# Box blade issues and more



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

Hey guys I got this Box Blade with my tractor. I was hoping someone here would be able to ID what brand it is . Also I will need a new hydraulic cylinder for it which is easy and I don't need it right away for what I want to do. What I really need is to figure out a bushing for the location the lower mounting pin goes into.You can see it in one of the pictures. I thought I found what I need but I was oh so wrong. What do you guys recommend ?


----------



## SidecarFlip (Mar 25, 2021)

Lookls like about half a box blade there. No sacarifier shanks?


----------



## BigT (Sep 15, 2014)

Howdy TR,

What size OD, ID, and length bushing do you need? You are going to have to weld them in place.....

Scarifiers are expensive, if you can find correct fit


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

BigT said:


> Howdy TR,
> 
> What size OD, ID, and length bushing do you need? You are going to have to weld them in place.....
> 
> Scarifiers are expensive, if you can find correct fit


BigT thanks for the reply . I don't mind welding them in . The outer diameter is a bit rough but If I remember right it was 1.45 . I did a quick measurement with the micrometer a couple weeks ago. I'll get another measurement. Do I need to have a bushing made or can I find them somewhere for something like this ?


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

I know scarifiers are expensive but I think I found some that will fit. I'm hoping to get this thing dialed in for les then half the price of a new box blade. I figure since I got it free with the tractor I might as well give it a good solid try at getting it fixed up. Luckily at this time I don't even need the scarifiers or the hydraulic cylinder for what I want to get accomplished.


----------



## BinVa (Sep 21, 2020)

I would think a quick fix would be to weld a plate drilled to the proper 3pt cat. size on each side of the mounting ears. A couple of grease zerks could be added if you felt it was necessary. Or just plate and add a 3pt stud instead of using a pin. B.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

UPDATE; 
My friend came by yesterday and said he'd turn me down a bushing on his lathe and we can weld it in.


----------



## FredM (Nov 18, 2015)

TractorRookie said:


> UPDATE;
> My friend came by yesterday and said he'd turn me down a bushing on his lathe and we can weld it in.


That is how I would have done it, had 2 bushes turned and welded in place.


----------



## unsquidly (Jul 13, 2021)

This looks like an old Gannon brand box scraper........What is the width and I might be able to come up with a model number for it.....


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

unsquidly said:


> This looks like an old Gannon brand box scraper........What is the width and I might be able to come up with a model number for it.....


I'll get a measurement and post back here. I tried to google search old Gannon Box Blades and could not find one that looked like it . But that doesn't mean anything.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

Im sorry 


unsquidly said:


> This looks like an old Gannon brand box scraper........What is the width and I might be able to come up with a model number for it.....


 I'm sorry haven't got the measurements . I've just been dealing with cutting down 5 big old trees and dealing with the aftermath of that mess.


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

That's an awesome old BB. Your buddy is gonna solve the bushing problem, awesome!!! Shop for scarifiers. Thing to look for is how they lock in place. Since you need them all, varied length won't matter. A hydraulic cylinder will be cheap. I'm guessing $400 and you'll basically have a new BB. Bargain!!!


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

ovrszd said:


> That's an awesome old BB. Your buddy is gonna solve the bushing problem, awesome!!! Shop for scarifiers. Thing to look for is how they lock in place. Since you need them all, varied length won't matter. A hydraulic cylinder will be cheap. I'm guessing $400 and you'll basically have a new BB. Bargain!!!


Thank you it seems to be a stout piece . I had it hooked up to the tractor to move it and did a little scraping and I could see the benefit of having it real quick. Do you agree with it being a Gannon box blade ?


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

TractorRookie said:


> Thank you it seems to be a stout piece . I had it hooked up to the tractor to move it and did a little scraping and I could see the benefit of having it real quick. Do you agree with it being a Gannon box blade ?


I have no opinion about the brand. I'm familiar with Gannon. But never saw one like that.

These unanswered questions always intrigue me. I'd always be on the search for an answer!!! It's one of a kind design for sure.

