BACKHOE LOADERS

Product Comparison TRAINING

KUE Marketing - May 2005

 KOMATSU vs CAT

Side-by-side feature comparison has been done with WB97R-5 and 432D
in KUE in April 2005

KUE Marketing - May 2005

Range

KOMATSU WB97R-5 CATERPILLAR 432D

STD CONFIGURATION STD CONFIGURATION

• Power shift T/M, twist grip • Power shift T/M, twist grip
• PPC Servo-controls • PPC Servo-controls
• Net power: 99,2 HP Turbo • Net power: 90 HP Turbo
• Std operating weight: 7.500 kg • Std operating weight: 7.800 kg

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 3 of 39

Competitive scenario
8.500 KOMATSU vs CAT
Operating Weight [kg]

WB97S-2

8.000

432D 442D
428D 438D

WB91R-2
WB97R-5

7.500
WB93R-5

7.000
70,0 80,0 90,0 100,0 110,0
Net Power [HP]
KOMATSU CATERPILLAR

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 4 of 39

Operator environment - Cab

• Modern design and new styling • Old style cab

• All around excellent visibility • All flat glasses
thanks to the round wide glass • Partially openable side windows
surfaces • Small rear window
• Wide & fully openable side windows • Noise level: LpA 82dB; LwA 105dB
• Protruding and strong roof
• One piece large rear window
• Noise level: LpA 80dB; LwA 104 dB
KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 5 of 39
Operator environment - Cab interior

• Automotive style interior • Tiltable steering column and sun

• Ergonomic lay-out of the front and visor only as option
side dashboards
• Standard tiltable steering column
and sun visor

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 6 of 39

Operator environment – Front visibility

• Excellent visibility to the front • Exhaust gas pipe reduces

working area thanks to the sloping visibility to the front working area
engine bonnet and exhaust gas
pipe at cab side

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 7 of 39

Operator environment – Upper front visibility

• Upper window gives a perfect • No upper window available

visibility in high position for • Loader is not completely visible
loading operations
• Loader is completely visible

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 8 of 39

Operator environment - Seat Sensor

Safe position
sensor

N/A

• The “Safe Position” seat sensor • Not available

warns with an acoustic alarm the
operator when the seat is out of
the Loader position and the
Fwd/Rev shifter is activated
• This application complies with the
European Standard (EN 474-3)

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 9 of 39

Loader - Structure

• Parallel linkage • Parallel linkage

• Divergent structure • Divergent structure
• Design with 14 pins: less greasing • Design with 24 pins: longer greasing
time time and higher service cost
• Self-levelling when lifting and • Self-levelling when lifting and
lowering (max angle 11°), ideal lowering (max angle 15°)
with forks
KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 10 of 39
Loader - Performance

• Lifting capacity at max height: • Lifting capacity at max height:

3.900 kg 3.388 kg
• Bucket breakout force: 6.500 kg • Bucket breakout force: 5.120 kg
(std bucket) (std bucket)

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 11 of 39

Loader - Controls

• PPC joystick is standard for the • PPC joystick is standard only for
whole range 432D and 442D
• Speed-up function standard

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 12 of 39

Backhoe - Structure

6.015 mm

• New S-Shaped boom • S-Shaped boom

• Comparable working diagram • Comparable working diagram

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 13 of 39

Backhoe - Performances

• Arm breakout force: 4.000 kg • Arm breakout force: 3.895 kg

• Bucket breakout force: 6.100 kg • Bucket breakout force: 6.665 kg
• Digging depth [SAE] • Digging depth [SAE]
• standard: 4.840 mm • standard: 4.850 mm
• with extended telesc.: 6.080 mm • with extended telesc.: 5.865 mm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 14 of 39

Performances - Productivity TEST
200 180,6
180
155,8
160
140
WB93R-5
m3 / hrs

120 101,3 100,1

100 432D
80
60
40
20
0
Productivity LOADER Productivity B/H

Test conditions, according to KES (Komatsu Engineering Standard):

