Toolcat 5610 delivered

[mdl6]

Hi everyone,
I have been a lurker for years on the tractor and attachment threads, and have followed the Toolcat since the "A" came out.
I got my 5610 this weekend and used it for 3 hours today. Three weeks ago I ordered a 5600 as one dealer told me the 5610 was "a year away." The next day radman posted that the 5610 was available and I changed the order.

I am a homeowner in the midwest and cut about 6 acres of grass, 5 acres of field grass and have 5 acres of prairie grass thru Pheasants Forever. I have used a Kubota CUT w/ 38 horsepower and used a 72" RFM and 84" bush-hog on the tractor. Most of the grass is cut w/ a Toro 72" ZTR (by my kids). I have neck problems and wanted the implements out front. I also have a 72" aerator, 3 pt. sprayer and quick attach snow blade.

Today I used the Bobcat 90" mower on the front and aerated at the same time. It took longer w/ the aerator because I had to raise it for every turn but overall saved time. The Toolcat didn't flinch doing both tasks. The engine temp stayed low in 80 degree heat w/ the AC on.

The grass cut quality was good without scalping. The ride quality was very good. I got the wider turf tires. I enjoyed the relative quietness of the cab compared to my tractor.
The tractor hydrostatic forward/reverse pedal is an advantage compared to the stalk mounted shifter on the 5610. However, the 4-wheel steering is fantastic.
I plan to get some forks to help store stuff on pallet racking and to remove some some dead trees. I am thinking of the Carry-On hauler for the 3 pt hitch to take the place of the dump bed on the 5600.

A big thumbs up so far.

Mike

 

[mouse]

congratulations on the new toy!

we needed a guinea pig

 

[Spudgunner]

Congrats and welcome.

Your comments regarding the hydro pedal sure hit home. For the first several months after I took delivery of my TC I kept trying to reverse my TC by pressing my heel down as I was used to on my Kubota. However, you'll eventually get used to flicking the shifter as second nature.

Nevertheless I still wish the TC had the hydrostatic fwd/rev "non-shifting" like my tractor.

Yep, the 4WS is cool. My TC tends to "crab" after running around for awhile in this mode and I have to "realign" it by switching into 2WS when the rear tires are indicated as straight and then switching back to 4WS when the front tires are indicated as straight. I think I may mention this the next time I have it serviced.

Please keep us informed.

 

[theoshin]

i posted a new topic on this.

 

[radman1]

Oh my gosh! YOU bought one before me? After all my ranting and raving about the 5610 you went and did it. Congratulations. What did you think of the 3 pt in action? How did the PTO and rear hydraulics work for you?

I think the Carry hauler is a good alternative to the dump box. I did modify mine to work on my Spee Co quick hitch. Had to do a little welding and replaced the top pin attachment and made it higher. I cut the existing top mount off and welded on a 2"x3" angle iron and brought it farther farward so it is more in align the the top pins. The bottom pins are CAT I in width. I also put wheels on underneath the hauler to make it taller and easier to hook onto the 3 pt lift arms. I can also roll it around the shed. I have an extra, small 2.5x8" cylinder and will probably turn it into a hydraulic dump box. I want to be able to unhook it, load it and hook back on with the Speeco quick hitch. I think I can make it more useful than the 5600 dump box by making it detachable and then filling it. I will get a sheet of wood or steel for the botton and sides to enclose it.

 

[mdl6]

Radman,
The 3 pt worked fine, just like the Kubota CUT it replaces. When I lowered it without the aerator the on the lift arms stayed up. I though this was a malfunction but they went down with light pressure. This never happened on the Kubota. I liked the 3 pt. height indicator. I could angle the rearview mirror to check to make aerator was high enough to make a turn without having to turn my bad neck. Also I used the side mirrors to make sure the aerator wasn't going to hit the driveway or sprinkler heads, thus avoiding more head/neck turning.

I have not used the rear hydraulics as I don't have an implement that requires it. The hydraulic top link for the Carry-On hauler is a thought.

I don't have the skills, time, or inclination to modify the Carry-On hauler like you did. The idea of adding wheels is a great one. Can you post pictures? That sounds simple enough for me.

I did not have a great deal of reservation getting a new model as I might have. The 5600 is well established and the addition of the 3 pt. is something that has been an option as I understand on some previous units. Also, with the new Bobcat CUT's they have had some experience with 3 points.
Mike

 

[radman1]

mdl6

With the Carry hauler, I will make a dedicated hydraulic cylinder for the dump bed. I don't think a hydraulic top link will work. However, the pivot point for the carry hauler is near the middle. If the back of the hauler is slightly loaded more than the front, it should be able to dump on its own when the front is released.

I have some pictures and will try to post them tomorrow of the hauler with the wheels.

Thanks for update on using the rear view mirror to see the attachments. I will probably order the 5610 tomorrow.

