Trying to pick a box blade. Woods bss54 says its 486lbs(I assume empty) and 54". I want it heavy for use but don't want it to be too much. The woods blade is $770. I'm also looking at a united blade-standard at 293lbs(60 inches). The united blade is 400 bucks. Thanks Joe
Is a 486lb box blade too much for a 2320?
- Thread starter joseph143
- Start date
- Views: 6958
Johndeere3720
Padawan Tractor Learner, Advertiser
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 3,965
- Location
- NW Oregon
- Tractor
- Bobcat T62, MT55, E42R, E10, John Deere 4100
I think you should get the lighter boxblade because.....
1. When the boxblade gets dirt packed inside ad you lift it up, the front end WILL come off the ground.
2. wrestling with that heavy an implement to hook to the tractor isnt too much fun.
3. price is much higher than the lighter one.
Either choice you make, be sure to post pictures of it!:thumbsup:
1. When the boxblade gets dirt packed inside ad you lift it up, the front end WILL come off the ground.
2. wrestling with that heavy an implement to hook to the tractor isnt too much fun.
3. price is much higher than the lighter one.
Either choice you make, be sure to post pictures of it!:thumbsup:
jfmach
New member
I'd wager it's about the maximum you can pick for a 2320 if you don't want to struggle with it all the time.
For my 2720 the JD vendor recommended I get a BB2072 maximum, I opted for the BB2065 which is 500lbs and 65" wide so I don't get the problems Johndeere3720 described (apart from the fun of hooking up a 500lbs piece of equipment of course
.
For my 2720 the JD vendor recommended I get a BB2072 maximum, I opted for the BB2065 which is 500lbs and 65" wide so I don't get the problems Johndeere3720 described (apart from the fun of hooking up a 500lbs piece of equipment of course
.
LD1
Epic Contributor
I'd wager it's about the maximum you can pick for a 2320 if you don't want to struggle with it all the time.
For my 2720 the JD vendor recommended I get a BB2072 maximum, I opted for the BB2065 which is 500lbs and 65" wide so I don't get the problems Johndeere3720 described (apart from the fun of hooking up a 500lbs piece of equipment of course
The 2320 JD is rated for a little over 1100 lbs @ 24" behind the pins. So a Boxblade under 500lbs is well under the MAX that It can lift.
And if you are doing boxblading, I'll assume you probabally have the FEL on as well. So very slim chance of lifting the front end.
Its all about what you can afford. The 293lb blade obviously isn't built as heavy/strong and probabally wont last as long. A 54" BB that weighs 486lbs on a 2320 will be almost indestructable and will last a very long time.
Also, if you get the lighter blade, you may find yourself adding weight to it frequently. @ only 293 lbs, it may not dig as well as you will expect. As well as 293 lbs is not a lot of ballast when it comes to FEL work. 500lbs is about perfect for that size tractor.
I will also note that the 2 BB that deere offers for this tractor are the BB10 and BB20. Which weigh 385 and 465lbs respectivly.
So long story short, it is NOT too big or too heavy and will work just fine. But it's your money so buy whatever one you like and can afford.
jfmach
New member
You're right LD1, the problem isn't the lifting part, it's the pulling part when there's dirt in the BB.
Let's say the BB is 54" by 1.5 foot by 2 feet . Means it has a capacity of 13.5 cubic feet.
A yard of loose dirt weighs roughly 1.5 metric tons. If you fill the box blade completely (which I guess won't usually happen but this is just for the purpose of the exercise) you'll have to pull an additional 1650 lbs, for a total of 2136 lbs.
So you'll probably be alright in a conventional scenario where the BB isn't full (pulling should be easier than lifting too), but again I don't think it would be a good idea to get a wider box (and I don't know that its section would only be 1.5'x2', if it's bigger it will be heavier...).
FYI the same assumptions with a 65" BB would be 1986lbs of dirt, 2200lbs with a 72" (and the BBs weigh more as well).
Let's say the BB is 54" by 1.5 foot by 2 feet . Means it has a capacity of 13.5 cubic feet.
A yard of loose dirt weighs roughly 1.5 metric tons. If you fill the box blade completely (which I guess won't usually happen but this is just for the purpose of the exercise
) you'll have to pull an additional 1650 lbs, for a total of 2136 lbs.So you'll probably be alright in a conventional scenario where the BB isn't full (pulling should be easier than lifting too), but again I don't think it would be a good idea to get a wider box (and I don't know that its section would only be 1.5'x2', if it's bigger it will be heavier...).
FYI the same assumptions with a 65" BB would be 1986lbs of dirt, 2200lbs with a 72" (and the BBs weigh more as well).
Last edited:
jfmach
New member
FYI, here's is a JD brochure on Frontier box blades (and rear blades and landscape rakes) for UTs:
http://www.deere.com/en_US/ag/media/pdf/frontier/landscaping/wsdsfe35662_20_21_lndscp_tools_lit.pdf
Based on the capacities posted on that document, I actually underestimated the BBs capacity by 5 to 10%. Add that much to the numbers.
http://www.deere.com/en_US/ag/media/pdf/frontier/landscaping/wsdsfe35662_20_21_lndscp_tools_lit.pdf
Based on the capacities posted on that document, I actually underestimated the BBs capacity by 5 to 10%. Add that much to the numbers.
LD1
Epic Contributor
But the two blades he is looking at, the heavier one is the smallest. The 293lb one is 60" as opposed to the 486lb one @ 54".
Assuming the sides and the height are the same, and the 486lb one is just constructed heavier, it WOULD be easier to pull than the lighter 60" on he is looking at.
Assuming the sides and the height are the same, and the 486lb one is just constructed heavier, it WOULD be easier to pull than the lighter 60" on he is looking at.
jfmach
New member
Correct, as you pointed out if it's lighter it's also more likely to bend at some point. I don't think the extra 6" and reduced price are worth the shorter lifespan. Of course it all depends how much he'll be using it. Your last sentence sums it up perfectly
ChuckinNH
Elite Member, R.I.P.
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2003
- Messages
- 3,081
- Location
- NH
- Tractor
- (B2620, had BX22) Simplicity Legacy w/48" mmm
I agree fully that the heavier, but narrower BB will be the best one for that tractor. Pulling weight doesn't matter much since you will lose traction before you hurt anything. That will just happen quicker with a wider Box. Lifting is seldom much more than the weight of the box in my experience since most of the soil stays put. I have a Woods 48" BB on my small B Kubota, and don't have any trouble at all with it except for traction once in a while. I'm guessing it is closer to the 54" mentioned in weight than the other two. The 54" will perhaps cover tire tracks better than my 48", but I haven't found that to be an issue yet. Now add plenty of weight to the tractor, but keep the hp, etc. the same and the game changes. I've seen Kioti CK-20's with 60" box blades do a pretty good job with loaded tires, and a loader, etc.
