Top O' the Line Box Blade????

[Harv]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Patrick -

I've been trying to figure out which stresses are causing your damage, and as near as I can tell there shouldn't be any significat forces applied to the support arms from engaging the dirt. It must all come from from the hydraulic ram. So to get the kind of damage shown in your picture, it seems like the ripper(s) on one side must be binding up or something when you try to raise or lower them.

What I can't see in any of these pictures is how the scarifiers are supported by the lower bar (square tube?) for digging. If they are free to pivot in that lower support, then I can see where there is a lot of leverage applied to the upper one, in which case you'd think the upper one would be a lot beefier.

I know the pict on the left here is not configured for hydraulics, but it gives us a peek at the raised position:

 

[patrickg]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Right Harv, All that and more happened. It sometimes sticks and tries to bend going up, sometimes down. Last time the bend was the other way and milder on the long piece but sharper on the two short pivot arms. This time one pivot got bent but near opposite end of itself from last time. The 2 in square tube is bent more this time and in the opposite direction from the last time. Here is a flash pic I just took showing adifferent view than the two you provided. Between the three, we got it covered. I will probably just trade up for a bit more width and a lot of BEEF.

 

[glennmac]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Patrick,

Do you have the Cammond BS series? If so, it's only rated up to 40hp. All the other ones are already the "industrial" line. I find it inconceivable that this could happen on an expensive product that is properly matched to your tractor. If it is properly matched and it breaks that easy, I wouldnt trust their products at all. I'd ask for my money back...and buy a Gannon.

 

[beenthere]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Harv. I think you are hitting the nail on the head, and the design doesn't apear that it can work, at least not with a ram. If anything, it appears to me the rippers should drop down, and be supported (pushed) in front of the 4x4 steel tube. Also, an A frame on the top side for the hyd. ram to push on would help stiffen that 2x2 tube. Any twisting when being lowered would bind up the individual rippers and bend the 2x2, which is apparently what is happening. Very enlightening.

 

[Harv]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

<font color=blue>the design doesn't apear that it can work, at least not with a ram</font color=blue>

I hate to say it, but I sort of agree. If anything prevents that whole mechanism from moving exactly up and down in its prescribed path, I don't see how it could avoid binding. Seems kinda iffy for an implement of this type. Maybe I'm missing something.

What I like better (except for the industrial price tag, no doubt) are the industrial boxscrapers by the same manufacturer. They use a whole different approach with "swing away" rippers. They look much less prone to the type of problems Patrick has been experiencing:

Attached is a better shot of the "swing away" mechanism from my Gearmore catalog.

BTW -- I notice the pictures I've posted in this thread of the Cammond box blades are the same ones that appear in the Gearmore catalog. Not just similar, but the exact same pictures. Only the name on the side of the implement has been altered. I guess Cammond is the manufacturer and Gearmore is just a west coast distributor?

 

[patrickg]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

It is Cammond, don't recall series. Tractor specs say I have 39.5 PTO HP At one time, one of these engines, on a test stand, produced 46 HP. With HST I doubt that I am getting over 40 HP to the ground. Anyway it is a mute question, OBE as I will probably replace it with a much heavier sturdier one. There is a 2C2 and 4C2 series from this makekr that are both more heavily built/rated. I'm thinking the 4C2 in 76 or 80 inch size, a bit wider than the 72 I have now. Cover my tracks better. Have wheels at max width for stability and don't want to set them any closer as I have had this thing on three wheels too many times (even on two wheels which I really don't like). The 72 in width was selected partially due to advice regarding small size of tractor. Not having much problem and don't think 76 or 80 inch is toooooooo much blade and it wold cover the tracks of the rear wheels better.

Patrick (waiting for Christmas, err ahh uhh I mean Mondays meeting results)

 

[glennmac]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Harv, Cammond does make the Gearmores. I spoke to Gearmore, who told me they have no dealers outide of California, Arizona and one other western state. They gave me the name of a guy at Cammond, who confirmed that Cammond's 2C2 series is the same as Gearmore's 2G2 series. I think Patrick has the Cammond BS series, which to me is a light/medium weight, low/medium end box retrofitted with a hydraulic scarifier mechanism. Cammond quoted me 1600 plus freight for a 2c2-72 (fixed blade) and 1700 plus freight for a 2c2-72T (hinged back with locking pin). I dont know that Gearmore picked up both the fixed and hinged back models.

Maybe you can pick up a Gearmore hydraulic unit out there for me, and Mark Chalkley can bring it back east when he returns from delivering his tractor to you.

 

[Harv]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

<font color=blue>Mark Chalkley can bring it back east when he returns from delivering his tractor to you</font color=blue>

Sounds like a perfect plan to me, Glenn. I'm sure Mark is about to reconsider my offer, so I'm going to go sit on the porch and wait for him...

 

[GlueGuy]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

Oh, and Mark, please bring a couple more of those coffee cups of yours, Harv & I are running low on coffee.

The GlueGuy

 

[patrickg]

Re: Top O\' the Line Box Blade????

I've pushed and pulled this apparently "light duty" box blade as hard as the L4610 in low or medium range at PTO speed in 4wd is capable and can't phase it in any way except the hydraulic raise lower scarifier function. I've been told here on TBN it looks really light duty with thin metal and no braces where other units have braces B U T it remains plumb, straight, true, unbent and in fine shape except for the hydraulic raise lower part. I think the box blade design is a good one and is mature, having probably been evolved over time to its current quite successful form and doesn't need the braces or heavier metal. However, the hydraulic part just might be an add on that hasn't evolved to a bullet proof form.
I sure can't fault the box/scraper part. I back into dirt piles at warp 3 to use inertia to move them when I couldn't possibly move them in low range 4wd, no problem. I really work the heck out of it and it just performs really well, especially now that I have learned to use the hydraulic top link to dump dirt rather than the 3ph (I got no instruction manual or training, just went for it. I have been observed of late by an old timer and he says I'm doin' just fine but was a bit surprised by my agressive style, especially tilting the blade. Anyway, I am most dissapointed with the hydraulic part and the difference in cost between this unit and the 2C2 is about $1000 retail. The 4C2 is another $200 up from there. Still, I like strong. If the factory offers a good price consideration, something much better than the retail difference, I'll just bite the bullet and get the 4C2. I like strong stuff. I will not baby a pile of steel. I may treat the tractor a lot better but it is a tad more sophisticated than just several hundred pounds of steel in a low tech configuration.
Anyone have thoughts on width? I am having no difficulty in 99% of instances pulling the 72 inch with box at maximum scraping adjustment and scarifiers fuly lowered. I can do a good job with just the scraper in medium range on the tranny and in softer dirt medium is ok for scraping while scarifying. I would assume that I could go up a bit in width and get better coverage for my tire prints without overloading the lil Kubby. They have 76 inch and 80 inch.models. I don't think the 76 would be a stretch but would like the 80 if that isn't unrealistic for a L-4610 4wd with HST. As this is my first tractor and box blade I have no experience to draw upon but the advice of others. I feel more comfortable hearing the pros and cons discussed here than relying soley on the manufacturer and or dealer. Info learned here has prepared me to better understand and participate in decisions made in consultation with the dealer.

So, what do you experienced box bladers think? My Kuby is rated at 39.5 PTO HP (46 at flywheel on a test bench, ever do much farming on a test bench?)

Patrick