snowblower - QA vs bobcat

[jabbahop]

I need some help working through the sales FUD that I am getting from my bobcat dealer and the QA sales team.

I have a toolcat C turbo with standard flow.

The QA guys have a 61 or 73 inch blower with the 14 to 7 pin adapter and shipping for $5K. The recommend the 73 saying I will have the power and you want it wider than the toolcat's 61" width. QA says their is a much better unit than bobcat - who knows if that is true.

The bobcat guy says - 73 is too wide and it won't work well with the wide range hydrallic motor that QA offers (says Bobcat's are tuned to specific gpm ratings). The 60" bobcat with the 5.5 motor package is $6K including the 7 pin setup that I need in either case.

It looks to me a few hundred dollars difference (after the 7 pin gets installed) and the advantage of having a local dealer standing behind the bobcat unit.

I know some of you have one of these units - any advice? This is a big ticket item and I don't want ANY regrets on this.

 

[radman1]

IMHO, I would go with the bobcat. They are designed for the flow rate. Good units. I would go with a unit slightly wider than the toolcat. I think they make a 66" unit. Bobcat will have better resale as well. I haven't been disappointed with Bobcat attachments.

 

[theoshin]

i would go with the bobcat - if it does not work well they will need to get the motor right as it is bobcat/bobcat. snowblowers are finicky about matching flow to motor to fan size. i had my motor package changed. i would recommend the 200 unit - the 240 needs the high flow. i have the 240 72 inch but probably would buy the 200 if i could do over as the 240 is huge and heavy. overkill for my use. i would definately want a blower wider than 61 inches - otherwise you will be driving over snow every time you turn. probably the 200 66 with standard flow. not sure how the 72 would go without high flow.

you need to talk with someone who has the 200 66 or 72 without high flow.

ts

 

[Rip]

I'll throw my vote in for the QA-2000 (73" or 61").

First of all, QA does not use a one-size-fits-all motor for a given series. You tell them what machine and flow you are using it on, and they build the blower with the appropriate motors (fan & auger) for that flow rate. They will use one of three or four motor displacements to cover the range they list in the literature.

Second, the overall width really only affects the first pass through virgin snow, after that you can take 70, 80, 90% of full bite as you wish. Having the blower somewnat wider than the machine does reduce the chance your wheels will run in virgin snow on turns. This is really not a bit deal. A narrower blower will be a bit lighter and cheaper ($100), but also not a significant difference.

The 200(0) series (20" fan diameter) is the most appropriate size for a Toolcat. The 240(0) series has a 24" fan and really wants more hyd HP and machine weight to handle it efficiently.

Unless you anticipate another multi-function hydraulic attachment, you do not really need the 7 pin or 14 pin wiring set-up. The hand-held aux controller from QA will work just fine. It only controls the chute rotation and deflector angle, so is not something you are having to adjust every minute anyway. Some have mounted it to the dash or joystick, or just lay it on the passenger seat.

My first QA blower was set up for 15 gpm for my PowerTrac 1845 and worked fine last winter. Your standard-flow TC has more I think.

I have dealt with Brad at QA for two blowers and several other attachments and he will treat you right (as I am sure the others there will as well).

On the other hand, I am sure there is nothing wrong with the Bobcat blowers, just more $$.

Good Luck and Happy Thanksgiving!!

 

[theoshin]

i dont disagree as i have never run the competitors blower.

about the 240 - its wt is around 1050 lbs - that is no problem for the tc. my brushcat is 1700 lbs. i too thought it was a bit much for the tc but bobcat and my dealer were sure it was fine. my dealer claims they have sold several 240's to tc owners whom are happy with its performance. i would like to compare it to the 200. i used my blower 4 times last winter. i hope global warming is not to blaim! the broom was used a lot more as it did great under 4 inches and leaves the driveway clean. 8 inches usually comes over a day and i can broom 2x at a fast speed to keep up.

ts

 

[Rip]

Theo,

The intent of my comment regarding the 240(0) series with the 24" fan was more that it needs more hydraulic HP to take advantage of the larger blower fan. In fact QA lists the flow range for the 2400 series as 24 to 42 GPM. The standard-flow TC is quite a bit less than that, and even a high-flow model with 27 gpm is in the bottom of the range.

The physical weight is only about 100 to 125 lbs more for the same width.

Hope your new D is working out and that you have had no other problems beyond the initial belt issue.

Happy Thanksgiving.....

 

[dylan]

I have the bobcat 200 72" running on a b series low flow. I give it an ok rating. It blows but not nearly as well as my tractor blowers.
The fan housing is not very deep on the bobcat blower and you have to creep though the snow.

