CK20 Loader

[sschriber]

I'm looking to purchase a CK 20 and I'm confused about the loader bucket. Specs on the Kioti site show widths available of 48" and 54". I went to a dealer and measured 51" width on the CK 20 with 120 loader on the showroom floor. Is the 48" bucket, 54" bucket, or something else?

 

[Dmace]

That's a very good question.

I just ran out and measured mine and it is 51" across the front. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

 

[wallace]

Kioti has been only putting the 48 and 50 inch buckets on since early this year.
We can no longer get the 54' buckets
This is something that Kioti does not have a comment about or at least they will not tell me.

 

[IslandTractor]

</font><font color="blueclass=small">( Kioti has been only putting the 48 and 50 inch buckets on since early this year. We can no longer get the 54' buckets) </font>

Too bad. I like the 54. As the 54 inch Kioti buckets are somewhat less voluminous for a given width than some other brands this will presumably cut the capacity of the bucket unless they redesigned the depth and height as well as reducing the width. If they made the new bucket higher it will interfere more with forward vision. I wonder why they cut the size as the FEL on the CK20 has substantially more lifting power than competing 20hp tractors (eg Kubota 7510 which has a 48" bucket).

 

[KiotiJohn]

If memory serves me, originally the 48 and 51 were offered, but not the 54". The research and development department felt that a 50" bucket was all the stress the loader arms could take and decided that the only bucket should be the 50". I suppose some 48" buckets are still around, but I don't think they're really being offered on the new CK20s are they? I know they changed buckets on most models for the same reasons.
This information came from one of the engineers about a year ago.

 

[AutoUnionTypeC]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( If memory serves me, originally the 48 and 51 were offered, but not the 54". )</font>

John,
They offered a 54" as well, I have one on mine.
Regards, Jamie

 

[Steve_Miller]

I have the 54" bucket as well. Bought tractor a year ago September.

Steve

 

[mathey]

54" here too, almost 3 years old

 

[KiotiDave]

The Company has taken all the CK loaders (KL120 and KL130) and put them in a package form for easy ordering, less inventory and saving money. The loaders come from Korea and it is much easier to project what to manufacture if you reduce choices. It also saves the company money in the long run by packaging every loader the same. It all comes on one pallet shrink wrapped in plastic which takes up much less room than shipping odd size buckets. Who can guess which buckets will sell and which buckets will gather cob webs?
Just my take on the changes made by KIOTI.
KiotiDave

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( If memory serves me, originally the 48 and 51 were offered, but not the 54". )</font>
Memory didn't serve me!! They originally offered the 48" and 54" buckets and I got the 54".
Island, I believe that's the outside measurement and should be considered a 50" bucket if measured inside behind the cutting edge lip, even though it will be slightly wider than that.
John

 

[IslandTractor]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">
Island, I believe that's the outside measurement and should be considered a 50" bucket if measured inside behind the cutting edge lip, even though it will be slightly wider than that.
John )</font>

Nope, it is a true 54 inches interior. Measured it for a toothbar.

Ed

 

[Steve_Miller]

Ditto

Steve

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Nope, it is a true 54 inches interior. Measured it for a toothbar. )</font>
Well, that's the most important thing, that you got the proper measurement for your toothbar, and that you bought one!! Sure is a great add-on isn't it?
John

 

[IslandTractor]

The toothbar is great and wins hands down in the "bang for the buck" category of modifications to the FEL. After initial attempts at clearing brush with the stock FEL, chain hooks and chain, I really wanted a grapple. However after using the toothbar I realize that it may be difficult to justify the cost of adding a grapple for what I am doing. For the several acres I am clearing, I would probably spend as much time installing the grapple/hydraulics as I would gain in further efficiency at clearing debris. I am moving brush to burn/chip piles and need to travel only 50 yards or so with a loaded bucket. The balancing act necessary with the toothbar is no problem for this even though a grapple would clearly be the tool of choice. I just drive backwards if I have the bucket overloaded (with light brush) and if I am dealing with briars I find it useful to create a small pile then lower the bucket and push the whole mess towards the pile. Again, no doubt a grapple would be twice as efficient but you can do the job with the toothbar/FEL whereas the plain FEL bucket alone was hopeless for this task. I use the chains only for logs now.

Couple of photos follow showing the ability to move debris/brush with just the FEL/toothbar and not needing to get off the tractor (horrors!) to fiddle with a chain.

Ed

 

[IslandTractor]

Toothbar allows me to push over and rip out up to 3-4 inch saplings and cart them off with associated debris without using the backhoe or bothering with chains. Less mess than with the backhoe and by ripping out the roots/stump it does a cleaner job than the bush hog.

 

[KiotiJohn]

One of the things I like the best about the toothbar is when I'm trying to load a big pile that is full of all types of materials, like vines, branches etc. The plain cutting edge bucket would nearly always just push it forward and out rather than getting in the bucket. With the TB, it graps hold and I can get it all in the bucket, usually in one try.
Of course, all the extra digging power is great too. Right after I got the toothbar, I cleared about 2 acres of small wax myrtle trees in just 4 days. I never would have done that without the TB!
John