick headed you don't even know when you have been called a troll, heh heh. I didn't use your logic agianst you, you lack logic so It would be impossible to use against you.

You say I won't admit cat has done wrong, but you have shown nothing, your opinion is not a fact, just your big mouth flapping. The hi tracks outsell all others and it isn't a choice thing, that is your misguided opinion because you do not understand true economics in a pull through market. ALL sales are market driven bobbo, if there was a SIGNIFICANT market for those machines, Cat would fill it. Obviously the market is so small it is not profitable, yet you can't admit that because your so blind you can't see that concept. You show that you have zero knowledge in what acutally drives a large company to make a product, you expect what you want and think you are the majority and are too tunnel visioned to know that you are not. No company is going to risk what you are asking, the fact that you don't realize that shows you to be the troll here, the same ranting lunacy from you each time, despite real facts. You are too damn funny bobbo, you must have the flattest forehead in the country from running into the brick wall so much, heh heh.

I reckon Ron's had a think about things and realised he better shut up before he makes a fool of himself like D8Bob has

Bill linn, I recon that the tracks were just scrabbing through lack of traction rather than the sprockets jumping inside the tracks...........I can't believe I have got sucked into this argument again, BAH!

Whats that little dozer in the middle JR Hayes picture Bob, could it just be a Hi-Drive? LOL

bob
I went to JRs site it didn't say we won't own a hi-d. Must be some more of your fantasies. I think your IQ and your shoe size are the same. And you constantly prove it. I don't know why I or anyone else even answer your hairbrained thoughts.
sonnyg

need new Cat and D8Bob seem to be related. Seems as though the whole bloody internet is caving in under the weight of the High Track versus Low track debate. Cat do not care, why would anyone else.

http://www.deere.com/en_US/cfd/construction/deere_const/crawlers/1050c_general.html?sidenavstate=11

Thanks to JD. The Hicraps maybe on the way out.
Last time I was at the Cat dealer. There where lots of new small ovals. And very few new hicraps.
There where lots of trade in hicraps though. So maybe the fasination with those goofy things is wearing down. Yeah just like kids now like the old muscle cars of the 60's and 70's. Maybe the new batch of operators will want the good ovals back. If CAT had to depend on their existance nowadays on the crawler tractor. Like they did years ago. They would be nonexistant. It sure isn't the sales hicraps that keep them going.
Yeah I notice Catsilver and JoeG. The top paid CAT internet clean up guys. Are here in force.
Hey can you read this. Keep the hicraps comming off the assembly lines. But if a customer asks for a D8K or D9H then offer it. Its just so simple. Its called CATER to the CATERPILLAR customer. You can do it.

Reality isn't even in your vocabulary is it bob?? heh heh. You should get a job in politics, you write a lot and say nothing, just like a washington pro.

Keep up the CAT attack on me. Your the polititians. Reread what you and Penn have said on ACMOC and you will see who writes alot and says nothin. When you can't battle the logic of CATS idiot design. Then you have to attack the accuser. Me.
Your the one that is blinded by the CAT can do no wrong deal. Others have pointed out that the hicrap is not the greatest, you won't listen. All you have is the typical CAT sales hype. And on the contrary, it looks like what I wrote is very interesting. Its what the old CREW Catsilver, Bluey, JoeG. The three omegoes. Have to say thats old and boring. I can pick up a CAT sales brochure and get the same sales pitch. LOL
Hey Friz, CAT cares. Thats why they got their 3 top guys on me. LOL The 3 stooges.

We've heard all this before Bob, when people see thru your B-S and say so you make the attack personal with accusations of some sort of Factory attack.I'm sure that anyone who has read half your posts can make up their own minds about who write a lot and say nothing without your help.

Not a word of it is crap. Your the one that has to MAKE it look bad. See how you keep doing it.
Caterpillar needs to cater to the customer. Some places need and want the D8K and D9H. Some outfits do not want the hicrap (hightrack) junk.
Those outfits are forced to move to a different manufacture, to get the dozer they need and want. So how come you keep up the attack against this?
Lets help CAT make the best crawler tractors they ever made, again. For a CAT salesman you are pretty stupid. It's like you want those customers to move to the other manufactures.

Back to the insults eh Bob,no I'm not stupid, customers buy what they want and when the D8K was being produced side by side with the D8L no one bought the K. I am not attacking the customer's right to a choice,but supporting a manufacturers duty to its shareholders to continue making a profit by selling something which the customer's want and need to do the job at a lower cost per unit produced. Customers have not moved to other manufacturers, many would have moved to Komatsu had the D8K and D9H continued in production because Komatsu were one step ahead in weight and horsepower all the time. The D8H and D9G were more relaible tractors than the D8K and D9H and although both were the best available in their day they can't match the current machines for reliabilty, overall life and efficiency. So keep your insults to yourself, you only have yourself to blame if someone responds in the same manner as you do.

Well said Catsilver.

