Wallenstein BXM32 or 42 for my John Deere 1025R TLB

[dbchaplin03]

Good evening,

We just bought an acreage with 5 acres of overgrown honeysuckle and neglect. We are starting to thin it out (not clear cut) to increase the size of our yard into more of a park like setting. I have a TON of chipping and shredding to do. We are in Ohio and heat the house primarily with wood so anything over 3" will become firewood most likely.

Does anyone have hands on experience with the Wallenstein BXM32 or 42 on a 1025R? It is rated at 18hp pto which is considerably less than Wallenstein says is required for the BXM42 but it seems like a bunch of people online have claimed that the BXM42 runs good on low hp tractors and I would never be running it at max capacity anyhow.

I am the kind of person who doesn't like to buy things twice and i would rather spend $1200 more for the bigger machine now than wish i had later. I know the 1025R is a mighty small tractor but I'm an Air Force officer and we move every 2-3 years so it is the current tractor for now. I've owned 3 different Kubota's in the past at various locations we were stationed at so my tractor size could easily increase the next time we move. I just got too good of a deal to pass this one up with the loader, backhoe, drive over deck, and several other attachments when i bought this one.

Any real feedback is appreciated.

Thanks,

Chap

 

[mpilihp]

I have a BX42 and run it with an older pasquali with a 38hp engine. I dont think id go under 30hp. I could stall the engine with lager peices of wood if i didnt hang onto ut and let the chipper speed up. I just replaced the pasquali with a new holland tc35 with a 35hp motor. Id habe gone smaller other than the fear of veing able to run the chippwr..

 

[onionfmr]

I have a BX42 and run it with an older pasquali with a 38hp engine. I dont think id go under 30hp. I could stall the engine with lager peices of wood if i didnt hang onto ut and let the chipper speed up. I just replaced the pasquali with a new holland tc35 with a 35hp motor. Id habe gone smaller other than the fear of veing able to run the chippwr..

I agree with mpilihp. I also have BX42. I used to have a MF1240 with around 24-25 PTO horsepower. The BX42 was marginal for that tractor. If the wood I was chipping wasn't just right, would constantly stall the tractor. I now have a MF1754. No issues running that chipper.

 

[Fiziksgeek]

I have a BXM32 for my Massey Ferguson GC1720 (and previous GC2400). It's a great fit. I definitely think you could go up a size, but would need to be careful about what you run through it. Having the larger chipper is really about lowering the amount of work you need to do with branch preparation...not as much cutting needed to get them to run smoothly into the small opening. I would go for it.

I gotta admit, I find myself using the shredder less and less, and wonder if a regular chipper would have been better...

 

[Captain Dirty]

I have no experience with the BXM chipper-shredders and do not know how the belt-driven speed increase affects the operation. I have used a BX42 (chipper only) with a 32 pto hp Kubota @540 rpm. I had a lot of jams when chipping limbs that ended with 1/8" twigs. The pliant twigs and leaves would pass by the chipper knives and form a "bird's nest" that would jam in the chute, notwithstanding the "twig breaker" function. The friend from whom I borrowed the chipper ran it on a 25 hp Kubota at 1000 rpm and reported no such jamming problems. (Better airflow??) The typical promotional videos show "easy" material like dry leaves or straight logs (your firewood) going through like the proverbial s___ through a tin horn; it may be instructive if you could try an armload of honeysuckle vines on a demo basis.

Secondary note: In addition to pto power also consider the dimensions. I strapped 8 x 10's to the skids of the BX42 to raise the chipper enough to get flatter pto shaft angles for my comparatively tall tractor.

 

[dbchaplin03]

Fiziksgeek,

I just talked to Karen at Woodward Crossings (Outstanding by the way if any is wondering. She has responded 3 times today via email and its Sunday. You don't find customer service like that anymore) Anyhow she highly discouraged the BXM42 because of the weight. I had thought about that. She said it would be very dangerous on a tractor that size.

What are your no B.S. thoughts about the BXM32? We are clearing literally 20 years of overgrowth from about 4.5 acres on our property. The brush, trees, and honey suckle are so thick we couldn't make it to the back property line even before the leaves came on this spring. (we were hiking with our kiddo's who were 3 and 5). Anyhow there are already brush piles everywhere from the previous owners, plus i have weeks of thinning with a brush cutter to do. Once i get the overgrowth thinned out I'll get in there with my landscape rake to start cleaning up the years of leaves, fallen logs, etc which is really why i think the Chipper/Shredder would be most beneficial.

My wife is a huge gardener. (last vegetable garden was 40'x100' and a 40'x40' strawberry patch). I would really like to have the finer mulch for our compost also. I've wrestled for months on getting just a straight chipper vs the chipper/shredder and i really think for our needs, the BXM32 would be the best bet. What are your thoughts as an owner of one?

