L3240 implement sizing

[TMGT]

I just upgraded from a B2620 to a L3240 but because of the size jump a lot of my implements are now too small so I'm looking to upgrade those as well.

Mainly looking for a larger box blade and rear blade, I've looked at the "recommended" sizing in the manual but I know from experience that Kubota is very conservative on sizing and their recommendations won't cover my tire tracks. (~71in outside tire to tire)

Looking for some feedback from people that have used larger blades on this size tractor. I'm looking at a 72" box blade which I think it'll handle no problem for my needs based on how well it pulled my full 60" box up my steepest hill grading the road.

The problem is deciding on a rear blade, in order to cover my tracks when angled id have to go up to an 8ft blade, I don't mind doing that, but I'm just worried I'll run out of power/traction at that size with a 32hp 5800lb tractor.
I'm not looking to do a lot of earth moving with it, just some gravel road maintenance/ditching and occasional snow removal. I found a decent deal on a nice 8ft Rhino 950 with hydraulics, just worried it'll be overkill.

Right now I have a fairly heavy 6ft 3way adjustable that I was using on my B series, but once angled its narrower then my track width.

So has anyone ran something like a Rhino 950 on a L3240 before?

 

[jeff9366]

I just upgraded from a B2620 to a L3240 but because of the size jump a lot of my implements are now too small so I'm looking to upgrade those as well.

The problem is deciding on a rear blade, in order to cover my tracks when angled id have to go up to an 8ft blade, I don't mind doing that, but I'm worried I'll run out of power/traction at that size with a 32hp 5800lb tractor.

Rear Blade is normally used on an angle. Unlike a Box Blade, material spills off the end of the Rear Blade forming a windrow, so weight of the material is usually not that high when blade is angled.

You may find the Rear Blade satisfactory grading moist soil, unsatisfactory grading hard soil.

Close call.


Have you filled your turf tires with liquid? Unlikely to be necessary to maintain traction with a modest 32 horsepower driving the wheels. I have air in the R4/industrial tires on my L3560 and have always found air maintains traction pulling a filled 60" Rollover Box Blade up a slope.


Kubota L3240 - dimensions

2007 - 2013 L40 Series
Compact Utility tractor
Previous model: Kubota L3130
Series next: Kubota L3540

Kubota L3240 Tires:
4WD Standard tires (ag): Front: 7.2-16. Rear: 12.4-24
Lawn/turf front: 27x8.50-15
27-10.50LLx15
29x12.50-15
Lawn/turf rear: 355/80-D20
41-18LLXx16.1
41x18--20
Industrial front: 10x16.5 (4WD)
Industrial rear: 420/70-24 (4WD)


Dimensions:

4WD ROPS Weight: 3395 lbs [1539 kg]
4WD Wheelbase: 71.1 inches [180 cm]
4WD Length: 114.8 inches [291 cm]
Width: 59.8 inches [151 cm]
Height: 90.7 inches [230 cm]
Ground clearance: 14 inches [35 cm]
2WD
[120 to 150 cm] 2WD} 45.5 inches [115 cm] {4WD} Front tread: 47.6 to 59.4 inches
Rear tread: 47.2 to 58.3 inches
[119 to 148 cm]
4WD turn radius: 8.9 feet [2.7 m] (with brakes)

Page information:
Last update: March 8, 2015
Copyright: Copyright 2016 TractorData LLC
Contact: Peter@TractorData.com

 

[TMGT]

Rear Blade is normally used on an angle. Unlike a Box Blade, material spills off the end of the Rear Blade forming a windrow, so weight of the material is usually not that high when blade is angled.

You may find the Rear Blade satisfactory grading moist soil, unsatisfactory grading hard soil.

Close call.


Have you filled your turf tires with liquid? Unlikely to be necessary to maintain traction with a modest 32 horsepower driving the wheels. I have air in the R4/industrial tires on my L3560 and have always found air maintains traction pulling a filled 60" Rollover Box Blade up a slope.