 

[jmfox]

Mike,

There must be something to report.

jmf

 

[JDeerekid]

yea where are the pictures????

 

[Rolando]

Ditto, we need some action photos!

 

[mdl6]

I'll try to post some pix in the next couple of days.
I picked up the Carry-On hauler from Tractor Supply. It only fit in a pick-up bed sideways. It is larger than anticipated even though I knew the dimensions.
It is 6 feet wide and sticks out on either side of the of the wider turf tires. With it being attached to the 3 pt. it extends way back from the end of the unit.
With the 4 wheel steering the back of the hauler swings very wide. Wide enough that I knocked over a yard lamp post even though I thought I was well past it. Chalk one up to the school of hard knocks, literally....
Mike

 

[radman1]

The swing of the 3pt with the 5610 is quite impressive in 4 wheel steer. It is probably best to leave it in 2 wheel steer with rear implements unless you have lots of room.
Is the carry hauler lift pins too low to hook to the lift arms of the 5610? It was too low for my CUT. Therefore, I added the 5" steel wheels beneath the carrier to raise it. Now I can get my quick hitch hooks under the pins.

 

[Rolando]

Hey radman, how about some pictures of your modifications to the hauler? I'm wondering if this would be a possibility to be able to carry a water tank without a trailer. It's probably not a great option, since after the weight of the hauler itself, I could only carry about 1500 lbs of water. With a trailer, the Toolcat can pull 4k, if the 5610 has the same rating as the 'D'.

I wonder, if you installed a pair of swiveling casters on the back of the hauler and didn't connect the top link, could you double the load? The lower links would now be lifting only half the load with the casters carrying the other half. This wouldn't be as mobile as a full 3-pt mount, but easier to back up and more maneuverable than a trailer. You would need fairly big-wheeled casters, of course. I wonder if the make a caster that can carry 1500 or 2000 lbs?

Did you see these reviews at Northern Tool? Some expressed concerns about the strength of the lower link mounts. I know that you have the capability to weld and reinforce, but I don't, so I would be dependent on having others work on it.

 

[jmfox]

Bobcat has finally decided to disclose the Toolkitty.

jmf

 

[radman1]

Hey radman, how about some pictures of your modifications to the hauler? I'm wondering if this would be a possibility to be able to carry a water tank without a trailer. It's probably not a great option, since after the weight of the hauler itself, I could only carry about 1500 lbs of water. With a trailer, the Toolcat can pull 4k, if the 5610 has the same rating as the 'D'.

I wonder, if you installed a pair of swiveling casters on the back of the hauler and didn't connect the top link, could you double the load? The lower links would now be lifting only half the load with the casters carrying the other half. This wouldn't be as mobile as a full 3-pt mount, but easier to back up and more maneuverable than a trailer. You would need fairly big-wheeled casters, of course. I wonder if the make a caster that can carry 1500 or 2000 lbs?

Did you see these reviews at Northern Tool? Some expressed concerns about the strength of the lower link mounts. I know that you have the capability to weld and reinforce, but I don't, so I would be dependent on having others work on it.

I have not yet used the carry hauler for any significant weight. The lower pins are placed through 3" channel iron with 1/4" plate welded inside of the channel iron for reinforcement. It seems like it should do ok. Maybe the 1/4" plate is something that was added due to complaints.
The angle iron use is a little on the light side for my liking but I tend to overbuild my projects. The top and bottom frames and support are probably 2"x2"x3/16" angle iron. I will price some light gauge steel tommorrow and may enclose the sides and cover the mesh bottom. 2nd choice would be to use wood to enclose. The additonal steel would give better overall strength.

I will try to post some pictures tomorrow. I have pictures but still on the camera. Still trying to figure out if I want to mount a dump cylinder. The dump hinge is nearly in the middle of the hauler and it won't take much to make it dump, even if by hand. If load it toward the back, it will dump itself.
I do have a slight bow in the bottom frame in the back. Don't know if it was made that way or if it was tied down to tightly when being hauled. Should be easy to bow back. For $350 and the amount of time involved to build one, I think they maybe a good idea for the 5610 or a CUT to give some cargo capacity and it maybe a great way to unhook, load and reconnect to haul material. I am hoping I can turn it into a great idea.

The hauler is rated for 2500# but that is probably excessive given its current state. 1500# is probably more reasonable.

 

[Spudgunner]

Bobcat has finally decided to disclose the Toolkitty.

jmf

Off topic....kinda....
Good grief. I can't believe they chose to put a pic of a 3-point snow blower (complete with twisted-neck operator) as one of their lead-in images at that URL.

 

[3Bladz]

maybe some swivel casters from a 3pt bush hog mower would work on your dumpster?

