Grading Someone with a 4100 and 54" front blade
- Thread starter Cdash
- Start date
- Views: 5641
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
Thanks Keeny!!! That shows everything I needed. It never fails to impress me, the amount of engineering and ingenuity that JD puts into its products. I plan on using those brackets to build off of for my own front blade. I just wanted to verify that all of JD's blade is supported by those 4 points and how.
That gets me off and running. Now to find the time to do it all.........
Thanks Keeny!!! That shows everything I needed. It never fails to impress me, the amount of engineering and ingenuity that JD puts into its products. I plan on using those brackets to build off of for my own front blade. I just wanted to verify that all of JD's blade is supported by those 4 points and how.
That gets me off and running. Now to find the time to do it all.........
JDgreen227
Super Member
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
rp425,
Clean looking setup---did you fabricate the mount for the blade? Reason I ask, I have a 4210 with a 420 loader and a 54 inch power angle front blade on my old 318. Being retired I am too broke to buy a new blade to fit my 420, wondering how hard it is to make a mount for my older blade. Thanks.
rp425,
Clean looking setup---did you fabricate the mount for the blade? Reason I ask, I have a 4210 with a 420 loader and a 54 inch power angle front blade on my old 318. Being retired I am too broke to buy a new blade to fit my 420, wondering how hard it is to make a mount for my older blade. Thanks.
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
<font color="green"> ... It never fails to impress me, the amount of engineering and ingenuity that JD puts into its products... </font>
I am not so sure it so ingenuis in this case. Although I am not concerned that the mounting points will completely fail, I wish they were more precise and made out of harder steel.
There are six non-solid "joints" between the tractor frame and the blade.
1 Frame to Front Hitch pin and slots.
2. Front Hitch to Tilt-Angle Mount pin and slots.
3. Tilt Pivot and tilt cylinder pins.
4. Angle Pivot.
5. Quick-tatch connection to blade assembly.
6. Spring-trip pivot.
All these joints seem to be wearing a bit, putting more and more vertical slop into the setup. At this point, there is probably a full six inches of slop in the vertical direction at the bottom edge of the blade.
It is becoming an issue because it is getting to the point where even on level ground, the blade is only able to push down far enough to barely lift the front wheels off the ground. On uneven ground, it is sometimes not possible to get any pavement-scraping down-force at all.
Another issue is that when trying to do some light grading in dirt, when I hit a higher or tougher chunk of earth, the various joints and the slop conspire to flip the blade assembly down, digging even more into the ground. If the blade was completely rigid in the vertical direction, the angle would not change - the blade would shave through as intended, or the tractor would stall or lose traction, but not get its front end wedged up into the air.
I am thinking I could weld some 3/4" or 1" nuts onto the top of the tilt angle mount and then after it is mounted, tighten some bolts through them, pushing on the front bumper of the tractor frame to take all the slop out of the first two joints in the system.
That will probably be in the spring when I start working on the yard again.
- Rick
<font color="green"> ... It never fails to impress me, the amount of engineering and ingenuity that JD puts into its products... </font>
I am not so sure it so ingenuis in this case. Although I am not concerned that the mounting points will completely fail, I wish they were more precise and made out of harder steel.
There are six non-solid "joints" between the tractor frame and the blade.
1 Frame to Front Hitch pin and slots.
2. Front Hitch to Tilt-Angle Mount pin and slots.
3. Tilt Pivot and tilt cylinder pins.
4. Angle Pivot.
5. Quick-tatch connection to blade assembly.
6. Spring-trip pivot.
All these joints seem to be wearing a bit, putting more and more vertical slop into the setup. At this point, there is probably a full six inches of slop in the vertical direction at the bottom edge of the blade.
It is becoming an issue because it is getting to the point where even on level ground, the blade is only able to push down far enough to barely lift the front wheels off the ground. On uneven ground, it is sometimes not possible to get any pavement-scraping down-force at all.
Another issue is that when trying to do some light grading in dirt, when I hit a higher or tougher chunk of earth, the various joints and the slop conspire to flip the blade assembly down, digging even more into the ground. If the blade was completely rigid in the vertical direction, the angle would not change - the blade would shave through as intended, or the tractor would stall or lose traction, but not get its front end wedged up into the air.
