Comparing CAT 980 Series Loaders with Komatsu WA500 in Real-World Operations

[MikePhua]

The Evolution of the CAT 980 Series
The Caterpillar 980 series wheel loaders have long been a benchmark in the 30-ton class, serving in mining, quarrying, and bulk material handling. Introduced in the 1960s, the series has evolved through multiple generations—980C, 980F, 980G, and 980H—each bringing improvements in power, hydraulics, cab comfort, and emissions compliance.
Caterpillar Inc., founded in 1925, has consistently refined the 980 platform to meet changing industry demands. By the time the 980G was released in the mid-1990s, it featured electro-hydraulic controls, improved visibility, and a redesigned cab. The 980F, its predecessor, was known for mechanical simplicity and ruggedness, often preferred in harsh environments where reliability trumped refinement.
Komatsu WA500 and Its Competitive Position
Komatsu’s WA500 series was developed to compete directly with the CAT 980. With a similar operating weight and bucket capacity, the WA500 has been used extensively in aggregate yards, coal handling, and port operations. Komatsu, founded in Japan in 1921, introduced the WA500 in the late 1980s and has since released multiple iterations, including the WA500-3 and WA500-6.
Early WA500 models were powered by Cummins N14 engines, which offered strong torque but suffered from camshaft wear issues. Later models transitioned to Komatsu’s own Tier 3 electronic engines with common rail injection, improved fuel efficiency, and closed-center hydraulics.
Terminology annotation:

• Electro-hydraulic controls: Electronic switches and sensors used to operate hydraulic functions, replacing mechanical linkages.
  
• Common rail injection: A fuel delivery system that maintains constant pressure for precise fuel atomization.
  
• Closed-center hydraulics: A system where hydraulic flow is demand-based, improving efficiency and reducing heat.
  

Operator Impressions and Field Performance
Operators who have run both machines often cite the CAT 980F and 980G as reliable, torque-rich performers. The 980F is praised for its ability to climb coal piles and maintain traction under load. The G series introduced cab improvements but also brought electronic control issues—particularly in damp conditions, where boom and bucket functions could become erratic due to moisture-sensitive switches.
In contrast, the WA500-3 was noted for its quick acceleration and smoother ride, attributed to its lighter frame and responsive transmission. However, recurring camshaft failures in the N14 engine raised concerns about long-term durability. The WA500-6 addressed many of these issues with a redesigned powertrain, lock-up torque converter, and hydraulic fan.
In Norway, operators found the WA500-6 underwhelming in terms of low-end power, requiring high RPM to deliver full performance. The gear lever placement was criticized for interfering with legroom. Meanwhile, Volvo’s L220E and L90F were gaining market share due to superior cab ergonomics and fuel economy.
Maintenance and Reliability Trends
CAT loaders, particularly the 980F, are known for their longevity. Units with over 10,000 hours often continue in service with minimal downtime. Certified powertrain rebuilds are common, extending life by another 8,000–12,000 hours. The 980G, while more refined, has higher maintenance costs due to its electronic systems.
Komatsu WA500 loaders vary by generation. The -3 models are mechanically straightforward but suffer from engine component wear. The -6 models offer better diagnostics and emissions compliance but require specialized service tools and training.
Recommendations:

• For remote operations with limited support, the CAT 980F is preferred due to mechanical simplicity.
  
• For high-volume loading with trained technicians, the WA500-6 offers smoother operation and better fuel efficiency.
  
• Always verify engine model and serial prefix to determine manufacturing origin and parts compatibility.
  

Parts Availability and Dealer Support
In North America, Caterpillar’s dealer network is extensive, with strong support for legacy models. Parts for the 980F and G are readily available, including remanufactured components. Komatsu has improved its infrastructure, with parts distribution centers in Tennessee and Quebec, but some older WA500 models may require longer lead times for engine components.
In Pennsylvania, contractors working with Anderson Equipment (Komatsu) and Beckwith Machinery (CAT) reported good service from both, though CAT was noted for better support for small contractors.
Cab Comfort and Operator Experience
The 980F cab is functional but dated, often described as “caveman” by modern standards. The G series improved visibility and seating, with optional Viking seats enhancing comfort. Komatsu cabs are roomier, with better door hardware and quieter interiors. However, electrical issues and gear lever placement remain concerns.
In Arizona, operators preferred the newer 980H for its responsive controls and reduced smoke emissions. The WA500-6 was praised for its hydraulic smoothness but criticized for requiring full throttle to access peak power.
Conclusion
Choosing between the CAT 980 series and Komatsu WA500 depends on application, support infrastructure, and operator preference. The 980F remains a workhorse with unmatched durability, while the WA500-6 offers modern features and smoother operation. Both machines have proven themselves in demanding environments, but understanding their strengths and limitations is key to maximizing uptime and productivity.