Paying for itself.

[FarmerSteve]

The key component of cost as I've experienced it is the depth to sand or gravel for the drain/leachfield. If you picture the drainfield as a way to get the graywater back into the underlying aquifer, then you can see that you've gotta dig down (in Michigan, this means through the clay layer) until you hit permeable sand or gravel. If that is a long way (like 20 feet or so around here), then you've gotta fill the hole back up with something permeable like sand or gravel, so the water has a way to drain down to the lower sand or gravel level. Trucking in the sand or gravel is where the expense is, since unless you have suitable borrow available, you've gotta buy it.

 

[jinman]

Hey CB-Doc, you should know I'm looking at your "figgers" and I'm going to weigh-in with something if I see an inconsistency. When you figure the cost you will save by having your own equipment, you can't figure the total cost of the job if you have someone else do it. We "backhoe renters" would point out that the cost saved should be the difference in the cost of a rental. For example: If a rental backhoe would have cost $200 per day plus delivery, you only saved that amount by having your own backhoe for your septic system. The remaining amount you saved by doing it yourself would have been a constant whether you rented or not. Don't you think this is a fair point? I too like having my own equipment, but I just can't bring myself to "plop down" the $7k-$8k for one when I can rent a "real hoe" for $200 per day.

You and I may just have to disagree on this.../w3tcompact/icons/blush.gif/w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

JimI

 

[cowboydoc]

I can buy that Jim. I wouldn't have even attempted it though without my own backhoe as I hate being rushed and constantly having to look at hours and when it has to be back, but we'll go the rental route just for arguments sake. It took me six days to do the septic system though. Even with a bigger backhoe I could have maybe saved a day. If I use your figures then I saved $1000 plus probably at least $75 each way for delivery, going rate here. Ok so I saved $1150. That brings me to $1325. Stumps will probably take me three or four days to dig out. Figure four days as I also want to trench a water line down to my arena. So that's another $800 after this weekend. Now I'm up to $2125. I'll keep you and everyone else informed of the jobs I do with it and we'll see where the numbers come out. Fair enough?

 

[glennmac]

I dont have a backhoe yet, but let me jump in on the general principle.

There is a big fun factor and satisfaction factor in operating your own equipment to improve your land. This leads me to do things on my property that I never would have hired anyone to do and never would have rented equipment to do. Yet, after I have done it, I have improved my land and made it more valuable.

I am convinced that I can increase the value of my property over the next ten years by far more than the cost of the equipment--and enjoy doing it. Now, perhaps mathematically it could be shown that I could have produced a similar increase in value by renting various pieces of equipment for a similar cost over that period. But I know myself. I simply wouldnt have done the jobs without my own equipment. So, having done nothing, I would have saved the economic cost of the rental equipment, but I would also have foregone the even greater economic increases in the value of my property. To say nothing of the "psychic rewards" I would have foregone.

 

[cowboydoc]

You're exactly right Glennmac!!! I hate renting because of all the rules and restrictions and worrying about the time, etc., etc. The reason I used the whole cost of the system minus the supplies is because I never would have even attempted it without the backhoe. To me I saved the original amount but I see where the other guys are coming from as well. I probably wouldn't have gotten these stumps taken out either. There are two in the yard that have been there since I bought the land. After this weekend hopefully they'll be gone but they would have stayed there as well.

 

[dmccarty]

FarmerSteve,

Its interesting to see how the spetic fields are built in different areas of the country.

You are right about the fill component of the septic system. The reason we can have a conventional spetic system is that our soil depth is very shallow. On one perc side its averages something like 24 inches and we need 36 per the state regulations if I remember correctly. So we have to bring in fill dirt. But I know of someone, who brought in the same amount and type of fill dirt we need for $2,000. I have one quote from a trucking company for $4,000 and from a spetic installer for $7,000. That is ONE heck of a range in price.

The fill is partly to drain but mainly to allow the waste water to be treated. The bugs are supposed to cleanup/filter out the bad stuff in the liquid from the spetic tank. The state regs in NC are concerned with having the correct soil depth to allow the cleaning of the fluid as well as to prevent any leaching to the surface.

Later...
Dan

 

[Bird]

Dan, you're right about the systems being different in different areas. This "Wilson clay loam" around here doesn't perc well at all. Six years ago, I had a small septic system installed for a small mobile home for my parents. They called it an "evapotranspiration bed". They put in two 400 gallon septic tanks, then ran the output line to a two way valve, dug two 20' x 40' pits, 2' feet deep and laid what looked like corrugated and perforated 8" black plastic pipe (or tubing) with a thin fabric sleeve on them to keep dirt out, around each of pits about 2' in from the sides. They hauled in sandy loam (said they used to use sand but had learned the sandy loam worked better). They put a few inches in the pits first so the pipe was on it, then covered the whole thing with just a very slight mounding. The theory was that some would soak into the ground, but that a wicking action would bring moisture to the surface to evaporate. The instructions were to turn the valve to direct the flow to the other pit when the surface of the one being used appeared damp. I simply turned the valve on the first of each month, the ground never got wet (grass grew like the dickens though), and it worked quite well. Total cost of the system was $3,800 and they said a major part of that was having to haul the sandy loam from a place about 50 miles from here.

Bird

 

[jinman]

Don't let me bamboozle you with all this "rental talk." I'd love to own my own backhoe, but there are levels of tolerance to the rental game that make it more or less feasible to do. Several of my backhoe rentals have been from a rental place so close that I drove the hoe to my property. Delivery and needing a hoe at only the beginning and end of a long job make owning one seem better. My two assertions here are that when comparing savings, you have to compare to rental cost, and a rental hoe (if maintained properly) is much more capable than any compact tractor hoe (that doesn't include tight spaces where small is better). Inconvenience? No one ever said saving money has to be convenient./w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif/w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

JimI

 

[FarmerSteve]

Probably the septic installer's stuff is special septic field fill .

 

[glennmac]

To complete an economic analysis of ownership v. rental you also have to figure the residual value of the owned equipment. Well maintained tractor equipment has a high resale value. For example, you could complete all your hoe projects in 5 years, have significantly increased the value of your property, and be able to sell your hoe for maybe more than 50% of what you paid.