ATTN: Heavy BOX BLADE Experts.....Give us your opinions please.

[scoutcub]

Been reading the thread with great interest....can't hold off on throwing in my :2cents:. :laughing:

I started a thread sometime ago about a HD box blade.....and the reason for it, no one has really touched upon here yet. Many of the newer 40HP+ compacts made these days can lift a lot.....like #2500, such as mine. Ballast is a real issue. I loaded my rears with Rimguard, which is #1100. Finally ended up with a used FFC that weighs in at #1560. Seems like these "superboxes" all share similar designs. So that puts me about even for loader lift capacity/ballast. It's a CAT 2 implement, so I have to use adapters for my CAT1 3pt......something to think about in the design phase? Or just use adapters....
I've toyed with the thought of going lighter, like around 1000 or 1200....because I want to install a TNT, and wondering if the extra weight will cause excessive strain once the box is tilted....? I don't want to hijack the thread here and perhaps should start a thread on the subject....Hopefully Brian (mtnViewRanch) will read this and respond, either via PM or for the benefit of others.
Anyways, I think EA should be commended for the decision to build this new line of "superbox". I think there is definitely a niche for it, and I believe building the weight into the box itself versus adding external weight is the way to go. EA is well into the design phase in a short period of time, and looking for feedback during the design phase.....what other company can boast that?
I haven't purchased anything from EA as of yet.....but I will seriously consider them in all future purchases for these reasons.


Frank

 

[RedNeckRacin]

BE STILL MY BEATING HEART!

I bought the extreme severe duty 84" BB from you guys and I'm relatively happy with it besides the weight and the broke tooth that I already managed to beat up. The harden steel snapped right off of the shank right where the support starts. Thats frustrating that I have had it less than a year and I'm going to have to start repairing it already. I have a heavy clay/shale mix thats sticky when wet and tough as nails when dry and compacted. The blade will actually lift when it starts to get full and it certainly skips when it hits a tough spot or a rock cause the cutting edge to pick up. I have YET to find anything to get ahold of that will stop/slow down my tractor with your BB behind it. I have even had the rippers all the way extended and the tractor doesnt even grunt pulling it.

Behind a 8-10k lb tractor, 800lbs is not nearly enough for weight in terms of ballast(my 1700lb concrete counter weight is just barely enough with a full bucket of wet clay) 800lbs is actually about what is in each of my tires with rimguard for a comparision. Sometimes the BB is my only choice for a counter weight with dirt work and it falls short with these short wheel base utility tractors. Don't forget that most of us also have 4wd, so if your rating it for 100hp, it might just end up behind a 100hp 4x4 tractor that weighs 10,000lbs+.


Good product so far, and for the price difference from a Woods/Gannon to yours I don't regret my purchase other than if your actually coming out with a heavier duty unit!

 

[jenkinsph]

Looks good so far, might have gone with 5/8" plate on the sides which would surely put it in a heavy duty class.

 

[ovrszd]

I'm with Brian. I'm not impressed with the tower design either. And like him, not sure what the side bracing is for. If the box is built properly, that's unneeded. Unless you're just trying to add weight....

Also a heavy box with fixed rear blade is useless unless you have a hydraulic top link to allow deeper cuts.

Everyone already knows how I feel about fixed scarifiers.......

Another point that should be considered is designing it QH compatible. As a designer of Attachments, I'd think that would be toward the top of the list.

I guess what you have designed is a "heavy" box with no particular construction advantages. This thread has been active for a week and this is the best your design team can come up with???

 

[EverythingAttachments]

Questions,

Why the braces on the top inside edges? They sure are not needed.

Shouldn't you be using a tower similar to the Gannon? :confused3: What you have shown collects material and holds it in, and again bracing that should not be required.

So for this BEAST, What is the projected cost? You may have to lighten it up a bit to cut some costs.

Those braces wouldn't be needed for the lower end of the rated HP range. This particular box is going to be rated for up to a 180hp 4wd tractor or 220hp 2wd tractor so the support will be needed.
With a depth of 44", the braces shouldn't limit the performance whatsoever.

Come on man!! You want heavy, and now you want it lighter??
I know exactly what you're saying. Ted wanted to start with the Beast, which will be the heaviest model and then work his way back down to models that are more in line with the Gannon.
The market for the Beast is probably even less, but there is a market. It is aimed more for land clearing and grading behind very large tractors.

After this blade, he will make some "superboxes"(I like that name) that are more in line with the gannon with options like retractable shanks and hinged backs.


The Viper cutting edge by Valk will be the largest, heaviest cutting edge being used on any 3pt attachment according to the manufacturer.
He's probably going to offer this Box in 78,90,96,108 and 120" widths and the cost will depend on just how much labor is involved.

 

[EverythingAttachments]

Also a heavy box with fixed rear blade is useless unless you have a hydraulic top link to allow deeper cuts.

Everyone already knows how I feel about fixed scarifiers.......

Another point that should be considered is designing it QH compatible. As a designer of Attachments, I'd think that would be toward the top of the list.

Most tractors that use a blade like this will have downpressure.
It will be designed for Cat 2 and Cat 3 quick hitches.
More models to come. This is a start.....starting from the top.

The first blade we build will be going to a guy in LA with a 135hp tractor that is making a pond on his property.

 

[jenkinsph]

Most tractors that use a blade like this will have downpressure.
It will be designed for Cat 2 and Cat 3 quick hitches.
More models to come. This is a start.....starting from the top.

The first blade we build will be going to a guy in LA with a 135hp tractor that is making a pond on his property.

What about the mast? That appears to be the weakest link so far. Upon reexamining the pictures I agree that the bent plates with their dogleg design is not as good as having the large perpendicular mast parts that Gannon uses.

 

[EverythingAttachments]

Ted says that it is an illusion that the hitch looks weak because the rest of the unit is so massive. It will look different when it's live and in color.
It will be stronger than the Gannon Hitch. It is made from 1/2" steel and mounted on a 6x6 tube with the back support. I'm pretty sure that theirs is 1/2" and mounted on a 4x4 tube.

 

[jenkinsph]

Ted says that it is an illusion that the hitch looks weak because the rest of the unit is so massive. It will look different when it's live and in color.
It will be stronger than the Gannon Hitch. It is made from 1/2" steel and mounted on a 6x6 tube with the back support. I'm pretty sure that theirs is 1/2" and mounted on a 4x4 tube.

The Frontier BB1284 I have made by Woods Gannon has 5/8" plate for the mast and is mounted to 5" box tubing, this is a 1260 lb boxblade with hydraulic scarifiers. If Ted is going to build a 2000 lb boxblade it needs more mast than shown so far. I commend him for reaching out though and think pursuing this is a good idea.

 

[EverythingAttachments]

The Gannon hitch is totally dependent on that tube for support.
Also, the blade in the drawing is not complete. They are still working on it today and I should have more pics to post before the day's out.
Keep up the comments. Ted's watching!:thumbsup:
Travis