- Home/
- Comparison/
- Felling-and-Bunching Machine/
- Tigercat 822C vs. Tigercat 870C
Tigercat 822C vs. Tigercat 870C
3 reasons to buy Tigercat 822C:
Sizes
| Clearance | 760 mm and 710 mm | 7 % more or 50 mm |
Operation
| Operational weight without attachment | 24494 kg and 30331.7 kg | 19 % less or 5837.7 kg |
Booms
| Minimum cutting radius | 3250 mm and 4800 mm | 32 % less or 1550 mm |
5 reasons to buy Tigercat 870C:
Operation
| Fuel Capacity | 970 l. and 490 l. | 49 % more or 480 l. |
| Hydraulic system fluid volume | 190 l. and 165 l. | 13 % more or 25 l. |
Carrier
| Rolling bearings number on either side | 9 and 8 | 11 % more or 1 |
| Traction force | 33112.2 kg and 25401.2 kg | 23 % more or 7711.0 kg |
Booms
| Maximum cutting radius | 8460 mm and 8380 mm | 1 % more or 80 mm |
Neutral reasons:
Sizes
| Dimensional length | 4445 mm and 5540 mm |
| Overall width | 3330 mm and 3300 mm |
| Height to cab upper part | 3330 mm and 3300 mm |
Operation
| Generator current strength | 110 amperes and 110 amperes |
| Operating voltage | 24 V and 24 V |
Motor
| Manufacturer | Cummins and Cummins |
| Model | QSL9 and QSL9 |
| Full power | 223.7 kW and 223.7 kW |
| Power measured at | 1800 rev / min and 1800 rev / min |
Carrier
| Caterpillar track pitch | 200 mm and 215 mm |
| Shoe dimensions | 610 mm and 610 mm |
Booms
| Pin lifting at maximum radius | 4025 kg and 6040 kg |
Images
Sizes
| 1. Dimensional length | 4445 mm | 1. Dimensional length | 5540 mm |
| 2. Overall width | 3330 mm | 2. Overall width | 3300 mm |
| 3. Height to cab upper part | 3330 mm | 3. Height to cab upper part | 3300 mm |
| 5. Clearance | 760 mm | 5. Clearance | 710 mm |
Carrier
| 7. Shoe dimensions | 610 mm | 7. Shoe dimensions | 610 mm |
Booms
| 9. Minimum cutting radius | 3250 mm | 9. Minimum cutting radius | 4800 mm |
| 10. Maximum cutting radius | 8380 mm | 10. Maximum cutting radius | 8460 mm |