Kubota L3240 - dimensions

2007 - 2013 L40 Series
Compact Utility tractor
Previous model:Kubota L3130
Series next:Kubota L3540

Kubota L3240 Tires:
4WD Standard tires (ag):Front: 7.2-16. Rear: 12.4-24
Lawn/turf front:27x8.50-15
27-10.50LLx15
29x12.50-15
Lawn/turf rear:355/80-D20
41-18LLXx16.1
41x18--20
Industrial front:10x16.5 (4WD)
Industrial rear:420/70-24 (4WD)


Dimensions:

4WD ROPS Weight:3395 lbs [1539 kg]
4WD Wheelbase:71.1 inches [180 cm]
4WD Length:114.8 inches [291 cm]
Width:59.8 inches [151 cm]
Height:90.7 inches [230 cm]
Ground clearance:14 inches [35 cm]
2WD
[120 to 150 cm] 2WD} 45.5 inches [115 cm] {4WD} Front tread:47.6 to 59.4 inches
Rear tread:47.2 to 58.3 inches
[119 to 148 cm]
4WD turn radius:8.9 feet [2.7 m] (with brakes)

Page information:
Last update:March 8, 2015
Copyright:Copyright 2016 TractorData LLC
Contact:Peter@TractorData.com

Not sure what the point of copy and pasting the tractor data info is?

 

[Peter 315]

For you to read...........:laughing:

 

[TMGT]

For you to read...........:laughing:

Well lucky for me I'm a researcher so I read about everything I can on a peice of equipment before I buy it lol.

It looks like he bolded the part about HP/weight in my quote so I don't know. I included the weight if the loader and liquid ballast for the total tractor weight.

Hopefully someone with a similar tractor can give me some real world experience with a larger back blade.

 

[Peter 315]

Well lucky for me I'm a researcher so I read about everything I can on a peice of equipment before I buy it lol.

It looks like he bolded the part about HP/weight in my quote so I don't know. I included the weight if the loader and liquid ballast for the total tractor weight.

Hopefully someone with a similar tractor can give me some real world experience with a larger back blade.

You will get 100 different answers as you all ready know.. If you get the 8 foot you take less of a cut if it starts to pull hard . I have a 72'' rear grader blade that I used once and some other attachments that I never use...

 

[TMGT]

You will get 100 different answers as you all ready know.. If you get the 8 foot you take less of a cut if it starts to pull hard . I have a 72'' rear grader blade that I used once and some other attachments that I never use...

I know what you mean, I rarely use my landscape rake but when I need it I need it, that one is only 5ft but I'm not sure if I'll replace it with a larger one or not. Guess it depends on if one falls in my lap.

The rear blade gets used the most so that's why I'm mainly concerned about sizing it. A 7' would also work but is still a little narrow at full angle.

I like opinions, just hoping for a few based on similar experiences.

 

[Peter 315]

I know what you mean, I rarely use my landscape rake but when I need it I need it, that one is only 5ft but I'm not sure if I'll replace it with a larger one or not. Guess it depends on if one falls in my lap.

The rear blade gets used the most so that's why I'm mainly concerned about sizing it. A 7' would also work but is still a little narrow at full angle.

I like opinions, just hoping for a few based on similar experiences.

Just get the 8' you can always cut a 1' off...........

 

[TMGT]

Just get the 8' you can always cut a 1' off...........

Yeah thats what I was thinking, we'll see if the one I'm looking at is still for sale. The Rhino is pricy but seems really well built.

 

[Fallon]

Landpride RB3784 (7'). RB37 Series Rear Blades | Land Pride

My L4060 is about the same. 72" track, similar HP when you factor my lack of HP due to lack of Oxygen here in Colorado. don't. The same weight.. It's a hair narrow is some respects, but it can be offset. That way I can get extra pseudo width when I need it but without maneuverability problem when I dont. I'd like to get hydraulic angle & a diverter for offset, but can't justify it... yet.

A back blade isn't heavy enough to really anchor my machine, unlike my old heavy 74" Gannon box blade or 5' LPGS with a full load. But at higher angles it will start pushing you to the side.

 

[TMGT]

Landpride RB3784 (7'). RB37 Series Rear Blades | Land Pride

My L4060 is about the same. 72" track, similar HP when you factor my lack of HP due to lack of Oxygen here in Colorado. don't. The same weight.. It's a hair narrow is some respects, but it can be offset. That way I can get extra pseudo width when I need it but without maneuverability problem when I dont. I'd like to get hydraulic angle & a diverter for offset, but can't justify it... yet.

A back blade isn't heavy enough to really anchor my machine, unlike my old heavy 74" Gannon box blade or 5' LPGS with a full load. But at higher angles it will start pushing you to the side.

Thanks, that's just what I was looking for. I really like my 6ft, it can also offset so I know I can get more to the side if need be.

I was thinking 7ft would be good, only reason I was looking at the 8ft is because I found a nice Rhino with hyd. on the tilt and angle for a good price.

