Box blades recommended

[Anonymous Poster]

Hello all - Have an L3410 - going to buy a box blade. Too small, not efficient. Too large, tire spin and less efficient. Can anyone recommend what size they may have and what material they move. Wet Clay and Item 4 weigh more and require more conservative box blade widths. That is what I will be doing most of. Large enough to cover the tire tracks, but not so large as useless. I have seen 72" but I believe this is overkill. I believe a 60" will work with R4's as the bucket is standard 66" but I have to measure. 65" is just right, if I can pull it. - Any thoughts?

 

[Buck]

Dazed,

I have a Woods GB 65 and have been very happy with it. It is about as solid as they come and integrity of the unit has never crossed my mind as an issue.

I do move dry clay. I wouldn't think of moving wet clay with a scraper. My tires would spin. An L3410 wiuld have no problems whatsoever with this scraper. I agree that 65" is about right. You want to cover the tires. In the last two weeks I dug a 250 ft , 1.5 ft drainage ditch with it and am glad the scraper is wider than my wheels.

Buck

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Buck - Just went up to the land and measured it. 72" gives me an inch and a half outside each wheel. 65" Doesn't completely cover the R4's. Do I go with the 65" or the 72" and go back for another pull with the heavy stuff?

 

[Buck]

Dazed,

I am no expert on this, but my gut feel is that even with 72" you'll not have a problem.

My parents used to live north of ALbany an the soil was so soft and sandy I know I would have no problems at all with a 72" and I have less HP than you.

What are you going to use it for?

Thanks,

Buck

 

[john_bud]

Dazed,

I think that 72" is going to be too wide to pull. Especially if you get a "quality" box. There are many brands, and many models. For me, the heavier the better, so a Gannon 66" unit at about 850 pounds fit the bill. The greater weight digs in to hard pack quick. The extra beef also keeps from breaking the box when you hit a hidden rock (we have a bunch).

As to the rear tread width, you may want to adjust it to a narrower setting. It's easy with unfilled tires. More of a tussle when filled and really a job for 2 or more beefy guys.

John Bud

 

[Kub]

Dazed, I have a Woods HB72 @ 660 lbs on my L3410/R4's and I can bog it down if I'm not careful. R4's don't give you the best traction. The Woods HB72 was originally used on a M4700DT/ags/52hp and if I loaded it good enough, I could spin her wheels. I think a Gannon 850 pounder with all due respect would be way too much for a 3410, especially an HST, in my humble opinion. It seems to me it would bog down too easily but I could be wrong. Gannon makes some really heavy duty equipment. If you go by Kubota's own implement limatations, the max box blade for the 3410 is 650lbs and 52 inches but I wouldn't take this as gospel. The choice is yours.

Kub

 

[Anonymous Poster]

Thanks guys. The box blade I'm looking at is the Woods HB65 - I think I want the hinged tailgate that's why it's not the GB65. If you say north of Albany, NY and mean Clifton Park, it's all sand. I'm moving clay and stone in western Rensselaer County. I think the HB72 is too heavy - but I might get away with the 65. The tires are loaded, so I'd rather not change them if possible.

 

[kokopelli2]

dazed
i run a pretty heavy duty (650lbs) 72 inch box with my 2910 and r4s. we have plenty of clay down here in maryland. i dont think you would have any trouble pulling a 72 inch box. i can fill mine up heaping before i loose any traction....then i just put it in 4wd

 

[John_Mc]

I have the Woods GB 72 that I pull behind a NH TC 33D with filled R4's. I've had no problems. I do have to take shallower bites in some conditions (moist clay, larger buried stones, etc - there's a lot of that here in VT), but I'd much rather do this than have a blade that doesn't cover my tracks. Your 3410 is larger and heavier than my tractor, so I wouldn't think you'd have any serious problems pulling it.

John Mc