BX1500 and Woods BH6000

Tom_H · May 20, 2005

I agree completely with what JM has said. If I did not have a subCUT and were looking to purchase one new, and wanted a bh at the same time, simply getting a BX23 would be the most logical choice, though I respect those like Matt, Woods, and Blackmajicwoman who feel otherwise.

For those of us who have a 5 yo BX2200, with an expired warranty, purchasing the BH6000 would be far less expensive than a trade in on a new BX23. Further, since I am going to have to pay for any and all repairs myself anyway, I would not need to worry about voiding a warranty.

If someone can only afford a BX 1500, 1830, or 2230 at the present time, doesn't want to finance, and wants to spend the next 4 years saving for a BH6000, it is a good option. If a person doesn't need a bh now, but thinks there is a slim choice he may need one in several years, he is well served by the BH6000.

One way Kubota could address this issue is to make the bh for BX23 an optional item. Then a buyer could purchase the tractor now and the bh later if desired.

Junkman · May 20, 2005

Tom.... I agree with you 100% on a used tractor where there is no factory warranty left, that the Woods is an excellent choice if you find that you need the backhoe. My comments were directed toward a in warranty Kubota tractor having the Woods added to it. I am in no way, placing any disparaging remarks against the Woods backhoe.
As for Kubota offering the BX23 model, less the backhoe and / or the loader, I don't see them doing that until they get to the point where they have production of these units far ahead of demand. There is no reason that they can't offer the BX23 as a stand alone tractor, since the backhoe and loader can be added at any time. It is simply a marketing tool to force the sale of a higher level machine. I have often though about what would happen if my tractor was damaged beyond repair, if I could get a replacement without the loader and backhoe. My guess is that under no circumstance would they sell just the BX23 tractor alone, even though it wouldn't disrupt production in one bit. Most times manufacturers use production disruption as an excuse for not wanting to sell a product in a "condition" that they don't offer it normally.

Tom_H · May 20, 2005

Good insights. I agree. I also know that you've always said good things about Woods' quality in general.

By the way, how's that grass catcher performing?

Junkman · May 20, 2005

( By the way, how's that grass catcher performing? )

The grass catcher is resting comfortably where UPS dropped it off. It is suffering from a bad case of lack of enthusiasm after the bolt problem. I have the holes repaired, but haven't had the ambition to finish the job. Just one of those things that will happen when the grass gets to the point where it must be picked up. I have only cut the grass once. Another advantage of not fertilizing last fall or this spring. I am not certain if it is old age creeping up on me quickly or I just got old and didn't realize it before this. I scrapped the hood of the tractor last week, and even that didn't bother me......... /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif

Volfandt · May 20, 2005

Lazy arms? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Volfandt

Lockport · May 22, 2005

Did it not play out like this? The original BX2200 could have a bh. Then, Kubota made the BX22 and I understood it had a reinforced frame. The issue was stress/twisting of the lighter frame and they advised against bh on the BXxx00 series. I would have assumed warranty work of such related damage deemed caused by a bh on the BXxxxx series would be refused. I am surprised that Kubota rep says only now are they moving in this direction. Very interesting rfogle. I am also very surprised to learn that dealer's are installing bh. They must have acquired some sort of commitment by Kubota.

blacmajicwoman: Have you noticed any stressing or related signs of excedence on your machine in your 10h seat time?

Tom_H · May 22, 2005

( Did it not play out like this? The original BX2200 could have a bh. )

I have never heard that. There are 3ph backhoes made by aftermarket companies that can be attached to any tractor with the same category hitch. That doesn't mean they will work well together however. I have never heard of any backhoe specifically designed to be compatible with the BX2200 until the Woods BH6000.