 

[NCL4701]

May depend to some degree what you’re doing with it. I have an old 6’ I run behind a L4701 that doesn’t cover the wheel tracks when angled. It does a better job redistributing the gravel on the road that migrates toward the ditch than the BB1572 box blade. For gravel I don’t really care if it covers the wheel tracks or not. Our dirt is primarily clay so if I’m grading something other than gravel I need the weight of the box blade (and often the rippers) to do anything much more than bounce on the surface anyway. Box blade weighs probably over twice what the backblade does. Last time I really had to do a major rehab on the road (totally neglected for about 15 years) I had to rip up the base and flatten it all with the box blade to get it loose enough to recrown with the backblade, then used the box blade to distribute the tailgate spread gravel for the top dressing, then back to the blade for a little fine tuning. If I’m just trying to flatten something (like some our trails), fill in pot holes, clean out turnouts and ditches, and cut out washboard those are more of a box blade thing.

Maybe I’m just not a very skilled operator but I need both for different operations (basically box blade for heavy stuff and backblade for fine tuning or wind rowing) and have never run across a situation where covering wheel tracks was a big deal with the backblade. Maybe plowing snow it would be important. Don’t know because I don’t do much of that.

 

[3gunr]

i run a 7 ft blade behind a 28 hp tractor and even with a full blade it has never stopped it. i live at the end of a mile long gravel rd and have to grade it 3 or 4 times a yr. i would get the 8 ft blade.

 

[TMGT]

i run a 7 ft blade behind a 28 hp tractor and even with a full blade it has never stopped it. i live at the end of a mile long gravel rd and have to grade it 3 or 4 times a yr. i would get the 8 ft blade.

I have a little over 1/4 mile of road that I maintain but it has a very steep/long hill.
Pulling material back up it was pretty tough with my old tractor, the L pulls no problem with the 5ft box and 6ft scraper but it would be nice to be alittle wider, just don't want to end up going too big and having the same problem as before with the B. If it was all pretty flat I wouldn't think twice.

 

[TMGT]

May depend to some degree what you’re doing with it. I have an old 6’ I run behind a L4701 that doesn’t cover the wheel tracks when angled. It does a better job redistributing the gravel on the road that migrates toward the ditch than the BB1572 box blade. For gravel I don’t really care if it covers the wheel tracks or not. Our dirt is primarily clay so if I’m grading something other than gravel I need the weight of the box blade (and often the rippers) to do anything much more than bounce on the surface anyway. Box blade weighs probably over twice what the backblade does. Last time I really had to do a major rehab on the road (totally neglected for about 15 years) I had to rip up the base and flatten it all with the box blade to get it loose enough to recrown with the backblade, then used the box blade to distribute the tailgate spread gravel for the top dressing, then back to the blade for a little fine tuning. If I’m just trying to flatten something (like some our trails), fill in pot holes, clean out turnouts and ditches, and cut out washboard those are more of a box blade thing.

Maybe I’m just not a very skilled operator but I need both for different operations (basically box blade for heavy stuff and backblade for fine tuning or wind rowing) and have never run across a situation where covering wheel tracks was a big deal with the backblade. Maybe plowing snow it would be important. Don’t know because I don’t do much of that.

I do everything from road maintenence to grading work to snow removal (although that hasn't been too much the past few years).
I have a use for both the box and rear blade for sure.

I like my 6ft blade but I can see it having a harder time ditching since it won't be past the tires as far when offset.

The 7-7.5ft seems about perfect but I keep finding blades I like that are 8ft for decent prices, can cut it down no problem but hate to do that if I don't have too.

The latest blade I'm looking at is a bit heavy at about 1200lbs and only has cat2 mounts, but thats pretty easy to fix.

The current 6ft blade is an older Leinbach, just finally added a front stand to it a few weeks ago. It's been a good blade, had it for over 10years now.

 

[NCL4701]

I do everything from road maintenence to grading work to snow removal (although that hasn't been too much the past few years).
I have a use for both the box and rear blade for sure.

I like my 6ft blade but I can see it having a harder time ditching since it won't be past the tires as far when offset.

The 7-7.5ft seems about perfect but I keep finding blades I like that are 8ft for decent prices, can cut it down no problem but hate to do that if I don't have too.

The latest blade I'm looking at is a bit heavy at about 1200lbs and only has cat2 mounts, but thats pretty easy to fix.

The current 6ft blade is an older Leinbach, just finally added a front stand to it a few weeks ago. It's been a good blade, had it for over 10years now.View attachment 681482

Leinbachs: That’s a little bit of a blast from the past! They used to have a pretty decent business over in Pfafftown just north of Winston not far from us. I don’t know who made this one but it wouldn’t surprise me if Leinbachs made it, too.

