127 replies to this topic

[JD3430]

Were I you I would be more worried about the transport width of 2 5’ wide bales than I would be about any other facet of making 5’ bales. And I would spend exactly 0 time looking for a 5x5 baler. Go 5x6, lots more to pick from.

For the last 6 years, I have been placing 4’ wide bales spaced about 1&1/2-2’ apart on the bottom, and the double upper row bales butted tight side by side so there’s less chance of falling off. I only had a few of the many many hundreds of bale loads get tippy when I load and transport this way.
If I did 5’x 5’ bales and butt the bottom double row tightly together, it’s the same width, but now the upper row is just a single row in the middle, which won’t be nearly as tippy as a double upper row.
So why would transport be a “worry”, when it’s less top heavy and less tippy?
In the picture, the bales are overhanging 8-12” over the edge of a 102” wide trailer. (The back pair is butted because the mega ramps are only 96” wide).
If they were 5x5’s they’d overhang only 6-8” on a 102 wide trailer. So I can go down the road at a little narrower width, too.

While I do agree a 5x6 baler is a more versatile choice with greater selection, the 1500 extra pounds shoving me down steep hills is a safety consideration and the pulling a 5x6 up a hill with a 1100lb bale is going to require dropping a gear or 2 compared to a 4x5 baler I currently use. A 5x5 baler is lighter than a 5x6.

Attached Files

•  3E94A73A-295E-4CC6-B6B3-1C7E8EBC322A.png   2.39MB   2 downloads

[stack em up]

Just because the baler is capable of making a 6’ bale, doesn’t mean you have to make a 6’ bale

[Gearclash]

For the last 6 years, I have been placing 4’ wide bales spaced about 1&1/2-2’ apart on the bottom, and the double upper row bales butted tight side by side so there’s less chance of falling off. I only had a few of the many many hundreds of bale loads get tippy when I load and transport this way.
If I did 5’x 5’ bales and butt the bottom double row tightly together, it’s the same width, but now the upper row is just a single row in the middle, which won’t be nearly as tippy as a double upper row.
So why would transport be a “worry”, when it’s less top heavy and less tippy?
In the picture, the bales are overhanging 8-12” over the edge of a 102” wide trailer. (The back pair is butted because the mega ramps are only 96” wide).
If they were 5x5’s they’d overhang only 6-8” on a 102 wide trailer. So I can go down the road at a little narrower width, too.

While I do agree a 5x6 baler is a more versatile choice with greater selection, the 1500 extra pounds shoving me down steep hills is a safety consideration and the pulling a 5x6 up a hill with a 1100lb bale is going to require dropping a gear or 2 compared to a 4x5 baler I currently use. A 5x5 baler is lighter than a 5x6.

If you are doing that then you will be all set to haul 5’ wide bales.  You might like loading the trailer better with 5 footers even.  I do wonder if you will give up some tonnage overall with a 5’ wide bale if you place a single wide row on the second layer.  Your best bet for load tonnage and overall baler satisfaction would be to use a 5x6 baler set to about 66”.   That should be the happy medium between fewer bales  and a load that stacks denser.  

[JD3430]

If you are doing that then you will be all set to haul 5’ wide bales.  You might like loading the trailer better with 5 footers even.  I do wonder if you will give up some tonnage overall with a 5’ wide bale if you place a single wide row on the second layer.  Your best bet for load tonnage and overall baler satisfaction would be to use a 5x6 baler set to about 66”.   That should be the happy medium between fewer bales  and a load that stacks denser.  

 

But how?

66" would only allow for 5 rows of bales on a 30' trailer-so only 10 on bottom and only 5 on top. Wouldnt that weigh less than 18) 5x5 ( 60") bales??

I was thinking a 62" bale...pushed up nice & tight...would be almost perfect. It would still result in 1' overhang past end of trailer, but I can handle that. Trailer is 30' 6 rows on bottom of 62" bales is 31' 

 

18) 1,100-1,150 would be perfect. 

[Aaroncboo]

So theoretically if you got a 5x6 baler and only made them for 4ft round would that be the same amount of hay as a 4 x 5 that's 5 ft round and 4 ft wide?

[JD3430]

Now I’m seeing the 5x5 & 5x6 5’ bale is actually 61.5” not 60”.
4x5 bales are actually only 46.5” wide, not 48”.
Never knew that...
That’s going to make my load a little wider than I originally thought

[Gearclash]

But how?

66" would only allow for 5 rows of bales on a 30' trailer-so only 10 on bottom and only 5 on top. Wouldnt that weigh less than 18) 5x5 ( 60") bales??

I was thinking a 62" bale...pushed up nice & tight...would be almost perfect. It would still result in 1' overhang past end of trailer, but I can handle that. Trailer is 30' 6 rows on bottom of 62" bales is 31' 

 

18) 1,100-1,150 would be perfect. 

