Single shank ripper 28" - 30" WORKING depth?

[Kirboid]

Hi All.

I am looking for a 3PH single shank ripper/subsoiler with a working depth of at least 28", preferably 30" - 32". There's stuff out there on Google that says it is a 28" to 30" shank , but with research I find the working depth is only 20" - 24". I have easy access to a 50 hp 4WD JD for the ripping.

It will be relatively light usage. Based on a detailed soil study, I need to break up a rooting zone barrier (topsoil to hardpan horizon) at 27". This is a one time rip for 5 acres of vineyard in-row preplant preparation. A bigger multishank unit is not useful since I need to rip on the row (8 feet apart), so it's one at a time.

I guess maybe part of the issue with a longer shank is the 3PH travel distance - too long of a shank could not be fully lifted...??

 

[jenkinsph]

In order to get enough clearance to lift it above the ground it would need to be set back farther the the run of the mill subsoilers in your link. If designed with good use of geometry this would also reduce some of the loading on the top link. I would also recommend you consider the ones with the parabolic shank as I think these are slightly easier to pull. You will need plenty of ballast on the tractor to pull a subsoiler this deep.

 

[77bronco]

Do you have the facilities to make one the size you need? Years ago, we made ones for Cat D8s for ripping orchards. They were 8 ft x 2 ft x 4 in.
If you can get a tool bar, then you could make the size you need and not have to hunt all over the country to find the right size.

 

[Kirboid]

I agree that parabolic is probably a better chouce for the working depth that I need. I have access at work to a plasma cutter and mig welder, so building one is an option.

If I were to build a parabolic shank, I guess I would need to cut several pieces out of plate 1/4" to 3/8" thick each, and laminate them together?

 

[McGeesEquip]

Kirboid,

Tufline has a 28In. single shank sub-soiler out. They have a 32 In. sub-soiler model out with 3 shanks. The 32in shanks that they use in the triple shank series I think will change over.

Take a look at the Tufline series, and if your interested I will see about a 32 In. single model.

www.equipmentbarn.net/Tufline-Single-28In.-Shank-Subsoiler-Cat.-2.html

Thanks

 

[radman1]

That is really deep ripping. Unless you soils are really loose, I don't see how a 50 hp tractor will pull it. I pulled a single shank with my JD 5300 MFWD, loaded tires and FEL. I could only go about 14-16".

 

[Kirboid]

Kirboid,

Tufline has a 28In. single shank sub-soiler out. They have a 32 In. sub-soiler model out with 3 shanks. The 32in shanks that they use in the triple shank series I think will change over.

Take a look at the Tufline series, and if your interested I will see about a 32 In. single model.

www.equipmentbarn.net/Tufline-Single-28In.-Shank-Subsoiler-Cat.-2.html

Thanks

I had seen Tufline the 28" single shank but it appears it's working depth is around 24". If the shanks are interchangeable, and the factory would sell the single toolbar setup with a 32" shank, that would probably work. I'd be interested in a price on that.

That is really deep ripping. Unless you soils are really loose, I don't see how a 50 hp tractor will pull it. I pulled a single shank with my JD 5300 MFWD, loaded tires and FEL. I could only go about 14-16".

So you think my Case 33 hp compact won't work either, LOL! I agree 50 hp might not be enough hp/weight. I can give it a try, if it doesn't work, I could try a double pass. Obviously would take longer, but I only need to rip about 13 rows 400' long each, so it's not a big deal. It will take longer to accurately layout the rows than the actual ripping!

Worse case, I'm renting 15 acres for hay to a guy who has big iron, I could ask/pay him to rip it for me.


Thanks,

Kirby

 

[Spindifferent]

I own a Tufline 1S-24 and use it with my JD 3520.

This unit has a 24" shank.

I can only pull it in 4WD, and the max working depth is around 18". As you pull the unit through the soil, the soil tends to mound-up at the top of the shank under the toolbar, and this prevents the shank from going all the way into the soil. Might be able to get another inch or three deeper on multiple passes.

The unit is rock-solid, and the shank is bolted-on and has a shear pin, so it seems like you could ask them if they can make a unit with a single 32" shank.

However, ground clearance on the 3pt with a 32" shank may be the limiting factor on small tractors.

Best of luck!

