Cat® Product Information

Competitive Bulletin
November 2015

Cat® D10T2 vs.

Komatsu D375A-6

For Dealer Sales Personnel

Table of Contents

Production Study .................................................................................................................................................................3

Study Procedures ................................................................................................................................................................9

Equipment Studied ............................................................................................................................................................13

Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................................................14

Notes ....................................................................................................................................................................................15

2 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Production Study

Objectives
1. Compare productivity of the D10T2 vs. the D375A-6 in both level ground and downhill dozing
applications.
2. Test the D375A-6 in torque converter and lockup modes.
3. Measure fuel consumption and efficiency of the D10T2 and D375A-6 in various dozing applications.

Study Dates
December 9-16, 2014

Location
Western United States Copper Mine

Observers and Participants

Liz Sears
Josh Wirsching
Mel Busch
Cameron Wright
Lance Cowper
Jason Werner
Loren Vincent

Written By
Louis Faivre
Mel Busch

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 3

Production Study

Summary
This study was conducted over a six day period. The D10T2 demonstrated a productivity advantage
of 16.5% to 4.3% and a fuel efficiency advantage of +8.7% to -3.7%, depending on application
and terrain. During tests conducted on level ground, the D10T2 was 10.9% more productive and
8.7% more fuel efficient than the D375A-6 operating in Manual Shift Power Mode. Additional tests
were conducted on level ground with the D375A-6 operating in Auto Shift Power Mode. The D10T2
was 4.3% more productive than the D375A-6, while the D375A-6 demonstrated a 3.7% advantage
in fuel efficiency when operating under these conditions. Fuel efficiency was calculated by dividing
the corrected hourly production rate by the hourly fuel consumption rate. Tests were also conducted
on a 20% downhill slope. The D10T2 was 14.1% more productive and 3.6% more fuel efficient than
the D375A-6 operated in Manual Shift Power Mode. The D10T2 demonstrated a 16.5% advantage
in productivity and a 2.3% advantage in fuel efficiency over the D375A-6 operated in Auto Shift
Eco Mode. It should be noted that the Komatsu Operation and Maintenance Manual (OMM) was
consulted prior to each test to determine which operating modes were appropriate for each application.
These modes were used as described or were altered to provide best performance and efficiency in that
application. For example, the use of Reverse Slow Mode was neglected in order to give the D375A-6
faster cycle times than it would have had if Reverse Slow Mode had been used. In most cases, if the
D375A-6 had been operated as recommended in its OMM performance and efficiency would have
been lower than measured.

4 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Production Study

Summary Charts
Level Ground, Manual
D10T2 D375A-6 D10T2 % Advantage
Operation Mode EAS Off Manual Shift, ‘P’ Mode  
Days 1, 2 1, 2  
Pits 1, 3, 4, 7 2, 5, 6, 8  

Total Time of Testing hr 6.52 6.41  

Total Volume bcm 2735 2559  
bcy 3,578 3,347
 
Cycles in Study   196 187  
Average Cycle Time min 2.00 2.06  
Cycles Per 60 Minutes   30.00 29.13  
 
Production Per bcm/hr 419.36 399.30 5.0%
60 Minute Hour bcy/hr 548.50 522.27
 
Actual Push Distance m 57.56 54.49  
ft 188.85 178.77
Adjusted Push Distance m 56.03 56.03  
ft 183.81 183.81
 
Corrected Production bcm/hr 430.86 388.36 10.9%
bcy/hr 563.54 507.95
 
Hourly Fuel Burn L/hr 107.85 105.65 –2.1%
gal/hr 28.49 27.91
 
Fuel Efficiency bcm/L 4.00 3.68 8.7%
bcy/gal 19.78 18.20
Metric numbers are derived from English numbers. All numbers are rounded to two decimal places
for calculations.

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 5

Production Study

Level Ground, Auto

    D10T2 D375A-6 D10T2 % Advantage
Operation Mode   EAS On Auto Shift, ‘P’ Mode  
Days   5, 6 5, 6  
Pits   17, 19, 21, 23 18, 20, 22, 24  
 
Total Time of Testing hr 4.86 4.86  
Total Volume bcm 2162 2130  
bcy 2,827 2,786
 
Cycles in Study   155 152  
Average Cycle Time min 1.88 1.92  
Cycles Per 60 Minutes   31.91 31.25  
 
Production Per bcm/hr 444.79 437.90 1.6%
60 Minute Hour bcy/hr 581.76 572.75
 
Actual Push Distance m 57.36 55.86  
ft 188.20 183.28
Adjusted Push Distance m 56.61 56.61  
ft 185.74 185.74
 
Corrected Production bcm/hr 450.68 432.10 4.3%
bcy/hr 589.47 565.16
 
Hourly Fuel Burn L/hr 107.20 99.03 –8.3%
gal/hr 28.32 26.16
 
Fuel Efficiency bcm/L 4.20 4.36 –3.7%
bcy/gal 20.81 21.60
Metric numbers are derived from English numbers. All numbers are rounded to two decimal places
for calculations.

