tc40d rock hound question

[andrewe1546]

Has anyone tried to use a tc40d with a 16LA loader to run a skid steer type rock hound attachment? Will it be to heavy for the tractor? Will there be enough oil flow to run it? I would be getting the oil supply off the rear remote couplers.

 

[jinman]

Andrew, you need to tell us how much the rock hound weighs and what it's recommended hydraulic flow is. With those two bits of info, we can easily tell if the 16LA and your TC40D would be appropriate. Perhaps, the weight and flow required are your questions. . .don't know.

The 16LA loader can easily handle around 1500 lb up to 3' off the ground. About the best hydraulic flow you can hope for from your rear remotes and using 1/2" hoses would be 8 gpm or less and 2500 psi maximum. Those are your tractor's specs and now you just need to find if the rock hound is a good fit.

 

[andrewe1546]

Thanks Jinman, the rate and flow were a large part of my question. The rockhound weighs 1010lbs and requires 6-13 gpm of flow. My other concern was how bad is the lifting capacity going to be affected when the rockhound sticks out so far past the loader pins?

 

[Ford850]

Another thing to consider is the weight of the rockhound when it's full of rocks. Will you be able to lift it high enough to dump it?

 

[jinman]

Andrew, as I understand it, there is a 48" rockhound that has no bucket and simply rakes the rocks inside its housing until it is full. Then, you lift the rockhound and leave a pile of rocks to later pick up with your loader bucket. There is also a 60" and 72" rockhound that include a bucket to collect rocks. These models allow you to lift and transport the rocks to a pile where they can be dumped. However, this process is not a lift and dump in the traditional sense because it is recommended that you keep the bucket low to the ground.

I think you would have no problem with the 48" or 60" rockhound, but the 72" model might be a little large. It would probably work fine if you had the 72" 3PH model, but I think you would prefer the 60" model for mounting on a loader. I believe the 16LA loader can handle any of these rockhounds, but certainly I would not look at lifting the 72" model anymore than 2' to 3' off the ground. Full of rocks, it will be right at your loader's maximum lift capacity.

For any of the rockhounds, I think the best setup would be to have the rockhound on the 3PH instead of the loader. I'd keep my loader bucket to pick up piles of rocks left by the 48" model or pick up rocks from the piles created when dumping the 60" or 72" models. In my opinion, the 3PH rockhound with a normal bucket on the FEL is the preferred setup. Especially since if you put the rockhound on the FEL, you have to drive backwards to operate it.

I've never had a rockhound or seen one operate, but my guess is that they are a lot of work even when they are operating properly. They also seem to need a pretty skilled operator for best results. If I had rocky soil, I'd consider buying a rock bucket for my loader as an alternative to the rockhound. To me, the rockhound is something used by a landscaper to prepare grass seedbeds around new construction houses or even refurbishing existing lawns with rocks. It's not really the type of tool you'd use to clear acres and acres of land of small to medium rocks. Just my opinion. . . .

 

[andrewe1546]

I would be using this for my business. I do alot of lawn installs and finish grade work. As time goes on I am getting larger and larger areas to prep for seed. I currently have two power rakes that i use on the larger sites and they do a fantastic job getting the area ready for seed. I then go over the area with a skid steer mounted rock hound (that I am getting tired of renting) and it puts that finishing touch on it. I guess my thoughts were to try and use the equipment that I already have to run the rock hound so I don't have to buy another piece of equipment or rent anymore. I know they sell 3point rock hounds but like you mentioned before it is not a easy tool to use on a skid steer and I think it would be even harder to use on a 3point. I saw the 60 inch unit that you were talking about and fear it would be to narrow leaving tire tracks behind. I have never seen anyone use these on anything but skid steers and maybe there is a reason for that. Hmmmmm I am quickly talking myself out of this idea!!hahaha Thanks for all the replies....you guys were a big help! If you hear of anyone that has gone down this road please let me know. Thanks again.

 

[GreatWhitehunter]

Weight aside I doubt you'll have the flow. I also do new lawns in rocky N.E. and my solution was my harley rake and a 2" tined rock bucket on the loader. This way I rake all the rocks ino a windrow and the just float the loader down the windrow and dump the rocks into a waiting trailer or the customers desired local.

Matt

 

[jinman]

I know they sell 3point rock hounds but like you mentioned before it is not a easy tool to use on a skid steer and I think it would be even harder to use on a 3point. I saw the 60 inch unit that you were talking about and fear it would be to narrow leaving tire tracks behind. I have never seen anyone use these on anything but skid steers and maybe there is a reason for that. Hmmmmm I am quickly talking myself out of this idea!!hahaha Thanks for all the replies....you guys were a big help! If you hear of anyone that has gone down this road please let me know. Thanks again.

My opinion is that the 3PH model with the dual toplink and clamshell cylinders would be very easy to operate. A 3PH with position control is also much easier to control depth than with a FEL mounted implement. I think a tractor with the 72" rockhound on the 3PH would be great. The limit would be that you cannot dump your load of rocks into a trailer. You'd have to make a pile and then use the FEL bucket for loading.

With a skidsteer, you have a tremendously maneuverable vehicle with a very large hydraulic capacity for powering the rockhound. With a tractor, you have an extremely flexible vehicle with the ability to mount two implements at once for dual-purpose operation. What you lose is maneuverability and hydraulic flow in a tractor the size of the TC40D. For your application, I'm tending to agree with you that the skidsteer is the best choice.

How about buying a 72" rockhound and use it on a tractor for small jobs and rent just the skidsteer bare to use with the rockhound on big jobs? If you are renting a skidsteer with a rockhound, you are probably paying much more than you would if you rented the skidsteer bare.

 

[andrewe1546]

That is a good idea.....I can pick up a used unit for around $3000.00 and if it didn't work on my new holland I could still save money on a rental. The rental is $150.00/day. Thanks

 

[RobertN]

I have done lawn and seed prep. To do correctly, takes work and well, prep.

I just bought a TC40, delivery is Saturday. With the rock hound(do you mean Harley Rake?) on the front, you would still want ballast on the 3pt; that would make for a long tractor to manuever.

I have used 56HP Bobcat S185's. It'll lift similar to the TC40, maybe a little more. You should be able to lift the implement. However, a skidsteer typically has a lot of hydraulic flow, because they are designed for hydrualic implements. You would best be served with pto pump to run this thing so you have lots of flow.

Are you renting or do you own the skidsteer?