• LOADER: V-shape loading on a truck (2.850 mm height)
• BACKHOE: trench digging and dumping at 45° - 1.700 rpm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 15 of 39

Performances - Cycle time TEST
25 23,5
20,6
20
seconds

15
11,8 WB93R-5
9,8
10 432D

0
Loader Backhoe

Test conditions, according to KES:

• LOADER: V-shape loading on a truck (2.850 mm height)
• BACKHOE: trench digging and dumping at 45° - 1.700 rpm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 16 of 39

Performances - Single movement times
Single times - Loader - Max rpm
7,0 6,3
6,0
5,0 4,4 4,4
seconds 4,0
3,0 WB93R-5
3,0
1,9 1,9 432D
2,0 1,6 1,8

1,0
0,0
loader raising loader lowering bucket roll- bucket
back dumping

Single times - Backhoe - 1.700 rpm

5,0
4,5 4,2
3,9 3,7
4,0 3,6 3,6 3,6
3,3 3,2 3,2
3,5 3,0 WB93R-5
seconds

3,0 2,7 2,8 2,7

2,3 2,5 432D
2,5 2,0
2,0
1,5
1,0
0,5
0,0
boom boom arm digging arm bucket bucket swing C.W. swing
raising lowerinig dumping closing opening C.C.W.

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 17 of 39

Backhoe - Controls

• Standard PPC controls (including • Standard PPC controls (including

stabilisers)
• Independent tiltable columns with
continuous adjustment
• Standard wrist-rests
• Telescopic control: proportional
switch on the RH PPC joystick
stabilisers)
• Tiltable columns, not independent,
with only 3 operating positions
• Telescopic control: by pedal
(limits foot space)

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 18 of 39

Backhoe - Swing

• Electro-hydraulic boom lock • Electro-hydraulic boom lock

• 2 positions for swing lock (RH &
LH)
• All swing support is casting
• Only central post position for swing
lock, not suitable for European
market: it is not possible to lock the
BH in transport position
• Less casting components on the
backhoe

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 19 of 39

Backhoe - Hydraulic cushions

• Hydraulic cushion on: • Hydraulic cushion on:

• Swing (left and right) • Swing (left and right)
• Boom (lifting) • Boom (lifting)
• Arm (closing)

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 20 of 39

Backhoe - Hoses layout

• Good hoses routing over the boom • Hoses are not well grouped and
• Tidy layout exposed to damage
• Hoses are protected • Hoses routing allows rubbing
between hoses and arm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 21 of 39

Backhoe - Bucket

1 2

• 2 digging positions: • Only 1 digging position: no

1) close to bucket teeth: plinth customisation
digging (vertical digging) • 5 articulation points
2) far from bucket teeth: higher • 45mm bucket pins
force and bucket rotating angle
• 4 articulation points
• 45mm bucket pins
KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 22 of 39
Engine - Specifications

• Displacement: 4,5 L • Displacement: 4,0 L

• Aspiration: Turbo • Aspiration: Turbo
• Power: 99,2 HP (SAE) • Power: 90 HP (SAE)
• Muffler with insulation material • Muffler without insulation material
• Stage 2 • Stage 2

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 23 of 39

Engine - Fuel consumption TEST
18
16 15,2
14 13,4

12 10,4 10,4
L / hr

10 WB93R-5
8 432D
6
4
2
0
B/H Loader

Test conditions, according to KES:

• LOADER: V-shape loading on a truck (2.850 mm height)
• BACKHOE: trench digging and dumping at 45° - 1.700 rpm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 24 of 39

Engine – Air Intakes

• Air intakes (two) are from the side, • Air intake (only one) is from the
free by obstacles side, mostly covered by the loader
arm

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 25 of 39

Transmission

• Max speed: 40 km/h • Max speed: 29,4 km/h

• Auto Power Shift standard (twist • Power Shuttle standard
grip) • Automatic Power Shift available as
• Automatic and semiautomatic OPTION
shifting selectable • Kick down system only with automatic
• Kick down standard version

