BX1500 and Woods BH6000

[Tom_H]

I agree completely with what JM has said. If I did not have a subCUT and were looking to purchase one new, and wanted a bh at the same time, simply getting a BX23 would be the most logical choice, though I respect those like Matt, Woods, and Blackmajicwoman who feel otherwise.

For those of us who have a 5 yo BX2200, with an expired warranty, purchasing the BH6000 would be far less expensive than a trade in on a new BX23. Further, since I am going to have to pay for any and all repairs myself anyway, I would not need to worry about voiding a warranty.

If someone can only afford a BX 1500, 1830, or 2230 at the present time, doesn't want to finance, and wants to spend the next 4 years saving for a BH6000, it is a good option. If a person doesn't need a bh now, but thinks there is a slim choice he may need one in several years, he is well served by the BH6000.

One way Kubota could address this issue is to make the bh for BX23 an optional item. Then a buyer could purchase the tractor now and the bh later if desired.

 

[Junkman]

Tom.... I agree with you 100% on a used tractor where there is no factory warranty left, that the Woods is an excellent choice if you find that you need the backhoe. My comments were directed toward a in warranty Kubota tractor having the Woods added to it. I am in no way, placing any disparaging remarks against the Woods backhoe.
As for Kubota offering the BX23 model, less the backhoe and / or the loader, I don't see them doing that until they get to the point where they have production of these units far ahead of demand. There is no reason that they can't offer the BX23 as a stand alone tractor, since the backhoe and loader can be added at any time. It is simply a marketing tool to force the sale of a higher level machine. I have often though about what would happen if my tractor was damaged beyond repair, if I could get a replacement without the loader and backhoe. My guess is that under no circumstance would they sell just the BX23 tractor alone, even though it wouldn't disrupt production in one bit. Most times manufacturers use production disruption as an excuse for not wanting to sell a product in a "condition" that they don't offer it normally.

 

[Tom_H]

Good insights. I agree. I also know that you've always said good things about Woods' quality in general.

By the way, how's that grass catcher performing?

 

[Junkman]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( By the way, how's that grass catcher performing? )</font>

The grass catcher is resting comfortably where UPS dropped it off. It is suffering from a bad case of lack of enthusiasm after the bolt problem. I have the holes repaired, but haven't had the ambition to finish the job. Just one of those things that will happen when the grass gets to the point where it must be picked up. I have only cut the grass once. Another advantage of not fertilizing last fall or this spring. I am not certain if it is old age creeping up on me quickly or I just got old and didn't realize it before this. I scrapped the hood of the tractor last week, and even that didn't bother me......... /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

 

[Volfandt]

Lazy arms? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Volfandt

 

[Lockport]

Did it not play out like this? The original BX2200 could have a bh. Then, Kubota made the BX22 and I understood it had a reinforced frame. The issue was stress/twisting of the lighter frame and they advised against bh on the BXxx00 series. I would have assumed warranty work of such related damage deemed caused by a bh on the BXxxxx series would be refused. I am surprised that Kubota rep says only now are they moving in this direction. Very interesting rfogle. I am also very surprised to learn that dealer's are installing bh. They must have acquired some sort of commitment by Kubota.

blacmajicwoman: Have you noticed any stressing or related signs of excedence on your machine in your 10h seat time?

 

[Tom_H]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Did it not play out like this? The original BX2200 could have a bh. )</font>

I have never heard that. There are 3ph backhoes made by aftermarket companies that can be attached to any tractor with the same category hitch. That doesn't mean they will work well together however. I have never heard of any backhoe specifically designed to be compatible with the BX2200 until the Woods BH6000.

 

[Junkman]

The way that the story was recounted to me about how the BX22 came about is from a high level technical executive from Kubota. He told me that they came out with the original BX machines, with the loaders, but after introduction the dealers started asking about a available backhoe in addition to the loaders. Then Kubota started to research how they could add the backhoe to the BX machines and found that a 3 point hitch type backhoe was not an alternative. They then tried a frame mounted one, but found that the original frame was insufficient for adding a backhoe without modification. They then started to figure out a way to modify the frame, and realized that it wouldn't be a practical method to do in the field. That led to the BX22 being completely assembled with a redesigned frame from scratch that utilized the other components of the original BX machine. It was easier to design the product from scratch, than to try to create a modification kit for use in the field. From what I was told, to do the modification in the field was going to require the machine be torn down almost completely and then rebuilt with a lot of expensive parts being added and others being discarded in the process. I don't know what the actual differences in the frame are, but apparently they are sufficient that Kubota feels that if they are going to be selling the BX with the "beefed up" frame, that it will only go with the backhoe attached. Possibly if they were to sell a BX22/23 without the backhoe already attached, then another manufacturer such as Woods, could also manufacturer a backhoe to attach to the Kubota design and then Kubota would loose that backhoe sale. If I had to guess at what the marketing decision of only selling with the backhoe, that they made, this would be high on the list of reasons. Junk......

 

[Woods]

The 3 point mount back hoe could probably twist the frame on these sub CUT's with out any re-enforcement. I was impressed with the weight and guage of the sub frame mounts that came with the Woods Ground Breaker back hoe I mounted on my BX2230 this year. It doubles the width of the tractors frame from the rear hitch to the front loader mounts. Also, it provides a split cross pin for the lower 3 point hitch arms so you don't have to remove any plates to attach and detach the lower arms. I'm confident I won't be twisting the frame with this set up. There's just not enough force applied until the hydraulic saftey unloader valving relieves.

Woods does need to provide steel tubing for the hydraulic runs to the main tranny block because the rubber hoses run too close to the rear tire. Keep you eyes on them to keep mud and rocks off of them. The swivel seat mounting doesn't allow for full adjustment of the seat foward and aft sliding. The 2 main safety retaining pins on the hoe mounts aren't as easy to use (read: hammer) as the the BX23's sping loaded type either. My guess is that Woods equipment will be improving these minor issues soon once they get enough feedback. I paid $3999 for the BH6000 hoe and the extreamly low price I got my BX2230 for warranted getting the Woods backhoe instead of the BX23... although I was ready to get the BX23. 45 hours and so far so good /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif Hope many others enjoy the benefits of this addition to their tractor when finances allow.

 

[Junkman]

What was the savings of the BX2230 plus the Woods backhoe as compared to the BX23????