The Best Dirt Moving Attachment - FOUND

[jmc]

Looks like a fully loaded 2 wheeler would weigh over 10,000 lbs, centered about half way between its wheels and your tractor drawbar. That's over 5000 pounds of extra axle stress. It may be asking a lot from something designed as a compact tractor.

John

 

[WVBartMan]

John: The weights will average from a 2 cy load around 6,900 gvw, 1,656 lb tongue weight (24% as designed by the manufacturer), and a 5,244 lb load (scraper) net. I have several three point implements that weigh 850 to 1,000 lb and the tractor handles them well without the FEL. Running the draw bar as short as possible will definatly help in keeping the front end on the ground should I get into heavy material. The real issue is hopefully hauling more material safely without damaging the tractor. The present scraper works fine and if anything maybe a little small for the tractor. The larger scraper is designed for 2.5 cy capacity but I felt an average of 2 cy per load would be suffecient. The last half of a cubic yard to reach the 2.5 cy capacity takes 80% of your fuel and time to get and really not worth it.

This is becoming a hard decision for me and I hope people like yourself and others here at TBN don't get aggravated with my questions. Thank you and others for your responses.

 

[DDT]

I will bet our 5030's would have a hard time pulling that one, Too bad

 

[WVBartMan]

DDT: Your probably right. I think my brother inlaw is going to have to go and buy a new one like I did instead of getting a good "family" deal. The thought of having a bigger scraper was definatly enticing but the thoughts a tearing up the 5030 makes it definatly not worth it.

 

[JimMorrissey]

Bart,

This is a great thread. I check it all the time.

I don't see the larger scraper harming the tractor all that much. I could see the larger one doing some damage if you were to continually lug it down in a higher gear, but you wouldn't do that /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif Otherwise, it will pull until it can't handle anymore, then you're off. Where do you see the damage possibly occuring? The rear hitch can take the load you mentioned no problem.

 

[have_blue]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( ( I will bet our 5030's would have a hard time pulling that one, Too bad )</font>

DDT,

I think I would go for one on the low end of the HP rating. If I understand correctly, you have fine adjustment on the depth of cut. Using a smaller unit, I bet you can run in a much higher gear, take a shallow cut, and nearly keep up with the next larger size scraper. Probably with a lot less lugging too. Also, I think you get diminishing returns when you try to pack in the last fraction of a yard. You gotta' keep that scraper moving quickly and steadily to move a lot of earth.

 

[WVBartMan]

Jim:

Here are my issues, any advise would be great, from anyone.

1. The tractor I have is a 53 hp Kubota L5030 with an operating weight from the factory of 4,000 lb. I have filled the R4 tires to add 1,000 lbs.

2. The factory spec's on the tractor is 6,600 maximum trailer weight and 1,430 maximum tongue weight. This is based on no rear tires filled and no FEL hanging off the front. I estimate the FEL at 1,500 lbs.

3. I have three scrapers to select from and I presently own the Hoelscher DP6 that my brother inlaw wants to purchase. The three are the following:

Hoelscher DP6, 1.3 cy capacity, 6' wide cut, empty weight 1,100 lbs, loaded weight 4,350, tongue weight loaded 1,044 lbs with a cost of $3,943

Durabilt DB5, 1.5 cy capacity, 5' wide cut, empty weight 1,400 lbs, loaded weight 5,150 lbs, tongue weight loaded 1,236 lbs with a cost of $2,900

Ashland 25S, 2.5 cy capacity, 6' wide cut, empty weight 1,900 lbs, loaded weight 8,150 lbs at max capacity or with a 2 cy load 6,900 lbs, tongue weight loaded 1,956 lbs with 2.5 cy or a tongue weight of 1,656 lbs with a 2 cy load, with a cost of $5,847

The pro's and con's of each:
Hoelscher: Pro's - Nice design, easy to operate, extremelly well made, light weight. Con's - low capacity, no front mold board to keep material from falling out of scraper, 4 inch ground clearance.

Durabilt: Pro's - Front mold board for holding material in during transport, 1.5 cy capacity, low cost, 5' cut width, making filling a breeze. Con's - I have never seen one, no web site, skinny scraper tires, unknown ground clearance, the picture looks like a short bowl requiring the material to be stacked high, could be a bad representative picture.

Ashland: Pro's - Front mold board, hydraulic control for height/cutting depth, heavy duty with bolt on grader cutting blade, larger capacity with longer bowl, wider rear tires, draw bar pull instead of three-point hitch, load closer to tractor, 11 inch ground clearance. Con's - Weight (500 lbs more than Durabilt, 800 lbs more than the Hoelscher empty), cost ($1,043 more than the Hoelscher, $2,947 more than the Durabilt).

The main issue is my Kubota has a hydrostatic transmission and I want to make sure the tractor will not be in a constant overwhelming strain loading, hauling and dumping the larger scraper. The Durabilt has a nice price, larger capacity than my Hoelscher but the unit is an unknown other than the one picture I found on a website (http://www.farmequipdistr.com/), go to the Durabilt (E9) and click on it to see the scraper.

Any advise would be helpful from those experienced with compact tractors and heavy loads. Thanks for the help.

 

[DDT]

have_blue I would like the 6' model because my tracks are 74" wide side to side wall.
WVBartManre
In a prefect world the dealer(s) should let you demo the ones you a interested in.

 

[have_blue]

DDT,


OK, I gotcha.

It wouldn't matter to me, as I would use it for digging and transporting dirt, not finish work. I see the tool as a very low profile excavator and funny little dump trailer combined. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[WVBartMan]

DDT: Your correct, in a perfect world you could demo the unit to determine proper sizing. I would love to see these units in person to determine what I was buying. It's going to be a hard decision.