excavator conversions

[timberjake]

I am looking into buying either a used timbco 415 with Rolly II head(7000 hours) or new link belt spin ace with kesla 25(or other equivalent log max keto etc.) harvester head.  Has anyone had experience with these setups and did you make any money?  I am in 80% hardwood thinnings with 80% pulp sized trees.  20% Aspen or softwood clearcut with most stems 12-24".

[Bobus2003]

I have a Link Belt 1600 with a Kesla 410SH Harvester Head (Stroke Style) and i really like it.. Got it from the Bank Repo so i don't have alot of money into the whole unit.. Works very well in Ponderosa Pine

[bushmechanic]

Conversions don't really stand up to repeated forestry use,they are not designed to use harvesting heads.You will get it to work ok but it won't last as long as proper tree harvesters.First of all the oil cooling systems are not good enough to disperse the heat generated by a harvesting head.Then there is the problem of oil filteration,the excavator is not designed for the repeated failure of cylinder seals and oil contamination is almost garenteed.There is also the electrical for the head,if it is not installed properly you are going to have a big fire on your hands!I know this from experience because over the years I have seen all of these problems.A 160 John Deere with a Logmax head and the spools in the hydraulic valve sticking from excessive heat.The hydraulic oil cooler plugged with debris.A 320 Cat with a head power cable chaffed and then it caught fire-total loss-burnt completely.Anyway that's my two cents worth.

[amberwood]

Timberjake. I have just been through this problem and have a few points to throw into the mix.

A purpose built Harvester base is always going to work better and for longer. Dedicated pumps to run the head, along with oversized oil coolers will make a huge difference. The tank in our machine holds 350L of oil, and has twin pre filters. There is even a suction pump to refill the tank after a hose blow out. You will need it. A major blow out will empty the tank in under a minute. They typically have more power available and are not running at 110% to make enough flow to get the head productive. Guarding for the cab(you) and machine protection is a big factor. Clearance, high wide track gear? Can you get over those stumps without bellying out? Boom/stick sets, the harvester will have the correct geometry and ram placement to throw a tree around. An excavator is designed for digging holes and loading trucks. The downside. Mucho expensive to buy, and maintain. Alot of dedicated parts are used, whereas a converted excavator will have alot of your parts avail off the shelf from the local dealer.

Essentially it comes down to the amount and type of use you expect from the machine, the budget you have, and what good machines are available on the 2/h market.

If you are going into this to make money then make sure you have a huge cash buffer up your sleeve. It only takes one major part to go out to lunch and you are parked up and out of production.

DTR

[timberjake]

Amberwood,

I've been logging about 4 years and have had a small excavator with a stroke head(additional oil cooler was added) and had good results.  I now have a timberjack 990 and often dream of it engulfed in flames.  What I am specifically wondering about with the conversion is it's dependability with a roller type head.  Peak performance/production isn't as important as uptime to me.  I just don't want to buy a new system and have the same problems I have with my current used machine.

[Jamie_C]

Purpose built is definitely the way to go if you really want a machine to last and make the head perform. Purpose built machines have totally different boom geometries, double or triple the oil cooling capacity, larger hydraulic pumps ( the Tigercat 845 i run has 3), better filtration, better guarding, etc, etc, etc.

That being said, around here Timbco's have a terrible reputation of being a really cranky machine. They have a tendancy to run really hot and will constantly "cook" the o-rings and seals and will have numerous hydraulic leaks that are virtually impossible to get dried up. They will really make a head work well. There is a small shop in NB ( the Levesque Brothers of Target processing heads fame) that seem to be able to work miracles on Timbco's and make them hum like nobody else can and solve the heating problems too.

I only know of one Rolly II head that was used around here, the fella that had it usually followed a feller buncher with it as they hated cutting off the stump with it. The head always seemed to work well too.

[amberwood]

timberjake. Alot of operators over here run excavators with roller/processor heads fitted. It really is ALOT cheaper than a purpose built unit, but there are still many that go up in smoke. The problem you mention, apart from those already listed, would be having to rob hydraulic power from another part of the machine to run the head. Ours runs 4 separate pumps off a drop box. Two pumps for the machine, plus one dedicated for the head and fourth for pilot functions. LOTS of hoses.
I think new is key. A new excavator conversion should work alot better until stuff starts wearing out and tempertures rise etc. Then you have problems.

DTR

[timberjake]

Well,

I've decided to go with the conversion.  Although it has some limitaions, I found some guys running them locally with good results.  One guy has a link-belt with a keto 150 head on it with 25000 hours. 

thanks for the input

[snowstorm]

Well,

I've decided to go with the conversion.  Although it has some limitaions, I found some guys running them locally with good results.  One guy has a link-belt with a keto 150 head on it with 25000 hours. 

thanks for the input      i have a 150 keto on a valmet .......it works well......when everything is right in sp fir its fast

[barbender]

Seems like the link belts get converted fairly often, do they build their machines to take woods use a little better? I think you'll do fine, should be a versatile machine.

[deutz4]

Our first machine was a converted Samsung. We not only had to deal with the lack of hyd. flow but the aftermarket forestryguard package was miserable to deal with. It eventually burned on us and I blame the guards for limiting our access. We currently own a timbco & a fabtek and they both handle normal workloads very well. Granted, last week was hot & humid and we have had AC & oil cooler problems but so what. That's life in the woods.

[Bobus2003]

Seems like the link belts get converted fairly often, do they build their machines to take woods use a little better? I think you'll do fine, should be a versatile machine.

Theres quite a few Link belts here that been converted to logging use.. Most are running Denharco Boom Delimbers, I really like my Link Belt, seems too hold up realy well..