I am thinking I could weld some 3/4" or 1" nuts onto the top of the tilt angle mount and then after it is mounted, tighten some bolts through them, pushing on the front bumper of the tractor frame to take all the slop out of the first two joints in the system.
That will probably be in the spring when I start working on the yard again.
- Rick
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
JDgreen227 - I did fab the mount and it was not bad at all. I am in the process of changing blades along with a new mount that will incorporate a 7 ft. blade with dual hyd. cylinders. The 54" blade is way under sized for the 4110 with the correct weight and traction setup for winter snow plowing.
JDgreen227 - I did fab the mount and it was not bad at all. I am in the process of changing blades along with a new mount that will incorporate a 7 ft. blade with dual hyd. cylinders. The 54" blade is way under sized for the 4110 with the correct weight and traction setup for winter snow plowing.
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
I have a 4100 w/loader and want to get a front blade cuz the loader makes a horrible snow plow. My local JD dealer only has a $1,400.00+ aftermaket blade that attaches to my loader arms - no hydraulics even. About like just using my loader bucket but w/blade, i.e. if i'm going to attach a blade to loader arms I may as well use the loader.
After reading this post I'm enlightened and now leary of a few things:
1) 54" blade is too small for snow,(which I had a feeling), but JD dealer said 72" would push the tractor frontend sideways if angled to much. Anyone have experience with this?
2) the Quic-Tach system looks like it is sloppy & cause Quick-Wearout almost prematurely due to so few hard points/mounts. However, this is the blade system I set out to purchase ...and found myself here.
SO, ideal setup for me would be a 60"-72" replacable edge blade on hydraulics with quick-Tach or equivilent with solid mounting.
Has anyone fabricated anything w/plans to share or found any aftermkt system? I have a limited machine shop so nothing to exotic /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Thanks
I have a 4100 w/loader and want to get a front blade cuz the loader makes a horrible snow plow. My local JD dealer only has a $1,400.00+ aftermaket blade that attaches to my loader arms - no hydraulics even. About like just using my loader bucket but w/blade, i.e. if i'm going to attach a blade to loader arms I may as well use the loader.
After reading this post I'm enlightened and now leary of a few things:
1) 54" blade is too small for snow,(which I had a feeling), but JD dealer said 72" would push the tractor frontend sideways if angled to much. Anyone have experience with this?
2) the Quic-Tach system looks like it is sloppy & cause Quick-Wearout almost prematurely due to so few hard points/mounts. However, this is the blade system I set out to purchase ...and found myself here.
SO, ideal setup for me would be a 60"-72" replacable edge blade on hydraulics with quick-Tach or equivilent with solid mounting.
Has anyone fabricated anything w/plans to share or found any aftermkt system? I have a limited machine shop so nothing to exotic /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Thanks
ducati996
Banned
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
Pocket,
Can I suggest a rear blade as an option? I use a RB60 Frontier for my gravel driveway commitments, and when I need to scrape off thick ice....It works really well moving snow
and up to pretty decent snowfalls as well (up to a foot or more) with the 4100 and above you have position control so you lightly touch driveways...its a sturdy blade that wont break and can be used all year round...less expensive as well compared to front blade with angle setup...
Just a thought....
Ducati
Pocket,
Can I suggest a rear blade as an option? I use a RB60 Frontier for my gravel driveway commitments, and when I need to scrape off thick ice....It works really well moving snow
and up to pretty decent snowfalls as well (up to a foot or more) with the 4100 and above you have position control so you lightly touch driveways...its a sturdy blade that wont break and can be used all year round...less expensive as well compared to front blade with angle setup...
Just a thought....
Ducati
bigpete
Veteran Member
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
Pocket,
The 54" blade will work just fine for your 4100. For the 4115, it is just a little too narrow.
The blade angles up to 27 degrees. At 15 degrees, the width plowed is 52 1/4 inches. At the full 27 degrees, the plowed width is 48 inches. Measure the track width of your 4100 to find your comfort level. I've never heard a 4100 owner complain about their blade, even though it would be better at 60". You will experience the sideway forces even with the 54" blade. A front blade is light years ahead of a rear blade or loader for snow removal.
Pocket,
The 54" blade will work just fine for your 4100. For the 4115, it is just a little too narrow.
