Demolition Attachments Compared: Hydraulic Breakers vs. Pulverizers vs. Shears

Walk onto almost any active teardown and you'll see one of three tools hanging off the excavator's stick: a hammer pounding through a slab, a pulverizer crushing concrete down to rubble and rebar, or a shear slicing through steel like it's cardboard. They all fall under "demolition attachment," and contractors new to the work sometimes treat them as interchangeable. They're not. Each one is built around a different mechanism, suited to a different material, and priced and financed differently as a result. Here's the real breakdown, with real CAT spec numbers, so you can match the right tool to the right job instead of guessing.

Hydraulic Hammer: Impact Force on Concrete and Rock

A hydraulic hammer breaks material through repeated high-force impact -- a piston driven by hydraulic pressure strikes a tool bit (a point, chisel, or blunt tip) thousands of times, fracturing concrete, rock, or asphalt through blunt force rather than cutting or crushing. CAT's H115 S Performance Hammer, a mid-size model in the lineup, delivers 370 to 800 blows per minute at a minimum operating weight of 2,354 lb, running on 19 to 34 gpm of hydraulic flow at 1,885 to 2,175 psi, with a 4.3-inch tool shaft diameter. It's rated for carriers between 26,500 lb and 44,100 lb (roughly 12 to 20 metric tons) -- a genuinely mid-size excavator class, not the compact or the largest end of CAT's hammer range.

Hammers are the right call for primary breaking: slab-on-grade demolition, foundation removal, rock excavation, and any job where the material needs to be fractured before it can be handled at all. They're less efficient at separating rebar from concrete or processing already-broken material -- that's a pulverizer's job -- and they do essentially nothing against structural steel, which is a shear's job.

Pulverizer: Crushing Concrete and Separating Rebar

A pulverizer uses two hydraulically actuated jaws to crush concrete between them, breaking it down into smaller, more manageable pieces while separating embedded rebar for recycling -- a fundamentally different mechanism than a hammer's repeated impact. CAT's MP324 multi-processor with pulverizer jaws delivers 418.9 short tons of crushing force at the primary cutter, 368.3 short tons at the cutter tip, and 109.1 short tons at the tooth tip, with a maximum jaw opening of 38 inches. It cycles open in 1.8 seconds and closed in 1.2 seconds, and it's rated for excavators between 24 and 35 tons -- a meaningfully larger carrier class than the H115 S hammer, reflecting how much more structure a pulverizer attachment itself has to carry.

Pulverizers excel at secondary processing: taking concrete that's already been broken loose (by a hammer, by controlled demolition, or by the structure simply coming down) and crushing it into pieces small enough to load, haul, and recycle, while cleanly separating the rebar that scrap yards pay for separately from the concrete itself. A pulverizer is a poor substitute for a hammer on intact slab or foundation work -- it needs a pre-existing edge or crack to get its jaws into material, not a flat, unbroken surface.

Shear: Cutting Structural Steel and Rebar Clean

A shear cuts rather than crushes or breaks -- a scissor-like hydraulic jaw action that slices through structural steel, rebar, pipe, and cable cleanly, the way you'd use shears on sheet metal just at enormously higher force. CAT's S3090 Rotating Scrap & Demolition Shear delivers 1,320 ton-force at the throat, 534 ton-force at the apex, and 282 ton-force at the tip, with a 35.8-inch jaw opening, running on up to 185 gpm of hydraulic flow at up to 5,075 psi. It's rated for excavators from 90 to 110 tons stick-mounted, or 30 to 54 tons boom-mounted -- a genuinely large-excavator attachment, reflecting the scale of structural steel it's built to process.

Shears are the right tool for structural steel demolition (steel-frame buildings, bridges, industrial structures), rebar cutting during concrete processing, and scrap and recycling work where a clean cut matters more than crushing or breaking. They do essentially nothing useful against intact concrete or rock -- that's a hammer's job for breaking it loose and a pulverizer's job for processing it afterward.

Noise and vibration are worth a specific mention too, since they affect where each tool can actually be used. Hammers are the loudest and most vibration-heavy of the three by nature of their impact mechanism, which is why CAT builds a standard silencing feature into the H115 S specifically to allow hammer work in noise-sensitive areas like residential neighborhoods or near hospitals, where local noise ordinances can otherwise shut a job down mid-shift. Pulverizers and shears, working by crushing and cutting rather than repeated impact, generate meaningfully less noise and vibration for the same material-processing job -- a real consideration on urban and close-quarters demolition sites where a hammer's noise profile alone can be the deciding factor in which attachment gets specified for the job.