Of course it snowed here today and my bobcat blower was broken and in the shop again so i could just be biased!

i'm having problems with the chute. it does not get a signal to rotate or change the elevation. the dealer is looking into it ... again.

 

[theoshin]

the high flow 240 bobcat 72 inch flow require are 24 to 32 gpm so i think the tc with high flow is in the middle of that range. i know if i turn the high flow off the blower really has trouble even getting snow off the driveway. i think more flow would help but more importantly a higher hp engine would help as going down hill the blower is unstoppable and going up my hill it looses performance signficantly.

 

[y3ll0w]

You seem to have quite a dilemma on your hands. Both seem to be blowing a little smoke up your rear.

Found this:

Hydraulic Drive:
Bobcat and QA/Erskine offer the exact same hydraulic motors. The manufacture is the same and the displacement is the same.

Specifications:
Flight/fan the Bobcat uses a plate that will block off some of the fan, could be an effort to allow the snow to be thrown with more force = more distance, also possible to throw less in the way of quantity. The QA uses a wide open fan, may provide more snow flow.
1 stage auger QA痴 is 2 larger in diameter.
Intake Height QA痴 is 9 larger.

Controls:
In addition Bobcat decided for some reason to change their attachment control kit to 7 pin. Some point to a way for Bobcat to 斗ock in their equipment owners to purchasing their attachments. This newer technology has a short track record compared to the 14 pin that has been around for decades.

Miscellaneous:
Bobcat痴 chute痴 rotation mechanism looks a little more of a problem compared to QA痴 chain.

There was actually more to this document with some side by side picture comparisons but I cannot find it at the moment. I will post it when I do.

 

[theoshin]

erskine used to make snowblowers for bobcat - that is why they are so similiar in design. i believe bobcat bought erskine then sold it back to erskine employees after IR took over bobcat??? something to that effect.

the charlynn drive motors on the snowblowers are nothing special - good motors but not that expensive - that is why i cant figure out why all the bobcat attachments are soo expensive. that is another thread.

so basically both blowers are pretty similiar because of their common background. either one will work with the right package.

on my 240 i can change the size of the opening with a somewhat adj plate.

btw - i found dealers prices on attachments varry widely. even the "retail price" varried by hundreds of dollars from one to the next. dont believe the bs that attachments are discounted - they are. 6000 for a 200 seems a bit steep.

 

[Spudgunner]

I have a Bobcat 200, 72" on order. That was the largest (width-wise) that the BC sales dude would recommend. I noticed that when he wrote the sales order, he specified a particular fan motor package that would work with the hi-flow. If you go with the QA, I'd second Rip's recommendation for using the QA controller unless you have several different 14-pin attachments that you want to use.

When I get my BC blower it will be sitting next to my neighbor's 84" QA blower and I'll get to check them out side by side.

I understand your desire to absolutely make the right choice in your purchase but I doubt if you can make a wrong decision here. Both units seem extremely solid.

 

[GitchiGummi]

6K for the Bobcat blower is Approx. 1K higher than my dealer quoted me recently. Negotiate or shop around. It is frustrating that they make the unique 7-pin hook-up. Converting a 14-pin blower means more stuff to go wrong. Dealer "support" can be a double edged sword too. If they are offering you high "retail" pricing, chances are they will chisel you on the service too!

I got the same line about Bobcat's attachments being specifically matched to perform better! Interesting that the blowers use the same hydraulic motors.

 

[Spudgunner]

6K for the Bobcat blower is Approx. 1K higher than my dealer quoted me recently. Negotiate or shop around. It is frustrating that they make the unique 7-pin hook-up. Converting a 14-pin blower means more stuff to go wrong. Dealer "support" can be a double edged sword too. If they are offering you high "retail" pricing, chances are they will chisel you on the service too!

I got the same line about Bobcat's attachments being specifically matched to perform better! Interesting that the blowers use the same hydraulic motors.

Technically, it is not a "line"...although its wonders may be overstated. My blower is identified automatically, through the 7-pin CAN bus, as needing Hi-Flow and I don't have to fiddle with the switch in the cab. What else the Toolcat and the blower talk about I don't know as I don't have a CAN bus analyzer. I would expect other attachment/equipment manufacturers to follow suite if they've haven't already. Also, it appears they use the same make of fan motors (Eaton), but the displacements are customizable at time of ordering. This is true of both BC and QA/Erskine.

