Charlie_Iliff
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2001
- Messages
- 1,890
- Location
- Arnold, MD
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT1845, John Deere 2240, John Deere 950, John Deere 755, Jacobsen Turf Cat II
Wasabi\'s PowerTrac fixation
<font color=red>"Ok you PT braggerts....enough with the chest pounding already!!" </font color=red>
I quit chest pounding years ago. It hurt my hands.
<font color=red>"You guys should start a new thred titled "Weekend Tractor and Implement Addicts Support Group"!"</font color=red>
Isn't that what TBN is now?
<font color=red>1) Am I to infer that the custom backhoe adaptations being discussed produce a better solution than the hoe offered by PT. Is that primarily a cost function?</font color=red>
PT doesn't offer a hoe except on the 2400 series, which are utility tractor/loader/backhoes. For me, where slope mowing was a primary consideration, the after market skid steer type hoe was the only option.
<font color=red>2) Similarly, is the discussed Long bucket fix a better route than the standard PT Grapple bucket...If so, why? </font color=red>
I dunno. The 4 n 1 is allegedly better for digging and grading, and the grapple better for things like piles of brush. Bubenberg loves his grapple. MChalkley and others swear by 4 n 1's. I'm trying to learn to use the latter, but really would love to have both.
<font color=red>3) Is there consensus as to clear advantage of comparative utility and ease of changing implements on the PT vs. 3pt ?</font color=red>
Comparative utility is not possible to estimate until you are looking at a particular job and a particular pair of implements. I like the implements being out front where I can watch them. I've had a lot of mowing, raking and baling time looking over my shoulder. Of those three, I suspect it would be difficult to find a push type sqare baler. For some implements, the rear location may work better, but none of those I currently use. For changing, even with a quick hitch attachment on a 3-point, the Power Trac is easier, because it's in front. Compared to a regular 3-point, you're talking a painless 15 seconds for the PT change v. 15 minutes, barked knuckles, a sore foot, and a slipped pry-bar bruise for a 3 point change that goes really well. Consensus? Probably not. TBN doesn't allow those.
<font color=red>4) What experiences have you all had with attempting such adaptations with PT engineers. Are they open to changes?</font color=red>
I'm not sure the guys I've talked to are engineers, but they know the equipment. They are willing to discuss any modifications, and helped me with information to pass on to Long for the 4 n 1 bucket and Lackender for the hoe. Then, they asked for pictures of how it came out. They also talked through with me using attachments that they had for one machine on another, even if not on the price list. Mark Chalkley can describe his experience before he decided in favor of his EF instead of the PT. He discussed a number of modifications with them.
<font color=red>5) Please weigh in with opines on suitability of a 1430 (30hp diesel PT) vs 45 hp for the aforementioned Bearpen uses. (...we're clearing about seven acres to put in pasture, orchard and vineyards, so ground prep and maintenance will be important functions, over ten miles of logging roads to improve/maintain....also, planting, auguring for fence posts and such. We're building, so material handling will come in handy. We'll also likely get a cement mixer.. don't have a lawn there and don't plan on one, but will need brushhog. Got hills!!...Bearpen runs from 3800 to 3200 ft elevation)</font color=red>
I'd decided on a 1430 until the price dropped on the 1845. I suspect that the 1430 will do your jobs, but when it comes to power, as we all know, if some's good, more's better. Don't miss the chance to try out the 1850, and the 1460. Get one of those, and your bank will like you even better. (You're already getting the crawler, right?)
<font color=red>"Ok you PT braggerts....enough with the chest pounding already!!" </font color=red>
I quit chest pounding years ago. It hurt my hands.
<font color=red>"You guys should start a new thred titled "Weekend Tractor and Implement Addicts Support Group"!"</font color=red>
Isn't that what TBN is now?
<font color=red>1) Am I to infer that the custom backhoe adaptations being discussed produce a better solution than the hoe offered by PT. Is that primarily a cost function?</font color=red>
PT doesn't offer a hoe except on the 2400 series, which are utility tractor/loader/backhoes. For me, where slope mowing was a primary consideration, the after market skid steer type hoe was the only option.
<font color=red>2) Similarly, is the discussed Long bucket fix a better route than the standard PT Grapple bucket...If so, why? </font color=red>
I dunno. The 4 n 1 is allegedly better for digging and grading, and the grapple better for things like piles of brush. Bubenberg loves his grapple. MChalkley and others swear by 4 n 1's. I'm trying to learn to use the latter, but really would love to have both.
<font color=red>3) Is there consensus as to clear advantage of comparative utility and ease of changing implements on the PT vs. 3pt ?</font color=red>
Comparative utility is not possible to estimate until you are looking at a particular job and a particular pair of implements. I like the implements being out front where I can watch them. I've had a lot of mowing, raking and baling time looking over my shoulder. Of those three, I suspect it would be difficult to find a push type sqare baler. For some implements, the rear location may work better, but none of those I currently use. For changing, even with a quick hitch attachment on a 3-point, the Power Trac is easier, because it's in front. Compared to a regular 3-point, you're talking a painless 15 seconds for the PT change v. 15 minutes, barked knuckles, a sore foot, and a slipped pry-bar bruise for a 3 point change that goes really well. Consensus? Probably not. TBN doesn't allow those.
<font color=red>4) What experiences have you all had with attempting such adaptations with PT engineers. Are they open to changes?</font color=red>
I'm not sure the guys I've talked to are engineers, but they know the equipment. They are willing to discuss any modifications, and helped me with information to pass on to Long for the 4 n 1 bucket and Lackender for the hoe. Then, they asked for pictures of how it came out. They also talked through with me using attachments that they had for one machine on another, even if not on the price list. Mark Chalkley can describe his experience before he decided in favor of his EF instead of the PT. He discussed a number of modifications with them.
<font color=red>5) Please weigh in with opines on suitability of a 1430 (30hp diesel PT) vs 45 hp for the aforementioned Bearpen uses. (...we're clearing about seven acres to put in pasture, orchard and vineyards, so ground prep and maintenance will be important functions, over ten miles of logging roads to improve/maintain....also, planting, auguring for fence posts and such. We're building, so material handling will come in handy. We'll also likely get a cement mixer.. don't have a lawn there and don't plan on one, but will need brushhog. Got hills!!...Bearpen runs from 3800 to 3200 ft elevation)</font color=red>
I'd decided on a 1430 until the price dropped on the 1845. I suspect that the 1430 will do your jobs, but when it comes to power, as we all know, if some's good, more's better. Don't miss the chance to try out the 1850, and the 1460. Get one of those, and your bank will like you even better. (You're already getting the crawler, right?)
, but only with the proviso that she will also be trained in its full use. (Ok, honey, you can mow "sometimes"). I'm not sure who is being Tom Sawyered more, her or me!! Such is the state of affairs for one such as me hitched to an absolutely lovely but incredibly independent minded lady with a mind for business!