M62 TLB for Maintaining Hilly Land ?

[AuCivil]

As JWR says, the Japanese don't seem to understand about widening the tractor wheelbase for hillside work. But American farm tractors do.

There is a 3pt kit for the M59/62. I'd get it if you go that way, but swapping the hoe and 3pt is enough of a chore that you may want to keep your eyes open for an extra 3pt tractor.... an older American farm tractor for the 3pt hillside work. Although compact and utility size tractors don't have much ability to widen their stance, the next size up in the tractor world are those farm or ag tractors and many offer adjustable width of the wheelbase.

Our old JD "B" ag tractor isn't much good for anything except 3pt work, but like most farm tractors it came with long rear and front axles. The tires can be extended out along those axles to nearly ten feet total. That makes it almost as wide as it is long, looks ridiculous, but is almost impossible to flip. You can find ag tractors with extra long and wide axles.

My own view about hillsides is I try every way possible to avoid going there.

Both of our TLBs will will slide sideways before it begins to feel tippy. I don't know why that is so, but am very glad it does. Both have wide construction tread tires with heavy sidewalls. The M59 weighs a bit over 8000 lbs, the JD 310 about twice that.

Note that most American and Japanese tractors and TLBs DO NOT have brakes on the front wheels or any suspension - although I understand that European tractors have both. Think for a moment about what that means when going downhill with a weight in the loader bucket.....

rScotty

My 4710 is a little smaller. Probably 4500 lbs with loader. I use 4x4 in low when I go down hills. Seems like long axles would be a severe hindrance in the woods.

Disappointed to hear that changing the BH is a chore. May push me to re-think my equipment choices.

 

[rScotty]

Thanks for the advice. No doubt it would be better but the 310 weighs too much for me to move with my setup. It also doesn't have a 3-point/PTO option. If I could avoid limbs, the cab would be nice.

Well, if the 310 is too heavy then that is no good & that is the end of it. BTW, the M59 is right at 8000 lbs and the 310 is twice that. Low down weight and wide industrial tires make both TLBs tend to slide before tipping. When we bought the Kubota TLB, rear wheel extenders were offered by Kubota in their "build it" option.

Although swapping the BH and 3pt accessory on the Kubota TLB is about as simple and civilized as possible, those 3pt components are HEAVY. I have that 3pt kit, but at close to 80 I am getting too old to swap them comfortably. So take your own age into account. There was a time when it swapping them was no chore at all. And at that time it only took maybe 15 minutes. Took longer to find all the parts than to swap them.

However, for us older guys there is another point in favor of the Kubota TLB. That Kubota is about the easiest Tractor or TLB ever made to get onto and off of. Much nicer than most and that is way more important than I wish it was.
Try one and you'll see what I mean.
rScotty

 

[JWR]

My 4710 is a little smaller. Probably 4500 lbs with loader. I use 4x4 in low when I go down hills. Seems like long axles would be a severe hindrance in the woods.

Disappointed to hear that changing the BH is a chore. May push me to re-think my equipment choices.

I tend to agree with Scotty -- you probably ought to think in terms of a separate tractor for bush hogging. Brand new backhoe machines are expensive enough you might very well get a low hours backhoe and an older utility tractor for about the same money.
You didn't mention the acreage needing bush hog work, but a 6ft hog will cover a lot of territory pulled by a medium say 45 to 55 hp utility tractor. I would not be hesitant to buy a used utility tractor of name brand with under 1000 hrs on it -- the lower the better of course. 4WD of course, I'd never get a 2WD. These days a New tractor is not necessarily trouble free! I'd be just as happy, maybe more so, if I found a good deal on one with 200 to 400 hrs on it rather than brand new.
While I am preaching, I think you should estimate how much of your likely work will be with the backhoe and how much with the bush/utility tractor. Spend accordingly. OBTW, maint and repair costs will be drastically greater for the backhoe than for the plain old utility tractor over the long haul, everything else being equal.

