Which Back hoe?

crowlej · Jul 10, 2001

I'm buying a JD 4300 with 430 loader and a back hoe... my question is which hoe the 47 or 48? the 48 offers 1' more digging depth (8'6" vs. 7'6") at a premium of about $1,000! Is it worth it? is it more HD than the 47 or only 1' longer?

DarinRay · Jul 10, 2001

crowlej,

If money isn't that much of an issue or should I say if you can come up with it I woudl invest in the 48 for sure. If you look at them side by side you will want the 48. That extra foot will make you happier when you need it and you will and more. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif.

Darin

cowboydoc · Jul 11, 2001

Bigger is always better. I've learned over the years to always go with more than what I think I need. Always regret not going up in size. Better to spend the extra $1k now than to regret it later. If you look at them side by side the 48 is definitely more hoe than the 47.

MJB · Jul 11, 2001

I have the JD48 hoe on my 4300. I think that in addition to the extra foot of digging depth you get about a foot and a half more reach. I frequently use every inch of reach with my 48 so I could not imagine living with any less. If you can swing the bucks I would certainly go with the 48.

I love the smell of diesel in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

dmccarty · Jul 12, 2001

Crowlej,

Check the specs on how much each of the hows can lift, the digging force, etc. Reach can be important if you are digging a deep hole but its also very important if you are trying to dig out a large stump. I think there are more important differences between the 47 and 48 besides the digging depth.

I'm assuming that you can put a 48 on a 4300.

Later....
Dan McCarty

crowlej · Jul 12, 2001

Yes JD lists it as an option on the 4300 so assume the tractor and the hydraulics are up to the challenge.

Thanks for the reply

crowlej · Jul 12, 2001

How does the 48 work overall on the 4300? I thought maybe it would be too much for the size of the Tractor!?

MJB · Jul 13, 2001

The backhoe works very well on a 4300. It seems to be just the right size to me. I have seen a few of the larger frame (4500-4700) tractors with the 48 attached and the hoe actually looks a little small on these machines, in my opinion. I have the 18” bucket on mine, which seems to be a good compromise size as far as volume versus digging force. I run the tractor at about 1500 RPMs and the hoe seems to have plenty of power. I now have about 75 hours on my 4300 and I would estimate that at least half of that is using the hoe. I have alot of very soft ground on my land due to poor drainage and waterproof clay, so I often run the tractor with just the backhoe attached without the loader. The front end is a little light without the loader but I find that the unit has much better floatation and maneuverability this way. Hope this helps.

I love the smell of diesel in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Anonymous Poster · Jul 13, 2001

...so I often run the tractor with just the backhoe attached without the loader. The front end is a little light ...

Michael,

Before you hurt yourself... very very unsafe... that backhoe upsets the center of gravity and balance drastically without that loader attached... /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif

If you pull the loader off... also pull the backhoe off.

gvw · Jul 13, 2001

I would agree that the 48 hoe on the 4500 -4700 is a bit on the small side -wish that they would make a bigger unit!!!

MJB · Jul 13, 2001

I am aware of the risks. I am certainly not recommending anyone else operate his or her tractor like this. I move the tractor verrrrrrry slowly and carefully (always on flat or nearly flat ground) and I personally take full responsibility for my actions.

I love the smell of diesel in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

glennmac · Jul 13, 2001

I vote for the 48.

radman · Jul 14, 2001

I am curious as to the price of a JD 47 or 48 backhoe. I have rough estimates for kubota and other aftermarket backhoes but I haven't heard anyone other than cowboydoc mention costs. (Cowboydoc got too good of a deal) Are the JD hoes pto pump driven or do they run off the tractor hydraulics or can they be used either way?

glennmac · Jul 14, 2001

They are driven off the tractor hydraulics. Two quick-couple hoses. That part is clear.

As to price. Duh. I am looking at two written proposals from the same dealer, one for a 48 hoe on a 4400 and one for the same hoe on a 4600. Supposedly, the proposal lists the list prices, after which he deducts 11% discount from the total. This was his first offer out of the box. The weird thing is the list price for the hoe in the 4600 proposal is $7734 and on the 4400 proposal it is $7190.

In proposals from 2 other JD dealers on 4400, the list price of the 48 hoe is given as $7578 and $7194, but both of these dealers separately price out the power beyond, which is required for the hoe, at $190. One of the dealers then took 10% off in the proposal; the other took 3% off, but only after I asked for a discount.

Welcome to the wonderful world of JD pricing. Remember Crazy Eddy? Remember chaos theory? Remember P.T. Barnum?

cowboydoc · Jul 14, 2001

The best price that I had gotten was $6600 with the power beyond kit installed and setup on the 48. That was before the deal on this other one came through.

Edited by cowboydoc on 07/14/01 08:29 AM (server time).

Anonymous Poster · Jul 14, 2001

I ended up paying $ 128 for the power-beyond kit and $ 5950 for the 48 hoe with 18 " bucket. I was quoted 3 different prices for the hoe ranging from $ 5950 to $ 7000.

List price is $ 7519.00 w/ 12" bucket.

Does anyone know if the 49 hoe will fit on a 4700??

MJB · Jul 16, 2001

I paid $5900 for my 48 hoe with an 18" bucket when I bought my 4300. It probably would have been a little more expensive if I had purchased it separately.

I love the smell of diesel in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

MJB · Jul 16, 2001

Just so everyone doesn't get the impression that I am constantly pulling wheelies with my 4300 when I run the backhoe without the loader attached I conducted a little experiment. I parked the tractor in my flat, level, and hard driveway with just the backhoe attached, and lowered the stabilizers to the ground. I then fully extended the hoe straight behind the tractor with the bucket about 6" off the ground. I then raised the stabilizers slightly so that the pads were about 2" off the ground. No wheelies yet. I then got off the tractor and placed most of my 170 lbs on top of the backhoe bucket. It took nearly all my weight to begin to lift the front wheels. I would estimate at least 150 lbs. Doing some quick math I calculated that the front wheels must still have at least 370 lbs of weight on them with the hoe fully extended and the stabilizers up. With the hoe in the normal transport position the number would be substantially higher, I would estimate at least 500 lbs. The front end is noticeably lighter when driving the tractor like this, but I don't feel that it is unsafe if operated with caution on flat ground. Your mileage may vary./w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

I love the smell of diesel in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif