SubCompacts . . purpose of box blade implement

[bumperm]

Having hydraulic top and tilt may not be 100% necessary, but it sure is 100% nice!

Adjusting the top link length changes the nature of the box blade. Shorten the top link and moving forward and the front cutting edge of the box is more aggressive, cutting more into the soil - the box fills with material. As the top link is lengthened, the front cutting edge becomes less aggressive, easier to pull, and finally stops digging in, only cutting off the tops of bumps - material is still carried in the box and only deposited in the divots and small low spots. This top link setting is also useful for moving material from one spot to another by dragging the full box with no cutting action. As the top link is further extended, the front blade stops cutting altogether as it is now above the ground - any material in the box is now deposited in a smooth layer behind the tractor as the box empties.

The nice thing about a hydraulic top link in all this is that you can watch what's happening as you adjust the length and get exactly the box action you want. It's dynamic, when using the box scraper to cut, move, and spread material, the top link is being adjusted for each phase of operation. Of course, one could just lift the box with the 3-point to dump or spread, though I don't find that nearly as effective or smooth. I used a manual top link with a box and it's nowhere near as convenient as hydraulic top, so with manual, one tends to make do with how the top link is adjusted rather than stopping, tweaking it, repeat.

The above is reversed when the tractor is moving backwards pushing the box, as the rearmost blade will cut when the top link is lengthened. There is a caveat though, the 3 point hitch is not intended for heavy loading in reverse, so pushing the box should be approached with caution and only for lighter loading. I've never bent anything, but I've heard of people who have.

 

[s219]

I haven't used mine in years. A good scrape blade is much better for smothing gravel driveways.

One of the main points to a box blade is that the box allows you to remove material from high spots and redistribute it to low spots -- something that cannot be done with a simple blade (at least not well). It is the key unique aspect to the box blade and the reason that whole design was invented (and I think it's rather ingenious). The presence of the box allows material to collect and naturally redistribute on uneven terrain. When running down the length of my 600-700' driveway with the top link set just right for smoothing, it's amazing to see the material level in the box fluctuate (ebb and flow is another way to describe it) as I am shaving off any high spots and filling any low spots.

A simple blade has its own set of unique capabilities. Both devices are useful/unique in different ways. There is some overlap, but there are things that are unique about both.

In terms of maintaining my gravel driveway, I do 90% of it with my box blade. Having a hydraulic top link makes it very capable. But if I need to crown or move material from the edges to the middle, there is no substitute for my rear blade, angled in two axes. It is the better tool for that. It's also far better for snow removal. My neighbor uses a box blade to move snow off his driveway, and it's so much less efficient than a rear blade. What takes me two passes with a rear blade -- down one side an up another -- takes him 6-7 passes or more.

 

[AxleHub]

My neighbor uses a box blade to move snow off his driveway, and it's so much less efficient than a rear blade. What takes me two passes with a rear blade -- down one side an up another -- takes him 6-7 passes or more.

S219,

Can you explain how a box blade is used for snow removal? As I understand it . . it can't angle . . so it is straight. It would seem it only drags a path . . and I'm not able to picture how that is helpful. If it angled the snow would be worked to the side. If it picked up the snow it would be a bucket that couldn't get rid of the snow. And your tractor has to go over the snow first before it even gets to the blade. And to try to revetse push snow with the box blade would be terribly inefficient it would seem.

 

[bcp]

Almost the same as a standard box blade. They don't angle, and they contain the snow.

Wheeled box blade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHszaf88rss

Front box blade
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK_TAKWcv0k

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

S219,

Can you explain how a box blade is used for snow removal? As I understand it . . it can't angle . . so it is straight. It would seem it only drags a path . . and I'm not able to picture how that is helpful. If it angled the snow would be worked to the side. If it picked up the snow it would be a bucket that couldn't get rid of the snow. And your tractor has to go over the snow first before it even gets to the blade. And to try to revetse push snow with the box blade would be terribly inefficient it would seem.

You answered your own question. It's not that efficient for snow and neither is a conventional bucket. That's why so many people mount blades on their FEL for snow removal. Where it can work nicely is in combination with a front mounted implement: backup to the edge/door/etc, drop the blade and pull ahead a bit more than a tractor length. Lift the blade and backup thru the pile to drop the front implement behind the pile and push. Saves a lot of turning around. It's almost inevitable with snow removal that some snow will be driven thru, just part of the job.

 

[s219]

S219,

Can you explain how a box blade is used for snow removal? As I understand it . . it can't angle . . so it is straight. It would seem it only drags a path . . and I'm not able to picture how that is helpful. If it angled the snow would be worked to the side. If it picked up the snow it would be a bucket that couldn't get rid of the snow. And your tractor has to go over the snow first before it even gets to the blade. And to try to revetse push snow with the box blade would be terribly inefficient it would seem.

