# NH's 2x3 entry.



## Vol

More on NH's smaller large square baler.

Regards, Mike

http://www.progressiveforage.com/news/product-and-services/new-holland-adds-bigbaler-230-to-lineup


----------



## Vol

If I did my ciphering correctly this baler would make a 500-550 pound bale. A lot of small tractors could handle that.

Regards, Mike


----------



## Teslan

Vol said:


> If I did my ciphering correctly this baler would make a 500-550 pound bale. A lot of small tractors could handle that.
> 
> Regards, Mike


I think I'll wait on this one. It took about 8 years for 3x3s to become popular here. Most of my customers have the equipment to handle 3x3 bales, but maybe for the small customer 2x3 would be easier feeding. flaking and such. I think my NH stacker with Milstak could still stack them. Though they might have to drop onto the 2nd table which would not be ideal.


----------



## Gearclash

We have always liked the 2x3 bales our older NH makes. Around 500 lb bales in alfalfa or grass. At the time we got it our only skidsteer was rated for 1200 lb, and it could very comfortably carry two 2x3 bales.

It would appear that the new 2x3 is a cut down version of a 3x3 with a precompression chamber, so I think the bale density would be higher than the old 2x3. Bale weight could be more than 500-550lb, as an 8 foot bale.

The article didn't say what the actual dimensions of the bale are; the old 2x3 was 24" x 36".


----------



## Teslan

Gearclash said:


> We have always liked the 2x3 bales our older NH makes. Around 500 lb bales in alfalfa or grass. At the time we got it our only skidsteer was rated for 1200 lb, and it could very comfortably carry two 2x3 bales.
> 
> It would appear that the new 2x3 is a cut down version of a 3x3 with a precompression chamber, so I think the bale density would be higher than the old 2x3. Bale weight could be more than 500-550lb, as an 8 foot bale.
> 
> The article didn't say what the actual dimensions of the bale are; the old 2x3 was 24" x 36".


NH website says 24 wide and 35.5 high. I kinda thought it would be 35.5 wide and 24 height. For me to stack it I guess it would need a quarter turn chute.


----------



## PaMike

If you had someone that needs a light bale why not just clip the 3x3 off at 5 ft or less?

I will say that trying to take a 3x3 flake and hand feed it is a real pain.Just to big and cumbersome...

BUT I just don't see a huge volume of guys that are going to buy this machine. A custom baler operator is going to look at his customers. His big customers that support him large amounts of acres are going to have a big loader that can handle big bales and aren't going to want to handle 2x the number of bales.

This might be a niche market, but I think the niche is pretty small....


----------



## rjmoses

Personally, I like the idea.

Pulling a 3x3 or 4x4 around here would be 1) risky, and 2) impossible to get hay dry enough (down to 12%). A 3x3 baler or bigger would need at least 175HP tractor to keep the sunny side up.

I'm guessing a 2x3 could bale at 15-16% without problems. A 2x3x8 would be about 9 sm. squares. This is a bale size that most compact tractors could handle easily.

I would love to try one for one cutting.

Ralph


----------



## Teslan

rjmoses said:


> Personally, I like the idea.
> 
> Pulling a 3x3 or 4x4 around here would be 1) risky, and 2) impossible to get hay dry enough (down to 12%). A 3x3 baler or bigger would need at least 175HP tractor to keep the sunny side up.
> 
> I'm guessing a 2x3 could bale at 15-16% without problems. A 2x3x8 would be about 9 sm. squares. This is a bale size that most compact tractors could handle easily.
> 
> I would love to try one for one cutting.
> 
> Ralph


A 3x3 for the most part takes 15-16% without problems.


----------



## rjmoses

Teslan said:


> A 3x3 for the most part takes 15-16% without problems.


I was under the impression that big squares needed to be in the 12-14% range. My understanding was that the bale density was so tight that it couldn't really breathe.

That seems to be the general theme of this thread: http://www.haytalk.com/forums/topic/16940-moisture-in-big-bales/

Soooo, I wonder if the same applies to a 2x3 bale.

Ralph


----------



## Lewis Ranch

Does anyone know about what the cost of this unit will be?


----------



## deadmoose

Lewis Ranch said:


> Does anyone know about what the cost of this unit will be?


 3 easy payment options:

Firstborn

Left arm

Right leg.


----------



## Teslan

rjmoses said:


> I was under the impression that big squares needed to be in the 12-14% range. My understanding was that the bale density was so tight that it couldn't really breathe.
> 
> That seems to be the general theme of this thread: http://www.haytalk.com/forums/topic/16940-moisture-in-big-bales/
> 
> Soooo, I wonder if the same applies to a 2x3 bale.
> 
> Ralph


I bale grass hay up to about 16% without any problems. And alfalfa up to 18-19% if the stems are dry. 12-14% is ideal. When it gets below 10% it gets to dry for grass and if you want heavy bales you better have heavy twine or the bales will break.


----------



## Gearclash

Stumbled across this as I was browsing around on the net looking at big square baler reviews as my brother is half thinking about getting a newer baler and retiring the D1000. He was told that New Holland has dropped the Big Baler 230 model. Apparently it didn't sell very well. We like the 2x3 bale size, but I am at a point of bidding it adieu as a bigger bale = more hourly capacity. If we are going to change balers, I would like to go to a 3x4.


----------