The Three Side by Side

• Hydraulic hammer (CAT H115 S): impact force, breaks intact concrete/rock/asphalt, 2,354 lb operating weight, fits 12-20 ton carriers

• Pulverizer (CAT MP324): crushing jaws, processes already-broken concrete and separates rebar, 418.9 Sh Ton primary crushing force, fits 24-35 ton carriers

• Shear (CAT S3090): cutting jaws, slices structural steel, rebar, and pipe, 1,320 ton-f throat force, fits 30-110 ton carriers depending on mount

Notice the carrier size progression: hammers scale down to compact and mid-size excavators, pulverizers step up into the mid-to-large range, and the biggest rotating shears are built for genuinely large excavators in the 90-110 ton class. That's not arbitrary -- it reflects how much reaction force each mechanism pushes back through the boom and stick, and it's exactly why matching attachment to carrier correctly matters as much as matching attachment to material.

Which Job Actually Needs Which Tool

• Tearing down an intact concrete structure from the top down: hammer first to break it loose, pulverizer second to process the rubble and pull rebar

• Processing a pile of already-broken concrete and rebar for hauling and recycling: pulverizer, no hammer needed

• Taking down a steel-frame building or cutting up structural steel for scrap: shear, not a hammer or pulverizer

• Trenching through rock or breaking up asphalt for a road project: hammer

• A mixed demolition site with concrete, rebar, and structural steel all present: most serious demolition contractors run more than one of these attachments, often on more than one excavator, swapping as the job's material mix shifts

Rent-vs-Own Looks Different for Each of the Three

The rent-vs-own case isn't identical across these three attachments, because they wear and get used differently. A hammer sees essentially continuous impact stress on its tool bit and internal piston, and its wear parts (bushings, tool bits, seals) get consumed on a predictable schedule tied directly to hours of use -- a contractor running hammer work most weeks is burning through consumable wear parts whether the hammer is owned or rented, which tilts the economics toward owning once utilization is high enough to justify it. A pulverizer's jaws and cutting edges wear more slowly but take real abuse from embedded rebar and aggregate, and CAT's own design notes that blades on its multi-processor jaws can be flipped to expose a fresh edge, extending service life before full replacement. A shear's blades see concentrated cutting stress and need periodic sharpening or replacement, but a well-maintained shear on structural steel work can run for years between major rebuilds if it's not overloaded against material outside its rated capacity.

For a demolition sub or wrecking contractor who runs one of these attachments on nearly every job -- a structural steel specialist leaning on a shear, or a concrete recycling operation living on a pulverizer -- owning that specific tool, financed against the excavator or as its own asset, usually wins over renting once utilization clears a modest threshold. A general demolition contractor whose job mix shifts job to job between concrete, steel, and rock may genuinely be better served renting whichever attachment a specific contract calls for, rather than owning all three and running two of them at low utilization most of the year.

Why This Matters for How You Finance the Fleet

A demolition contractor outgrowing a single rented attachment often makes the mistake of financing "a demolition attachment" as a generic line item, when the real decision is financing the specific tool that matches the jobs actually on the bid calendar. A sub who's mostly tearing down structural steel doesn't get much use out of a pulverizer; a sub doing residential and light commercial concrete demolition may never need a large rotating shear at all. Financing the attachment that actually matches your typical job -- rather than whatever's available to rent that week -- is the same logic that applies to financing the excavator itself: the asset should match the work, not the other way around.

BFC's demolition attachment lifecycle cost breakdown covers what happens after you own one of these tools -- when to rebuild a worn hammer or shear versus replace it outright -- and our broader demolition contractor equipment guide covers how to size the whole excavator-and-attachment fleet to the jobs you actually bid, not just the one in front of you right now.

Explore BFC's Equipment Financing

BFC finances construction equipment and attachments nationwide for startups and existing businesses, any credit profile. Visit our home page, explore our Financial Center, apply for equipment financing, browse our equipment for sale inventory, or subscribe to our blog for more coverage like this.