I was recommending the 5 x 5.5’ bale purely from a theoretical point of view.  I wasn’t thinking about trailer length.  

 

Now for some numbers.  I am going to assume bale density is equal always.  A 4x5 bale is 78.5 cubic ft, 22 on a load is 1727 cu ft.  A 5x5.5 bale is 117 cu ft, a load of 15 is 1755 cu ft.  A 5 x 62” bale is 104.8 cu ft, a load of 18 is 1781 cu ft. 

[Gearclash]

So theoretically if you got a 5x6 baler and only made them for 4ft round would that be the same amount of hay as a 4 x 5 that's 5 ft round and 4 ft wide?

Diameter usually trumps length.  A 4x5 bale is 78.5 cubic feet, a 5x4 bale is 62.8 cubic feet.

[swmnhay]

18) 1,100-1,150 would be perfect.

IMO No.Ive made some bales 5x5 bales for horse market.They suck.More bales to pickup.Less tons per hr with the baler.It just costs more to make a 5’ bale then a 6’ bale.5’ bale adds bale count to monitor also,go to trade it’s how many bales on machine just like miles on a vehicle.

30’ trailer 14-5x6 Bales is perfect.Depends on the hay it could be to much weight for trailer so could make slightly shorter.I max out my trailer axles with 14 bales with 24,000 on them.

To me it’s a nobrainer but then again I’m not concerned about width at all.

[JD3430]

IMO No.Ive made some bales 5x5 bales for horse market.They suck.More bales to pickup.Less tons per hr with the baler.It just costs more to make a 5’ bale then a 6’ bale.5’ bale adds bale count to monitor also,go to trade it’s how many bales on machine just like miles on a vehicle.

30’ trailer 14-5x6 Bales is perfect.Depends on the hay it could be to much weight for trailer so could make slightly shorter.I max out my trailer axles with 14 bales with 24,000 on them.

To me it’s a nobrainer but then again I’m not concerned about width at all.

 

Maybe in your operation that's true, but I don't make or market hay the same way you do. What works for you, doesnt work for everyone else. 

 

80% of my bales are not made for the horse market and the 10% that are  don't want a 6' diameter 1500lb bale. It's too hard for them to handle. A 5x6 wont fit in the Hay Huts my customers use, either. The remaining 10% are to feed cows and the feeder wont accept a 6' diameter bale, either.

 

I'm coming from a 4x5 bale, so a 5x5 bale will lower my bale handling time by 20%. 

1500 4x5's now becomes 1200 5x5's.  A load of 23 4x5's now becomes 18 5x5's.

 

But I do think a 5x6 baler might be the way to go. More balers to select from and I like the idea of not pushing a baler to its limits on bale size. 

[JD3430]

I was recommending the 5 x 5.5’ bale purely from a theoretical point of view.  I wasn’t thinking about trailer length.  

 

Now for some numbers.  I am going to assume bale density is equal always.  A 4x5 bale is 78.5 cubic ft, 22 on a load is 1727 cu ft.  A 5x5.5 bale is 117 cu ft, a load of 15 is 1755 cu ft.  A 5 x 62” bale is 104.8 cu ft, a load of 18 is 1781 cu ft. 

 

I'm really liking the efficiency of that 5' x 62" bale. 

(I'm guessing a 61.5" x 62" bale is about 110 cu ft.)

 

A few other things to consider:

On hilly ground, a 5x5 will be more stable. 

Will my current dual bale spear set up work-gotta check spear length- I think they're 36"....

When I lift 2) 900lb 4x5's, rear of tractor is fairly stable, but I think wheel weights will be needed and that's going to add another $1,000 to the budget- I dont do fluid or 3pt weights.. 

[Gearclash]

Spear length shouldn’t be an issue.  I use 39” OAL spears on every bale that comes on the yard and I’ve about seen it all for bale size and quality.  Regarding loader stability, that extra foot of bale sticking out in front of you will get your attention.

[swmnhay]

Maybe in your operation that's true, but I don't make or market hay the same way you do. What works for you, doesnt work for everyone else. 

 

80% of my bales are not made for the horse market and the 10% that are  don't want a 6' diameter 1500lb bale. It's too hard for them to handle. A 5x6 wont fit in the Hay Huts my customers use, either. The remaining 10% are to feed cows and the feeder wont accept a 6' diameter bale, either.

 

I'm coming from a 4x5 bale, so a 5x5 bale will lower my bale handling time by 20%. 

1500 4x5's now becomes 1200 5x5's.  A load of 23 4x5's now becomes 18 5x5's.

 

But I do think a 5x6 baler might be the way to go. More balers to select from and I like the idea of not pushing a baler to its limits on bale size. 

You have ALWAYS told us on HT your major market was mushroom hay!I wouldn't of given the advise I did if it was for horse market,

 

It's not difficult to make some 5x6 for mushroom hay and what you need for horses at 5x5.Thats what i do 5x6 for feedlots as heavy as I can make because they want them big,its less bales to handle.I might make 100 bales and that i go by scale on baler and set bales size to shoot for a 1000 lb bale.

