Want/need a bigger/better landscape rake. Help me pick.

[pwright]

So I have a Land Pride LR1572 that I have been using but there are times when it doesn't do what I want it to do. This could be just in the way I am using it however.

I use it for two things. Raking up the loose rock that magically appears in the driveway (~0.45 miles) as well as other areas of the property and then tidying up a portion of the road leading up to our area. This "road" is really a wash (or arroyo) and when we get heavy rains it often runs with water cutting little channels and spreading rock in it.

The roads (and my driveway) here are all native material. Which is to say no base course and no gravel other than what occurs naturally. A grader comes through twice a year to blade the roads and whenever a road gets so tore up by runoff that it can't be used. Some pics for clarity.

Entering the wash.

At our turnoff.


A week later cleaned up with the rake.


The problem is that while a 72" rake angled 30 deg still covers the width of the tires (60") at a 45 deg angle it is now ~10" shy of covering the tires. With the sheer amount of rock to be moved off I need to run at a 45 which means I can't get as close to the road/driveway edge as I would like. At a 30 deg it is just barely outside the edge of the tires. This leads to my driveway getting narrower.



I'm thinking of going to a 84" rake which would give me 59.4" at full angle and would be close enough to covering the tires. Am looking at the EA XTreme Duty Compact Tractor Landscape Rake which has the forward pivot and would allow me to offset and get outside the edge of the tires on one side. With the offsetting rake I could potentially stay with a 72 or even a 60 inch rake. Or maybe go with an 84" anyways. I do plan on picking up the gage wheels in any case so that when I do clean up the sandy road I don't end up with all the little whoops in it.

Is the 84" rake just too much rake for my little tractor especially given that is used to move rock primarily?

 

[zzvyb6]

It does take much tractor to pull an 84" rake down a gravel driveway. I have a 96" Arps rake with gauge wheels thatI run angled at 45 degrees. This gives me the maximum longitudinal leveling capability for eliminating whoop-D-doos. I have added extra weights (as 1" steel plates to the rake tine bar to give it extra 'dig'. Be sure to use a chain for a top link, so the the tractor running over humps is minimized. After a few runs over a period of time, your road wil be Road Commision quality.

The wider rake means fewer runs to do the whole driveway/roadway. I make 3 passes: Once down each side angled and once down the centerm straight. Your only problem will be keeping the tractor a proper distance from the road edge because of the rake overhang. I sometimes use a piece of electrical conduit taped to the radiator guard set to locate the tractor laterally.

I'd bet you could tow these rakes with a lawnmower with a proper floating hitch, or even a P/U truck with a winch to raise it.

 

[jeff9366]

I have a "Hydraulink" Top Link, now available relatively cheap from Agri Supply.

HydrauLink-Category 1 Self Contained Top Link | Agri Supply # 7638�

Hydraulink is very useful operating a Box Blade, Rear Blade, Landscape Rake, Rotary Cutter and any other implement sometimes fitted with a floating Top Link.

When I had my Kubota B3300SU, about the same weight at your CT225, I felt its secondary function as a shock absorber between the tractor and ground contact implements added to the longevity of the 'B'.

I am not enthusiastic about chain used a a Top Link. There have been cases of Rotary Cutters, blades and rakes colliding with something, then flipping up and onto the tractor operator.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

LINK: rotary cutter flip site:tractorbynetocom - Google Search


Be safe.

 

[sdef]

I have the ETA rake you mentioned at 84". I purchased the 84" version due to all of the trees on my property and limited maneuverability. I also have the gauge wheels and would not own this rake without them. They make final finish grading or any other use easier other than use as a blade, maybe. I have T-N-T and it also makes using any implement easier. My tire width is a bit wider than yours and I would prefer a wider rake if I had the room to use it.

The rake also has a float position on it for the top link but I have never used it. See the ETA videos for this rake. One of them mentions the float position.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

My :2cents:.

Forget about the ETA rake that you linked to and get the 84" rake that sdef has. They are not the same rake. This rake is the best landscape rake for the $$$ that is available IMO. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

As a side note-question, can you build some crown into the road and ditch the sides so that the water damage is not so severe? :confused3:

 

[pwright]

Thanks for the feedback guys. Much appreciated.

Brian - So the Severe Extreme is heavier and looks to be an even stronger built attachment but am I really going to be able to tell the difference in operation? For a ~40% increase in price I kinda need to know that I'm going to see some actual benefit. The rake only gets used 4 or 5 times a year. Or do you see my use as being potentially damaging to the regular Extreme rake?

re: crowning/ditching the road

As I said, it's a wash. It's just sand, rocks and the occasional boulder. I could crown it but the first vehicle that drove down it near the edge would just collapse the edges. And then when the grader guy came through later he would just wipe out any work I put in crowning and ditching so there's that. We only see water running in it 2-3 times a year tops. But when it does it tends to run heavy and makes it pretty rough after it drains away. Nice thing is that leveling it out while it is still wet makes for a nice drive for a month or two after that. I also would need to get a new rear blade and you just spent any extra money I had.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Thanks for the feedback guys. Much appreciated.