The blade angles up to 27 degrees. At 15 degrees, the width plowed is 52 1/4 inches. At the full 27 degrees, the plowed width is 48 inches. Measure the track width of your 4100 to find your comfort level. I've never heard a 4100 owner complain about their blade, even though it would be better at 60". You will experience the sideway forces even with the 54" blade. A front blade is light years ahead of a rear blade or loader for snow removal.
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
The problems I have with the sloppiness of the quick-tatch are mostly when using it to try and grade dirt. It works fine for moving snow.
Also, my machine had 475 hours on it when I bought it, most of which I suspect was pushing dirt grading driveways or something. I bought from a dealer far enough South that the blade was probably never used for snow. Grading dirt is a much heavier-duty application than pushing snow.
For dirt, I find the blade is only really useful for moving loose dirt like maybe back-filling after using a trencher or leveling the sand on the beach down near the lake (but a rear-mounted rake works even better for that).
I do wish it was wider - maybe 66 or 72 inches would be about right on my 4100. However, I am perhaps not appreciating the ease of menuevering around things in my driveway like parked vehicles and stuff. A wider blade would be great for the open portions, but a pain for the piddly detailing up against the house and garage.
The side forces are only an issue when you try and use too much down-force to scrape the pavement clean because the front tires have little or no weight on them for steering traction. Even then, it really doesn't get pushed to the to the side, but just goes straight instead of responding to steering. Lifting the blade slightly restores steering. Running in 4WD is almost a must. The independent rear brakes can also be used to help with this situation.
I agree with the other posters that for snow in the couple inches up to maybe 6 or 8 inches deep, a front-mounted blade is the fastest way to get it moved, assuming you can push it to the side of the road or driveway. For deeper snow, I would use a front-mounted snowblower.
Here in MN this season, I have only had to plow once so far, and the "had to" part of that may have even been stretched a bit just to get some seat time. You can see in the photos I posted last week that the tires still have mud on them from the fall!
- Rick
The problems I have with the sloppiness of the quick-tatch are mostly when using it to try and grade dirt. It works fine for moving snow.
Also, my machine had 475 hours on it when I bought it, most of which I suspect was pushing dirt grading driveways or something. I bought from a dealer far enough South that the blade was probably never used for snow. Grading dirt is a much heavier-duty application than pushing snow.
For dirt, I find the blade is only really useful for moving loose dirt like maybe back-filling after using a trencher or leveling the sand on the beach down near the lake (but a rear-mounted rake works even better for that).
I do wish it was wider - maybe 66 or 72 inches would be about right on my 4100. However, I am perhaps not appreciating the ease of menuevering around things in my driveway like parked vehicles and stuff. A wider blade would be great for the open portions, but a pain for the piddly detailing up against the house and garage.
The side forces are only an issue when you try and use too much down-force to scrape the pavement clean because the front tires have little or no weight on them for steering traction. Even then, it really doesn't get pushed to the to the side, but just goes straight instead of responding to steering. Lifting the blade slightly restores steering. Running in 4WD is almost a must. The independent rear brakes can also be used to help with this situation.
I agree with the other posters that for snow in the couple inches up to maybe 6 or 8 inches deep, a front-mounted blade is the fastest way to get it moved, assuming you can push it to the side of the road or driveway. For deeper snow, I would use a front-mounted snowblower.
Here in MN this season, I have only had to plow once so far, and the "had to" part of that may have even been stretched a bit just to get some seat time. You can see in the photos I posted last week that the tires still have mud on them from the fall!
- Rick
ducati996
Banned
Re: Someone with a 4100 and 54\" front blade
For the amount of money a good rear blade costs compared to the angleing front blade option its a real good alternative, thats very cost effective and allows you the FEL use at the same time...the rear blade is almost undestructable as well..
It works best with position control capable machines...
For the price of the front blade w/ angling it better work good!!
Just an alternative suggestion/idea...
Ducati
For the amount of money a good rear blade costs compared to the angleing front blade option its a real good alternative, thats very cost effective and allows you the FEL use at the same time...the rear blade is almost undestructable as well..
It works best with position control capable machines...
For the price of the front blade w/ angling it better work good!!
Just an alternative suggestion/idea...
Ducati
