# Loaders; fuel & Pushing



## DaySpring Services (Feb 1, 2005)

I'm in the process of trying to figure out where I'm going with my company for next season. I've been looking into getting a loader, i've had a few posts about it and bids. I want to know how big loaders with fuel? My bobcat will suck down a half tank within 2 hours if I'm using my blower. I'm leaning towards either a new or newer Deere 544 or Cat 928. What can I expect in fuel consumption? Also, how are these machines for pushing a full load? It's not rare for us to get 1-2 feet over night. I have a 8 foot pusher for my Bobcat and never use it, I always end up spinning my wheels after 100 feet even in 6 inches!


----------



## Mick76 (Aug 2, 2009)

My 248 cat definately sucks down more fuel then the 740... after 8 hours or so I'll need to refill the cat but the 740 has a 75 gallon tank.......If I fill up the cat and the loader after 8 hours of use the cat almost always take more fuel......also I push with the storm so theres never more then 2 inches ont he ground at any one time and the cat handles that with no problem... of course if we get some ice all bets are off....


----------



## Grn Mtn (Sep 21, 2004)

sorry not sure on the fuel consumption, but the loaders push anything don't worry about that. 

I would tell you to go with the CAT. A) they are located 20 minutes from you, B) we have fantastic customer service from them, C) did i mention they are located really close to you


----------



## buckwheat_la (Oct 11, 2009)

i have a older 910 cat that we use with a really deep 10ft pusher, and i well tell you this, it is the most fuel economic piece of equipment i have ever seen!!!, 110 liters of fuel well last 24-28hours, before a refill is needed.


----------



## framer1901 (Dec 18, 2005)

New last year Komatsu WA 200, normal nite = just under 2 gallon per hour; the other nite with 8-10 inches it was 3.3 gallon per hour.


----------



## snobgone (Feb 2, 2010)

Depends on how hard the machine is working too. Our 544s run for at least 8 hrs on a light push, but heavy wet snow sucks the fuel right out of them. Both the CAT and JD are great machines. Whoever mentioned above about dealer service hit it IMO, gotta be convenient to get parts and service.


----------



## bubba11 (Dec 28, 2009)

my l70D volvo burns 2.5 gallons per hour that was the average over about 100 hrs


----------



## Going Commercial (Oct 15, 2008)

Milton Cat in Batavia, not cheap but good support and parts when you need them. I can give you a name of the guy I would and have dealt with in the past out there. I am also considering a loader but more in the line of a 908 and a 12 ft pusher. Send me a private message if you want the info on Milton Cat.


----------



## DaySpring Services (Feb 1, 2005)

The cat dealer is about 45 mins away.There is a Deere dealer about 15 mins away, I dont know their reputation though.


----------



## Going Commercial (Oct 15, 2008)

Deere dealership is 5 Star Equpment, talked to them numerous times abour mini excavators. I do not know much about them other than I was told it has changed names quite a bit thru the years. Worth looking into because they are closer to you.


----------



## bobcatdoug (Feb 3, 2010)

i run a 544c for snow in northwest iowa just on a farm acreage (drifts can get mighty deep!) shes been a great machine 6000+ hours but usually jump in the bobcat A300 now as it will move much faster (both suck fuel)


----------



## snow game (Sep 28, 2008)

Your looking at a $100,000 plus machine and your biggest worry is fuel consumption?


----------



## SullivanSeptic (Nov 30, 2008)

snow game;999934 said:


> Your looking at a $100,000 plus machine and your biggest worry is fuel consumption?


I am glad somebody said it. If you rworried about fuel consumption, then you are buying too large of a machine. If you use the machine right, it should pay for its self and its fuel, 10 times over. I wont buy a machine or truck unless it can gross enough money in the first year to pay for its self.


----------



## DaySpring Services (Feb 1, 2005)

I'm not worried about fuel consumption, I'm just trying to find out all the details before I make a purchase. I research all my options and detail quite extensively before I make a purchase. I'm sure most look at the fuel efficiency when buying a new truck.


----------



## NICHOLS LANDSCA (Sep 15, 2007)

SullivanSeptic;999960 said:


> I am glad somebody said it. If you rworried about fuel consumption, then you are buying too large of a machine. If you use the machine right, it should pay for its self and its fuel, 10 times over. I wont buy a machine or truck unless it can gross enough money in the first year to pay for its self.


Exactly what I was thinking reading this. If you are worried about fuel consumption you can't afford the loader.JMO Something else to think about is how will you move it. You will most likely have to hire someone to move it for you.


----------



## DaySpring Services (Feb 1, 2005)

Moving the machine is not an issue. Anywhere it it will be used will be within 15 mins. of where it will be stored so I can just drive it there. If it needs to go long distance (which it wont any time soon) I will need to hire someone.


----------



## DGODGR (Nov 30, 2008)

Fuel consumption, on any machine, is worth knowing so that you can accurately estimate your overhead. You are wise to research it. Shame on those trying to berate a guy for doing his homework. I have used (and fueled) both 928s and 544s. They get about the same fuel consumption rate. The harder it works the more fuel it will consume. Heavy wet snow will be harder to move than light fluffy snow (as I'm sure you know). I will usually dump about 25 to 28 gallons for an 8 hour shift. 
Another thing to consider is tire chains. I know that you have had issues with chains on pavement but loaders can have more traction issues than a skid steer. It's not so bad if you can use momentum and are not on slopes. You should'nt be spinning tries on the loader like you do when turning the skid steer anyway. I have also found that my 544J works better on slick ground than the Komatsu (WA200) that I was using last year. I think that the hydrostatic transmission (on the Komatsu) made it more difficult to get traction. I run Pewag 10MM square links (at about $1K/pair) so it will be a significant expenditure it you decide to get some. You can get away with chains on only the front or back tires instead of all four.


----------



## framer1901 (Dec 18, 2005)

Fuel consumption not an issue? Jees.

Spend 50 to 120+k, new or used. New loader motors are more effecient and burn less than the older ones - my 200 burns almost half as much as a 8000 hour 444 we rented two years ago. For me at least, when factoring that used payment at 8-10% interest plus 100 per month more in fuel verses the new payment at 1.9% not to mention first few years of up keep - it did matter.

DGODGR - what tires are on your 200? We switched out the stock radials for bias and it was a nite and day difference, very very few issues with a 16' danials.


----------



## bubba11 (Dec 28, 2009)

DGODGR - what tires are on your 200? We switched out the stock radials for bias and it was a nite and day difference, very very few issues with a 16' danials.[/QUOTE]

I had the same results with bias and radial tires. bias seem to be much better in the snow


----------



## DGODGR (Nov 30, 2008)

framer1901;1001433 said:


> Fuel consumption not an issue? Jees.
> 
> Spend 50 to 120+k, new or used. New loader motors are more effecient and burn less than the older ones - my 200 burns almost half as much as a 8000 hour 444 we rented two years ago. For me at least, when factoring that used payment at 8-10% interest plus 100 per month more in fuel verses the new payment at 1.9% not to mention first few years of up keep - it did matter.
> 
> DGODGR - what tires are on your 200? We switched out the stock radials for bias and it was a nite and day difference, very very few issues with a 16' danials.


I'm not 100% sure what they were (rental & I don't have it anymore), but I'd bet a steak diner that they were radials. The Deere I now own has 20.5R x 25s (radials) and it gets better traction than the Komatsu. I have heard others, on this site say that they do better (in the snow) with the bias ply tires. I know that you will save money on them but I will stick to the radials.


----------