Wanted to ask, is there a "hook" that latches the scarifier bar in the lowered position. If I could see that hook design it would help. What I can see is just the top end of what I think is the hook. The shape of the bottom end is what I'm wanting to see.


----------



## LouNY (Dec 15, 2016)

The hydraulic cylinder will rotate the square tube the scarifiers fit in, with it rotated as it is now the shanks are raised,
retract the cylinder and the square tube will rotate around so the shanks are vertical.
If it's not a Gannon it is a close knockoff.
For connecting to the 3 point lift arms I would want a long pin that will go through both plates with the lift arm sandwiched in between.


----------



## SidecarFlip (Mar 25, 2021)

YUou can either buy shanks with weld on points or pin on points (with a roll pin). I prefer the pin on points myself. ASC Agri-Supply sells bare shanks as well as shanks with points and the pin on points (and weld on points) too.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

ovrszd said:


> I have no opinion about the brand. I'm familiar with Gannon. But never saw one like that.
> 
> These unanswered questions always intrigue me. I'd always be on the search for an answer!!! It's one of a kind design for sure.
> 
> Wanted to ask, is there a "hook" that latches the scarifier bar in the lowered position. If I could see that hook design it would help. What I can see is just the top end of what I think is the hook. The shape of the bottom end is what I'm wanting to see.



I was able to snap a couple pics last night. I hope you can make sense of these. I want to use it for spreading some rock and cleaning up a long driveway. Eventually I will need the scarifiers and hydraulic cylinder to work but I have to take one thing at a time. Thank you


----------



## SidecarFlip (Mar 25, 2021)

One thing I'd do is hard rod the bottom edge of the side plates asap.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

SidecarFlip said:


> One thing I'd do is hard rod the bottom edge of the side plates asap.


Thanks for the heads up. I'm so green when it comes to this stuff I hadn't even though of that.


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

Looking at your last pics, I'm more confused than before.

Everyone take a look at his latest pic showing the rotating shank beam. 

Is the cylinder currently extended? If so, the shanks are rotated forward?

If the cylinder is retracted, then how does it have enough stroke to extend far enough to lower the shanks?

My simple mind is struggling. 

For sure I don't see any locking mechanism so all the forces exerted by the lowered shanks is being put on the cylinder?

Mine latches in the lowered position removing the load from the hydraulics.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

ovrszd said:


> Looking at your last pics, I'm more confused than before.
> 
> Everyone take a look at his latest pic showing the rotating shank beam.
> 
> ...



Beats the heck out of me too !!! 🤷‍♂️. The previous owner was no help either. It may have had the cylinder replaced with the incorrect one. Its hard to say.


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

Looks fine to me. Extending the cylinder would put the shanks down, and retracting the cylinder would pull the shanks up. It looks like there might be two pin location options on the square tube that holds the shanks. Either that or it's a locking pin hole. 

Anyway, if you had to buy this exact thing brand new and fully functional (i dont know if a functionally identical model is sold new right now or not) it would be thousands of dollars. Fixing this thing up for anything under 1k is not a bad deal.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

Vigo said:


> Looks fine to me. Extending the cylinder would put the shanks down, and retracting the cylinder would pull the shanks up. It looks like there might be two pin location options on the square tube that holds the shanks. Either that or it's a locking pin hole.
> 
> Anyway, if you had to buy this exact thing brand new and fully functional (i dont know if a functionally identical model is sold new right now or not) it would be thousands of dollars. Fixing this thing up for anything under 1k is not a bad deal.



Thats the plan. I work a lot and have 2 kids so finding time to be a part time tractor mechanic and farmer is tough but very enjoyable.


