Rotary Cutter Bush Hog quality???

[Oleozz]

Have had a BH Squealer for 24 yrs and it works about as good as the day I bought it. I change the oil once a year and sharpen the blades now and then.

 

[N80]

Here's a slightly, but not completely off topic question. I hear people talk about getting 3rd party loaders that are spec'd higher than the OEM loader for that particular tractor.

I just assumed it was the hydraulics on the tractor that determined the spec's on a loader. I'm sure attachment geometry and arm/pin/pivot strength are important too, but I just assumed that the hydraulics were the limiting factor. Can you really get significantly better loader specs while using the same hydraulic system?

 

[john_bud]

Here's a slightly, but not completely off topic question. I hear people talk about getting 3rd party loaders that are spec'd higher than the OEM loader for that particular tractor.

I just assumed it was the hydraulics on the tractor that determined the spec's on a loader. I'm sure attachment geometry and arm/pin/pivot strength are important too, but I just assumed that the hydraulics were the limiting factor. Can you really get significantly better loader specs while using the same hydraulic system?

Yes, you can. The non-brand loaders will use slightly larger diameter cylinders. That gives a very noticable increase in force. Cylinder push force is ID area x psi.

Going from 2" ID to 2.25" ID doesn't seem like much, but at 2500 psi there is 2000# more force applied. Per cylinder. You don't get all that as increased load as only a fraction is in the lift direction.

 

[N80]

Interesting. Makes you wonder why the OEMs don't have larger cylinders if that is all it takes to take advantage of available psi? After all, the oems do compete with each other and if all it takes is a larger cylinder it seems odd that they don't push the cylinder size up.

But I'm also assuming (since I know nothing about hydraulics) that at some point enlarging the cylinder is going to result in diminishing returns (and maybe slower cycle times or decreased extension?). I just can't imagine why the oem wouldn't put the size cylinder that works best with the available psi.

 

[chh]

I've used a neighbors tractor with a bush hog loader and it seemed really well built and worked well moving round bales. You can eventually wear out one of their batwings if you run over enough 3" to 4" saplings and rocks with it.

 

[jdbower]

But I'm also assuming (since I know nothing about hydraulics) that at some point enlarging the cylinder is going to result in diminishing returns (and maybe slower cycle times or decreased extension?). I just can't imagine why the oem wouldn't put the size cylinder that works best with the available psi.

You're right that cycle times or extension (or both) may be impacted, the larger cylinder has a larger volume so it either takes longer to fill or they make it shorter to equalize the volume. Perhaps more importantly, I could put a loader on my little 2520 that can lift a small planet, but all that will happen is the loader will push my tractor around rather than the object.

It's my thought that the OEM loader specs are determined based on some equation that includes loader lift ratings, loader reach (no sense in a loader that can lift a lot but only 6" high), tractor mass, frame strength/longevity, and, of course, cost. You can tweak any of these parameters to be better, but you typically rob from one of the others to do so. How much extra loader power can you add by filling the tires and adding more ballast? I have no idea!

 

[3RRL]

.... I just can't imagine why the oem wouldn't put the size cylinder that works best with the available psi.

George,
I think they probably do.
I also think jdbower's explanation touches on it. I'm sure OEM's set up their loader recommendations taking those things into consideration. You wouldn't want the front end to collapse with too heavy a load for the tractor itself...or something like that.