JD 350 Loader or Oliver Loader OC46

[superstevek1]

Hello new to the forum. I need advice...Looking at purchasing a mid 60's JD350 diesel loader with a ripper or an Oliver OC46 gas loader with a backhoe. Both are similar in price. The JD has more power. The Oliver burns a little oil otherwise is all there. It does not have the larger jet trencher backhoe but a smaller one that would probably go on the OC3. I like the JD350 because it is more solid and better shape but no backhoe. Price being the same do I buy the JD 350 and then pick up a backhoe for it? How hard it is to take off a ripper and put on a backhoe from time to time? Is it a lot of work? Or should I just go with the smaller Oliver knowing I will have to rebuild the engine in a few years. I have a hobby farm and will not be actively using this all the time. I hear the backhoe attachment for the JD 350 is heavy. If I do go with the JD 350 crawler loader which backhoe attachment would you put on it? Thanks for your feedback it is greatly appreaciated.

[Lavoy]

Unless the 350 you are buying is a hoe crawler, it is not just a matter of hanging a hoe on it, so in this instance, if the Oliver will do the job, I would buy it.
Lavoy

[superstevek1]

I appreciate the insight. That is helpful thanks. Is there a big power difference from 31 HP that the Oliver has than the 42 HP that JD claims to have? Is it really noticable? Is it hard to take the ripper on and off or is it really not meant to do this? Is there like a quick disconnect or not really. I guess my question is how much modification is required to put a backhoe on a non hoe JD model crawler? By the sounds of it seems like whatever attachment they came with is what you kinda stuck with not like the newer machines.

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

The JD350 was not designed for any sort of quick disconnecting of the ripper attachment. And, the ripper hydraulics won't be large enough to operate the JD backhoe. That requires a completely different hydraulic setup which would then be way too much for the ripper (if you went thru all the work to put it back on there).

There is also the fact that the JD hoe is really heavy. They tend to wreck the back end of the u/c. Better to find a hoe equipped 450, I think.

There was a 3-pt hitch and PTO setup for the 350. With one of those you could use a smaller backhoe using a PTO driven hydraulic pump. Then you could swap all sorts of things on and off the machine. Provided you can actually find a 350 3-pt somewhere. They were not common....

I don't know the Oliver you mention, but don't think there would be a significant difference given the slight HP difference you mention.

Stan

[superstevek1]

Stan...thanks for the reply. I really appreciate the feedback.

[JWB Contracting]

Hi,

The JD350 was not designed for any sort of quick disconnecting of the ripper attachment. And, the ripper hydraulics won't be large enough to operate the JD backhoe. That requires a completely different hydraulic setup which would then be way too much for the ripper (if you went thru all the work to put it back on there).

There is also the fact that the JD hoe is really heavy. They tend to wreck the back end of the u/c. Better to find a hoe equipped 450, I think.

There was a 3-pt hitch and PTO setup for the 350. With one of those you could use a smaller backhoe using a PTO driven hydraulic pump. Then you could swap all sorts of things on and off the machine. Provided you can actually find a 350 3-pt somewhere. They were not common....

I don't know the Oliver you mention, but don't think there would be a significant difference given the slight HP difference you mention.

Stan[/quote


I was under the impression that the ripper attachment mounts on the same hooks that are used for the factory backhoe attachments.

Most loaders have the power beyond valves installed, so all that is needed is a couple hoses, fittings and quick couplers. We like the 9550 hoes, they are the right size for a loader machine vs the heavy 9300 series. We find that 450 hoe machines don't stand up well for hoe work - have seen lots of broken and cracked transmission cases where the 350's just break the frame to crossmember bolts. We also have adapted numerous case and ditch witch hoes to fit Deeres. They are smaller but do perform well. We find hoes needed to be mounted solid to a crawler tractor. There is no give or movement on tires like a rubber tired hoe. So I would not recommend 3 point hitch mounting, especially on a Deere as 3 point hitch components are very expensive and hard to come by. The key is to remove the hoe when not doing hoe work.

I am also Deere biased. 350 parts including undercarriage components are readily available. I also find that diesel power to more reliable vs. gas.

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Hmmm. I haven't had a 350 for quite a while, but seem to recall quite a few bolts to undo to get the ripper off. Almost as much work as it would be to remove a 3 pt hitch. But, mine was a dozer, so perhaps there was a different mounting scheme for the loader machines that made it easier.

The idea of a 3pt mounted hoe is to use a smaller and lighter hoe well within the strength of the 3pt. Not the large Deere hoe for the 350. This idea was already in my mind from another thread about adding a hoe to a 420. The only way to do that is use a small 3pt hoe with its own PTO pump.

You are so right. A 350 3pt is hard to come by. It is exactly what I would want, though. A diesel 350 outside blade dozer with a 3pt would be my Dream Machine.

Stan

[Scottyb]

My original parts Deere ripper on my 350c hangs on hoe hooks. If I installed quick couplers it would come off and on in a minute.

Like Stan had, I also have a ripper set up that bolts to the back of a 350b, no bracket involved and this one is a few hours work to put on. It is however after market, not Deere parts.