- Spindifferent

 

[sweettractors]

I have pulled a 1S-28 Tufline to the max with a 8000 Ford (100 HP +) 2 wheel drive and in dry clay based soil, it was all I wanted. Ken Sweet

 

[McGeesEquip]

I had seen Tufline the 28" single shank but it appears it's working depth is around 24". If the shanks are interchangeable, and the factory would sell the single toolbar setup with a 32" shank, that would probably work. I'd be interested in a price on that.

Kirboid,

I got the costs of changing the 28 In. shank out to go with a 32 In. Here is a link to the page with the price. I currently have a Tufline name brand coupon discount going on any of the Tufline equipment. Take the price that is showing on the page and with the coupon it would be $1,197.95 + Shipping.

The change over to a larger shank added about 20 lbs to the unit.

http://www.equipmentbarn.net/Tufline-Single-32In.-Shank-Subsoiler.html

If you need any help, please feel free to call me.

Thanks,
Bruce McGee

 

[jake98]

That sure sounds like you'd need a bigger machine, to me. A little back hoe would do it tho.

 

[jenkinsph]

I agree that parabolic is probably a better chouce for the working depth that I need. I have access at work to a plasma cutter and mig welder, so building one is an option.

If I were to build a parabolic shank, I guess I would need to cut several pieces out of plate 1/4" to 3/8" thick each, and laminate them together?

I would cut the shank out of a single piece of plate steel. Why bother with laminating? Seems that would just add to the labor and welding time. I should add that you can use some of the drops in building the rest of the implement.

Last time I built one for 24" working depth I used 1" plate and made a template out of cardboard, then cut it out with a torch.

 

[Reg]

It is nearly 30 years since I took much interest in vineyards.
At THAT time running a mole plough down to 2 ft was widely recognized as adequate.

I guess I'm having a little problem getting my head around the idea that there is something critical between 24 and 28 inches ?
For vines you need good drainage between the rows, no doubt, but the difference between 24 and 28 is probably a lot less than between pulling a mole through and not pulling a mole.

 

[sixdogs]

Brillion has a single shank sub-soiler that I looked at last yeat. There is a short shank and long shank version and the long shank has 35" of ground clearance.

Brillion Farm - Sub Soiler

I happened to find a used single shank short clearance and wanted it for both cat I and cat II. The way I solved the ground clearance issue was by changing the mounting arrangement. Here's a link to my thread and in the second or third page you can see the side brackets and how they give me extra ground clearance by lowering the hitch pins. You would likely be OK with clearance by shortening your lift arms but I wasn't. Here's a photo as well.
I only rip 12"-14" deep but it's easy to go to 24" with a bigger tractor. Not sure you could go that deep with yours but maybe if the ground is firm and tractor weighted. Watch out for rocks and underground hazards. Good luck.

 

[Kirboid]

It is nearly 30 years since I took much interest in vineyards.
At THAT time running a mole plough down to 2 ft was widely recognized as adequate.

I guess I'm having a little problem getting my head around the idea that there is something critical between 24 and 28 inches ?
For vines you need good drainage between the rows, no doubt, but the difference between 24 and 28 is probably a lot less than between pulling a mole through and not pulling a mole.

The agri-science side of viticulture has changed alot in the past 10 years. The mole is still a recognized technique to improve drainage, it is done between vine rows. The problem with the mole is that sooner or later the tunnel collapses. I will be installing permanent drainage tile using 4" perf'd drainage pipe between every third vine row.

Ripping the vine row itself prior to planting improves drainage in the rooting zone, but that is not the primary purpose. The main reason this is needed is to break a dense clay layer that averages around 28" to increase the effective rooting depth. If it is not ripped, the roots will not easily penetrate past this layer. In a layer like this, ripping does more than just slice a cut in the layer. Wingtip ripping creates upward pressure on the layer and fractures the layer to the left and right of the rip itself - as long as it is done when the soil is not too moist.

The depth of the layer was identified by using an electronic soil compaction/penetrometer probe and a soil survey (first photo) with observation of mottling (second photo - horizontal accumulation of mineral deposits, indicating a drainage restricting layer, i.e. compaction).

Ripping at 24" would be above this layer and not accomplish the goal of improved effective rooting depth. Should anyone be interested in diving deep into this topic, here's a good USDA pdf.

Why spend the time and money on this? Studies have shown that it improves vine health and drought resistance, and increases yield 5% to 15%. For a crop that yields $4000 - $6000 per acre, the payback is clear.