wasabi
Platinum Member
I am soon to pick up a Power-Trac 2445 with a trailer package. It includes a serious backhoe (3200lb breakout) that is conveniently removable and can be replaced with a 3pt.
In the now famous "Goodbye Kubota, Hello Power-Trac" thread, M Chalkley wrote: <font color=blue>"It was the three-point hitch that worried me. It consisted of a hydraulic top link and two cylinders to control the height of the side links. The cylinders are controlled by a three-spool valve on the right side of the seat. It had the advantage of allowing down pressure, which is something I've always wished my Kubota had, but it did not provide a float position - the side link arms are held rigidly in whatever position they are set to with the hydraulic cylinders. This was completely unacceptable, because most three-point hitch implements require the float position. So, Jack and I have developed a plan for a new three-point hitch design and are working on the implementation of it. The new design also uses only three cylinders, but provides both float and down force when necessary, as well as top and tilt functions, and is a significant improvement over both a standard compact tractor three-point hitch and the original Power Trac design, in my opinion. The new three-point hitch design will do everything a "normal" compact tractor hitch with hydraulic "top and tilt" will, plus down force. A rear hydraulic PTO provides power to rear-mounted tillers, etc. provided, of course, they're hydraulically powered."</font color=blue>
Here is my quandary. The unit I am acquiring has the 3pt (as described by MC), but the seller wants extra for it. I can't quite tell without actually spending time messing with it, whether or not MCHalkley's eloquent description of improvements can be retrofitted using the existing PT hitch or if it is a start from scratch project. My inclination is to buy it as is (assuming fair price) under the supposition that I can make it work.
What think you all?
P.S. In case you are wondering what I would do with it, I imagine it being fairly handy....for example, I have tons of gravel to spread over a mile and a half loggin road. With a rear 3pt and quick plate, I could use the angle blade while simultaneously using the bucket to dump and spread in the same FEL swoop (pun intended). Similarly, I could both rake and till.....or till and harrow....or mow and rake....etc
In the now famous "Goodbye Kubota, Hello Power-Trac" thread, M Chalkley wrote: <font color=blue>"It was the three-point hitch that worried me. It consisted of a hydraulic top link and two cylinders to control the height of the side links. The cylinders are controlled by a three-spool valve on the right side of the seat. It had the advantage of allowing down pressure, which is something I've always wished my Kubota had, but it did not provide a float position - the side link arms are held rigidly in whatever position they are set to with the hydraulic cylinders. This was completely unacceptable, because most three-point hitch implements require the float position. So, Jack and I have developed a plan for a new three-point hitch design and are working on the implementation of it. The new design also uses only three cylinders, but provides both float and down force when necessary, as well as top and tilt functions, and is a significant improvement over both a standard compact tractor three-point hitch and the original Power Trac design, in my opinion. The new three-point hitch design will do everything a "normal" compact tractor hitch with hydraulic "top and tilt" will, plus down force. A rear hydraulic PTO provides power to rear-mounted tillers, etc. provided, of course, they're hydraulically powered."</font color=blue>
Here is my quandary. The unit I am acquiring has the 3pt (as described by MC), but the seller wants extra for it. I can't quite tell without actually spending time messing with it, whether or not MCHalkley's eloquent description of improvements can be retrofitted using the existing PT hitch or if it is a start from scratch project. My inclination is to buy it as is (assuming fair price) under the supposition that I can make it work.
What think you all?
P.S. In case you are wondering what I would do with it, I imagine it being fairly handy....for example, I have tons of gravel to spread over a mile and a half loggin road. With a rear 3pt and quick plate, I could use the angle blade while simultaneously using the bucket to dump and spread in the same FEL swoop (pun intended). Similarly, I could both rake and till.....or till and harrow....or mow and rake....etc
