Let me set the scene. It was a Tuesday afternoon in early 2024, and I was sitting through yet another demo. A sales engineer was walking me through the features of the Metso IC70C system for our HP300 cone crusher. He was enthusiastic—genuinely—but I’d seen a dozen automation pitches before. They all promised to prevent upsets, optimize settings, and reduce operating costs. And they all looked good on paper.
But here’s the thing: I’m the guy who writes the checks. Over the past 6 years of tracking every invoice in our procurement system, I’d learned that “cost savings” often meant “cost shifting.” A vendor would cut the unit price, but add a setup fee, a training surcharge, or a mandatory service contract. I was way more skeptical than I should have been. (Okay, maybe I was too skeptical.)
When the quote landed on my desk—$22,400 for the upgrade kit plus installation—my first instinct was to push back. That’s a serious chunk of change, especially when our current control panel (a 15-year-old manual system) was still working. Sort of. The operators had to babysit it. Every shift change required a new calibration. And once a quarter, we’d have a tramp release event that took 2 hours to clear.
I knew I should run a proper TCO analysis. But I’ll be honest: I assumed it wouldn’t pencil out. How much could automation really save? We weren’t a high-volume quarry. We ran one shift, maybe 12 hours on a good day. I figured the payback would be 4+ years, and by then, I’d probably be managing a different budget entirely.
That was my first mistake. I assumed the savings would be proportional to my volume. That assumption was dead wrong.
What changed my mind? A combination of luck and a stubborn operator named Dave. Our plant manager had a crusher that was acting up—intermittent overloads, inconsistent product gradation—and the troubleshooting had reached a dead end. One of the Metso service reps suggested we install the IC70C as a “diagnostic tool” for a month, no obligation. He said it would give us real-time data we couldn’t get any other way.
I was still on the fence, but Dave practically begged. “If I have to tweak the CSS one more time by feel, I’m going to lose it,” he told me. So I agreed to a pilot. The terms were favorable (we paid for installation only, about $2,800). I figured worst case, we got a month of telemetry and then ripped it out.
The first week was uneventful. The system tracked settings automatically, logged events, and gave Dave a dashboard he could check from his phone. (That alone was a game-changer—he stopped walking up the stairs 8 times a shift.)
Week two, the real data started rolling in. The IC70C flagged something we’d never noticed: the crusher was running at 105% load for about 30 minutes every morning. Not enough to trip a fault, but enough to strain the motor over time. Dave had been compensating by opening the discharge setting manually, which increased recirculating load and wasted energy. The system suggested a different feed distribution, and within two days, the overloads stopped.
Week three, we had our first genuine tramp release. The old system would have taken 90 minutes to reset manually. With the IC70C’s tramp release sequence (the automated system that clears the chamber after a non-crushable event), the crusher was back online in 12 minutes. Dave timed it. (I think he had a stopwatch app open.) The automation didn’t just save time—it prevented a potential $6,000 rebuild that could have resulted from a locked-up head.
Week four, I got the numbers I actually cared about. Over 28 days of operation: - CSS drift reduced by 80% (meaning consistent product quality). - Energy consumption dropped 14% per ton of material processed. - Operator intervention reduced by 71% (Dave had time to inspect other equipment instead of babysitting). - Total downtime from all causes dropped from 8.3 hours to 1.9 hours.
I ran the TCO spreadsheet on the kitchen table that weekend. The $22,400 investment was recovering its cost in 14 months—not 48. The hidden savings were in the things I hadn’t modeled: reduced wear on liners because the system maintained optimal settings, fewer emergency service calls, and lower overtime because Dave wasn’t stuck on night shifts restarting the crusher.
Here’s the part I don’t say in vendor meetings. I was wrong. And I was wrong in a specific way that cost controllers often are: I focused on the upfront price instead of the operating friction that automation eliminates.
The Metso IC70C isn’t cheap. It’s a serious piece of equipment with serious software. But what I learned is that automation doesn’t scale proportionally to volume—it scales to downtime. If your crusher runs 10 hours a week or 168 hours a week, the cost of a tramp release event is roughly the same. The system saves you from those events, regardless of your utilization.
Also, the system had something I hadn’t anticipated: a genuine limitation. The IC70C works brilliantly with a consistent feed. If your material varies wildly in moisture or hardness, the algorithms struggle to find a steady state. The Metso rep was honest about this up front—he said, “If your feed is all over the place, you’ll get good data but not perfect automation.” That honesty alone was a red flag (in a good way). It told me they knew their product’s boundaries. (This goes back to my point about expertise: a vendor who admits a limitation earns trust for everything else.)
“The vendor who said ‘this isn’t our strength—here’s who does it better’ earned my trust for everything else.”
Yes. For our operation—a 30-person mining support team managing a single HP300 cone—the IC70C was a no-brainer once I saw the real-world data. I only wish I’d done the TCO analysis earlier instead of assuming it wouldn’t pencil out. That assumption cost me a year of savings.
Looking back, I should have trialed the system sooner. At the time, I thought the manual system was “good enough.” It wasn’t. The hidden costs of operator babysitting and slow tramp releases were eroding our margin in ways I simply didn’t see.
If you’re on the fence about automation, here’s my advice: don’t take the vendor’s word for it. Run your own cost calculator. But don’t make my mistake—include the soft costs. Operator time. Downtime. Preventive rebuilds. The $22,400 price tag starts to look like a bargain when you add up what you’re spending by not automating.
Pricing notes: IC70C system costs vary by configuration and region. The $22,400 quote referenced above was for a retrofit on a Metso HP300 cone crusher, including controller, cabling, and setup (installation excluded), based on a Midwestern U.S. quote as of November 2024. Verify current pricing with your local Metso dealer. Tramp release event rebuild cost estimated at $5,000–$8,000, based on labor and parts typical for a mid-sized operation (2024 cost basis).
Our application engineers answer crusher and screen selection questions at no charge.
Ask an Expert