9 hours ago
Legacy and Evolution of Mass Excavators
The Caterpillar 385 series and the Hitachi/Deere 800-class excavators represent two distinct philosophies in heavy equipment design. Caterpillar, founded in 1925, has long been synonymous with rugged durability and global dealer support. The 385C L, introduced in the early 2000s, was designed as a high-production mass excavator, often paired with large buckets for quarrying, mass excavation, and heavy demolition. It featured a 513-horsepower Cat C18 engine and an operating weight exceeding 180,000 pounds, making it one of the largest hydraulic excavators in its class.
Hitachi, with roots dating back to 1910 in Japan, partnered with Deere in North America to co-develop and distribute excavators. The ZX850 and EX8000 series were built for similar applications, emphasizing reliability and simplified maintenance. These machines typically weigh between 175,000 and 185,000 pounds and are powered by engines in the 500–550 horsepower range, depending on configuration.
While Caterpillar dominated the North American market in the early 2000s, Hitachi and Deere gained traction among contractors seeking lower downtime and easier parts sourcing. By 2010, Hitachi had sold thousands of ZX850 units globally, particularly in mining and infrastructure projects across Asia and South America.
Structural Integrity and Boom Failures
One recurring issue with older Cat 385 units is boom cracking. The boom—the long arm that connects the stick and bucket to the main body—is subjected to immense stress during rock excavation and demolition. Cracks often appear near weld seams or pivot points, especially in machines with high cycle counts or those used in harsh environments without proper maintenance intervals.
In contrast, while Hitachi booms are not immune to failure, they tend to crack less frequently due to different metallurgy and design tolerances. However, there have been documented cases of complete boom separation in extreme conditions, such as a 2011 incident in Alberta where a ZX850 split during frost-laden rock excavation. The failure was traced to a combination of operator overreach and sub-zero fatigue stress.
Hydraulic Systems and Reliability
The Cat 385C L’s hydraulic system is powerful but complex. It features variable displacement pumps and electronically controlled valves, which allow for precise control but also introduce multiple failure points. Common issues include:
Hitachi and Deere systems, while slightly less refined in control, are praised for their simplicity. Their hydraulic circuits are easier to troubleshoot, and parts—both OEM and aftermarket—are widely available. This makes them attractive to contractors in remote areas or those with in-house maintenance teams.
Operator Comfort and Productivity
Caterpillar machines are known for their ergonomic cabs, with air suspension seats, intuitive joystick controls, and excellent visibility. The 385C L includes climate control, adjustable armrests, and noise insulation, making it a favorite among operators during long shifts.
However, comfort does not compensate for downtime. In high-production environments, a machine that’s offline—even with a plush seat—is a liability. Hitachi’s cab is slightly more utilitarian but functional. Operators report fewer interruptions, allowing for consistent digging cycles and better overall productivity.
Dealer Support and Regional Considerations
Choosing between these machines often comes down to dealer proximity and support quality. In regions like Michigan or Alberta, Caterpillar dealers are well-established, offering rapid parts delivery and field service. In contrast, Hitachi/Deere support varies by region but is often bolstered by third-party suppliers and independent mechanics familiar with Japanese systems.
A contractor in Ireland noted that while Cat machines filled buckets faster, the frequency of breakdowns led to project delays. Conversely, their Hitachi ZX850, though slower, maintained uptime and allowed them to meet deadlines without relying on dealer intervention.
Recommendations for Used Equipment Buyers
When purchasing a used mass excavator, consider the following:
Final Thoughts
Both the Caterpillar 385 and Hitachi/Deere 800-class excavators are capable machines with distinct strengths. The Cat excels in power and operator comfort but demands vigilant maintenance. Hitachi and Deere offer a more forgiving ownership experience, especially for contractors who prioritize uptime over marginal speed gains.
As the industry shifts toward telematics and predictive maintenance, future iterations of these machines may bridge the gap between performance and reliability. Until then, the choice remains a balance of application, support, and philosophy—whether one prefers the brute force of Caterpillar or the quiet persistence of Hitachi.