In comparing my neighbor's QA blower with my Bobcat, the similarities are very striking. The BC blower has a more "streamlined" product with less wires/hoses to get snagged but it appears harder to work on for exactly the same reason. Again, I don't think a person could go wrong with either.

 

[y3ll0w]

My blower is identified automatically, through the 7-pin CAN bus, as needing Hi-Flow and I don't have to fiddle with the switch in the cab. What else the Toolcat and the blower talk about I don't know as I don't have a CAN bus analyzer.

That is a nice feature but not for $1000 more for the QA which has several advantages specification wise which is really the only important factor when your using the thing.

 

[GitchiGummi]

The Quick-Attach blowers don't appear to be any less expensive than the Bobcat blowers unless you are paying your Bobcat dealer 110% of retail.

Skid Steer Attachments - Quick Attach Attachments, Inc.

It seems that the AFTER MARKET company (QA) should adapt its product to the proper attachment type for the machine if they want to be attractive to buyers. Couldn't QA offer the blower configured for the TC (7-pin)? It just seems backward to adapt the machine to an aftermarket attachment.

I can't even pretend to understand the details given regarding what all the "pins" do or do not do. Could this thing be "adapted" out at the blower and make the Bobcat controls work it?

I decided to order the Bobcat blower (SB200X66" high-flow) to keep it simple for me. Also, while under warranty, I don't want the dealer to blame any problems (it seems this machine can have an occasional problem) on after market attachments. With the machine order the Bobcat blower was SIGNIFICANTLY CHEAPER than the QA is listed for on their web site.

Thanks for all of the good advice re: high-flow and blower width etc.

5 weeks until delivery, TC-D. Hope they don't build it on Jan. 2 all hung over in the plant!

Remember the "Bobcat Attachment Advantage: Bobcat attachments are engineered and manufactured to fit Bobcat loaders for optimum job performance, dependability, and durability." From Bobcat Literature!

 

[mike123]

I have the erskine 2000 in 79 inches on my toolcat "c" turbo with High flow and am very pleased.

The width has very little to do with how much flow you need. Sure you might have to slow down a little in real heavy snow but the most important thing is you have to match up the proper moter with how much flow you have available.
Bobcat couldn't seem to get their story straight. They just wanted to tell me I need to go with a 61" because of my horsepower. You can have the smallest width blower from bobcat and still have poor results if they don't match the moter properly.
This is why I went with the erskine. I gave them my specs and they matched it accordingly. They seem to have way more experience then bobcat.
Mike

 

[y3ll0w]

This is why I went with the erskine. I gave them my specs and they matched it accordingly. They seem to have way more experience then bobcat.
Mike

They do. QA/Erskine has about 70 years of experience with blowers, bobcat has less than a 10th of that.

 

[y3ll0w]

The Quick-Attach blowers don't appear to be any less expensive than the Bobcat blowers unless you are paying your Bobcat dealer 110% of retail.

Thoes prices are not correct the bobcat branded is about 1k more than QA.

Remember the "Bobcat Attachment Advantage: Bobcat attachments are engineered and manufactured to fit Bobcat loaders for optimum job performance, dependability, and durability." From Bobcat Literature!

It's interesting that the same attachments can be used on a half dozen or so skids, the TC, and TTC

 

[Spudgunner]

...
It seems that the AFTER MARKET company (QA) should adapt its product to the proper attachment type for the machine if they want to be attractive to buyers. Couldn't QA offer the blower configured for the TC (7-pin)? It just seems backward to adapt the machine to an aftermarket attachment.
...

I couldn't agree more. From what I can tell the "leap" is having to put some degree of brains on the attachment in order to talk with the Toolcat over the digital bus. The CAN bus has been around for a LONG time and I'm sure Erskine/whomever could design (or have designed for them) the necessary hardware/firmware on their few (?) attachments that need to divert hydraulics.

BTW, score one for Quick-Attach on the chute. I like theirs better than the one on my BC.

 

[theoshin]

They do. QA/Erskine has about 70 years of experience with blowers, bobcat has less than a 10th of that.

i am pretty sure bobcat used erskine blowers yrs back. then they bought erskine. then after ir took over bobcat they wanted to clean house a bit and the erskine employees plus maybe some investor capital bought erskine back from bobcat. at least that is what i have been told. that is why the blowers are so similiar.

btw - matching motors to flow is easy - not sure why manufactures would have any difficulty. picking a hydraulic motor is pretty simple if you live in the world of hydraulics. the new d has a rex roth pump - very high quaility. bobcat use charlin. pumps on my attachments - decents motors. overall a good combo but they are not that expensive if you buy in any kind of bulk like bobact does.

my 2 cents