KL120/KL130 vs Bobcat CT122/CT230 FEL lift capacity

[johnsopa]

Some of you may have seen that I am considering a new CK20 HST vs a 100 hour 2008 Bobcat CT230 (basically a CK30 HST). (http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...1-help-new-ck20-hydrostatic-transmission.html)

I went to compare the FEL lifting capacities and need some help reconciling the differences I see.

From Kioti's website and brochure:

CK20 HST loader (KL120)
1,076 lbs lift capacity to full height at pivot pins

CK30 HST loader (KL130)
1,155 lbs lift capacity to full height at pivot pins

From Bobcat's brochure:

CT122 loader
830 lbs loader lift capacity @ 500 mm in front of bucket pin (w/ rear ballast)
1,140 lbs loader lift capacity @ bucket pivot (w/ rear ballast)

CT230 loader
1,225 loader lift capacity @ 500 mm in front of bucket pin (w/ rear ballast)
1,605 lbs loader lift capacity @ bucket pivot (w/ rear ballast)

It's obvious to me that the CK20 FEL compares pretty well to the CK30 but I'm trying to figure out how to compare against the Bobcat CT230 that I'm considering.

Which of these is an apples-to-apples comparison? I'm guessing that Bobcat maybe uses a different manufacturer for its FELs instead of Kioti.

Thanks.

 

[Dmace]

You are correct, the Bobcat uses a loader made by Rhino which is well known for quality loaders and backhoes.

 

[VictorW]

From what members have posted, the Bobcat fel is a little stronger than the Kioti. Your numbers also show that and with a much bigger difference in the CT230. Rhino, in USA, does make nice equipment and has been making loaders and backhoes for years. Here's their site: RHINO | Born to Lead | Agricultural, Industrial, and Commercial Equipment

 

[kiotiken]

Sorry, it's not going to be easy to compare.

1st, I can't find the lift cap at pp (you say 1605lbs)
- Front-End Loader Specifications - Bobcat Company

FYI, here's the KL130. KIOTI - run ahead of the pack!

Here's why it hard. These numbers are to full height. Full height is 85.4 inches at pp for the CT230 (7tl FEL) and 92.5 inches for the CK30 (KL130 FEL). The problem is that lift capacity drops off quickly the higher you lift the FEL. To compare apples to apples, you have to figure out the capacity of each at a given height either at pp or 500mm in front of them, and I don't think you're going to find that info.

Here's some more number to confuse you a little more. IMHO, breakout force is more useful when looking at the FEL, after all, how many times to you want to lift more than 1000lbs over your head? The 7TL is 1644, 500mm in front of pp and the KL130 is 2046lbs at pp. What those two numbers mean to each other, I have no clue.

To me, I like the extra height of the KL130. Undoubtedly, it reduces lift capacity, just from the bucket being that much further from the tractor and the geometry, but when you're trying to load a truck/trailer with something hanging from a chain, or using pallet forks to put something on a shelf etc, you'll appreciate that more than the small hit you're taking in lift capacity. On the other hand, if you'll never do anything than move dirt, the opposite is true.

I've been following your other thread as well. No tractor will give you the best of all worlds. From the deals you're looking at, the CT230 is the best choice, regardless of lift capacity for weight or height.

 

[dfkrug]

These numbers are to full height. Full height is 85.4 inches at pp for the CT230 (7tl FEL) and 92.5 inches for the CK30 (KL130 FEL). The problem is that lift capacity drops off quickly the higher you lift the FEL. To compare apples to apples, you have to figure out the capacity of each at a given height either at pp or 500mm in front of them, and I don't think you're going to find that info.

Great post, KK. The lift height is important, and both the 7TL and the
Kl130 go quite a bit higher than the FEL on the CK20/CT22.

When I had both tractors, I compared how they were built, side-by-side:
http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/bobcat-tractors/155379-bobcat-ct230-kioti-ck30-side.html

It is amazing how much wider the Rhino unit is, too, which required a
new approach to running lights.