 

[AuCivil]

I tend to agree with Scotty -- you probably ought to think in terms of a separate tractor for bush hogging. Brand new backhoe machines are expensive enough you might very well get a low hours backhoe and an older utility tractor for about the same money.
You didn't mention the acreage needing bush hog work, but a 6ft hog will cover a lot of territory pulled by a medium say 45 to 55 hp utility tractor. I would not be hesitant to buy a used utility tractor of name brand with under 1000 hrs on it -- the lower the better of course. 4WD of course, I'd never get a 2WD. These days a New tractor is not necessarily trouble free! I'd be just as happy, maybe more so, if I found a good deal on one with 200 to 400 hrs on it rather than brand new.
While I am preaching, I think you should estimate how much of your likely work will be with the backhoe and how much with the bush/utility tractor. Spend accordingly. OBTW, maint and repair costs will be drastically greater for the backhoe than for the plain old utility tractor over the long haul, everything else being equal.

May need to bush hog 15-20 acres and scrape a couple of miles of road.
Was thinking the backhoe with thumb would be an asset in moving stump piles from the thinning and downed trees.
Was also considering a stump grinder to clear some of the trails.

 

[rScotty]

May need to bush hog 15-20 acres and scrape a couple of miles of road.
Was thinking the backhoe with thumb would be an asset in moving stump piles from the thinning and downed trees.
Was also considering a stump grinder to clear some of the trails.

I've never met anyone who put a a thumb on their backhoe and regretted it. The simple addition of the thumb makes it into a completely different machine. Now it picks up logs and holds them at waist level for cutting into rounds. It stacks stumps into piles and places uncut limbed logs into neat racks.

I've got a six foot tall rack of limbed 12 to 20" pine logs about ten feet wide and 40/50 feet long. The bottom row is on stickers, so the whole pile is just curing in place. Will be firewood, not lumber. I've no idea how a person would do that without a hoe and thumb.

The thumb picks up stones out of the ground and places them into stone walls. It landscapes, then picks up scrap of all kinds, wads it up, and places it into a dumpster. It uproots shrubs and puts them into a pile. There is just no end to the lifting work it saves.

Digging with the hoe becomes secondary. Because of the thumb, we are always using the hoe - but I almost cannot remember when I last used it for digging or trenching.

If you have stumps, please do get a stump grinder or something like it. Or come up with a scheme.
I don't have one but can tell you that stump digging is rough. Digging anything over the occasional 8 to 10" stump will make your hoe old before its time. Digging stumps and side-sweeping with the bucket are what is hard on them.
That goes for the big 310 as well.
rScotty

 

[AuCivil]

I've never met anyone who put a a thumb on their backhoe and regretted it. The simple addition of the thumb makes it into a completely different machine. Now it picks up logs and holds them at waist level for cutting into rounds. It stacks stumps into piles and places uncut limbed logs into neat racks.

I've got a six foot tall rack of limbed 12 to 20" pine logs about ten feet wide and 40/50 feet long. The bottom row is on stickers, so the whole pile is just curing in place. Will be firewood, not lumber. I've no idea how a person would do that without a hoe and thumb.

The thumb picks up stones out of the ground and places them into stone walls. It landscapes, then picks up scrap of all kinds, wads it up, and places it into a dumpster. It uproots shrubs and puts them into a pile. There is just no end to the lifting work it saves.

Digging with the hoe becomes secondary. Because of the thumb, we are always using the hoe - but I almost cannot remember when I last used it for digging or trenching.

If you have stumps, please do get a stump grinder or something like it. Or come up with a scheme.
I don't have one but can tell you that stump digging is rough. Digging anything over the occasional 8 to 10" stump will make your hoe old before its time. Digging stumps and side-sweeping with the bucket are what is hard on them.
That goes for the big 310 as well.
rScotty

Just need to get rid of the protruding part of the stumps to allow mowing, disking and eliminate high-centering vehicles. Would still need to be careful blading and scraping.

 

[RjCorazza]

I've never met anyone who put a a thumb on their backhoe and regretted it....

I believe that. I recently used an excavator for the first, and likely last time.... 3rd project would have been much easier with a thumb.

 

[Fixastuff]

If I was working trails with a backhoe I’d go at them backwards and do whatever bench cutting is needed to make them safe.

 

[AuCivil]

If I was working trails with a backhoe I’d go at them backwards and do whatever bench cutting is needed to make them safe.

That's what i was thinking. Not near as fast as a mini-x but workable.

 

[mikester]

Thanks for the advice. No doubt it would be better but the 310 weighs too much for me to move with my setup. It also doesn't have a 3-point/PTO option. If I could avoid limbs, the cab would be nice.

Unless you have a specific need for a compact machine you aren't doing yourself any favours getting an M62 over a full sized construction TLB.