Junkman · May 22, 2005

The way that the story was recounted to me about how the BX22 came about is from a high level technical executive from Kubota. He told me that they came out with the original BX machines, with the loaders, but after introduction the dealers started asking about a available backhoe in addition to the loaders. Then Kubota started to research how they could add the backhoe to the BX machines and found that a 3 point hitch type backhoe was not an alternative. They then tried a frame mounted one, but found that the original frame was insufficient for adding a backhoe without modification. They then started to figure out a way to modify the frame, and realized that it wouldn't be a practical method to do in the field. That led to the BX22 being completely assembled with a redesigned frame from scratch that utilized the other components of the original BX machine. It was easier to design the product from scratch, than to try to create a modification kit for use in the field. From what I was told, to do the modification in the field was going to require the machine be torn down almost completely and then rebuilt with a lot of expensive parts being added and others being discarded in the process. I don't know what the actual differences in the frame are, but apparently they are sufficient that Kubota feels that if they are going to be selling the BX with the "beefed up" frame, that it will only go with the backhoe attached. Possibly if they were to sell a BX22/23 without the backhoe already attached, then another manufacturer such as Woods, could also manufacturer a backhoe to attach to the Kubota design and then Kubota would loose that backhoe sale. If I had to guess at what the marketing decision of only selling with the backhoe, that they made, this would be high on the list of reasons. Junk......

Woods · May 22, 2005

The 3 point mount back hoe could probably twist the frame on these sub CUT's with out any re-enforcement. I was impressed with the weight and guage of the sub frame mounts that came with the Woods Ground Breaker back hoe I mounted on my BX2230 this year. It doubles the width of the tractors frame from the rear hitch to the front loader mounts. Also, it provides a split cross pin for the lower 3 point hitch arms so you don't have to remove any plates to attach and detach the lower arms. I'm confident I won't be twisting the frame with this set up. There's just not enough force applied until the hydraulic saftey unloader valving relieves.

Woods does need to provide steel tubing for the hydraulic runs to the main tranny block because the rubber hoses run too close to the rear tire. Keep you eyes on them to keep mud and rocks off of them. The swivel seat mounting doesn't allow for full adjustment of the seat foward and aft sliding. The 2 main safety retaining pins on the hoe mounts aren't as easy to use (read: hammer) as the the BX23's sping loaded type either. My guess is that Woods equipment will be improving these minor issues soon once they get enough feedback. I paid $3999 for the BH6000 hoe and the extreamly low price I got my BX2230 for warranted getting the Woods backhoe instead of the BX23... although I was ready to get the BX23. 45 hours and so far so good /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif Hope many others enjoy the benefits of this addition to their tractor when finances allow.

Junkman · May 22, 2005

What was the savings of the BX2230 plus the Woods backhoe as compared to the BX23????

Lockport · May 22, 2005

The 230 lbs. difference between the BX2230 and the BX23 is all in the frame, then? I also heard the D902-E-BX engine in the BX2230 is heavier than the D905-E-BX in the BX23 so a little more extra steel there. Where on the frame did they reinforce?

Woods · May 22, 2005

I got just plain lucky to find an 8 hour BX2230 with the loader and 60" mid mower for $10.5K. Add in the back hoe and tax and I was at $15.2K...a no brainer. Granted, not everyone will find deals, but I would imagine new BX1500 owners could realize some savings over the BX23 as well with the Woods BH6000 back hoe ??? What do the BX1500's go for? Keep in mind, Woods recomends a loader must be installed on the front. Don't know if front counter weights could offset the 700lb. hoe in the back. Probably not.

blackmajicwoman · May 23, 2005

First off, sorry for the long post. To purchase a BX23 was not an option for me last year, at least financially speaking. After researching my needs and comparing that to my budget, the BX1500 was suited fine for me. I really wanted a BH, but just couldn't afford it. In fact, I just barely scraped enough for the tractor, FEL, and MMM. Here's the quick cost breakdown when I was purchasing: BX23 w/ 60" MMM = $17k, BX1500 (FEL, 48" MMM) = $10k...then adding the Woods BH6000 in March was an additional $4.6k. I didn't have the $17k to start with, or I would have just bought the BX23!

