• 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!

Cost comparison PDF.

Deas Plant

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2006
Messages
1,533
Location
Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
Hi, Folks.
In my poking around in dim to almost black corners of the web today, I happened upon this little gem. It is a cost comparison between ADT's and pull pans and no prizes for guessing who the winner is, although I did notice that they didn't factor in any compaction costs for the pull pans, claiming that pull pans need little or no compaction equipment. (See competetive equipment methods for moving dirt, page 4. I don't even want to think about trying for 100% Level One compaction with just pull pans.) nor a grader or dozer to keep their fill in shape and no watercart for either operation.

Having said that, they didn't factor the cost of a grader for the haul roads into either operation either, although a Cat 12H was mentioned. If a grader was available for haul roads for each operation, the pull pan grader could conceivably also keep the pull pan fill in shape for it has been my experience that no form of scraper operates well for long without some form of dump area maintenance.

http://www.pullpans.com/Cost.pdf
 

JDOFMEMI

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2007
Messages
3,074
Location
SoCal
Thats a nice little piece of sales work for a pull pan dealer. I would like to know where they get their fuel consumption info. I run a lot of the types of equipment they mention, and my fuel use is far from what they call out. This skews the cost in the pans favor.
For example, D-6R at 16 gallon per hr???? Mine burns 6 to 8 depending on application
Volvo A-35C at 11 gal per hr???? mine average 4.5 to 5 ( I have 11 of them)

I have no idea the fuel burn of the tractors, so I will not comment on it.

As to the pans needing no additional compaction, what a joke. A Cat 657 that weighs in at around 75 ton empty still needs support equipment for compaction, so I know a farm tractor weighing about 15 or 20 tons with a bigger footprint will need even more compaction effort.
When you add that compaction effort in, and use the right fuel rates, the advantage for the pans gets smaller. On paper, they are cheaper, but in the real world, they are limited to parts of the country with nice, uniform material that loads easily.
I don't know yet where that is, but I am pretty sure it does not lie West of the Great Plains.
Many dealers have touted the advantages of pans in CA, only to be sent packing when their machines could only get 1/2 loads, due to the type of material. if it is too dry, they wont load, if it is too sandy they wont load, if it is too wet, they wont load, if it is too loose, it won't load, or if it is too hard they wont load. Dont even mention a rock.

I'll get off of my rant now.
 
Top