Skidsteer advice

[Anonymous-0]

What would you fellers recomend for a good all round skidsteer for the farm? need to pack 1200 lb round bales and normal farm duty.Relible ol machine with good track record.

 

[4010 puller]

bobcat 763 or case 1840, 4 cylinder around 50 horse and 1500# lift. Any smaller than that it will probably do a lot of teetering off level ground.

 

[Anonymous-0]

Yea the tipping i dont want and also would like enough power to do some digging.Is there a kind of a rule of thumb on how many hours on one to avoid?

 

[formenwhogrow]

Mustang 2040 Reliable Yanmar diesel, 1500# capacity, rugged machine. Have one with 2300 completly trouble free hrs.

 

[g mccool]

A Case 1840 or 1845 are both good machines & easy to operate. If you want something a little newer go with the XT series. They moved a few things around a little & you can run one of these for hours & never have to get out of the seat to stretch. Not a big deal if you only use it for a short time but if you set in one for 8 hrs a day you want something comfortable. As far as things starting to wear out I would think 2500-3500 hrs you would still be OK as long as it has been maintained. Gerald

 

[Anonymous-0]

How much do you want to spend on one? A machine with a 1300 lb. rated capacity and up will be a good digging machine(may need a tooth bucket)and you'll wonder how you got along without one. Rated capacity is half of the tipping load. Depending on your budget, I'd probably look for a Case(18 series or newer) or a Bobcat(43 series and newer) because they are still in business and parts/service would be easier to get. Bobcat has a big advantage in that most Bobcat dealers rent attachments so if you need a post hole auger or a concrete breaker etc., you can rent them without having to buy them. I wouldn't rule out other machines though. Mustang, Thomas and a couple others are good machines. If they are new enough to have a universal quick attach, Bobcat attachments will fit. Machines I wouldn't consider are the older JD and New Holland skid steers(NH built for JD) because you sit too low in them and can't see the bucket cutting edge. They also aren't built as heavy as other brands. They have a long wheelbase and are good for lifting but if you want to do some serious digging, they have been known to crack frames and it will be very hard to do as nice a job as a machine where you can see what the cutting edge is doing. Skid steers are incredible landscaping machines but in order to do the best job, you need to be able to see the cutting edge on a dirt bucket. The job will go much faster as well. I have a Thomas T133 I bought new in 94 and it's good machine but I think Thomas dealers and service are going way downhill. At least they are here. One good thing about a Thomas is that they are much simpler machines to work on than others. No fancy electronics to go bad or give you fits trying to figure out what's wrong. The best thing for you to do is if you find a machine, post it on here with the price, hours, service record, repairs, tire wear, attachments and any other info, so that we can give you a better opinion if it's worth buying. All around visibilty is a problem in some skid steers. Dave

 

[RodinNS]

Personally the only machine I'd really consider IS a NewHolland.
The Lx565, Lx665, Ls160, and Ls170 are all 1600-1700 # SAE operating load machines.
While it is true that you do sit low in them, they are without equal for stability and will lift a greater percentage of their own weight than any other machine.
They are lighter... but in nearly 4000 hours that I've put on my Ls170 I've yet to see any problems crop up that were the result of it being light.
Old, old machines like the L555 (the first generation SuperBoom) certainly had some cracking issues with the boom but I've never seen any problems with the second gen (Lx and Ls) loaders.

The biggest problems I've had were wheel bearings and the motor drive splines. It seems that I change at least a couple wheel bearings a year and I've changed the motor shafts in both drive motors as it dropped the bolts that retain the gear on that tapered shaft.
I'd not prticularly blame the machine for either as it gets used hard in very difficult conditions, often submerged in mud/manure/slop.

Lots of the others mentioned are good machines and all with have their quirks. Gehl also makes a good machine... and I might try one if I couldn't find a NH.
The rest are about a crapshoot beyond that I think... and that includes CAT.

Thomas seems to be very day to day as a company so I'd be more than a little leary of that too. They had quite a shutdown there a while back, I think changed hands during the shutdown... and they're going again, but for how long is anyones guess.

Rod

 

[c.perkins]

Thomas 133 or 135 very good machine. I run a 245 avery day with over 2500hrs with 1 brake cable replacement and basic service being the only work its needed.

 

[JMS/.MN]

I"ve had a Gehl 4625SX for 11 years. Hand controls. It"s a personal thing- I don"t like hand and foot controls- I like my feet flat on the platform except when using the grapple. 46 hp Kubota diesel, rated lift of 1350. (Have lifted 2800 lb concrete blocks a few inches high, enough to move them- rating is usually one-half of what it can do) Tough, dependable machine, about 4000 hours on it now. SX means it has remote hyd- but is not high flow. Would like the later series like a 35, with high flow for snow blower, etc. Also would have universal plate. 4625s go for about $8-8500 here now. Drive different ones to see which controls you like. Bobcat, NH, Case also make good machines. I"d give up the loader tractor before the skidloader.

