FBs at work

  • Thread starter Thread starter cory
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 7
  • Views Views 118
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
Those are all yours?

Thoroughly impressive line up of machines that seem a bit otherworldly in their capability, robustness, a general fearsomeness.

Being an owner, I'd love to hear your take on them.
 
We got into FB work unconventionally. We still don’t have a hotsaw (Quadco). It began as large mastication projects, turned into cut to length operations, with mastication as cleanup. So we ended up with a fixed logmax 7000xt processor head, and a Fecon BH200 we can use interchangeably. It cost us a fortune to convert the FB pumps to accommodate both heads. Now the new Timberpro machines are built to be compatable with all head configurations (hotsaw, processor, masticator)

FB’s are incredibly powerful machines that push out a lot of hydraulic power, and have a large lifting chart. They don’t have a lot of reach, and you don’t operate them with the stick far out of plumb.

They burn 2-3x the amount of fuel as an excavator, they are hard on hydraulic hoses (as are the extreme winter temps). Also, 6000psi hoses are not cheap. FB’s have seemingly infinite amounts of power to the tracks when compared to an excavator.

The Deere 2954 is a road builder with a Waratah 623 dangle head. Dangle heads are more forgiving for felling trees (but less controlled than fixed) and a lot more gentle when you are processing logs. Also that machine has significant more reach than the FB, which is helpful if you’re throwing around 80-100’ long trees.

Edit: in summary, you need to put a lot of work in front of a FB to justify ownership, hope the work doesn’t end, then add money and diesel.
 
“Mulching” is used by other industries it’s more specific to call the work Masticating IMO. Although I’m guilty of using the terms interchangeably.
 
Back
Top