8' wide LPGS for a CUT

[oosik]

Piston - if you get the Land Pride GS2596 it has dual attachment points for the 3-point lower arms( Class 1/ Class 2). My LPGS is one of my implements where I have put my "great blob" of concrete on for added weight. This blob weighs 485#. So 796# for the LPGS + 485 for the blob = 1281# I have no qualm about doing this because my 3-point is class 2. The added weight sure quiets things down.

WoW! I still have a picture of my blob. Everybody should have a blob. View attachment 572522

 

[Piston]

Piston - if you get the Land Pride GS2596 it has dual attachment points for the 3-point lower arms( Class 1/ Class 2). My LPGS is one of my implements where I have put my "great blob" of concrete on for added weight. This blob weighs 485#. So 796# for the LPGS + 485 for the blob = 1281# I have no qualm about doing this because my 3-point is class 2. The added weight sure quiets things down.

WoW! I still have a picture of my blob. Everybody should have a blob. View attachment 572522

I will probably do just that.
BTW, how would you compare your Rhino 950 rear blade to pulling the grading scraper?
I have a Landpride RBT4096 rear blade that weighs 850 pounds not including hydraulic cylinders and skid shoes. I believe your blade is pretty much identical in specs at about 840 pounds or so? Which is harder to pull?

 

[oosik]

Piston - sorry I'm not back sooner. Our local wx is really raising havoc with HughesNet. Anyhow - my Rhino 950 lists for 1015# and with the mechanical adjustors rather than the hydraulic ones its right at 1100#. How hard do they pull - kind of depends upon what I'm doing...

However - without a doubt I can bring the Orange beast to a standstill with all four wheels digging when pulling the rear blade. The only way that will ever happen with the LPGS is with all the scarifiers full down and then have them hook on to some bedrock. I had that happen a couple years ago - the one time I wished I had my seatbelt on. Came real close to launching me right forward and down off the hood.

Anyhow - when I'm out making new trails - right thru the big 'ol sage brush - around my ancient Ponderosa pines - I got the concrete blob on the LPGS - dust, dirt, field grass, sage brush and cow poo - all flying in all directions - all at the same time. Katie bar the door - here comes the wild man and his orange beast. Scarifiers full down - breaking virgin ground - creating new trails. The only time its pulled hard is that one time the scarifiers hook solid bedrock.

Sounds really wild - doesn't it - actually I'm going somewhere between two to three MPH.

 

[Piston]

Thanks for the comparison, that’s good to know. I don’t see myself using the scarifiers much at all with the grading scraper. The biggest issue I may have with the size is banging it into trees when going through my trails
Regardless, I should be picking it up this weekend and hoping to give it a try shortly after that. Depends how much of a break the wife will give me from renovating the house.

I’m curious about your blade, although it’s off topic, the Rhino site lists it as 836lbs. Is yours an older/heavier version? They don’t list one in the 1,000lb range (there is a pretty big gap in their lineup there!)

 

[oosik]

Well - I bought the blade just a year ago. My Op manual lists the weights for the 8 foot 950 at 1015# and the 9 foot 950 at 1055#. The manual adjusters - tilt, angle & offset add an additional 85#.

Doesn't make sense, does it - such a small gap between the 850 to 950 and then look at the jump between the 950 to the 1540.


View attachment 572567

 

[oosik]

Strange - I would guess that there is some sort of miss print in the Rhino site listing. Look at the very little weight difference between the 850 to the 950. Then look at the large gap between the 950 to the 1540.

You know what - this is NOT a situation that weighs on my mind and WILL NOT be resolved with my digital bathroom scales - ha, ha, ha.

 

[BMan2005]

Well - I bought the blade just a year ago. My Op manual lists the weights for the 8 foot 950 at 1015# and the 9 foot 950 at 1055#. The manual adjusters - tilt, angle & offset add an additional 85#.

Doesn't make sense, does it - such a small gap between the 850 to 950 and then look at the jump between the 950 to the 1540.


View attachment 572567

Yeah odd your manual disagree's with the online spec weight. I would tend to think the manual is more correct, but who knows. Rhino makes the 100 series rear blade for Bush hog also and Bush hog has the same weight that rhino has on there site.
Just for kicks, The Rhino 850 & Bush Hog 91 series are a rebranded Dirt Dog 91 series blade. Funny how they all swap Implements between one another.

 

[RickB]

Well Rhino and Bush Hog are both owned by Alamo Group. Not a stretch to believe there is some commonality.

 

[Piston]

That is really strange that there is such a discrepancy. It doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things, as long as it works well the specs don’t mean squat. However it sure is a big difference!
It’s also strange that the 8’ blade is rated for considerably more tractor than the 9’ is rated for. I would tend to believe the operators manual over the website.

 

[oosik]

Those two areas are just really weird. Must be the same group that wrote the implement spec page for my M6040 as the spec sheet for Rhino rear blades. My implement spec page is just full of impossible inconsistencies.

I have a feeling that a lot of these inconsistencies are because the design engineers who may also write the implement spec page - face a world of four walls and never are let out to smell dirt - see an implement under actual work conditions - are faced with conditions other than a perfectly flat concrete floor when connecting/dropping their ground engagement implements.

There are, of course, exceptions. But those exceptions are the things we never forget