[JD3430]

You have ALWAYS told us on HT your major market was mushroom hay!I wouldn't of given the advise I did if it was for horse market,

 

It's not difficult to make some 5x6 for mushroom hay and what you need for horses at 5x5.Thats what i do 5x6 for feedlots as heavy as I can make because they want them big,its less bales to handle.I might make 100 bales and that i go by scale on baler and set bales size to shoot for a 1000 lb bale.

 

Right! and the 80% I spoke of is mushroom/mulch hay. I dont want a 5x6 bale because it's too heavy for my tractor. A 5x6 mushroom/mulch hay bale @ 20% would weigh 1500lbs or more. I cant go buying another bigger tractor to handle them! So no matter who the customer is, my tractor cant handle bales that big 2 at a time. I dont want to go backwards and do 1 bale at a time. 

You always tell me you have bigger equipment than me and maybe yours can handle a 5x6 bale, but mine cant! 

I dont know why its so hard for you to understand that I want to make a 5x5 bale to keep my weight ~1,100lbs so for these reasons:

 

1) my loader can lift them 

2) My horse customer hay huts can handle them

3) they fit in cattle hay feeder

4) less tippy on truck and less tippy in field.

 

I can jump from a 4x5 to a 5x5 with my current equipment, but I cant jump to a 5x6. 

[Gearclash]

Yup, full size 5x6 are big.  20% moisture hay in a 5x6 is going to be more like 1800-2000lbs +, especially if the baler is cranked tight.  I’ve taken some of my own bales across the scale at 1800, and the baler what nowhere near its max pressure setting.

[JD3430]

Yup, full size 5x6 are big.  20% moisture hay in a 5x6 is going to be more like 1800-2000lbs +, especially if the baler is cranked tight.  I’ve taken some of my own bales across the scale at 1800, and the baler what nowhere near its max pressure setting.

 

Thank You!  

 

5x5, or to be technical 61.5" x 60-62", ought to be just right for MY situation. 

If my bale weight average on a 20% bale is 875 and my average bale weight on a 14% bale is ~800, adding 20-25% weight when making a ~5x5 should be right around 1050-1100. 

 

Another good thing about a 5x6 is that if in the event I do come into a larger loader tractor, I could make 5.5-6' x 5' bales. Dont think itll ever happen, but it's better than being limited to a 5x5 baler.

 

Now the NH 5x6 balers weight still has me bugged. I will be pulling a baler that weighs 1300 more pounds and the bale will weigh about 200 more lbs. 

[swmnhay]

Right! and the 80% I spoke of is mushroom/mulch hay. I dont want a 5x6 bale because it's too heavy for my tractor. A 5x6 mushroom/mulch hay bale @ 20% would weigh 1500lbs or more. I cant go buying another bigger tractor to handle them! So no matter who the customer is, my tractor cant handle bales that big 2 at a time. I dont want to go backwards and do 1 bale at a time. 

You always tell me you have bigger equipment than me and maybe yours can handle a 5x6 bale, but mine cant! 

I dont know why its so hard for you to understand that I want to make a 5x5 bale to keep my weight ~1,100lbs so for these reasons:

 

1) my loader can lift them 

2) My horse customer hay huts can handle them

3) they fit in cattle hay feeder

4) less tippy on truck and less tippy in field.

 

I can jump from a 4x5 to a 5x5 with my current equipment, but I cant jump to a 5x6. 

I'd sooner pickup one 1800# bale then 2 1000# bales.It will be way faster.You wouldn't be going back wards at all

 

Im giving you advise not bragging how I do it and thats what HT is about.

 

But then do you want advise or just someone to agree?

[Gearclash]

I looked up the advertised shipping weight on the NH BR7000 series balers.  You are right that the 5x5 weighs 1500 less than a 5x6.  Knowing what I do about those balers, I am a little suspicious that the 5x5 is actually built a little lighter as I see no reason there should be that much weight difference.  Maybe mike10 can shed a little light on that.  IMO, you won’t have a problem with a 5x6 baler.  As I said earlier, I pull them with a 2wd 115 hp tractor that is not especially heavy.  We don’t have the steep hills here like some parts of the country but I do go road ditch hopping with this rig sometimes and so far I haven’t ever got in trouble with it.  Sometimes we are crawling up or down some pretty steep stuff with maybe a near full chamber and I have yet to get pushed around.  I do like the bigger heavier tractor with big tires and MFD better for this job but the lighter 2wd with cookie cutter rears will do it well enough.

[carcajou]

One thing to consider, going to a larger diameter bale spoilage can be dramatically less.  It also takes up a lot less bale yard space.

[JD3430]

Another thought in the "positive" column:

A 5x6 would be 1000RPM.

My 4x5 is 540 RPM.