The Caterpillar 385 series and the Hitachi/Deere 800-class excavators represent two distinct philosophies in heavy equipment design. Caterpillar, founded in 1925, has long been synonymous with rugged durability and global dealer support. The 385C L, introduced in the early 2000s, was designed as a high-production mass excavator, often paired with large buckets for quarrying, mass excavation, and heavy demolition. It featured a 513-horsepower Cat C18 engine and an operating weight exceeding 180,000 pounds, making it one of the largest hydraulic excavators in its class.
Hitachi, with roots dating back to 1910 in Japan, partnered with Deere in North America to co-develop and distribute excavators. The ZX850 and EX8000 series were built for similar applications, emphasizing reliability and simplified maintenance. These machines typically weigh between 175,000 and 185,000 pounds and are powered by engines in the 500–550 horsepower range, depending on configuration.
While Caterpillar dominated the North American market in the early 2000s, Hitachi and Deere gained traction among contractors seeking lower downtime and easier parts sourcing. By 2010, Hitachi had sold thousands of ZX850 units globally, particularly in mining and infrastructure projects across Asia and South America.
Structural Integrity and Boom Failures
One recurring issue with older Cat 385 units is boom cracking. The boom—the long arm that connects the stick and bucket to the main body—is subjected to immense stress during rock excavation and demolition. Cracks often appear near weld seams or pivot points, especially in machines with high cycle counts or those used in harsh environments without proper maintenance intervals.
In contrast, while Hitachi booms are not immune to failure, they tend to crack less frequently due to different metallurgy and design tolerances. However, there have been documented cases of complete boom separation in extreme conditions, such as a 2011 incident in Alberta where a ZX850 split during frost-laden rock excavation. The failure was traced to a combination of operator overreach and sub-zero fatigue stress.
Hydraulic Systems and Reliability
The Cat 385C L’s hydraulic system is powerful but complex. It features variable displacement pumps and electronically controlled valves, which allow for precise control but also introduce multiple failure points. Common issues include:
- Hydraulic hose ruptures due to pressure spikes
- Ram seal leaks from overextension or contamination
- Overheating of hydraulic oil during prolonged heavy-duty cycles
- Fuel starvation caused by solenoid malfunctions
Hitachi and Deere systems, while slightly less refined in control, are praised for their simplicity. Their hydraulic circuits are easier to troubleshoot, and parts—both OEM and aftermarket—are widely available. This makes them attractive to contractors in remote areas or those with in-house maintenance teams.
Operator Comfort and Productivity
Caterpillar machines are known for their ergonomic cabs, with air suspension seats, intuitive joystick controls, and excellent visibility. The 385C L includes climate control, adjustable armrests, and noise insulation, making it a favorite among operators during long shifts.
However, comfort does not compensate for downtime. In high-production environments, a machine that’s offline—even with a plush seat—is a liability. Hitachi’s cab is slightly more utilitarian but functional. Operators report fewer interruptions, allowing for consistent digging cycles and better overall productivity.
Dealer Support and Regional Considerations
Choosing between these machines often comes down to dealer proximity and support quality. In regions like Michigan or Alberta, Caterpillar dealers are well-established, offering rapid parts delivery and field service. In contrast, Hitachi/Deere support varies by region but is often bolstered by third-party suppliers and independent mechanics familiar with Japanese systems.
A contractor in Ireland noted that while Cat machines filled buckets faster, the frequency of breakdowns led to project delays. Conversely, their Hitachi ZX850, though slower, maintained uptime and allowed them to meet deadlines without relying on dealer intervention.
Recommendations for Used Equipment Buyers
When purchasing a used mass excavator, consider the following:
- Inspect boom welds and pivot points for stress fractures
- Review service records, especially hydraulic system repairs
- Test fuel delivery systems and solenoid responsiveness
- Evaluate dealer proximity and parts availability
- Consider operator feedback on comfort and control responsiveness
Final Thoughts
Both the Caterpillar 385 and Hitachi/Deere 800-class excavators are capable machines with distinct strengths. The Cat excels in power and operator comfort but demands vigilant maintenance. Hitachi and Deere offer a more forgiving ownership experience, especially for contractors who prioritize uptime over marginal speed gains.
As the industry shifts toward telematics and predictive maintenance, future iterations of these machines may bridge the gap between performance and reliability. Until then, the choice remains a balance of application, support, and philosophy—whether one prefers the brute force of Caterpillar or the quiet persistence of Hitachi.