That's about it -- works like crap in my opinion. Snow spills out the top and front, so it takes a lot of passes to clean up.

 

[wchp14]

I am debating the Kubota BX series vs the B series.

I had the same debate a month ago and ended up buying a Kubota B2650 and have not looked back. The FEL is super handy and now my wheel barrow just sits in the garage, I bought a finish mower for it on craiglist and It came with a 60" box blade which is decent but I prefer a 6-way blade. With a B serries you get a "real tractor" vs a garden tractor on steroids. Everything I read prior to buying says buy the biggest tractor you can for the money, that phisolophy is 100 % correct.

 

[TMR]

I am debating the Kubota BX series vs the B series.

I had the same debate a month ago and ended up buying a Kubota B2650 and have not looked back. The FEL is super handy and now my wheel barrow just sits in the garage, I bought a finish mower for it on craiglist and It came with a 60" box blade which is decent but I prefer a 6-way blade. With a B serries you get a "real tractor" vs a garden tractor on steroids. Everything I read prior to buying says buy the biggest tractor you can for the money, that phisolophy is 100 % correct.

Thanks wchp14...did you look at the new B2601 vs the B2650? I do think the B series is much better for my needs. Probably some of my uses could use an L series but I do not want the extra size or weight for my work in the woods. Tom R

 

[AxleHub]

Greetings wchp14,

You stated . . Buying the biggest tractor you can for the money is the thing to do . . and that theory is 100% correct.

That very well might be your personal opinion . . but you bought a Kubota B series product . . and so your own brand would strenuously object to that opinion . . because they are as yet still the largest sold sub compact manufacturer on the planet.

Kubota would tell you they invented that sub compact market because they saw a staggering need for smaller sizes of tractors. Your B series is a compact . . it too was considered little more than a garden tractor on steroids by full size tractor owners at the time.

My point is . . the B series is a group of fine tractors . . but it is only a small part of the Kubota lineup. Sometimes bigger size is better . . . but many times smaller is more efficient or less brutish or more accurate. Its true in football and in tractors

 

[Eric102]

I've got one on my JDX739 garden tractor! Use it all the time for leveling small areas where my bigger tractor/box blade won't fit.

 

[Fawken]

I am debating the Kubota BX series vs the B series.

I had the same debate a month ago and ended up buying a Kubota B2650 and have not looked back. The FEL is super handy and now my wheel barrow just sits in the garage, I bought a finish mower for it on craiglist and It came with a 60" box blade which is decent but I prefer a 6-way blade. With a B serries you get a "real tractor" vs a garden tractor on steroids. Everything I read prior to buying says buy the biggest tractor you can for the money, that phisolophy is 100 % correct.

32 years experience with what I thought was the smallest tractor on earth has taught me that, no, you should not get the biggest tractor you can afford. Get the smallest tractor that will safely handle the biggest jobs you intend to do. Trust me, you'll be getting calls daily from your neighbors with machines too big to fit into the tight spot that need leveling or a pipe dug up.

 

[PeterK]

I have a BX24, rear blade not a box blade. It's good for pulling snow away from the garage, etc. and I never had a use for a box blade. If you have a gravel driveway, then box is good. If you need to level out raw ground, it's good for that too. But as a must have, after 6 years with my BX, I have no desire or need for a box blade. My driveway is paved and my lot is grass. I have a middle buster for breaking up new ground and a KK tiller that smooths like no tomorrow. So they probably take the place of a box blade. But IMO, it's would be stored and taking up valuable space. As far as rear weight, there's other options that are more compact and less expensive. I can live without one.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Something that is truly amazing is that we all DO NOT have the same set of conditions to work with. :shocked: Therefore we all do not have the same requirements, and yet so many of us think that we have the answers for so many without even knowing the conditions that a person has to work with. :scratchchin:

Don't get me wrong, I make these generalizations all the time and should not. :no:

As far as size of tractors to get, without actually knowing as many of the conditions as possible, aren't we actually only guessing what would work well for someone based on our own experience? :confused3:

 

[jenkinsph]

Something that is truly amazing is that we all DO NOT have the same set of conditions to work with. :shocked: Therefore we all do not have the same requirements, and yet so many of us think that we have the answers for so many without even knowing the conditions that a person has to work with. :scratchchin:

Don't get me wrong, I make these generalizations all the time and should not. :no:

As far as size of tractors to get, without actually knowing as many of the conditions as possible, aren't we actually only guessing what would work well for someone based on our own experience? :confused3:

I agree for the most part with the above. In most cases the questions are what size is needed to handle my jobs and the person posing the questions may not have a clue to their needs. Lots of general questions keep getting lots of general answers, lots of repetition for sure.

 

[Xfaxman]

Here is my 48" box blade on my 22 horsepower "SubCompact".

It has the ultimate hydraulic top link function. :thumbsup:

Moving gravel. http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...ter-put-together-post3448291.html#post3448291