Secondly, my dealer "must be OK" with installing the Woods BH6000 on the Kubota BX series, because he sent all of his BX owners a Woods BH6000 brochure in Feb. He was more than happy to install the BH on my BX1500. Also, Woods would not have manufactured the BH6000 without doing extensive engineering to make sure the BX series tractors could handle it. In fact, I even spoke to one of the engineers at Woods who told me the Woods engineering team specifically designed the BH6000 for the Kubota BX series. He also said they put much more engineering into the subframe than the BH itself!

The subframe supplied with the Woods BH6000 looks like it actually strengthens the frame beyond the BX23 frame. The subframe bolts along the side of the tractor frame and is integrated right into the FEL front frame mount. I have put this to the test with over 20 hours of digging on the BH with no flexing at all. But lets keep in mind that this is a 15hp machine with a small BH mounted...I would attempt to be excavating large 24"+ oak stumps or trying to dig up concrete! I know the limitations of my machine and am happy with the performance.

I do agree that it isn't the easiest to attached and dismount, but after taking it on and off a few times, use of my hammer, and some grease, it actually mounts pretty easy now. I have finished my digging projects for now and keep the BH dismounted, as I don't think there's a need to have 700#'s hanging off the back for no reason. When I do have it attached, I lower the boom and let the dipper out a bit to rest the bucket on the floor, which takes some of the weight and strain off the rear axle while the tractor is not being used.

As far as warranty issues, I don't abuse my tractor. I use it in a safe manner and don't try to do things it was not designed to do. With that, I don't expect to have any major warranty issues, but then again, the the warranty is only for 3 years! If you are weighing everything on a warranty that is only meant to address component manufacturing and assembly defects, then take an insurance policy out on your machine!!! Also, if this is your issue, than you should ONLY use Kubota manufactured 3PH implements!

Now, let me get off my soapbox. I hope this answers some questions out there.

bxbuster · May 23, 2005

Completely redesigned tractor from square one, not hardly. 200 lbs in additional weight from reinforcement alone? C'mon, the whole frame doesn't weight that much... The differences between the 23 and the 2230 are very minimal. Could a 2230 frame be made equal to a 23? Surely, can you say welder? After market tractor accessories are no different to me than after market parts for any other equipment. Most often the market drives demand for superior to oem performing parts and accessories. The temptation to go with a 23 out of the chute is there but if the woods out performs it at less money than what's the debate. By the way, I'm not saying that it does, I'm just making a statement from what I have read over the past few months.

Av8r3400 · May 24, 2005

I agree. I'd like to see where the 230 lbs difference is on the BX22/23 frame. I see little difference from the 22/23 frame to the sub-frame that Woods supplies. Possibly the ENTIRE 22/23 frame weighs 230 lbs?

Blackmajicwoman-- How much would you estimate the sub-frame and mount of the Woods hoe weighs? Is there 200 lbs of steel there?

Does anyone have any pics of the difference? (22/23 to 2200/2230)

blackmajicwoman · May 25, 2005

I would estimate that each side piece that make up the subframe are about 30#'s each.

vchandler · May 29, 2005

I just did my own installation of a woods BH6000 on my BX2230 and I was curious of the added weight so I weighed what went on and what came off and here is what I found. Rt subframe bracket is 35 lbs, left subframe bracket is 37.5 lbs, rest of added parts (seat bracket, loader braces, bolts, hydraulics, etc.) is 50.5 lbs, so total added weight is 123 lbs. So if you add the 30lbs for the BX23 brush gard, the 50 lbs or so added for the foldable ROPS and you can see where the 230lb difference is between the BX2230 and the BX23.

cokeman · May 30, 2005

Sorry if I'm a bit late contributing to this thread but my dealer has a new BX1800 with Woods loader and backhoe on his lot right now. The package looks very nice I might add.

Dean

tjkubota93 · Feb 18, 2016

Does anyone know why I cannot see the pictures that the OP posted? Is the thread too old? I know it's an old thread, but I am considering a woods backhoe, so this is (or would be) good info.
Oops I guess because I'm stupid! I was on the Internet and couldn't see them. But with the tapatalk tractor by net app, it works!