I will sometimes adjust the three point off center to put the blade closer to whichever side is in the ditch if cleaning ditches.

 

[TMGT]

Leinbachs: That’s a little bit of a blast from the past! They used to have a pretty decent business over in Pfafftown just north of Winston not far from us. I don’t know who made this one but it wouldn’t surprise me if Leinbachs made it, too.

I will sometimes adjust the three point off center to put the blade closer to whichever side is in the ditch if cleaning ditches. View attachment 681725

Yup, really liked the Leinbach for the money back then. I bought all my stuff used but have 3 Leinbach implements, the rear blade, landscape rake, and post hole digger. I also have a United brand box blade that I understand was part of Leinbach also.

 

[oosik]

I found that my Land Pride rear blade - RB2584 - was not heavy enough to adequately remove the snow berms that will form on my mile long gravel driveway. It weighed around 575#. So ..... when I upgraded to my Kubota M6040 in 2009 - I also upgraded to a Rhino 950( in 2013 ). Eight foot and 1050#. No hydraulics. It has proved more than adequate to "blade off" any/all snow berms that may form.

However - the M6040 with grapple, RimGuard filled rear tires and Rhino rear blade weighs - 10,100#. You could find that your upgraded tractor does not have the weight/traction to pull that Rhino in certain conditions. By gearing down you should always have sufficient power - you might just have to take smaller bites.

I've had this Rhino rear blade for seven years now. There will never be a condition where I find that I need more blade. The 950 is truly a beast.

When I plow snow - I offset and angle the blade. This will put the outside edge of the blade around a foot outside the rear wheel on the "plowed" side. In my case - a pure safety measure. There are several places on my driveway where I would rather have the rear blade extended off the edge - NOT the rear wheel of the tractor. This eight foot rear blade - when offset and angled will still not cover the full width of my rear tires. 80" - outside to outside. However - that a price I willingly pay for the safety of not getting right on the edge of the driveway.

You make a valid point regarding Kubota specs. The Rhino 950 is within the specs for weight on the M6040. However - Kubota recommends a max of 72" for blade width. I guess you just can't make everybody happy - all the time.

This blade cost $3500 seven years ago. Our 8% sales tax brought it up to - $3780. Adding hydraulics to the blade would have been an added $1000 to $1200.


View attachment 681981

 

[TMGT]

I found that my Land Pride rear blade - RB2584 - was not heavy enough to adequately remove the snow berms that will form on my mile long gravel driveway. It weighed around 575#. So ..... when I upgraded to my Kubota M6040 in 2009 - I also upgraded to a Rhino 950( in 2013 ). Eight foot and 1050#. No hydraulics. It has proved more than adequate to "blade off" any/all snow berms that may form.

However - the M6040 with grapple, RimGuard filled rear tires and Rhino rear blade weighs - 10,100#. You could find that your upgraded tractor does not have the weight/traction to pull that Rhino in certain conditions. By gearing down you should always have sufficient power - you might just have to take smaller bites.

I've had this Rhino rear blade for seven years now. There will never be a condition where I find that I need more blade. The 950 is truly a beast.

When I plow snow - I offset and angle the blade. This will put the outside edge of the blade around a foot outside the rear wheel on the "plowed" side. In my case - a pure safety measure. There are several places on my driveway where I would rather have the rear blade extended off the edge - NOT the rear wheel of the tractor. This eight foot rear blade - when offset and angled will still not cover the full width of my rear tires. 80" - outside to outside. However - that a price I willingly pay for the safety of not getting right on the edge of the driveway.

You make a valid point regarding Kubota specs. The Rhino 950 is within the specs for weight on the M6040. However - Kubota recommends a max of 72" for blade width. I guess you just can't make everybody happy - all the time.

This blade cost $3500 seven years ago. Our 8% sales tax brought it up to - $3780. Adding hydraulics to the blade would have been an added $1000 to $1200.


View attachment 681981

I do like the Rhino, I haven't heard back on the one I was looking at anyway. Seemed to be a pretty good deal at $1600 for a 950 with tilt and angle hyd.

With loader and filled R4's the L weighs in about 5800lbs so I imagine the 8 footer could move me around a bit. The turfs aren't filled so I'd lose about 1000lbs switching to them.

I did find a decent priced Woods RB850, it weighs even more then the Rhino though! No hydraulics, but thats an easy fix.

If its still available next time I'm off work I might see if I can get it.