- Home/
- Comparison/
- Felling-and-Bunching Machine/
- Tigercat 860C vs. Caterpillar 552
Tigercat 860C vs. Caterpillar 552
2 reasons to buy Tigercat 860C:
Operation
| Generator current strength | 110 amperes and 95 amperes | 14 % more or 15 amperes |
| Operational weight without attachment | 27330 kg and 35680 kg | 23 % less or 8350 kg |
6 reasons to buy Caterpillar 552:
Sizes
| Clearance | 889 mm and 710 mm | 20 % more or 179 mm |
Operation
| Hydraulic system fluid volume | 370 l. and 190 l. | 49 % more or 180 l. |
| Fuel Capacity | 1181 l. and 970 l. | 18 % more or 211 l. |
Motor
| Full power | 227.4 kW and 223.7 kW | 2 % more or 3.7 kW |
| Power measured at | 2100 rev / min and 1800 rev / min | 14 % more or 300 rev |
Carrier
| Traction force | 47174 kg and 27215.5 kg | 42 % more or 19958.5 kg |
Neutral reasons:
Sizes
| Overall width | 3275 mm and 3327 mm |
| Height to cab upper part | 3300 mm and 3962 mm |
| Dimensional length | 5380 mm and 9423 mm |
Operation
| Operating voltage | 24 V and 24 V |
Motor
| Model | QSL9 and C9 ACERT |
| Manufacturer | Cummins and Caterpillar |
Carrier
| Caterpillar track pitch | 200 mm and 215.9 mm |
| Shoe dimensions | 610 mm and 711 mm |
Booms
| Pin lifting at maximum radius | 6040 kg and 9400 kg |
Images
Sizes
| 1. Dimensional length | 5380 mm | 1. Dimensional length | 9423 mm |
| 2. Overall width | 3275 mm | 2. Overall width | 3327 mm |
| 3. Height to cab upper part | 3300 mm | 3. Height to cab upper part | 3962 mm |
| 5. Clearance | 710 mm | 5. Clearance | 889 mm |
Carrier
| 7. Shoe dimensions | 610 mm | 7. Shoe dimensions | 711 mm |