 

[ericm979]

After using a self-feed "chuck and duck" MacKissick for years, and now a hydraulic feed Woodmaxx WM-8H, I won't go back to a self feed chipper again. So far I've been ok without the shredder function but I did keep the MacKissick for shredding greens to compost. The chipper doesn't shred small stuff- redwood needles go through almost unscathed- but anything larger gets cut up. Other than the hydraulic feed speeds not being all that variable I've been happy with my Woodmaxx. Their smaller 6" unit would work on your tractor.

The MacKissick has a 4.5" chipper capacity and it was a serious limitation. Most of our brush does not grow nice and straight. A bend in the stem really restricts how it will fit into the chipper. I got good at orienting it the right way but it's still a limitation. With the 8H I don't have to spend nearly as much time cutting material so it'll fit into the chipper.

 

[dbchaplin03]

After using a self-feed "chuck and duck" MacKissick for years, and now a hydraulic feed Woodmaxx WM-8H, I won't go back to a self feed chipper again. So far I've been ok without the shredder function but I did keep the MacKissick for shredding greens to compost. The chipper doesn't shred small stuff- redwood needles go through almost unscathed- but anything larger gets cut up. Other than the hydraulic feed speeds not being all that variable I've been happy with my Woodmaxx. Their smaller 6" unit would work on your tractor.

The MacKissick has a 4.5" chipper capacity and it was a serious limitation. Most of our brush does not grow nice and straight. A bend in the stem really restricts how it will fit into the chipper. I got good at orienting it the right way but it's still a limitation. With the 8H I don't have to spend nearly as much time cutting material so it'll fit into the chipper.

I had considered and been looking at the Woodmaxx for quite some time. The TM-86-H is a hydraulic feed made specifically for the sub-compacts. They have outstanding reviews I just don't think i can get away with not having the shredder. Maybe I'm wrong and I would love your opinion. I really like the idea of being able to slow down the in-feed rate for larger capacity things and for the gnarly stuff because honey suckle is far from straight.

I just cant figure out what i will do with all the years of leaves and sticks and vines and everything else there will be once we get the trees and honey suckle cleared out. Small stuff i could mow up and bag and dump in the compost pile i guess.

What specifically do you use your chipper for? I'm serious about your honest input because I'm going to be pulling the trigger and placing an order in the next week. I don't wanna have regrets after i place my order and have a 600lb machine on a truck heading my way. I know the limits of both and really its a trade off at this point. Is the hydraulic in-feed worth more than shredder? Or for my practical purposes, is the shredder more valuable for shredding junk for compost and garden beds? I'd like any and all opinions, especially from current owners of both!!

 

[Captain Dirty]

<snip> I just don't think i can get away with not having the shredder. <snip>
I just cant figure out what i will do with all the years of leaves and sticks and vines and everything else there will be once we get the trees and honey suckle cleared out.<snip> Or for my practical purposes, is the shredder more valuable for shredding junk for compost and garden beds? <snip>

I agree with your assessment that you would be better served by a chipper-shredder than a chipper. Either type is a machine that invites abuse, and rotating weight and driving power are important. Unfortunately your tractor's 3 point lift weight limit (more than the pto power) limits your options.

Before purchasing a 6" pto chipper I used a Kemp (fixed teeth, no longer made) and Troy built (hammer mill, also longer made, but hammer mill seems to be the survivor) gas engine (under-)powered 3" chippers. To compensate for the lack of chipping power both machines had close tolerance (small bites take less power) chipping knives and narrow cone (severely limiting knots and crooks) in-feed chutes. The Wally chippers have over-sized rectangular chipping ports (4" x 10" in the BX42) that allow feeding knots and crooks; perhaps the BXM32's port is oversized. Another negative was the 3/4" hole grates on the shredding chamber. Wet leaves or damp compost would clog the chamber necessitating feeding dry sticks thereby degrading the mulch or shutting down to clear the chamber. The Kemp at least had a "door" and provision for a coarse grate. Both machines had options for larger (1-1/4"??) grates, but these may have had disadvantages; Long (6-8" x1/4" diameter) twigs were ejected lengthwise from the chamber through 3/4" holes; presumably thicker twigs would pass the coarser holes. Be wary of how difficult it may be to clear the shredding chamber. The "door" feature allowed the ejection of inadvertently fed rocks.

You stated you were military with 3 year tours. It appears likely that this tractor and its attachments may be short-term holdings to be sold when you move. The chipper-shredder will give you and your gardener wife smaller, more quickly decomposable mulch in the short term. A name-brand may give you more satisfaction and may have more re-sale value when you transfer (or if you become dissatisfied).

 

[dbchaplin03]

Captain Dirty,

I also agree that a good quality name-brand holds its value. The tractor itself may or may not make the next move with us but I am very reluctant to sell attachments. I've owned several that i kicked myself for selling because i almost always end up re-purchasing them which is pretty much throwing money away. I'm pretty patient with tractors. I find a very lightly used machine with low hours that's been babied and use it and almost always get my money back or even make a little. Attachments on the other hand.. There is no way to recoup those and the Mrs. doesn't get happy when she see's the checking account balance take a hit for a box blade, landscape rake, etc that have to be bought again.