Backhoe Backhoe Installation vs. Belly Mower Operation

[glennmac]

I have a Kubota B2910 and use a 72" belly mower. My questions relate to the compatibility between a subframe or 3ph mounted backhoe with the attachment and operation of the belly mower. Specifically:

1. With a subframe backhoe installed on the tractor, can the belly mower also be installed on the tractor and operated? I assume the answer to this is clearly no, because the presence of the inserted subframe would physically interfere with the presence of the belly mower.

2. With a subframe backhoe removed from the tractor, can the belly mower be installed and operated? This question arises because at least one backhoe mounting bracket stays underneath the tractor (in the Woods 7500 model I am looking at) after the backhoe is removed, and it appears that this bracket itself will interfere with the belly mower.

3. With a 3ph backhoe installed on the tractor, can a belly mower be simultaneously installed and operated? I understand the 3ph backhoe locks the rear 3ph from moving up and down, but does it also prevent the midmower belly links from also moving up and down?

4. With a 3ph backhoe removed from the tractor, can the belly mower be installed and operated, or is there some remaining bracket or device that would interfere?

If the answer varies by manufacturer, I am currently considering a Woods 7500 and a Kubota (whatever for the 2910), but I would consider other brands.

Thanks.

Glenn

 

[hayden]

Hi Glenn,

Here's what I know and where I know it from (sorry, bad english)

Subframe BH (i.e. Woods 6500/7500), installed or not: This is not compatible with a belly mower. To mount the mower you need to unbolt and remove the subframe bracket that attaches mid-ship. I know this from a neighbor who had a woods and returned it and got a Kubota for exactly this reason.

3PH, BH installed (Kubota 4960): Not compatible. The BH locks the 3PH arms as you stated. Although I don't have a belly mower, from the ones I've seen the 3PH lift arms lift the mower by way of links that hook over the lift arms. There is no other means to lift the mower other than the 3PH, which is immobilized with the BH attached.

3PH, BH removed. Mower can be attached. The only stuff that stays with the tractor when the BH is removed is the heavy-duty top link bracket (replaces the two-piece bracket that comes with the tractor), and the tractor frame reinforcing brackets/frame, which are now standard equipment on the 2710 and 2910 where they used to be add-ons for the 1700/2100/2400 series. In short, you have these braces on your tractor already.

The Kubota I think is the only reasonable choice you have with a belly mower. I have a 4690 and am very pleased with it. I've got the manual is there's any more info you need.

Peter

 

[glennmac]

Peter,

Thanks for the valuable info. I called Woods before posting here and they couldn't tell me whether their 7500 bracket would interfere with the mower. (They simply can't test all their products on all the tractors.) Two dealers I talked to weren't sure.

Since you have a 2910 with a 4690, I hope you don't mind a few more questions specifically on the 4690.

1. When the BH is locked on the 3ph, is the hitch locked in the 1 position, the 10 position, or somewhere in between -- or can you vary where it locks on the position control?

2. I don't really expect to mow with the 4690 on, but rather to just leave the mower on while doing some hoeing, just to avoid the hassle of removing the mower. I can now pin the mower up in the maximum raised position when using a 3ph implement. So is there any reason I can't do so with the BH on?

3. Do you run the BH off the tractor hydraulics or with the BH hydraulic pump? Why did you choose whichever one you did?

4. When you know what you are doing, how long does it take to install and remove the BH?

5. I am will be looking at a used 4690 about 6 years old. Do you know of any significant changes in the BH since then?

Glenn

 

[jgh]

11/15

In my earlier research, I considered a JD 4700 with a JD belly mower (5 or 6 ft?), and a Woods 9000 hoe. Not compatible because what remains when you drop the subframe of the hoe still interferes with the belly mower.

Check carefully is the moral of the story. The Woods guys DID know about this one and reference to the diagrams proved same.

Big pain,

J

 

[bpence]

Glennmac, can we assume from this discussion that the tractor has been retrieved from the claws of the mud monster and also that you are soon to share the story with us?

Bob Pence

 

[hayden]

Glenn,

I'll answer, but it will cost you a story. We REALLY want to hear about the sinking of the HMS Glennmac!

Here are the answers.

1) It locks in the mid to mid-high position. You leave the hitch control in the full-down position to ensure it's not fighting against the locked 3PH, but you then raise up the draw bars manually to what would be the mid to mid-high position.

2) I see your point. It might be possible to do what you describe, but I can't say for sure since I don't have a belly mower. I can ask my neighbor if he's ever tried it. He has a B2400 and 4672 plus belly mower, but I suspect the answer will extend to the 2910/4690. If it does work, your mower will of course be in the mid to mid-high position, not fully up which would be more desirable. I think the general wisdom is that any place where you would want to hoe is going to be rough enough to not want the mower on, but that's not universally true.

3) My BH has its own hydraulics. I was told that's the only way it's available. It all came out of one crate with one part number so I think it's true. The Woods I know can be purchased either way (the pump kit is separate). I went back and forth on what's best here, and in the end I think I like the separate hydraulics better, even though I didn't really have a choice. The reason is to minimize contamination. I never remove my loader so there is no source of contamination in practice on either my tractor or BH except when I'm changing fluid. With shared hydraulics I'd risk contamination every time I attached/removed the BH. But again, it's moot with the kubota BH.