----------



## LouNY (Dec 15, 2016)

OK, I went down and took some pictures of mine, it is a Gannon (an older one) and very similar in many ways to the OP's.































































So yes extending the hydraulic cylinder will rotate the ripper shanks out of the ground and back into the box.
Mine are mounted to U shaped holders on the back of the box tubing instead of in the tube.
On mine rotating the shanks down rotates and raises the hitch mounting tabs effectively lowering the box.
With all the shanks lowered to their deepest setting in hard ground it will stop a 11,000# tractor and leave her pawing in 4wd.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

LouNY said:


> OK, I went down and took some pictures of mine, it is a Gannon (an older one) and very similar in many ways to the OP's.
> View attachment 77092
> 
> 
> ...



Finally someone with something similar !!! Thank you for sharing


----------



## FredM (Nov 18, 2015)

ovrszd said:


> Looking at your last pics, I'm more confused than before.
> 
> Everyone take a look at his latest pic showing the rotating shank beam.
> 
> ...


Look at the box blade from this angle, because the pivot lever is not centered with a shorter throw on the cylinder side, the cylinder ram will not have to travel much to position the ripper shanks, and most likely, when the shanks are in the work position, the load will be taken by the pivot lever and the lower pin connection because the whole pivot link and the lower connection would be inline, picture your lower leg, the knee and your thigh as a comparison, that is a good comparison, medical with mechanical.


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

Vigo said:


> Looks fine to me. Extending the cylinder would put the shanks down, and retracting the cylinder would pull the shanks up. It looks like there might be two pin location options on the square tube that holds the shanks. Either that or it's a locking pin hole.
> 
> Anyway, if you had to buy this exact thing brand new and fully functional (i dont know if a functionally identical model is sold new right now or not) it would be thousands of dollars. Fixing this thing up for anything under 1k is not a bad deal.


Study that one more time. Would you say the cylinder is extended now? If so, the shanks are pointing forward. Never saw that before. How would you not get them into the tractor tires?


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

FredM said:


> Look at the box blade from this angle, because the pivot lever is not centered with a shorter throw on the cylinder side, the cylinder ram will not have to travel much to position the ripper shanks, and most likely, when the shanks are in the work position, the load will be taken by the pivot lever and the lower pin connection because the whole pivot link and the lower connection would be inline, picture your lower leg, the knee and your thigh as a comparison, that is a good comparison, medical with mechanical.
> 
> View attachment 77105


Yep, I can see that. Anxious to see it in operation.


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

ovrszd said:


> Study that one more time. Would you say the cylinder is extended now? If so, the shanks are pointing forward. Never saw that before. How would you not get them into the tractor tires?


The cylinder is about in the middle and the shanks would be 'partially retracted'. The shanks would be coming out of the bottom of the bar, not the top.

I drew a terrible picture in MSpaint as i am wont to do on tractor forums.
















I don't think the linkage could go 'past vertical' like this pic implies but imagining the whole square tube rotated 90 degrees was a lot easier than trying to redraw it at 74 degrees or whatever. These drawing skills do not go particularly far, obviously.

The red arrow is meant to illustrate that a force trying to rotate the rippers backwards would create a 'spreading' load between the square tube and the pivot pin of that large link, which would protect the cylinder as FredM mentioned. Some good thinking got thunk when they designed these fancy dirt pushers.


----------



## FredM (Nov 18, 2015)

I mentioned the knee to give the idea that when the leg is straight, it becomes locked as you all would know, that link works the same way with the ram extended and with the rippers in the ready position.


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

The two yellow links will not fit through the space between the square bar and the large lever's pivot unless the two pieces articulate/fold to become 'shorter'. However, hitting the ripper teeth would just put force in a straight line along those two lined-up arms (the leg/knee analogy), which would not cause the folding joint to move forward or back (it would create some of this force but at a low level the hydraulic cylinder could easily resist) and the primary force would be a spreading load between the square tube and the large lever's pivot point, which is heavily triangulated in space.

If you imagine having the mount on the square tube on the 'top' face instead of the 'rear' face, hitting the rippers would put a huge force into the cylinder. So all the extra complexity in the linkage is there to protect the cylinder from things the rippers hit.

Im sure I'm not helping, but I did know exactly what you meant, just overexplained as usual and it got lost in there.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

We need to settle this.lol. 