6 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Production Study

20% Downhill Grade, Manual

    D10T2 D375A-6 D10T2 % Advantage
Operation Mode   EAS Off Manual Shift, ‘P’ Mode  
Days   3 3  
Pits   9, 11 10, 12  
 
Total Time of Testing hr 2.00 2.06  
Total Volume bcm 1326 1213  
bcy 1,734 1,587
 
Cycles in Study   62 58  
Average Cycle Time min 1.93 2.13  
Cycles Per 60 Minutes   31.09 28.17  
 
Production Per bcm/hr 664.43 590.12 12.6%
60 Minute Hour bcy/hr 869.04 771.85
 
Actual Push Distance m 45.41 44.81  
ft 149.00 147.00
Adjusted Push Distance m 45.11 45.11  
ft 148.00 148.00
 
Corrected Production bcm/hr 668.91 586.13 14.1%
bcy/hr 874.90 766.63
 
Hourly Fuel Burn L/hr 121.10 109.93 –10.2%
gal/hr 31.99 29.04
 
Fuel Efficiency bcm/L 5.52 5.33 3.6%
bcy/gal 27.35 26.40
Metric numbers are derived from English numbers. All numbers are rounded to two decimal places
for calculations.

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 7

Production Study

20% Downhill Grade, Auto

    D10T2 D375A-6 D10T2 % Advantage
Operation Mode   EAS On Auto Shift, ‘E’ Mode  
Days   4 4  
Pits   13, 15 14, 16  
 
Total Time of Testing hr 1.79 1.80  
Total Volume bcm 1157 1039  
bcy 1,514 1,358
 
Cycles in Study   54 52  
Average Cycle Time min 1.99 2.08  
Cycles Per 60 Minutes   30.15 28.85  
 
Production Per bcm/hr 647.20 575.67 12.4%
60 Minute Hour bcy/hr 846.51 752.95
 
Actual Push Distance m 45.12 43.56  
ft 148.02 142.90
Adjusted Push Distance m 44.34 44.34  
ft 145.46 145.46
 
Corrected Production bcm/hr 658.60 565.54 16.5%
bcy/hr 861.41 739.70
 
Hourly Fuel Burn L/hr 121.59 106.82 –13.8%
gal/hr 32.12 28.22
 
Fuel Efficiency bcm/L 5.42 5.29 2.3%
bcy/gal 26.82 26.21
Metric numbers are derived from English numbers. All numbers are rounded to two decimal places
for calculations.

8 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Study Procedures

Laying Out the Pits

Single pit slot dozing was chosen to measure tractor productivity as it best controls the variables
of the study. The study consisted of two primary test areas with eight pits each. Pits 1 through 8
and 17 through 24 were in the level ground test area and pits 9 through 16 were in the downhill
test area, which had a 20% average downhill slope from the cut area to the fill area. Test areas were
approximately 91 m (300 ft) wide and 91 m (300 ft) long. The level ground test area had an extra
30.5 m (100 ft) area for dumping blade loads while the downhill slope test area allowed material
to be pushed over a high wall.
Each pit was approximately 6.1 m (20 ft) wide with approximately 4.6 m (15 ft) between pits.
The material consisted of soil and rock mixture with a material density of approximately 1588.5 kg/m3
(2,677.5 lb/yd3) for level pits and 1708.6 kg/m3 (2,880.0 lb/yd3) for sloped pits. Both tractors worked
from front to back in their respective pits. When tests were completed, the pits were surveyed. After the
first two days of testing, a maintenance tractor leveled the first eight pits, removed the berms between
the slots, and laid out eight new pits while testing was conducted in the downhill slope test area.
When the downhill slope testing was completed, the operators returned to the level ground test area
to complete testing on days five and six.