Incorrect again Catsivler. Komatsu is still ahead in HP and weight. So again you spin off some more salesman ship. Its not that no one would buy the D8K's when the D8L came out. Its that the D8K was discontinued. And no one had a choice anymore. Read your cat literature. It tells how CAT phased out the D8K. Is everything to do with ease of manufacture, and image, and forcing something on people. It is not the fantastic design you or CAT says it is. Read the John Deer literature, and look at the Komatsu's. And LOOK at your own CAT products. The D3 to D5 is available in the oval track. So even cat knows its the best way to go.
The dealer here has taken on a huge shipment of D4 and D5 oval's. Its the best selling tractor they have. And you know it. Its gona be so funny when John Deer takes away the D8 class dozer sales. I love it.

Heard it all before Bob during the last 50 years, starting with the For'County' stealing the D4 market back in the mid 50's, the Vickers tractor to beat the 13A,the 'Terramatic' drive Case loaders of the early 60's, the JCB hydrostatic loaders,the HD41 and the TD24, where are they all now?
You just don't get it do you? If people didn't want the Hi-Drive they wouldn't buy it, and if it hadn't proved to be longer lasting and more reliable the competitors would have overtaken, it hasn't happened. Don't tell me it will, after 25years, the Hi-drive concept has oulived the total production time of the D8H and D8K together.

That's Ford 'County' crawler.

I have a couple of questions. Does Cat have patent coverage giving them exclusive rights to the high drive track system as it is executed on their products? In other words, are competitors free to offer similar high drive track systems on their products if they choose to do so, or would they be blocked by Cat’s intellectual property rights?

Catsilver, you mentioned several Cat competitors who threatened to pull ahead of Cat over the years, but failed to do so. Suppose Cat had never come out with the high drive concept, but instead, continued development with the oval tracks, combined with the best possible technological developments on all aspects of their tractors. If that had been the case, do you believe that Komatsu, John Deere, Case, Fiat-Allis, and others would have overtaken the lead of Cat on comparable products?

I believe Komatsu could have taken over with the large dozers, in fact it is almost certain had Cat continued with the conventional design,all that could have held them back is the lack of a good dealership infrastructure. I believe that Cat held back for over 10 years while they developed the hi-drive and kept the D8 and D9 in the market with little update knowing that major change was required to keep ahead of the competition. Planetary final drives mounted independantly of the track frame were essential, putting them up in the air to take the weight of the machined off them even better to buld a lighter and cheaper final drive, easy access is an extra benefit, as is the hi-speed/low torque gearing to reduce gear loads. Some of the benfits could have been built in to a conventional but the Hi-drive and redesign made it all easier. I don't think the others would have pulled ahead too easily, they all suffer from less dealer back-up, less big tractor experience, both absolutely essential where Cat have dominated for so long. Cat do have patents on the Hi-Drive and I reckon there will be a rush of new machines from the competition when they run out.

Hey guys lets put this to rest Cats are the best even if its a low track or a high track.

High tracks have their place same as a low track.

Thanks
Tom

Komatsu has taken over. It has starting in the mining first. The D575 is the king. Cat has no dozer that can compete with it. The hightrack design should not be something that cat could patent anymore than they could patent the oval track design. Because it was Cletrac in 1920 that came out with it. It was copied by the guy mentioned in the posts above.
Cry all you want Catsilver about how the highcraps have lasted so long. Well the ovals have been there longer and are going just as strong if not stronger. If Komatsu would have gone hicrap first, that would have been their down fall. But since do no wrong Caterpillar went there first. It became all the rage. Well all the rage according to some die hard CAT fans anyway. There are lots and lots of contractors I know that hate the design. Its hated.
And there are lots and lots of mines that are going strictly Komatsu dozers. It is just simply a better machine. The finals out last the smaller lighter weight CAT finals. They have to be on the lighter side just like all the other tin on the stupid things. So they won't tip over if they high side a pebel.
You fought with John C. on the acmoc board when he showed the cost comparisons of hicrap vs ovals. You always want to point out how dumb or stupid I am. I'm only what you say because I battle your idiodic CAT salesman mentality.
They are not the same manufacture they where when it was called ...Caterpillar tractor company...
You just can't see it can you?

Tom, I would gladly put it to rest but you'd better tell the guy who wrote the last post as well. He started off claiming he knew all about engineering, then he turned to insults and some sort of cynical corporate plan to keep him quiet and now sheer lunacy!!
D8Bob has made a wonderful job making himself look a total idiot.

Just go to the ACMOC website and you will see that it is Catsilver and his coherts that are the real fools. They all seem to stick together with this antiD8Bob agenda. With their strange Cat religious sect, they have taken a vow, that CAT can do no wrong. So they have to attack D8Bob every way they can think of. Calling him and idiot and a host of other names. Just like little children, which they could be. LOL
Catsilver you should look at that post that Wabcoman did. And mentioned how the hicrap couldn't not perform the job. But I guess to you if anyone bad mouths the hicrap then they are an idiot. Did you learn that at CAT internet crisis school? Tom it will go on forever. Cause anytime I mention something bad about a hicrap. One of the CAT internet protectors will be here to, say its a lie. There was a show about such activities on TV awhile back. Funny isn't it?

Catsilver you are the biggest BSer I ever saw
I think you really do have multiple personalitys.
so do you realy warship those hitrac dozers?
I just hope I dont have to keep reading the garbage you put here. why dont you disapeer into cyberspace and never come back