 

[Anonymous-0]

Thomas were good when McCain owned them. I think they've changed hands a couple of times. On their website it says they are in the process of transfering production to China. I also heard that Thomas was going to make machines for Kubota. I've only seen a very few of the newer New Hollands. Not many contractors are using them here. I've heard in the past that New Hollands are more geared for farmers with a longer wheel base for lifting heavier loads. They dig up the ground more when you turn as well. Conventional skid steers like a 753, 133 or a 1845 etc, use a 2/3's weight bias and long wheel base machines use a 50/50 weight bias. I've run a newer JD with the flip up cab door and I might as well be wearing a balaclava with too small of eye holes in it. It also had a bunch of electronic crap that made it a pain to start and keep running. You couldn't just hop in it and go or lean forward to talk to someone while stopped. Mustang and Gehl are pretty much the same except sometimes use different engines. I think Gehl bought Mustang. Visibility is a big priority for me. The older NH's also had cracking in the frame by the drive wheels. On a farm, baler twine is the worst enemy of a skid steer. It wraps around axles and takes out seals. I've seen sycle knives welded on the frame to cut any baler twine that gets around the axle area. Dave

 

[MSS3020]

I have a 1840 Diesel. LOVE IT. I would suggest getting two buckets. One smooth, one with teeth. Cant dig a blummin thin without teeth. What ever you get make sure parts are still available at the dealer. Doesnt mean you have to get them there but if nothing else is available then...

 

[RodinNS]

I've run a couple of Thomas... I think 173's or something in the 3/4 ton range like I have, a Case 75XT, Gehl 5665 ? (I forget the Gehl number but it was a 1 tonne plus lift and about 65 hp Deutz) along with older NH 555's and my current Ls170. Mind you 99% of my experience is with this Ls... but I've never noticed much difference in manuverability. They all rip and tear pretty good or not so much at all if you choose. The wheelbase/manuverability thing is a misnomer propogated by Bobcat for a long time.
What I've found is that the machines with longer wheelbases like mine and the Gehl... and the 75XT is that they're all fairly stable. I still don't think the Case is as good as it should be... but it's not bad compared to what I've seen of the old Uni-Loaders.

One of the big features of the NH is the lack of rear frame towers. That gives a great increase to rear visibility with the low sloped hood. The mobile boom geometry also shifts weight around and keeps the center of gravity low to increase stability. That can be a disadvantage at times as you suggest, but a blessing at other times. There's not too many loaders in the Ls170's class that will go through a 66" wide and 75" tall door. That's certainly a factor in the farm market as a lot of these things are bought to get into some hellhole that a tractor can't go... or do heavy lifting that a small tractor can't do.
I can remember dragging many a downer cow out the door by hand because we couldn't get a tractor in. Now I just go in with the loader and handle it....
I think if I needed more visibility at the cutting edge I'd just get an LP bucket. Right now I use the short lip foundry bucket with a high back... but I never find much need to actually see the cutting edge. Pretty well learned to feel where it is and work like that.

Baler twine has never been an issue on this one. It wraps on the axle housings but never seems to get into the seals. Tractors are a different story tho...

Rod

 

[scot in pa]

We had a 763G, and it would ride on two wheels if we had to roll up wet hay, 4' wide 5' diameter bales. We couldn't keep the booms together on the 465 NH we had, finally the dealer admitted that the booms were a problem and replaced them. We had to point out the pile of them behind their shop, busted out and welded up where we were having troubles, to get hem to admit it.

The 1845C was a heck of a machine. With the wheel spacers for tracks, it WILL work on a 45 degree slope. Drive up, turn sideways, break silage loose, turn back up, and turn around to push it down off the slope.

 

[Anonymous-0]

Case 1835, 1840 and 1845 all have reduced visibility because of the loader towers. If your trying to get an exact cut or working with loose material, seeing the cutting edge is crucial. Long wheelbase machines are more stable and will pick up more weight in relation to their own weight and that's why a higher capacity machine with a long wheelbase will often weigh less than a smaller capacity conventional machine. Turning is easier with 2/3rds. of the weight on 2 wheels than 50% of the weight on 2 wheels and the other 50% on the 2 wheels, further back, being skidded sideways. If you do a lot of work on hills a longer wheelbase helps. If you want to clean out tight quarters like stalls in a barn,etc. a shorter wheelbase means a shorter overall length and better maneuverability. I've heard 1845's would tip backwards quite easily with an empty bucket. An 1845 is only 6000lbs. A T173 Thomas or 853 Bobcat with the same 1700lb. rating weigh 65 to 6600lbs. 1845's were very popular but not as stable if you worked on slopes. Dave