Is there a consensus (or majority) opinion on the best tractor shovel/Buford bucket type attachment? I will not need a full FEL but those shovel like attachments look like just the ticket Thoughts?
Capndar
Joined
·
13,463 Posts
I have had a couple of Johnny Bucket SR units -- one on my 322 that I bought direct from Johnny Products (in fact it was the first one they did for the open frame tractors and was SN 1001...so it had a slightly larger bucket than the later units that were made to comply with shipping constraints.) The other was one I bought locally at a very good price and put on a 318. Here are some pictures of these set-ups:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
These buckets are very handy for moving materials around your property and even for light scraping (I never had the toothed attachment bar, but did do some light shaving with it on some pathways -- results seen here. All the wood chips were also moved and places with the JBSR, as was a lot of tilled up soil...
![]()
![]()
![]()
You can't lift material up into a trailer or truck bed...so the Buford bucket is a bit closer to being able to do that. I did not want to load material, and because of the many sloped areas of my property I did not want the safety/tipping issues of a high lift when my wife was using it.
The beauty of these small buckets is that you can take them off and put them on with little hassle, and they store in a small space. Real FEL attachments do neither of these desirable things -- but they do lift loads of greater weight to full loading heights. And true FELs cost at least twice what the JBSR costs.
Chuck
These buckets are very handy for moving materials around your property and even for light scraping (I never had the toothed attachment bar, but did do some light shaving with it on some pathways -- results seen here. All the wood chips were also moved and places with the JBSR, as was a lot of tilled up soil...
You can't lift material up into a trailer or truck bed...so the Buford bucket is a bit closer to being able to do that. I did not want to load material, and because of the many sloped areas of my property I did not want the safety/tipping issues of a high lift when my wife was using it.
The beauty of these small buckets is that you can take them off and put them on with little hassle, and they store in a small space. Real FEL attachments do neither of these desirable things -- but they do lift loads of greater weight to full loading heights. And true FELs cost at least twice what the JBSR costs.
Chuck
Joined
·
13,463 Posts
Gabby,
The 44 is well matched to the 300/400 open frame tractor series, and I always wanted one for use around the property. The complexity of mounting and dismounting one makes having a dedicated loader/tractor combination an attractive alternative. With my limited number of tractors and my small acreage (plus the slopes mentioned above) I opted for a bucket that was easily removable. That 322 had to be ready to accept the bucket, the blade shown above, a center blade, the 30H tiller shown above, a landscape rake, a mower deck and a few other attachments without removing a loader frame. So for low tractor count / high attachment count the easily removable JBSR was a good answer for me.
I did have an engine hoist, and it came in handy for any lifting job I could plan to happen on the concrete apron of the shop or in the shop itself -- even used it to remove a front loading washer (heavy and awkward) from my diesel pusher coach when upgrading it to a more featured Maytag. the door of the coach is just one inch wider that the washer, and of course there are steep stairs at that doorway as well.
![]()
Chuck
The 44 is well matched to the 300/400 open frame tractor series, and I always wanted one for use around the property. The complexity of mounting and dismounting one makes having a dedicated loader/tractor combination an attractive alternative. With my limited number of tractors and my small acreage (plus the slopes mentioned above) I opted for a bucket that was easily removable. That 322 had to be ready to accept the bucket, the blade shown above, a center blade, the 30H tiller shown above, a landscape rake, a mower deck and a few other attachments without removing a loader frame. So for low tractor count / high attachment count the easily removable JBSR was a good answer for me.
I did have an engine hoist, and it came in handy for any lifting job I could plan to happen on the concrete apron of the shop or in the shop itself -- even used it to remove a front loading washer (heavy and awkward) from my diesel pusher coach when upgrading it to a more featured Maytag. the door of the coach is just one inch wider that the washer, and of course there are steep stairs at that doorway as well.
Chuck
Joined
·
13,463 Posts
If the tractor shovel is the one that augments the front blade attachment, then I would think it would be less capacity and since it empties differently (the shroud hinges away from the blade moldboard...?) it would be best suited to very loose materials like wood chips, gravel and loose soil.
I thought that the Buford Bucket had a slightly higher lift than the JBSR, and since it is a design built is very small shops you may see some unit to unit differences that are not typical of the JBSR. There is another design by OR-BILT that attaches only to the front frame like the JBSR and Buford attachments, but has a higher lift and looks to apply much more stress to the frame and load to the front axle.
My direct experiences are only with the JBSR, but the idea of a front mounted bucket that is a handy size and not a permanent/semi-permanent installation like a true FEL has some appeal to the residential acreage property owner that wants to reserve the tractor for other uses as well.
Chuck
I thought that the Buford Bucket had a slightly higher lift than the JBSR, and since it is a design built is very small shops you may see some unit to unit differences that are not typical of the JBSR. There is another design by OR-BILT that attaches only to the front frame like the JBSR and Buford attachments, but has a higher lift and looks to apply much more stress to the frame and load to the front axle.
My direct experiences are only with the JBSR, but the idea of a front mounted bucket that is a handy size and not a permanent/semi-permanent installation like a true FEL has some appeal to the residential acreage property owner that wants to reserve the tractor for other uses as well.
Chuck
Joined
·
13,463 Posts
Tmac,
I found that storing the JBSR on a 4 wheel furniture dolly really helped in aligning it onto my 322 when installing. No lifting required...I am 73 and did not find it to be much of a struggle.
Also be sure to cycle the hydraulic levers with the engine off when you lower it back onto the dolly, as this removes the pressure in the hoses and makes it much easier to couple and uncouple the fittings. I dont have a good dedicated image of this dolly as used on my concrete apron in the tractor storage bay, but you can see much of it in the left side of this picture.
![]()
Chuck
I found that storing the JBSR on a 4 wheel furniture dolly really helped in aligning it onto my 322 when installing. No lifting required...I am 73 and did not find it to be much of a struggle.
Also be sure to cycle the hydraulic levers with the engine off when you lower it back onto the dolly, as this removes the pressure in the hoses and makes it much easier to couple and uncouple the fittings. I dont have a good dedicated image of this dolly as used on my concrete apron in the tractor storage bay, but you can see much of it in the left side of this picture.
Chuck
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
