Broke my bucket!!!

Anonymous Poster · Jun 10, 2002

gvw, my biggest concern about all of John Deeres compacts have been the loader. The 460 loader to me is very lightweight and flimsy. Perhaps the bucket saved you from bending the loader. Compared to Kubota and even New Holland, the loaders are very lightweight. Checkout the web size on the loader arms, the cross bracing and the bucket attachement compared to a Kubota. I wanted to get a John Deere, it was the loader that stopped me. It just does not compare to Kubota. I was really hoping JD's new lineup would come up with a structurally better loader, they didn't, I won't buy a JD until they do even with all the new stuff they've come up with. Flimsy, flimsy, flimsy!!! Design a loader to match this great tractor. The current loader is made in Canada, perhaps like Kubota, they need to build it here in the USA or at least get some new engineering and have the current builder start over. The loader on the new JD 110 is very nice, but the tractor is very underpowered and slow. I use a JD 210 and the JD 110 has more in common with the compacts then the industrial ones. Perhaps they should have painted it green instead of yellow.

kevinro · Jun 11, 2002

I have a 460 loader with the HD bucket, and I have been nothing but mean to it since I bought it. I routinely lift heavy loads of rock, knock down trees, dig, and a host of other things. I have been very impressed with the HD bucket. Sounds like you might not have the actual HD bucket to me.

I did have the 'standard' bucket when I first bought the machine. It was substantially less impressive, and I managed to bend it the first day.

Kevin

rancar · Jun 11, 2002

The 460 loader and HD bucket I have on my 4710 appear to be the toughest I've seen and are comparable in quality to the best that Kubota and NH have to offer. Welland Works doesn't turn out chinzy products...they are known for quality workmanship. I did my research for two years and this is why I bought JD. If you guys are having problems breaking and bending your buckets, FEL arms, etc, I'd suggest you're using them in a far more aggressive manner than what they were ever intended to be used for. Even the best equipment will break if you abuse it enough. Know your limitations.

Anonymous Poster · Jun 11, 2002

Well, as long as your happy with it, thats all that is really important. The 460 loader is about half the web size and the cross bracing is tiny compared to what the Kubota sports. The 460 has a 2.5 inch tube cross brace while the Kubotas (LA850) is about a 4" tube. Pivot points are smaller as well. Maybe its just overkill, but when you run a 4000lb+ tractor into a object that is stubborn, I don't want to permanently change the loaders aspect. While I think the 460 loader is in everyway well built in terms of workmanship, I'd personally like to see more steel in it. I have second thoughts about the bucket, I would go for all the bucket I could and even add some bracing to prevent the twist a loader gets when picking up uneven loads. Its inevitable that you will use the left or right front lip or tooth to catch a root etc, and lift which will put more strain on that side of the loader. A sturdy bucket will help ensure the loader stays level. Other then that, I think the new JD's are fine tractors.

rancar · Jun 11, 2002

Understood....thanks for the qualifiers. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

dsgsr · Jun 11, 2002

The 73" HD bucket for the 460 loader has much more reinforcement than the regular bucket, for example the
HD has 3"X1/4" plates welded to the vertical cutting sides, A heavier cutting edge, reinforcement in the top-inside and 4 wear bars on the underside of the bucket. When I bought my unit in July 2000 dealers (at least in my area) were selling the regular bucket with 4 wear bars and calling it a HD bucket. I showed my dealer a JD pamphlet (with the real HD bucket) and told him that was what I wanted, thats what I got and now thats the only bucket he sells with the larger units unless otherwise requested by the customer.

centex · Jun 12, 2002

I have the 460 loader with the standard duty 73" bucket on a 4700. I had not given a whole lot of thought about it's strength for different applications until now. It is pretty easy to look at the bucket and loader and get some idea of what it can and cannot do. It is pretty obvious that one of the key design decisions that the JD engineers made was to make changing buckets very easy. They could have chosen to make the bucket attachment stronger instead. I have the forklift attachment and make use of this feature and really like it. This is however a weak point for any application that places an upward moment on the lip of the loader because the lower attachment is a pair of 1.25" pins welded to the bucket. I don't see how making the bucket stronger would do much to help. Clearly you could make the bucket stong enough that it would not bend or tear but the welds on the pin and the 1/2" clevis pin will still be a weak point even if the bucket were made out of 1/2" steel plate. One has to keep this in mind in doing any kind of back dragging with this bucket. If the load is applied at the top of the bucket instead of it's lip then the upper quick attachment points will be a weak link and could bend if enough load is applied. I looked at the loader designs of the big 3 when I was shopping and it appeared to me that both the Kubota and New Holland loader designs were stronger but this was not a primary decision point for me.

I have used the loader for moving a lot of dirt and a lot more large rocks and have not damaged anything yet. The thing that worries me now is that I have been using it to take the load off the tractors front tires when I use the BH. This put a lot of force on the lower quick attach pins and I wonder if the shock loads from the BH use might damage it. I think I may start just lowering the bucket to the ground.

rancar · Jun 12, 2002

Don,

<font color=blue>"...One has to keep this in mind in doing any kind of back dragging with this bucket. If the load is applied at the top of the bucket instead of it's lip then the upper quick attachment points will be a weak link
and could bend if enough load is applied...I have used the loader for moving a lot of dirt and a lot more large rocks and have not damaged anything yet..."</font color=blue>

I agree. Point I was trying to make with my comment on potential damage to buckets and FEL arms is to simply know one's limitations. Up my way, I sometimes see farmers and others who are hotheads use their tractors and FELs like they were front end loaders, dozers, or excavators. They ram their FELs into stumps, rocks, earth mounds, etc trying to do something that these machines are not designed to do. Using it this way, it doesn't take long for something to break.

Bob

dsgsr · Jun 12, 2002

I agree rancar. It seems that 'everybody and his brother' is buying a CUT and not educating themselves in its use or using much commonsense and then complaining about its flimsy material or poor design.