4) I can get it off in about 15 minutes (never actually timed). I can get it on in the same time provided everything is on level ground. If things are cockeyed, it can take much longer. Do it on level ground.

5) The current BH is the 4690A. I was told the only difference is that it's now made in Georga (where the loaders are made) rather than Japan. The manual also talks about rigging it on the newer machines. There are a number of links and bolt holes and you need to get them right to fit properly, especially with the 2910 extending draw bars. I actually mashed mine when first assembling things. I'b be happy to send you pics & details on rigging if you get the used one.

If you get a used one, be absolutely sure to get the heavy duty top link bracket for the 2910. I've actually got an extra one that I can make you a deal on if you go down that path.

Good luck,

Peter

 

[hayden]

One other thing. Do you have the folding ROPS? If so you are all set for a BH. If not, you will probably want to change over to it. The folding ROPS bar provides greater clearance (it's taller) so you don't wack your head getting in and out of the BH seat.

 

[hayden]

Glenn,

I talked to my friend about the BH and mower combination. He says he does it all the time (both attached). He also said you can raise the mower all the way and pin it up with some sort of locking pins (hopefully you know what he's talking about). You can then lower the hitch to mount the BH without lowering the mower. His only down-side comment was that you can't mow with the BH attached, but I think you already knew that.

His set up is a B2400, 4672 BH, and under-belly mower.

Peter

 

[glennmac]

Peter, thanks again. I have more questions (and, yes, I will recount my salvage operation this weekend}.

I looked at a used 4690 yesterday that had been hooked up to a 2910. The dealer said he could not fit the pin for the toplink through its hole without detaching and spreading the upper lift arms, which are exactly in the way of inserting the pin. A pain. This is the pin hole were the big "toplink" from the BH attaches to the tractor bracket.

I then found two threads, one from earlier this year and one from the archives, complaining about this very problem with the 4690 on 2710's and 2910's, but the threads seemed to peter out without any definitive solution having been reported. The more recent thread even had photos that I could not readily decipher.

Do you have this problem, and if not, do you know how you avoided it.

Glenn

 

[hayden]

Yes, I had exactly the problem described in the earlier thread, but resolved it.

The manual with the 4690A covers what bolt holes to use for the various links on the BH frame for each of the different tractors. It shows a different configuration for the 2710 and 2910, which was a mystery to me. I can only guess it's to provide additional clearance for the extendo links on the 2910 draw bars. I dutifully configured mine as the manual stated, and I had exactly the problem described - namely the top link arms are positioned such that they block insertion of the top link pin.

I then reconfigured to the 2710 setup, which happens to be close to, but not exactly the same as the photo in the post you mentioned. It now fits. It's tight, and the BH has to be lowered as far as it will go, but it fits.

I'd be happy to post a scan of the drawing from the manual and a photo of the BH itself to show the details.

 

[hayden]

Two other things to consider. Do you have R4 tires? If not we should talk about that.

The other possibility, and I'll probably get slammed for saying it, is to rig the Woods 7500 for 3PH mounting rather than subframe. In this config, you still need the new top link bracket on the tractor, but after that the woods mounts on just like the Kubota and has all the same properties. This is how I had the Woods 6500 on my B2400. It worked fine.

Despite this possibility, I'd recommend the Kubota over the woods. I like the Kubota mounting better, in particular the way the top bar hooks over the lower pin in the top link bracket, and then you slide the top pin in place. This makes getting things lined up MUCH easier than on the woods since the hook over the lower pin guides everything into position.

Peter

 

[glennmac]

Peter, I do have R4's.

I know Woods makes 3ph versions of all its hoes. I have a price exactly $1000 less for a Woods 7500 3ph vs. the 4690 3ph. Much of the difference is made up from the fact that the 4690 includes the integral pto pump, which is expensive. I can get the Woods without the pump on the BH and run the hydraulics to the BH from the loader valve with two simple quick connect hose couplers. The dealer has done many Woods backhoe installations this way, and is confident that the 2710/2910 bydraulic systems are powerful enought to handle the BH. He also has convinced me, along with other posts on these forums, that the so-called contamination issue of running the hoe with tractor hydraulics is too small a risk for me to worry about.

It seems that the hydraulic attachment/removal of the Woods might be easier. I think you are saying that the toplink pin problem may be less with the Woods. But you are also saying that the rest of the 3ph mechanical attachment/removal is easier and better with the Kubota. I think the dealer agrees with this.

So this is a mixed bag, as we used to say in the 60's. Big price difference, though.

Glenn

 

[scruffy]

Glenn, I am anxiously awaiting (along with many others) the tale of the resurrection, of the infamous nautical vessal 'USS GlennMac'! This has got be good, and we are waiting for every dirty little detail! (had to be a dirty job)

 

[hayden]

Is the woods $1000 less than the used 4690? That's a big difference, but my experience is that in the long run you'll be much better off getting the one you like best. This is of course real easy for me to say when it's your money.

As for attachment, I don't think the top link pin is an issue once the frame is step up.

Does the hydraulic attachment to the loader control disable the loader? I presume not. Also, how do the hoses get routed from the BH to the loader valve? Will they be easy to dress/undress?