Boxblade or Scraper Blade?

greg_g · Nov 9, 2011

Naw, you're misleading the startup/hobby farmer readers here. You're talking about equipment that they likely never heard of, or couldn't afford if they did. Yes your expensive and heavy scraper blade mounted on a tractor with optional (and expensive) hydraulic remotes can do as you say. But down here in the bargain basement, an entry level boxblade/landscape rake combo can and will produce the same results as your high end scraper setup. A little more work for a lot less money.

//greg//

RealJimbo · Nov 9, 2011

Thinking inside the box here . . . what if . . .

We mounted a blade between the sides of the box, with a pivot on one side and an hydraulic operated slide on the other? After the meterial is loosened (Scarifiers), mixed (standard fixed blade of box blade) we then lowered this new blade and angled it to move materail laterally? Then go back to standard box blade to smooth/finish?

Now if only I could actually fabricate instead of just come up with ideas . . .

bcp · Nov 9, 2011

Start with a box blade.

Add a rear side-to-side support.

Cut loose and hinge the entire back blade on each end

To angle the rear blade, remove one hinge pin and install a spacer or link that lets the unattached blade end swing back to a 30 degree angle.

Send me 10% of profits.

Bruce

Gordon Gould · Nov 9, 2011

greg_g said:
Completely unfair to the boxblade. //greg//

I agree with you but if you go back and look at your posts one could say that you were completely unfair to the rear blade.

Just an observation - no harm or malice intended. Everyone has a right to their preferred impliment.

MtnViewRanch · Nov 9, 2011

I have to say that I use my LPGB (land plane grader blade) the most on my roads and then my rear blade. Probably a toss up with the roll-over box blade and the land scape rake. I have 1 mile of main road and another 1 1/4 mile of roads that are not used as much and do not get the care that I should give them. Just not enough hours in the day to get everything done.

greg_g · Nov 10, 2011

Gordon Gould said:
I agree with you but if you go back and look at your posts one could say that you were completely unfair to the rear blade.

Disagree. When the discussion started, we were comparing conventional boxblades with conventional scraper blades. Entry level stuff, first time user stuff. Having owned/operated all three basic implements myself, I feel my earlier comparisons are valid relative to the results I required of them. Introducing high end hydraulically assisted scrapers, single purpose land planes, expensive roll-over boxblades, et cetera - only serves to steer the whole topic away from the actual question posed by the OP.

//greg//

babzog · Nov 10, 2011

greg_g said:
Disagree. When the discussion started, we were comparing conventional boxblades with conventional scraper blades. Entry level stuff, first time user stuff. Having owned/operated all three basic implements myself, I feel my earlier comparisons are valid relative to the results I required of them. Introducing high end hydraulically assisted scrapers, single purpose land planes, expensive roll-over boxblades, et cetera - only serves to steer the whole topic away from the actual question posed by the OP.

//greg//

It's perfectly fine. I asked about those two, yes, but I also mentioned what it was I primarily wanted to do (plus perhaps a few other things I started thinking of as the discussion kicked into gear). There were implements mentioned that I'd not even heard of (ie: the grader and landscape rake) that some feel are more suitable to the primary task (gravel driveway maintenance) while others feel that a little skill with one blade or the other is all I'd need. All of the debate and thoughts are welcome and are, in my mind, on topic. These attachments aren't cheap and I don't want to make a purchase of something that'll sit out back gathering rust while I scrounge up the coin for a more suitable tool. I don't mind a learning curve (provided we're not talking about some crazy hairpin).

MtnViewRanch · Nov 10, 2011

Greg ,is your feeling that a 400lb box blade works better than a 400lb rear blade for the OP?

greg_g · Nov 10, 2011

MtnViewRanch said:
Greg ,is your feeling that a 400lb box blade works better than a 400lb rear blade for the OP?

An entry level boxblade has scarifiers, an entry level scraper blade doesn't. A boxblade is bi-directional w/o getting off the tractor, you must dismount the tractor to reverse a scraper blade. An entry level boxblade has a considerable weight advantage over an entry level scraper blade. The OP profile identifies a MF1533 tractor. Massey specs the nominal track at 62 inches. Engine hp is spec'd at 33, which equates to ~24 drawbar horsepower. Given those figures, I'd recommend nothing larger than a 60" boxblade or a 72" scraper blade. Using basic King Kutter implements as a guide, their $549 BB-60 boxblade weighs 415#, as opposed to the $300 TRB-72 scraper blade at 280#. Matter of fact, their TYR-72 landscape rake - $400 without gauge wheels - weighs 20# more than the scraper blade.

All weights and prices can be confirmed here. That said, any 72" scraper blade that weighs as much or more than a 60" box blade, will cost considerably more than the boxblade. Click here for an example. That said, I usually shop for ground engaging equipment on a price per pound basis. Heavier is better.

//greg//

MtnViewRanch · Nov 10, 2011

greg_g said:
An entry level boxblade has scarifiers, an entry level scraper blade doesn't. A boxblade is bi-directional w/o getting off the tractor, you must dismount the tractor to reverse a scraper blade. An entry level boxblade has a considerable weight advantage over an entry level scraper blade. The OP profile identifies a MF1533 tractor. Massey specs the nominal track at 62 inches. Engine hp is spec'd at 33, which equates to ~24 drawbar horsepower. Given those figures, I'd recommend nothing larger than a 60" boxblade or a 72" scraper blade. Using basic King Kutter implements as a guide, their $549 BB-60 boxblade weighs 415#, as opposed to the $300 TRB-72 scraper blade at 280#. Matter of fact, their TYR-72 landscape rake - $400 without gauge wheels - weighs 20# more than the scraper blade.

All weights and prices can be confirmed here. That said, any 72" scraper blade that weighs as much or more than a 60" box blade, will cost considerably more than the boxblade. Click here for an example. That said, I usually shop for ground engaging equipment on a price per pound basis. Heavier is better.

//greg//