 

[IslandTractor]

The difference between 1100lbs lift and 1600lbs lift is something that you will notice in the real world. The CK30 is a great tractor but the KL130 is kinda wimpy especially as the CK20 can lift practically the same amount.

If loader lift is an important consideration for you I'd lean towards the CT230.

 

[kiotiken]

The difference between 1100lbs lift and 1600lbs lift is something that you will notice in the real world. The CK30 is a great tractor but the KL130 is kinda wimpy especially as the CK20 can lift practically the same amount.

If loader lift is an important consideration for you I'd lean towards the CT230.

IT, I'm going to have to disagree, not that there isn't a huge difference between an 1100lbs cap. and a 1600lbs cap. but that 1600 lbs is the reality, I haven't seen anything that says the CT230 has a 1600lbs capacity to full height.

Designing the FEL is a balancing act between different goals. You could make a FEL that could lift 4000lbs for the tractor (if the front axle could handle it), but it's not one you'd want to use, it would likely not have much reach and be very slow. Like wise, you could build on that could reach 30 ft in the air, but it would likely not lift much and again may be slow.

Some of the things they have to work with and balance;

#1 hydraulic flow and pressure. This is identical obviously on both.

#2 Geometry. This is different, and because the KL130 is further in front of the tractor, it will likely mean a lower lift capacity.

3# The lift cylinders used. Of course the bigger the lift cylinders, the strong they will be but the longer they will take to fill at a set flow rate. So if they do use larger cylinders on the CT230, the FEL would be slower.

The engineers that built each of these FEL's balanced them a little differently. Kioti when for a slightly higher reach, and that likely means it's got a slightly lower lift capacity, but they are both good FEL's and the one you choose will likely be your favourite.

 

[dfkrug]

To me, I like the extra height of the KL130. Undoubtedly, it reduces lift capacity, just from the bucket being that much further from the tractor and the geometry, but when you're trying to load a truck/trailer with something hanging from a chain, or using pallet forks to put something on a shelf etc, you'll appreciate that more than the small hit you're taking in lift capacity. On the other hand, if you'll never do anything than move dirt, the opposite is true.

If I can add more to your good points, KK:

I have lifted over a ton on a pallet with my KL130. That's down low, where
it really counts. I could barely lift it a few inches off the ground, but that
was plenty. I did lift it off the bed of a trailer, higher than that, but you
can "cheat" with the bucket curl to get the tiny bit of lift necessary.

So, IMO, you really need a spec for max lift at bkt pivot pins near the
ground, where forces are maximum. Other loader makers provide specs
like this, but not Kioti. And that's where the KL130 is going to eat the
KL120's lunch. I have operated both at their limits, and the KL130 has
way more force down low, even if the boom cyls are the same size. Breakout
forces are way different, too, partially because the bkt cyl on the 120 is
smaller.

When it comes to specs, the Kioti website is full of many errors: it has
all the cyls on both loaders the same size (45mm). It specs the 130 at
2000psi, not 2560psi. Or they meant to say the latter #.

I have found the KL130 to be plenty of loader for the CK30. Sadly, it is
hard to compare specs.

 

[IslandTractor]

IT, I'm going to have to disagree, not that there isn't a huge difference between an 1100lbs cap. and a 1600lbs cap. but that 1600 lbs is the reality, I haven't seen anything that says the CT230 has a 1600lbs capacity to full height. .

I haven't checked but I recall that Woods also makes a loader for the CK30 that has about 1500lbs capacity to full height. I understand your points regarding trade off of height and capacity but have always been confused by the fact that the KL130 only out lifts the KL120 by less than 100lbs. The KL130 is a reliable good loader but I've never understood why Kioti has hamstrung the loader. The lift capacity just doesn't make sense.

 

[dfkrug]

The KL130 is a reliable good loader but I've never understood why Kioti has hamstrung the loader. The lift capacity just doesn't make sense.

Maybe some numbskull at Kioti specced the 130 at 2000psi?