4310 in Garage

[sticky]

If you put a blade on your fel to remove snow, do you constantly take your bucket off and on to pile high after multiple snows? I have the 430 loader on a 4300 (12f/12r)and use a land pride 6 foot rear blade and love it. Sometimes I will plow in 3rd gear. Unless you only plow in first, don't you worry about bending your $4000 fel with a snow blade and amazing pushing power ? Remember, your tractor is stronger than the metal the fel is made out of so don't try to ram stumps out or concur the world with it.

I am sure many poeple will disagree, but for the money a set of forks is a better buy than front snow blade. You can use them 12 months of the year and clear a tree in 10 footers or a brush pile in notime and have fun doing it.

 

[jcmseven]

Sticky,
First, I want you and the other posters to know I am not hovering waiting to reply. I have been working on the computer this afternoon and have been periodically checking in with TBN to follow the conversation. I do have things to do, like riding on my tractor!!! Your questions are excellent! Am I putting my loader in extra stress by using the front blade? Is the blade financially feasable? First, with regard to the durability, the Green Team has thought of this. The blade mounts to a plate which distributes force evenly between the loader arms, so that neither arm is subjected to all the pushing force. Second, the blade is meant to work in one plane, not multiple planes such as a front loader bucket would. Although angling the blade would put more stress on one arm (slightly) over another, it is not nearly the torsional stress that would occur when digging into a heavy pile of dirt or rock, which most of us do regularly without concern. For added protection, the blade is spring loaded to "trip" if it encounters an immovable object, such as the cited tree stump, which is not regularly encountered when moving snow. I do not live in as high a snow area as you, so I cannot speak to lifting drifts of snow with the bucket. I can say that because the blade is hooked to the loader arms, one can lift it as high as the loader, thus enhancing one's ability to "knock down" piles of snow if they are high. And, if the bucket is needed, it takes about five minutes to put back on, which still saves time over a bucket-RB combo. I understand about the forks and other apparati for the loader and their cost-effectiveness, but, for me, I have more use for the blade as I plow a lot when I plow (probably six-eight miles of finish road with each snow - in total). Each would have to make his own decision on that one. Our local hospital has four JD compact's; three mid-frames and one large frame. The head groundskeeper said that with a 4410/430/72" RB and a 4710/460/84" blade it took two men about six hours to totally clean the drives and lots around the hospital. He purchased a six foot front blade similar to mine (but WITHOUT the hydraulic angling) for the 4410 last year. Six good snows last year and one so far this year show the lots can be plowed in about four-five hours with one tractor! To date, no durability problems with the 430 loader, which is less heavily-built than the 300CX Brian has. I think it serves as a viable option for anyone who has entensive snow removal and light duty grading to do.

John M.

 

[VTer]

Thanks all for the BB and snowblade input. I'll call the dealer about an exchange for the BB2060 to the BB2065. His original comment was that he thought the 60" better matched the capability of the tractor...of course I don't have the experience so I rely on his. I think he is guarding me in the case of some heavy blading, not just driveway work.

I was thinking about the 84" blade because I'm assuming that I will typically have it at the 30 degree angle which gives a 72" pass. My thoughts were that I would run a line from the rear SCV to the loader and get the 3rd hydraulic line put on the loader arm. The dealer told me that there would be a 3rd set of quick disconnects right by the dual SCV disconnects. Do I really need this or can I used the bucket SCV for the loader? I thought that I would want the dual SCV function still on the loader for lifting and rolling the blade while using the rear SCV for the angle axis.

Anyway, had fun running it around the yard the other day. Started right up in 15F weather. My 12 year old son had fun driving it too. Of course - ROPS up with seatbelt.

Thanks again.

 

[jcmseven]

Brian,
If you want the hydraulic angling, you will have to have the additional fittings on the right arm of the loader. I also have a lever on my right console for hydraulic angling which is included in the kit I have. The loader connections remain attached as the loader is still connected. I am not trying to talk you out of a 7' blade, but that is a very big blade. I personally think its productivity would be negatively offset by its girth.

John M.

 

[Dutch445]

VT,
Here's another vote for the 72" front blade. 84 does seem to be wide, and that does mean a lot of extra forces on the loader arms. The hydraulics for angling the blade are easily installed, you already have the 3rd SCV on the tractor, and the kit runs hoses to the mid coupler where you loader lines plug in, and adds 2 more couplers. Then there's parts in the kit that run steel hydraulic lines down the inside of the loader boom to the end where the bucket is, with another set of couplers there. These will be smaller couplers than what's at the back of the tractor. It's a pretty simple install for the kit, I have done them myself. Then you still maintain all the functions of the joystick, raising and lowering the boom, and curling or dumping the blade.. which is good to be able to change that angle depending on varying conditions.. (backdragging etc). With the blade installed on the boom, you still can raise the boom and push snowbanks back from the top down, and in some respects you can push further because the blade reaches out that much further than the bucket.
Anyway, the 72" seems plenty for your tractor. Curtis makes a nice unit, with the hydraulic relief valve that will help protect your boom by giving some cushion if you were to catch the corner of your blade. (it allows the blade to angle back on impact). Their blade also has trip protection like most. I beleive their blade has a 24" tall moldboard, where the Deere blade is 20". Curtis's blade angles 30 degrees,, where Deere's angles 23 degrees. There are other manufacturers also, but I haven't sold any of those yet.
/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[Treed_in_TX]

You know if you put your camera on wide angle you can take a picture even in the garage....

 

[VTer]

Here is a record shot. Not the best - scanned a photo. Maybe after paying for the tractor and assorted implements, I'll be able afford a digital camera.

 

[VTer]

Oops...let's try again.

 

[Bowhunter]

The scanned picture turned out very good. Congrats on the beautiful tractor.

 

[IbQuick]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( 4310man

I do not have my receipt with me at the moment, but I believe the front blade was about $1100 with $250 or so for the hydraulic angling kit and labor was free, as it was a new tractor. The blade is a JD manufactured item and is distributed from Welland, Ontario - the same as the loader. The blade has two large angling cylinders and is quick attach. All one does is unclick the bucket, and click on the blade, hook up two hydraulic lines, and go. I have never timed myself doing it, but it is very easy and I estimate would take about three-five minutes from start to finish.

John M. )</font>

Did you purchased that Blade from Deere and is it Black in color? My JD dealer has one for $1395.00 but he said you have to weld a hook on it some where to prevent the bucket roll from happening, does that make sence?