I'm going to have to remove the cylinder and try to articulate the ripper assembly so we can settle how this crazy thing works.

I did have to move it yesterday so I hooked it to the tractor and of course my curiosity got the best of me so I drug it around for a few minutes. It does a good job of making things smooth but I can really see the need for the ripper teeth. Id like to cut some roads/fire breaks around my place and I think it will be much easier if I have the rippers. 

Do any of you have suggestions on finding rippers ? I think I found them but I'd love to find the best deal possible.


----------



## TX MX5200 (May 12, 2020)

I may be wrooooong….but looks like when the cylinder retracts it rotates rippers down and raises the rear of blade….so ya would maybe lower the box down at rippers lower to engage both the rippers and rear blade.

just a guess….I just bought 2 rippers for 65dollars and was happy to find em. Mine are lighter duty and have holes for locking pins….looks like yours has the slip retainer clips to me. Your blade is more of medium duty and mine is standard duty, which is nice talk for more sissy like.


----------



## FredM (Nov 18, 2015)

I may be wrooooong….but looks like when the cylinder retracts it rotates rippers down and raises the rear of blade….so ya would maybe lower the box down at rippers lower to engage both the rippers and rear blade. 

Best to have a look at post #26, the ram only works the ripper column, ram retracted-- out of the ground --or ram extended, ready for ground penetration, the lower A frame has bushings/bearings to allow the ripper column to rotate, and the top of the A frame is connected to the rear and under the ram mount onto the box blade housing, to change the angle of attack, you have to use the top link.


----------



## TX MX5200 (May 12, 2020)

FredM said:


> I may be wrooooong….but looks like when the cylinder retracts it rotates rippers down and raises the rear of blade….so ya would maybe lower the box down at rippers lower to engage both the rippers and rear blade.
> 
> Best to have a look at post #26, the ram only works the ripper column, ram retracted-- out of the ground --or ram extended, ready for ground penetration, the lower A frame has bushings/bearings to allow the ripper column to rotate, and the top of the A frame is connected to the rear and under the ram mount onto the box blade housing, to change the angle of attack, you have to use the top link.


Gotya…I do know the round thingy on back is for moving trailers😁


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

I have found very cheap 16" rippers with 3 pin holes on Neatfarms, but to use them you'd have to weld some small bracketry on top of your square tube. Good news is the brackets you would need to make are just some bits of angle iron 1-1.5" on a side, cut into pieces about 1/2-3/4" wide, and welded onto the square tube to make a little triangle sticking up. Then you run your 1/2" hitch pins (cheap on amazon) sideways through that and it holds the rippers there. 3

Looks like that thing holds 6 or 7 rippers, though, so even using the cheapest stuff you can find and doing the welding yourself you're still gonna be in it at least $150-200 to get rippers on it.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

I'm looking at a box blade just like this one for sale near me but it's three hours away and I'm worried it might be to large for my MX5800. The manual says max 72" and 1000 lbs. The owner is not sure about the weight or brand. Does the OP or anyone have a guess what they think it weighs. I have seen pictures of the rippers and there not the traditional L shape. Instead of coming straight down and sweeping toward the tractor, they sweep back and then sweep forward. My guess is that the intent was to compensate for the point of rotation being so close to the hitching point.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

I can also see in the picture that extending the ram brings the rippers down as previously suggested.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

It’s my box blade I haven’t found rippers for it yet I’ve been to dang busy with other stuff. I have no idea what its weight is but my 39.5 horse tractor doesn’t seem to mind it dragging it around ripperless . Im sorry I don’t have any more info to give .Would you mind showing pictures of the one your speaking of ?


----------



## TX MX5200 (May 12, 2020)

Burn17 said:


> I can also see in the picture that extending the ram brings the rippers down as previously suggested.


looks fine to me…my guess would be 5 1/2” on one in pic….


----------



## TX MX5200 (May 12, 2020)

I pulled one like it with my Ford NAA without issue…no rippers used but you will be fine with the MX5800.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

TX MX5200 said:


> I pulled one like it with my Ford NAA without issue…no rippers used but you will be fine with the MX5800.