Brian - So the Severe Extreme is heavier and looks to be an even stronger built attachment but am I really going to be able to tell the difference in operation? For a ~40% increase in price I kinda need to know that I'm going to see some actual benefit. The rake only gets used 4 or 5 times a year. Or do you see my use as being potentially damaging to the regular Extreme rake?

re: crowning/ditching the road

As I said, it's a wash. It's just sand, rocks and the occasional boulder. I could crown it but the first vehicle that drove down it near the edge would just collapse the edges. And then when the grader guy came through later he would just wipe out any work I put in crowning and ditching so there's that. We only see water running in it 2-3 times a year tops. But when it does it tends to run heavy and makes it pretty rough after it drains away. Nice thing is that leveling it out while it is still wet makes for a nice drive for a month or two after that. I also would need to get a new rear blade and you just spent any extra money I had.

Here it is as I see it. You have some serious work to be done several times a year. Unless you are retired and have nothing else to do, you need implements that get work done quicker and easier than the lighter grade implements. When grading, weight is king. The first ETA rake only weighs in at 285 lbs and only has single pins for attachment of the draft links. The unit that I linked to weighs in at 395 lbs, so about 38% more weight and has clevis type attachment for the draft links. In my mind, you will get things done faster, easier and the implement itself will hold up better.

I've gone though the twisting-pretzeling of my landscape rake in the past, grading dry stream beds. When working with ground, not leaves, sticks and such, stronger-heavier is better.

The same thing holds true for rear blades, weight is king. Of course these implements cost far more, but if you want them to actually work for you, sort of what it looks like what you need. This would be the absolute minimum rear blade, This Land Pride RB3784 would be much better though. When ever you get that new rear blade, be sure to get it with skid shoes, they really do help. :thumbsup:

 

[Catchad81]

Get the severe duty eta rake. I have one and it has performed well. I don't usually get into the weight thing but in the rakes weight is good to have. Either one is light really.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Get the severe duty eta rake. I have one and it has performed well. I don't usually get into the weight thing but in the rakes weight is good to have. Either one is light really.

Land Pride's LR3784 is 488lbs, but pretty sure that it is more than double the cost of the ETA rake that I recommended. For a landscape rake, pretty hard to get past that 500lb level, 400lbs should work pretty good for him IMO.

 

[sdef]

Here are my experiences.

When I need to perform a task- any task with the tractor or any other tool I own, it needs to work efficiently and reliably. Typically this means I now only purchase things built by Dewalt, Makita, etc. I have learned these lessons by experience. When I purchase a tool I can't afford to spend the money nor the time on lesser types of equipment. In my experience they end up costing me more money and my valuable time than they are worth. I need to get my tasks completed relatively quickly with no aggravation from tools I can't depend upon.

In your area and for your uses you might be able to get by with lighter weight equipment. Maybe not. But I would bet that the heavier equipment recommended would do the same job in a better, more reliable fashion. So I guess it comes down to where one wants to spend their money and time. I also do some light grading with my rake and do not own a back blade. Between my rake and ROBB, I am good for my purposes.

My home and land work area is in a rare (for this part of the country) part consisting mainly of very heavy clay and rocks of all sizes up to small boulders. Most of the surrounding area seems to be sandy loam or a mixture of sand loam and clay. So for my usage, I only purchase equipment heavier than the typical TSC stuff. Nothing lighter will work effectively nor last.

I used to think the typical lighter weight TSC type of equipment would be good buys for easier to work land that was sandy. A friend has a farm 50 miles from me and his land is mainly sandy loam. In the past he has purchased the lighter weight TSC type of equipment, used from Craig's list, and has never had much luck with the performance of that very lightweight stuff, even in his relatively easy to work soil. He has either sold his lighter weight equipment or it sits mainly unused. I brought my tractor, ROBB, rake and two buckets over to his place to build a small duck pond, fill and level an area for 3000 gallons of water storage bins, greenhouse and butcher area, along with digging out a small part of a hillside so he could back his truck into that area and load/offload from his tailgate level with no lifting. We also drilled a bunch of 12" holes with his PHD. He would not even attempt this work with what he had (other than the PHD), yet I was able to complete it easily in a few days- a far shorter amount of time that he even considered possible, all due to my equipment selections.

I consider my equipment time savers and would not purchase anything lighter in weight. Even in my very tough soil conditions, I have only damaged one shank on the ROBB while grading and digging up very large sized rocks, and three tines on the rake- from when I backed into a couple trees a couple times :-(. All of my equipment has held up well and are what I consider to be the best bang-for-my-buck on the new market.

I only purchase what I consider to be better equipment. Around here it is nearly impossible to purchase good quality, used tractor equipment through any kind of advertisements. To me this means those who purchase the better equipment have no reason to get rid of them as they work well. Most of what is available is the typical lightweight equipment that typically are bent in some fashion. Not to mention they still want nearly new price.