My 260B is okay for digging holes and ditches, but I don't like it that much. I feel like its too heavy, almost like they scaled a 310C and called it a day. When you look at the cross-sectional area of a orange backhoe, its a fraction of the JD backhoe, so one of the two missed the mark. To preempt it.. I don't want to own, and prefer not to rent a mini-ex. My end goal is to increase the BH's lifting capacity, ideally by double (rockeries). I think most of this can be achieved by geometry, as an example, putting the cylinder under the boom pin now means it is lifting the boom with the full area, rather than only the rod area in the current config, the downside is this reduces the digging force capability.
1. Why are backhoes often a straight boom, or slight curve vs a mini-ex which has a banana boom? I suspect the common use case is digging ditches, which that config is fine for.
2. If you were to mush a mini-ex with a backhoe, what features would you adopt from the mini ex, which would you leave out?
The attached picture is a comparison of the 260B and a Case CX17C kinematic model I built.
260B has a stored height of 5.3' and 2.75' tail hanging out from the kingpin, the cx17c stored similarly is 8.2' tall and 3.2' aft of the king pin.
If i stare at this too long this winter, the welder might come out ha ha.
Note: The biggest limitation I see so far is that a 1.25" rod is getting to be a bit on the slow side due to the 1025R's low hydraulic flow. the CX17C I was comparing above has a 13 gpm flow.