Advanced Search

The Green Industry's Resource Center

Old 09-08-2000, 11:31 AM
southside southside is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 790
I was looking at the Toro atomic blades recently and was wondering if there is anything similar that will fit on
a 48" Walker GHS deck? Would they make any difference in cut quality? (We bag all jobs here) Would they cut up grass
finer so it takes longer to fill the catcher?
Any advice appreciated.

Southside Slashing
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2000, 01:48 PM
LawnSite Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: northeast ,ohio
Posts: 555
asked my dealer same question his answer was that they do not make a size that would fit within the height and width of many of the ghs and sd decks plus with the ghs you need one to be left handed

i felt let down too
sima member
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2000, 10:28 PM
MJB's Avatar
MJB MJB is offline
LawnSite Silver Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Wa
Posts: 2,869
gators for the Walker

I use Gator blades on my 42" Walker for bagging, and for my mulching deck. My mulching deck is twice as good when using the Gator blades. When bagging they help chop up the grass more so less dumping. Mow More Catalogs have gator blades for the Walker. or call 1-800-866-9667 for your catalog
Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2000, 12:22 PM
LawnSite Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 64
the part# for the walker mulching blades to fit the 48 in deck are...left blade MB6412..right blade MB6411
at 1 800-866-9667
yard man inc.
lawn service / landscape maint.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Layout Style:

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Grand View Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:39 AM.

Page generated in 0.06492 seconds with 10 queries