d vs c

[theoshin]

well, i wrote a very long review but the website did not post it! i spend 10 hours a day on computers so i am pretty confident it was not me. i will give a very shortened version

after a few hours with a friends d vs my c.

1) ride - on bumpy surfaces no comparison. on woods roads - 6-8mph with the c bouncing all over - 15mph with the d and pretty darn comfortable. mowing in a bumpy field was not bad at all vs causing me neckache with the c. much more improved than i thought possible with a 1500 load capacity machine. very impressed
2) traction - better - indp susp, larger lug vs turf tires, and new limited slips - tried to get stuck where i got stuck with my c and the d lugged itself out. not as good as my previous tractor but better. also better digging - maybe a lot was the tires but i think the ind susp and improved diffs a lot to do with it.
i have a really steep short road which it crawled right up with no wheel slippage. the c would slip some and had a harder time of it. i never had any traction issues on my driveways removing snow with the c but off road and for digging the d seems definately better.
3) power - about the same. better rpm management when mowing with a brushcat - does not allow the maching to drop rpms as much.
4) cruise control - really does work
5) maintenance - much easier access - simplified design with spine frame
6) cab - liked the c better - less left foot room on the d. seems more narrow? ergonomics improved but not by much. bobcat should have allowed for aux control by the lever on the joystick - for l/r with the broom and snowblower shoot. still have to remove hand to push on a button. not sure why they do this when their skid steers do it?
7) noise - others may disagree but at high rpm i thought the d was definately louder. the d just seemed louder in the cab at higher rpms - i suspect due to the new location of the engine immediately under the pass seat. this and the loss of the suspension seat are the only two downgrades for me when compared to the c.
8) reliability - to be seen. the c is the 3rd revision.

overall the d is a more comfortable machine with better traction and easier access for maintenance. for me, the better ride would be the big advantage (bad neck). it seems well built but reliablity is proven, not bragged and to be seen. i did not have any real problems with the c. if only the d was not so expensive! also that 3pt looms in the near future but not sure i would want to be looking backwards - why i like the tc over a tractor to begin with. life is full of decisions.

 

[radman1]

Nice comparison of each series. Would have liked to read the long version.

I didn't think the price of the D was much higher compared to the C.

I don't understand the rational or benifit of the power management system of the D. Is it like the anti-stall ability of the newer JD and kubota CUT's?

Why is the loss of the suspension seat a downgrade for the D, if the ride is so much better? Did you have a chance to try the D with a load in the bucket. When it is loaded, does it rest on the front suspension stops and make the ride rougher?

The 3 pt D should not be a issue for a new purchase. If looking back is a problem, then buy whatever attachment is needed for the front. PTO rear attachments are just much cheaper, many more companies and choices, and many rear attachments don't require looking back all that often unless near obstacles.

Less foot room on the D. I thought the changes in the cab between the two versions were minimal and mainly some changes in the position of levers/buttons?

Is there a difference is stopping the different versions? Bobcat brags about the hydrostatic braking on the D.

 

[theoshin]

Nice comparison of each series. Would have liked to read the long version.

I didn't think the price of the D was much higher compared to the C.

- no - both are pretty expensive - the d is a few thousand more

I don't understand the rational or benifit of the power management system of the D. Is it like the anti-stall ability of the newer JD and kubota CUT's?

not enough experience - i did notice when hitting heavy grass the motor bogged down much less - it must slow the machine quicker and allow for power to divert to the aux hydr faster - slows machine but then it goes back to your cruise after the thick part is mowed.

Why is the loss of the suspension seat a downgrade for the D, if the ride is so much better?

- i liked the fit of the susp seat better - softer, less upright, and maybe longer bottom - just liked the seat better on the c. the seat on the d is just like the passenger seat on the c. overall the ride is still much better even without the susp seat.

Did you have a chance to try the D with a load in the bucket. When it is loaded, does it rest on the front suspension stops and make the ride rougher?

put a bucket full of sand - no problem. drove quite a bit with the brushcat off the ground a few feet - that is 1700lbs - the ride was still very good - just a little light in the back but still much better than the c empty. i thought it would sag more but it did just fine.