Thanks guys I think I'll go take a look at it. I'm going to attempt to attach a picture. It only shows 2 rippers and I think there on there to hold it in a good position for attachment. He has the rest of them there just not on there.


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

I haven't seen that style of ripper before. Does look like they are just on there for 'parking'. Looking at the 3pt brackets which are a pretty standard spacing i would guess it's a 72" blade. Can't tell much about the construction of the back wall but i would guess it's closer to 600lbs than 1000 lbs. Just educated guesses so take it for what it's worth.


----------



## macdoesit (May 4, 2021)

2 more rippers for each side but see nothing for the 2 foot center.


----------



## LouNY (Dec 15, 2016)

Looks like 6 empty slots 2 in the center and 2 on each side.


----------



## FredM (Nov 18, 2015)

There are openings for 8 rippers on that tool bar and there are 2 openings under the A frame.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

Burn17
Thats almost identical to mine !!! I need some of those rippers. Can you post a bunch of pics if you get it so I can just how similar they are and how the rippers are mounted and such.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

TractorRookie said:


> Burn17
> Thats almost identical to mine !!! I need some of those rippers. Can you post a bunch of pics if you get it so I can just how similar they are and how the rippers are mounted and such.


Sorry for the delay, my mother has been having some health issues (92) and I haven't gotten free to go see it yet. I'm hoping sometime during the next week I'll make the drive. Fuel prices like they are it's going to cost me at least a couple hundred to go see it. If I get it I can take dimensions from the rippers and post pictures. It looks like it should work for me but I still have a few concerns about the design. I like the design but since the pivot points carry the load it could accumulate wear at those points. Can you tell me if there are grease fittings at the pivot points and are those points on on yours showing any kind of significant wear? He had originally told me it was 6' wide but when I saw your dimension on width I asked him to confirm it and he came back with the same 81 inches as yours. I haven't been able to find much information on the brand. I have been searching the internet looking for pictures but so far have only found yours, the one I'm going to look at and one that looks like it is a the half brother of them. I'll post some picture of it. It uses the same ripper bar but it's moved back and is using conventional ripper design. In front of that an additional crossmember. whether it was changed due to the design concerns I mentioned earlier or if the change was to reduce cost I don't know but they look to be related. It's been repainted and decaled as Gannon but who knows. I found it on a website that had it up for sale 3 year ago.


----------



## Vigo (Oct 8, 2021)

I don't see a pivot point for any kind of 'z-bar' linkage like the other ones.. lacking that anything you hit with the rippers is pulling on whatever holds your gland into the end of your hydraulic cylinder, be it snap ring or threads.. I would say without the linkage which reverses that force to the base end of the cylinder (which is pretty hard to bend or pop) and which could mechanically limit the force into the cylinder through leverage and 'mechanical stops' i'd say this is a less sophisticated design. 

However.. i would really like my rippers to be powered up and down and i'd take ANY design of it over what i've got! 

I do use my power top link to engage the rippers to a shallow depth just by tilting the box way forward, but when i posted about that on a different forum i got a lot of strong opinions about how that's not how it's supposed to work.. and yet i have done it many times without issue.. anyway..


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

I agree with Vigo. There needs to be a mechanical latch system to take the load off the cylinder. I converted a Manual lift LP BB to a Hydraulic lift. I retained the factory latch system so the cylinder has no load when the rippers are latched in the lowered position. When the cylinder is activated it first releases the latch, then starts lifting the rippers. I'll try to get some pics next time I have it on.