Direction of Dozing Dump Area

Start of Dig

Centroid Distance

Level Grade Pit Profile

Direction of Dozing

Dump Area
Start of Dig Edge of Wall

Centroid Distance

20% Grade Pit Profile

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 9

Study Procedures

Rotation of Operators and Study Procedures

Two experienced and highly capable operators were chosen to participate in the study. Both operators
were familiar with both tractors. The operators split their time equally between the two tractors to
account for any differences in technique. Pit depth was targeted at one blade depth. Both tractors were
operated in first gear forward and second gear reverse with air conditioning on.
Table of Suggested D375A-6 Operation Modes
Operation Gear Shift Mode Operation Mode Reverse
Type Soil Quality Working Conditions Automatic Manual ‘P’ Mode ‘E’ Mode Slow Mode
Digging, General soil Heavy duty operations, x   x    
dozing large production
Sand, soft soil Light duty operations, x     x  
frequent shoe slip
Rough ground, Load changes easily x     x x
soft rock   x x   x
Pushing Downhill Downhill slope x     x  
Uphill Uphill slope x    x    
Ripping Rough ground, Simple-to-crush rock   x x    x
soft rock
Rough ground, Difficult-to-crush rock   x    x x
hard rock

Operation Modes
The Komatsu D375A-6 can be operated in either Automatic Shift or Manual Shift. When the
tractor is operated in Automatic Shift, it is able to automatically shift gears up or down to match
the load conditions. Automatic Shift also utilizes the lockup torque converter when the load is in
the appropriate range. Manual Shift is able to automatically shift down when a large load is applied.
However, the operator must manually shift up if he wishes to do so. Manual Shift does not permit the
use of the lockup torque converter.
The D375A-6 has two additional modes that may be used in either Automatic or Manual mode.
Power (‘P’) Mode is meant to provide the highest level of production. Economy (‘E’) Mode is meant
to reduce track slip and fuel consumption.
The Cat® D10T2 does not require the operator to adjust operation modes. When the D375A-6
was operated in Auto Shift Power Mode or Auto Shift Eco Mode, the D10T2 was operated with
the Enhanced Auto Shift (EAS) feature on. EAS acts as an automatic transmission and allows the
operator to set a desired travel speed. The system then continuously adjusts gear and engine speed
combinations to achieve the desired speed in the most efficient way possible.

10 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Study Procedures

Operators often report ‘Hunting’ behavior while operating the D375A-6 in Automatic Mode.
This occurs when the tractor shifts in and out of lockup mode as the operator attempts to acquire
and carry an optimum blade load. Many operators choose to operate in Manual Mode, sacrificing
efficiency and productivity in order to avoid this annoying and uncomfortable machine behavior.
Komatsu also recommends the use of ‘Reverse Slow Mode’ on rough ground, rock surfaces, and
during all ripping applications. Reverse Slow Mode is meant to improve operator comfort and is
made necessary by the partially suspended undercarriage and oval track design of the D375A-6.
Caterpillar’s elevated final drive and fully suspended undercarriage do not require the operator to
sacrifice productivity in order to maintain comfort. Reverse Slow Mode was not used during these
tests in order to give the D375A-6 the highest productivity and fuel efficiency possible. Operating the
D375A-6 as specified in its OMM would have increased the productivity advantage of the D10T2.

Time Measurement
Study time was recorded in four time segments. The four segments included doze time in the cut area,
carry and spread time, reverse time through the carry and spread area, and reverse time through
the cut area. All four time segments were used to calculate total study time. The time segments were
recorded manually using a cycle timing spreadsheet.

Volume Measurement
Test areas were surveyed before and after each series of tests by mine surveyors. Pit volumes and
centroidal push distances were calculated for each pit in the test.

Examples of survey results

Above: Survey results for the 20% grade, manual and auto test runs
Left: Survey results for the level grade, auto test runs

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 11

Study Procedures

Distance Measurement/Centroidal Push Distance

To account for the distance material is moved in a dozing study, a centroidal push distance is
established for each pit. Centroidal push distance is defined as the distance the center of mass of
the material is moved and is determined from the survey results. For this study, the centroidal push
distance is the difference of the center of mass point of the cut area and the center of mass point of
the fill area. An Adjusted Centroidal Push Distance was calculated for each set of tests of the study.
For these purposes, the study was broken into four distinct sets of tests: Level-Manual Shift Power
Mode, Level-Auto Shift Power Mode, Downhill-Manual Shift Power Mode, and Downhill-Auto Shift
Eco Mode.
For each set of tests, the Adjusted Centroidal Push Distance was calculated by averaging the centroidal
push distances for the pits in that set. For example, the Adjusted Centroidal Push Distance for the
Level-Manual Shift Power Mode test was calculated by averaging the centroidal push distances for
pits 1-8. A correction factor, based on the centroidal push distance, is applied to the initial production
to obtain corrected production. The words “Actual Push Distance” and “Adjusted Push Distance”
are substituted for “Actual Centroid Push Distance” and “Adjusted Centroid Push Distance” in the
Summary Results. Production is adjusted by the following formula:
Actual Centroidal Push Distance
Corrected Production = Actual Production ×
Adjusted Centroidal Push Distance
Fuel Measurement
For this study, fuel measurements were taken using calibrated, temperature compensating fuel flow
meters. Both tractors were filled from the same certified source to avoid any inconsistencies. Once
filled, the tractors were moved to their starting positions and shut down. The fuel flow meters were
then zeroed before the machines were started and operated. Measurements were recorded from both
meters after each pit was completed.