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 26 of 39

Front Axle
• Dynamic load: 8.660 kg
• Oscillation: 20° (total)
• Steering: 50°
• Double acting steering cylinder in
protected position behind front
axle
• Remote grease fitting
KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 27 of 39
picture shows opt c/weight
• Dynamic load: 3.167 kg
• Oscillation: 22° (total)
• Steering: 50°
• Double acting steering cylinder, in
front of the axle: exposed to
damages
Rear Axle

• Dynamic load: 7.750 kg • Dynamic load: 9.260 kg

• 100% electro-hydraulically
differential lock, controlled by a
switch on PPC joystick
• Wheels have 10 nuts for better
retention
• Mechanical differential lock,
controlled by a pedal, very closed
to the brake pedal
• Wheels have 8 nuts

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 28 of 39

Hydraulics - System

CLSS CLSS

• Komatsu CLSS (Closed Load • Closed center

Sensing System) closed center • Load sensing
• More power to the working • Similar to Komatsu system
equipment at any engine rpm
• Less fuel consumption

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 29 of 39

Hydraulics - Pump

• Variable displacement piston • Variable displacement piston

pump pump
• Flow: 165 l/min • Flow: 163 l/min
• Pressure: 250 bar • Pressure: 228 bar
• Hydraulic power: 92 Hp • Hydraulic power: 83 Hp

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 30 of 39

Hydraulics - Control valve

• One valve for Loader and Backhoe • 2 separate control valves

• LIFD (Load Independent Flow • LIFD not available
Divider) inside: the system forces
the oil to all circuits regardless the
different load
• Simultaneous and smoother
movements

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 31 of 39

Hydraulics - Working modes
Power/Economy
switch

N/A

Speed-Up switch

• Backhoe • Working modes not available

• Power: max power available
• Economy: finishing works and
fuel saving
• Loader
• Speed Up: increase speed of
15%

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 32 of 39

Serviceability - Engine bonnet

• One piece fully tiltable bonnet • Multi-pieces bonnet

• With only one operation, the • Top hood is divided in 2 parts plus
engine compartment is accessible 2 side panels
from left, right and top

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 33 of 39

Serviceability - Checks

• Easy accessibility to service • Accessibility to the service points

points from ground level is only from the top: operator
regardless loader arm position must go up the front tire: NOT a
safe operation!
• With loader arm at ground it’s not
possible to get the access to the
engine compartment

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 34 of 39

Serviceability - Toolbox & Battery

• Wide toolbox, separate from the • Toolbox is in the same area of

battery area battery
• Easy-access battery location, on
the side
• Lockable compartment

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 35 of 39

Serviceability – Fuel tank

• Low position • Low position

• Easy to refill, also with poly-tanks • Capacity: 128 liters
• Large step to access the cab
• Capacity: 150 liters

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 36 of 39

 Best Selling Features vs CAT 1/2
• Better visibility (front and upper)
• Strong, attractive, modern overall design
• Better styling, ergonomics and comfort of the cab
• LOADER, superior performances:
+15% lifting capacity
+27% breakout force
+36% self levelling
+16% productivity
+14% faster cycle time
• BACKHOE: +20% fast cycle time
• Power Shift:
• Auto shifting and kick-down are std features (opt for CAT)
• +36% higher travel speed
• Engine, better performances:
+10% power
KUE Marketing
-12% - Mayfuel
2005 consumption (with
Komatsu loader)
vs CAT page 37 of 39
 Best Selling Features vs CAT 2/2
• More ergonomic PPC servo-controls, with std armrests
• CLSS hydraulic system designed by Komatsu:
• +11% hydraulic power
• Working modes for loader and b/h (Power&Economy and
Speed-up)
• Simpler serviceability:
• less greasing points
• one-piece fully openable engine bonnet
• accessibility from ground level
• +17% fuel capacity
• Stronger front axle: +175% dynamic load

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 38 of 39

 Please consider this Training for use internal
only to KOMATSU Sales Network.

KUE Marketing - May 2005 Komatsu vs CAT page 39 of 39