----------



## ovrszd (11 mo ago)

Vigo said:


> I don't see a pivot point for any kind of 'z-bar' linkage like the other ones.. lacking that anything you hit with the rippers is pulling on whatever holds your gland into the end of your hydraulic cylinder, be it snap ring or threads.. I would say without the linkage which reverses that force to the base end of the cylinder (which is pretty hard to bend or pop) and which could mechanically limit the force into the cylinder through leverage and 'mechanical stops' i'd say this is a less sophisticated design.
> 
> However.. i would really like my rippers to be powered up and down and i'd take ANY design of it over what i've got!
> 
> I do use my power top link to engage the rippers to a shallow depth just by tilting the box way forward, but when i posted about that on a different forum i got a lot of strong opinions about how that's not how it's supposed to work.. and yet i have done it many times without issue.. anyway..



I use my hydraulic top link all the time with the BB. I also have a hydraulic side link. You can do some pretty smooth work with both of them.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

I will take a look at mine I know there is zerks on it I'm pretty sure at the ends of the ripper beam. If you look close in my pics I think you can see the zerks. I just cant remember exactly where they are. The beam the rippers sit in is massive and very stout I don't see what could cause it to bend or get damaged under normal use. Also the linkage to rotate the ripper beam down appears very stout as well. I don't think there's much to worry about this things pretty solid. I wish I had time to locate a good deal on rippers and get my 3 point mounting holes squared away I cant wait to get some fire breaks and such cut with it.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

ovrszd said:


> I agree with Vigo. There needs to be a mechanical latch system to take the load off the cylinder. I converted a Manual lift LP BB to a Hydraulic lift. I retained the factory latch system so the cylinder has no load when the rippers are latched in the lowered position. When the cylinder is activated it first releases the latch, then starts lifting the rippers. I'll try to get some pics next time I have it on.


I agree with you and Vigo that isolating the ripper load from the cylinder is necessary and I believe Vigo's assessment of the design is right on. When the rippers engage the ground the load will go straight to the means of attaching the piston to the rod. I have personally seen pistons separate from the rod when overloaded. That said I didn't make myself clear on my concerns. I'm going to refer to these two as design 1, posted by the OP and design 2, the one i posted in #48 to show similarities and differences between the two. The similarities suggest a common manufacturer and the differences suggest design changes possibly for improvement or cost reduction. I'll attach two pictures to hopefully clarify.


----------



## Burn17 (9 mo ago)

TractorRookie said:


> I will take a look at mine I know there is zerks on it I'm pretty sure at the ends of the ripper beam. If you look close in my pics I think you can see the zerks. I just cant remember exactly where they are. The beam the rippers sit in is massive and very stout I don't see what could cause it to bend or get damaged under normal use. Also the linkage to rotate the ripper beam down appears very stout as well. I don't think there's much to worry about this things pretty solid. I wish I had time to locate a good deal on rippers and get my 3 point mounting holes squared away I cant wait to get some fire breaks and such cut with it.


Thank you TractorRookie I'm hoping that I can get the one I'm going to be looking at. If so I can send you a drawing of the ripper shape with dimensions. You might be able to adapt rippers of the conventional J shape but you might be able to make a pattern from the drawing and flame cut them from a mild or high grade plate steel. Once I know how there attached we might know more about adapting something already on the market. I'm sure your right that there's nothing to worry about with this design. I'm retired now but I spent a good part of my life designing machinery and you have to guard yourself from getting into the bad habit of looking for problems that don't exist. I actually like the design and it may not exist any more due to the cost of manufacturing it.


----------



## TractorRookie (Dec 6, 2021)

Burn17 said:


> Thank you TractorRookie I'm hoping that I can get the one I'm going to be looking at. If so I can send you a drawing of the ripper shape with dimensions. You might be able to adapt rippers of the conventional J shape but you might be able to make a pattern from the drawing and flame cut them from a mild or high grade plate steel. Once I know how there attached we might know more about adapting something already on the market. I'm sure your right that there's nothing to worry about with this design. I'm retired now but I spent a good part of my life designing machinery and you have to guard yourself from getting into the bad habit of looking for problems that don't exist. I actually like the design and it may not exist any more due to the cost of manufacturing it.


In my opinion cost was probably the deciding factor to discontinue the design. The dang thing is really stout I'm no engineering expert but I think the design change probably had more to do with ease of manufacturing then design flaws.


----------

