Go BottomJD 4300 430 Loader Question
 | Steve
Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 179 UK 
|
2000-01-28 12300
My JD 4300 HST, MFWD finally showed up! I am picking it up in the morning. I ordered the 430 loader with the 73" bucket, but it shipped with the 61" bucket. Dealer says it could be a week or two before the other bucket arrives. QUESTION: Is the 73" bucket too big? I will be moving mostly stone and sand. Should I just take the 61" and move on? The diff in price is about $80. Thanks.
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| Larry in MI.
Join Date: Posts: 1
|
2000-01-28 12302
Go for the bigger bucket. You don't always have to fill it. If you do need to fill it the capacity is there. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| Terry Weivoda
Join Date: Posts: 1
|
2000-01-28 12303
The identical problem happened to last spring when I ordered the 430 loader for my 4300. My dealer let me use the 73" bucket until my 61" came in. I used it last Spring to clean up after a snowstorm and it worked fine. Later when I used it to move dirt I did what I think most people do and that is to fill the bucket to its capacity. I think the 73" is too much for the 4300. I had a 73" bucket on a JD 5300 with a 540 loader and felt the rear end got a little light at times even with an 8' #65 blade attached to the three point. I feel much safer with the 61" bucket. I plan on trading my 430 loader for a 460 when I get my 4600. I have not made the final decision on the size of the bucket for that tractor. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| JeffM
Join Date: Posts: 1
|
2000-01-28 12304
Steve, I think it depends on your usage. Is the 61" the heavy duty bucket? Is the 73" the heavy duty or the standard duty bucket? Look carefully at the construction of the JD HD bucket vs the standard. The leading sides of the bucket on the HD are welded up with an additional thickness of metal. Under the top surface of the HD bucket there is also an additional thickness of steel welded the entire width of the bucket. I also think the cutting edge itself is wider (deeper) on the HD bucket. Are you just going to be moving loose stone and sand or are you going to be "groundbreaking" at all? If you are going to be scraping or shallow digging unbroken heavy soil, especially if gravel or rocky, or moving large stones then I suggest going with the 61" HD bucket because it will be much stiffer. If you are just moving manure, mulch, snow, or other light materials then go with the 73" standard bucket. Your 4300 with R4 or turf tires is right around 61" wide at the rear tires so either bucket will cut your width. I just ordered a 4400 with the 61" HD bucket and a removable tooth bar because I'll be trail clearing/grading and moving good-sized stones which requires a smaller, stiffer bucket. My 2 cents. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| Roger L.
Join Date: Jun 1999 Posts: 0
|
2000-01-28 12312
I'd go with the smaller bucket. Lots of reasons, but I guarantee that the smaller bucket will dig in the dirt better with that size tractor. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| David Paul
Join Date: Posts: 1
|
2000-01-29 12318
As a dealer We would reccommend the smaller bucket. You will get more work done if you are digging. If you divide the breakout force of the loader by the width of the bucket you will see you get more lbs breakout/foot with a smaller bucket, this is what gets digging type work done. Most customers want a larger bucket than they really need. A larger bucket is most helpful if all you do is handle low density material (mulch, saw dust, etc) all the time. The smaller bucket will do best on this tractor. ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add PhotoJD 4300 430 Loader Question
| Steve
Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 179 UK
|
2000-01-29 12337
Thanks for the info guys. I opted for the 61" bucket. This tractor is awsome! ....
Reply to |
Quote Reply |
Add Photo
Go Top
Share This