Machine Health
Before the study, the health of each tractor was checked to ensure that they were operating at peak
performance. The D10T2 had 1,715 service meter units (SMU) while the D375A-6 had 400 SMU.
The D10T2 and D375A-6 were both operating within design specifications. New cutting edges and
end bits of near equivalent thickness were installed on both tractors. Grousers on both tractors were
nearly new. The grouser height on the D10T2 measured 113 mm (4.45 in). The D375A-6 grouser height
of 109 mm (4.29 in) was within 4% of the D10T2 and was deemed acceptable. Both tractors were
serviced, including new OEM air and fuel filters, prior to running checkouts and conducting the study.
Several performance parameters, including torque converter stall, system pressures and cycle times,
and operating speeds for both tractors were confirmed to be in the correct operating range.

12 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Equipment Studied

Cat D10T2 Komatsu D375A-6

Horsepower (net)* 447 kW (600 hp) 455 kW (610 hp)
538 kW (722 hp)**
Tractor Weight (actual) 72 552 kg (159,950 lb) 75 251 kg (165,900 lb)
Blade Type Abrasion U blade U blade with wear plates

Blade Capacity 22.0 m3 (28.7 yd3) 22.0 m3 (28.7 yd3)

Blade GET New EWL cutting edges New heavy duty cutting edges
and end bits and end bits
Ripper Single shank Multi shank with center shank only
Track Shoe Width 610 mm (24 in) 610 mm (24 in)
Grouser Height

113 mm (4.45 in) 109 mm (4.29 in)

Torque Converter Stall 1,511 rpm 1,525 rpm
Filters New Cat air and fuel filters New Komatsu air and fuel filters
Serial Number JJW00102 60170
Machine Hours 1,715 400
**Horsepower according to ISO 9249/SAE J1349 standard
**D10T2 Reverse Power

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 13

Conclusions

• Test procedures allowed for a fair comparison of the

two tractors. Major variables that could affect the
outcome of a study such as material, push distance,
operator technique, survey results and machine health
were accounted for in the test procedures.
• The Komatsu OMM was consulted when selecting
operating modes for the D375A-6. These modes were
used as described or altered to provide the best possible
performance and efficiency for each application.
In most cases, the suggested operating modes would
have yielded lower performance and efficiency results.
• In all tests performed, the D10T2 was more productive
than the D375A-6. The D10T2 had a productivity
advantage ranging from 16.5% to 4.3%.
• The D10T2 displayed fuel efficiency advantages of up
to 8.7%. The D375A-6 was only able to exceed the
D10T2 in fuel efficiency during level ground testing in
Auto Shift Power Mode. Under these conditions, the
D375A-6 displayed a 3.7% fuel efficiency advantage
while the D10T2 was 4.3% more productive.
• The D10T2, featuring an efficient torque divider
coupled with Cat hydraulics, provides a stable and
predictable dozing system. The operator can control
the blade load, ground speed, and track slip with
minimal effort.
• The D375A-6 in torque converter lockup mode
frequently “hunts,” shifts in and out of lockup,
when attempting to acquire and carry an optimum
blade load.
• Operators often attempt to avoid the “hunting”
behavior displayed by the D375A-6 by carrying a
smaller blade load in lockup or by operating the
machine in manual mode only. Utilizing either
technique with the D375A-6 is less productive
and less fuel efficient than the D10T2.
• When comparing the two tractors’ specifications,
the D375A-6 should match or exceed the D10T2 in
production and fuel efficiency. However, due to the
superior design of the D10T2 and the factors discussed
above, this is not the case.

14 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 November 2015

 Notes

November 2015 TEJB9869 Cat® D10T2 vs. Komatsu D375A-6 15

For more complete information on Cat products, dealer services, and industry solutions, visit us on the
web at www.cat.com

© 2015 Caterpillar
All rights reserved TEJB9869 (11-2015)

Materials and specifications are subject to change without notice. Featured machines in photos may
include additional equipment. See your Cat dealer for available options.

CAT, CATERPILLAR, SAFETY.CAT.COM, their respective logos, “Caterpillar Yellow” and the “Power Edge”
trade dress, as well as corporate and product identity used herein, are trademarks of Caterpillar and
may not be used without permission.