The 3 pt D should not be a issue for a new purchase. If looking back is a problem, then buy whatever attachment is needed for the front. PTO rear attachments are just much cheaper, many more companies and choices, and many rear attachments don't require looking back all that often unless near obstacles.

- i completely understand the pto issues/advantages - just don't want to loose the size of the dump - i put a bobcat 75 gallon sprayer in there - i doubt it will fit in the smaller box with the pto model. 30hp pto via hydraulics is also questionable in real world useability. it has to add thousands to the cost of a new machine. if they could keep the bed size close then i would look very hard at that version as my father has multiple 3pt attachments. i have never used the dump other than to get to what is below the bed/maintenance. i posted on my complaints about the diff in cost between 3pt and front/skid attach previously - more profit in the skid version. however, i have gotten addicted to switching attachments in 2 minutes too.

Less foot room on the D. I thought the changes in the cab between the two versions were minimal and mainly some changes in the position of levers/buttons?

- i may be wrong but going from one to the other and back again that was my sense. maybe it was the seat but my foot seemed to have less room - no issue for normal sized feet! size 15 boots are big.

Is there a difference is stopping the different versions? Bobcat brags about the hydrostatic braking on the D.

- i prefer the stopping on the c - maybe it is because i am not used to it but the d stopped very quickly when i let off the pedal with rpms high using the broom. i touched the brake to get out of cruise with the brushcat and almost went through the windshield - don't do that! the c stops perfectly for me in work mode going forward and back around doors/house/barn - the d just stopped faster/more abruptly. again, maybe i could get used to it but with the c i would floor it in reverse and let off the pedal and it would come to a very smooth stop prior to running into the house. on the other hand the boom cycles faster at lower rpms on the d and in work mode it is much smoother inching forward at any rpm - with the c if you don't turn the rpm down it is hard to inch forward near buildings and for attachment hook up. that part is better on the d.

my 2/3 cents

 

[radman1]

I am afraid you will be right on the smaller dump box for the 3 pt version. The new version will have a composite box and it will probably be smaller. However, I would expect the width to be about the same. I was told the current box weighs about 700 lbs. The new composite box will be lighter. My guess it will also have less weight capacity. Even a nondumping box is better than nothing. I am like you, I dont think I would use the dump capability very much but the tilt ability of the box is needed for maintenance issues.

I would agree the 30 hp pto maybe a little on the anemic side but that is limited by flow rate, psi and the inefficiency of a hydraulic motor. The prototype toolcat had about 23 pto hp. The future plan is to have the pto directly belt driven from the motor - much more pto power. However, the change in the emission requirements in a few years will require new engines and thus require a redesign of any system they might develop now. ( It was suggested to me that the newer versions will have engines in the toolcat that will have more gross hp just to handle the emission requirements but the net hp may be similar.) Also cost will keep increasing as it becomes more complex. A lot of mid size CUT's produce around 30 pto hp and that amount of power will probably be sufficient for most tasks. I would expect the front mower/brushcutters used now for the toolcat and skidsteers are probably less than or around 30 pto hp.

 

[dsb5610]

Theoshin,

Did you look over the radiator/oil cooler on the 'D' after mowing with the Brushcat? Just wondering if it collected much debris and how the cleaning compares.

Also, did this 'D' have the stock air intake and how did that compare to the 'C'.

Thanks,
dsb

 

[theoshin]

Theoshin,

Did you look over the radiator/oil cooler on the 'D' after mowing with the Brushcat? Just wondering if it collected much debris and how the cleaning compares.

Also, did this 'D' have the stock air intake and how did that compare to the 'C'.

Thanks,
dsb

looks like the radiator is one part - not the 2 part like on the c that collected grass/debris between the radiators. the radiator does not look bigger length by width but may be larger depth? i am pretty sure the fan is moving more air - you can feel it anytime you stand around the back of the machine.

ran for 2 hours is 85 degree weather with a 60 inch brushcat and it stayed in the lower half of the green zone with the air con on. the radiator still collects debris but it looks like it would be easier to clean.

did not look at the air intake.