Johnston and Bucher launch ‘dual branded’ sub-compact sweeper
Let’s get the complicated corporate stuff out the way first. It should be quite clear to any observer that there are too many small independent suppliers of equipment to the scrap, waste, recycling and street cleansing markets nationally and globally.
On one hand, it’s what makes our jobs challenging. Just keeping up with new developments is a full-time job for me! But on the other hand it’s clear that in the mainstream automotive sector, our industry is in an era of consolidation and merger. This has already thrown-up some strange ‘partnerships’ – Norba ended up as a division of Geesink when, from a technical viewpoint, it should have been the other way around. How both ended up as part of US manufacturer Oshkosh is another story.
The coming together of bin lifter manufacturer Otto, compaction body manufacturer HN Logistics and several other suppliers of bins and containers seemed an excellent idea, but ‘common sense’ doesn’t always work, and design-lead HN Schorling is now owned by the Spanish Ros Roca Group.
So, how the sale of UK-based manufacturer Johnston Sweepers to Swiss-based Bucher works out remains to be seen. Bucher already owned German sweeper manufacturer Schorling and the Johnston sale included specialist manufacturer Johnston-Beam. This meant two major previously competing suppliers of airport sweeping equipment under the same corporate ownership. Likewise, Johnston and Schorling were often competing against each other in global markets for municipal street cleansing orders and, in such circumstances, there is a corporate temptation to badge the cheapest product in the group portfolio with whichever brand logo has the greatest chance of sales. Examples from the car and truck world suggest this is not always the best way to go, and that even the launch of a genuine jointly produced new product sold under a ‘dual branding’ policy is much harder than a room full of Swiss accountants might think.
So, basically, the new Bucher Citycat 1000 and the Johnston CN101 are the same product – but with numerous detail differences. Both will be sold in world markets under whichever brand has the strongest market presence, but it’s quite possible both versions will be available in markets where large ‘turnkey’ contracts are bid for. In the Pacific Rim where traditionally Johnston has been a major player, the CN101 will be the main contender, while in others such as the wider Germanic markets, the Citycat 1000 will be the strongest contender.
So the big question is – will this little one cubic metre capacity vacuum sweeper be up to the job? Producing such a physically small machine (it’s just 600 mm wide and under 2 m high) that has the capacity to work all shift long without overheating either the engine or the driver is a tough mission. Creating a sub-compact design that has enough suction capacity and brushing power to keep on working in an urban environment without excessive downtime day-in, day-out for several years is even harder. In spite of some manufacturers’ claims, many machines in this capacity class do not tend to last very long.
Transverse power unit
So the news that the Johnston CN101/Bucher Citycat 1000 has been designed specifically to work a typical northern European-style week with minimal meal breaks – yet still only needs a 1000-hour service schedule is a great starting point. Making a major contribution to higher standards of reliability is the adoption of a three-cylinder Deutz Diesel oil-cooled engine. And hopefully adding further to its reliability is the decision to place the power unit transversally across the chassis frame behind the cab, rather than towards the rear of the machine.
While the transverse engine location has resulted in a widely splayed chassis frame, it should help contribute to cooler running. But I’m convinced that another major benefit of this transverse location is that it places the mass of the engine and transmission components nicely between the wheelbase, which helps provide excellent handling characteristics.
There are several machines in this size class that don’t handle well on windy days. There are several more that offer clever design features in theory, but don’t translate into a friendly environment for the driver – who has to spend hours cooped up in a confined space. And we’ve already established that from a service engineer’s viewpoint, there are several more that just aren’t reliable enough to make the deployment of a fleet of sub-compact precinct sweepers economical – especially when manual sweeping and ‘street orderly’ carts are enjoying a revival in city centres because they offer a highly visual image that the job is actually being done, together with zero carbon emissions.
Sweepers boost tourism
So the fact that after several hours of working with a Johnston-branded machine, the CN101/Citycat 1000 package offers significant advances in all three areas – service schedules, operational safety and driver comfort – should come as welcome news to any city authority looking to encourage tourism for the local economy.
What impressed me was that, with only minimal familiarization, I could work the machine. Everything was close to hand and logical (the controls are similar to the current Johnston CX200), vision was excellent and although there is never going to be too much space in the cab of such a small machine, the provision of a proper truck-style suspension seat made the whole ‘driver experience’ a positive one. But wait, it gets better ...
 |
| In its element – footpaths, shopping precincts and other tight areas are what this new sweeper was designed for. Suction is comparable with larger machines, while the brushes are independently controlled |
What really impressed me was the way in which the four-wheel steering was able to tackle kerbs. Some competitive machines have gone the ‘articulated’ route to help promote stability. Sometimes this works (the Hako ‘Citymaster’ can be bounced up high kerbs in enthusiastic style), but some designs are too lightweight, or unstable to survive harsh treatment. It is pointless suggesting operatives shouldn’t hit kerbs at speed – it happens. It’s the designer’s job to help ensure it doesn’t risk damage to life or machinery when it does.
So it’s my job to take a brand new machine and find out what it takes to flip it over, or get it hopelessly ‘grounded’ on a high kerb. The answer is that it will take a great deal more abuse than even I would meter out in the name of ‘testing’. The CN-101 I drove would climb up a steep kerb square on – illustrating that there was plenty of power available. Or it could be driven up at an oblique angle without wagging a wheel helplessly in the air, or catching the wheel-mounted collector box underneath.
Conclusions
There are just a couple of factors that could do with more thought. First, there is not much room in the cab for driver’s things, such as a waterproof jacket or anything which might need to go in a ‘glove’ compartment. The only other ‘issue’ was when sweeping on a steep downgrade from which I had to then reverse. I was expecting the (single speed range) hydrostatic transmission to ‘hold’ the machine while I switched from forward to reverse without the parking brake being required. It didn’t. As a result, I smashed the brushes into some cast iron gates!
The gates were undamaged. But amazingly, the sweep gear of the CN101 survived as well. I’m told that a stronger ‘hold’ position can be set as standard and this will be looked at on production machines. Sweeping performance and water spray control are really well up to ‘compact’ sweeper standards with standard litter items like burger wrappings and drinks cans disappearing up the suction hose.
So will this single speed sweeper make big inroads into the global market in both its branded guises? I think it might.
Malcolm Bates is collection and transport correspondent for Waste Management World.
e-mail: wmw@pennwell.com