 

[mdl6]

Here are some pictures,
1. This is the 90 in. mower



This is the 6 ft. wide carry hauler next to the mower


This is the 3 pt. on the carry hauler, it is beefy enough to me,


5610 3 pt


Wider, bigger tires


3 pt height indicator

 

[radman1]

Beautiful! Mine is ordered and just waiting for delivery. Your carry hauler is a little bit different in construction than mine. Nothing major but subtle differences. Probably manufactured at different locations. I ordered a 72x48" sheet of 14 gauge diamond deck steel for the floor or my carry hauler today and a 13x72" 14 gauge plate steel for the tailgate. Cost was $175. I will just cover the sides and front with wood. The price of the steel if I covered everything was approaching $300. I bought a 1.5" bore by 6" stroke cylinder from Surplus Center today and will fabricate a hydraulic lift for the dump next week. I will get pictures as I do the project. I went with steel for the bottom and tailgate so material would slide out easily when dumped. I think wood could also work. At the 3000 psi of the toolcat hydraulics, the cylinder would exert 5000 lbs of force. If I place it at an angle of 30 degrees, I figure it will have plenty of force to lift the dump because the dump pivot point is so close to the center. At 30 degrees the lifting force should still be near 1500-1800 lbs. I had planned on using an existing 2.5" cylinder but the force was getting so high, I didn't want to make it that strong.

How light does the back end feel with the mower hanging out the front?

I like the wider turf tires but ordered the 29" lug tires. I get some mud and my experience with turf tires in mud has been not good. The turf should give better floation and some believe better in snow. I ordered the low profile 68" bucket with bolt on teeth. Low profile is 3" longer than the usual general purpose bucket, holds 16 sq. ft vs 11 sq ft of the GP. It also weighs about 2x of the GP bucket. I can use it on my skid steer if I need to with the heavier bucket. Dealer recommended the low profile 68" bucket as the ideal bucket for the toolcat. (In his opinion.)

 

[theoshin]

Beautiful! Mine is ordered and just waiting for delivery. Your carry hauler is a little bit different in construction than mine. Nothing major but subtle differences. Probably manufactured at different locations. I ordered a 72x48" sheet of 14 gauge diamond deck steel for the floor or my carry hauler today and a 13x72" 14 gauge plate steel for the tailgate. Cost was $175. I will just cover the sides and front with wood. The price of the steel if I covered everything was approaching $300. I bought a 1.5" bore by 6" stroke cylinder from Surplus Center today and will fabricate a hydraulic lift for the dump next week. I will get pictures as I do the project. I went with steel for the bottom and tailgate so material would slide out easily when dumped. I think wood could also work. At the 3000 psi of the toolcat hydraulics, the cylinder would exert 5000 lbs of force. If I place it at an angle of 30 degrees, I figure it will have plenty of force to lift the dump because the dump pivot point is so close to the center. At 30 degrees the lifting force should still be near 1500-1800 lbs. I had planned on using an existing 2.5" cylinder but the force was getting so high, I didn't want to make it that strong.

How light does the back end feel with the mower hanging out the front?

I like the wider turf tires but ordered the 29" lug tires. I get some mud and my experience with turf tires in mud has been not good. The turf should give better floation and some believe better in snow. I ordered the low profile 68" bucket with bolt on teeth. Low profile is 3" longer than the usual general purpose bucket, holds 16 sq. ft vs 11 sq ft of the GP. It also weighs about 2x of the GP bucket. I can use it on my skid steer if I need to with the heavier bucket. Dealer recommended the low profile 68" bucket as the ideal bucket for the toolcat. (In his opinion.)

i like the 29 lugs. the extra ground clearance is good. much better in dirt than the turf tread. not as easy on the lawn if wet. if your primary purpose is not mowing or using on lawns i would go with the lug. for snow you want tall skinny tires to give you clearance and high wt per inch for traction. wide tires are not as good. lugs are not as good as a off road type tread - no perfect tire for everything. i find the 27 turf (not the wide) and 29 lug pretty comparable on snow/ice. with the lugs you would theoretically have less lateral stability.

with the 90 you should have no problem - it is not that heavy - nothing compared to the brushcat. i really like the 90. i even use it on my woods roads - very easy to change heights. it is one attachment that feels like it was designed for the tc. i dont add any wt in the back and it is fine. with the snowblower, tiller, or brushcat i throw in at least a few hundred pounds out back.

i have the 68 lp and a 60 lp with teeth. i did not want to have to bolt on/off the teeth every time i needed them - they are aggressive. i think my dealer said the teeth were not ok'd on the tc for any bucket. they really help for digging (such as sod removal). the 60 is perfect with teeth. i use the bigger bucket for smoothing, moving dirt, and moving snow.

i wonder how long bobcat will continue using kubota engines??? their parent company obviously could supply a similar displacement for less. i hope they stay with kubota.