Looking for feedback on a HIAB crane model that is mostly popular in Europe

G

Gus_B

New member
Location
Toronto
Hi guys I'm hoping you can give me some honest feedback on a crane model that HIAB currently offers predominantly in the European market. It's a HIAB Z crane.
This crane was predominantly designed for the aggregate, trash, and scrap steel industry however in Sweden they are using it in the log/firewood industry because they can incorporate a dump body to dump without the need to lift a "Log style" crane in the air to dump the body. In my neck of the woods some job-sites do not allow you to lift a crane in the air while activating your dump body on site.
Do any of you think this may make a decent logging truck with a dump body or is this too much of a dramatic change from what is considered "traditional" in the North American Market?
I've personally never sold one but this concept has always intrigued me. I'd appreciate your thoughts on this concept. The attached video is terrible but I will see if I can find one in action that I will add. Thank you in advance for any input both positive and negative in regards to this style of crane that you can add.
Just looking for feedback from you guys in the industry.
 
Last edited:
It looks interesting, for sure. I like the way it folds, and can see it as a useful machine, if the capacities are there.

My concerns would be the number of moving parts, is it durable enough for the tree industry? And how fast does it move? Sometimes it seems to me that the more complicated a machine, the slower it moves.
 
Reach said:
It looks interesting, for sure. I like the way it folds, and can see it as a useful machine, if the capacities are there.

My concerns would be the number of moving parts, is it durable enough for the tree industry? And how fast does it move? Sometimes it seems to me that the more complicated a machine, the slower it moves.
Click to expand...
All excellent points Reach and something I've just started investigating. I've been in the industry a very long time but this style crane is completely new to me. What I'm trying to figure out is the speed, reliability and if is there a market for it? Would a short logging truck (25' reach with big capacity) that you could dump at will without lifting the crane out of the cradle be of interest to anyone? From what I've read so far the basic model has a reach of roughly 26' lifting 4,500 lbs.
I've asked the factory for cycle times but I don't expect a quick answer as they tend to keep this type on info secret so competitors don't use it.
I'm waiting on a video from HIAB corporate on a European customer in the logging industry in Sweden. If they send it to me I will share it with you and that will hopefully demonstrate the speed from unfold to time to use.
The only other Z crane video so far forwarded to me was the below. See at the 4:00 mark to see it in the stored position during travel. I think a Z model log crane rear mounted is useless in my opinion unless your loads are exceptionally high and you cannot stow a traditional crane in a boom rest over cab. What I'm interested in is having a crane like this mounted back of cab with a dump body.
 
Last edited:
Gus_B said:
All excellent points Reach and something I've just started investigating. I've been in the industry a very long time but this style crane is completely new to me. What I'm trying to figure out is the speed, reliability and if is there a market for it? Would a short logging truck (25' reach with big capacity) that you could dump at will without lifting the crane out of the cradle be of interest to anyone? From what I've read so far the basic model has a reach of roughly 26' lifting 4,500 lbs.
I've asked the factory for cycle times but I don't expect a quick answer as they tend to keep this type on info secret so competitors don't use it.
I'm waiting on a video from HIAB corporate on a European customer in the logging industry in Sweden. If they send it to me I will share it with you and that will hopefully demonstrate the speed from unfold to time to use.
The only other Z crane video so far forwarded to me was the below. See at the 4:00 mark to see it in the stored position during travel. I think a Z model log crane rear mounted is useless in my opinion. What I'm interested in is having a crane like this mounted back of cab with a dump body.
Click to expand...
From the video, it looks like it moves reasonably quickly, so speed is probably not an issue. Reliability is the big question at that point, and cost - if it’s too much more expensive than a traditional loader, will anyone buy it?

A truck like that would be interesting to me if it can truly dump effectively, although I like rear mount loaders a lot because they’re more versatile. You can’t load from a pile behind the truck with a mid mount.
 
Great points as I think it's more expensive relatively speaking compared to what the North American market standard is. So you use a log-loader to both load and unload the deck currently and it's mounted end of frame from what I understand. Would there be any benefit to having it mounted back of cab (Z-folding) to dump freely versus having to unload with the crane?
I'm quoting my first one in 15 years to a customer who not only handles logs but has a contract to clean up sites where people dump illegally in the middle of the night. Kinshofer makes a new grapple that can handle a variety of tasks.
I doubt it will go anywhere (price point as you mentioned) but thought I'd ask the pro's here on this site what your thoughts were.

​

 
Last edited:
Gus_B said:
Great points as I think it's more expensive relatively speaking compared to what the North American market standard is. So you use a log-loader to both load and unload the deck currently and it's mounted end of frame from what I understand. Would there be any benefit to having it mounted back of cab to dump freely versus having to unload with the crane?
I'm quoting my first one to a customer who not only handles logs but has a contract to clean up sites where people dump illegally in the middle of the night.
Click to expand...
With a rear mount, yes, the loader must be used to load and unload. A mid mount can have a dump behind it, you just have to swing the boom over the cab first, which means setting and retracting the outriggers twice.

Seems to me that this setup would be much quicker for someone who dumps most of their loads. Logs don’t dump well, but brush and other debris usually do, so as long as you’re not just using it as a log truck it would probably work well. I think you could build a roof for the bed too, and have a large, convertible chip truck too. There are some on the market now, but the folding cranes they use can’t run a grapple, and don’t usually have a lot of lift capacity.

If you bring one over to demo, it’s something we would be willing to put to work for a month to see how it holds up. We are just a little drive south, only about eight hours…
 
I'll keep that in mind. Also if you're ever in my neck of the woods come for a tour and lunch with a cold Canadian brew on me. Hopefully our two governments open the borders again freely without all these restrictions. I appreciate your input Reach. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
An existing solution for keeping the boom independant of the dumping body is the jmac design. It also provides the benefits of a rear mount. Pretty dope in my opinion.

jmactrucks.com

The Z-fold design is really simple, and similar to any common linkage knuckle design. To make the outer boom fold beyond full horizontal, you simply raise it until it’s in line with the main boom, put the grapple on the ground momentarily to push it slightly more, and then operate the outer boom “lower”, but it will now raise up and against the main. I’ll try to find a video of a different brand in operation.
 
It is a sweet set up. When speaking with a local Palfinger dealer about these, he told me that because of the lack of popularity in the US, they are much more expensive than an "a-frame" loader. Apparently because of the design, you can't load small pieces snug close to the loader (the back of the body of the truck). Of course if the logs are long that isn't a problem. Just something I hadn't thought of watching the videos. He recommended a knuckle boom instead as an option for folding up. They are making plenty of setups where the grapple can be left on, and can reach further for cheaper. They are slower. The log loaders are made for like 600,000 cycles to failure, where the k-booms are like 200,000. If you're occasionally picking up a few logs on a residential job, the kboom would work well. Whereas if you are loading logs all day definitely worth the traditional loader for the cycle time and the more robust build. Just some info I gleaned from a conversation about potential future build...
 
Just to reiterate, the 600,000 cycles to failure design makes the loaders more expensive, so the k-boom option would be cheaper. Still wicked expensive though I am sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom