What angle for weld-on Euro hooks?

[BCLoco]

I'm going to be making the switch to Euro hook ends on my 3ph lift arms. Question I have for those who currently use these, or do this conversion, is at what vertical angle should they be welded to the arm?

I'm removing my telescoping link ends and replacing them with a piece of 1" x 3" flat bar with a Euro hook welded on the end. I was just going to do a square connection from the end of the flat bar to the factory bevel on the Euro hook, but then I saw this guy's video and he cut the flat bar at an angle so the hook is more or less level at typical implement attaching height. Actually, I think he went too aggressive on the angle and the hook is pointed up slightly when the arms are lowered to that height.

I've never used these hooks before. Looking at other pics on the interwebs, it seems like the angle varies quite a lot with some arms looking like the hook is welded square to the arm like I originally intended. If I don't have to add another angle to the equation, I would really rather not.

 

[ptsg]

I would weld them with the same angle it comes with. They were designed to be welded on without angling up or down.

A bit hard too see but here are the ones in my tractor. It comes factory with them.

 

[jyoutz]

I'm going to be making the switch to Euro hook ends on my 3ph lift arms. Question I have for those who currently use these, or do this conversion, is at what vertical angle should they be welded to the arm?

I'm removing my telescoping link ends and replacing them with a piece of 1" x 3" flat bar with a Euro hook welded on the end. I was just going to do a square connection from the end of the flat bar to the factory bevel on the Euro hook, but then I saw this guy's video and he cut the flat bar at an angle so the hook is more or less level at typical implement attaching height. Actually, I think he went too aggressive on the angle and the hook is pointed up slightly when the arms are lowered to that height.

I've never used these hooks before. Looking at other pics on the interwebs, it seems like the angle varies quite a lot with some arms looking like the hook is welded square to the arm like I originally intended. If I don't have to add another angle to the equation, I would really rather not.

Wow, are you sure that you want to remove the fantastic telescoping function? Can you install these and still retain the telescoping functions? I find that feature to be far more beneficial than the pin attachment mechanism.

 

[BCLoco]

I would weld them with the same angle it comes with. They were designed to be welded on without angling up or down.

A bit hard too see but here are the ones in my tractor. It comes factory with them.

View attachment 2166472

No, that is actually a great picture. Thanks for sharing that. I see that yours is one of the ones that the arm is cut square, and that angle looks fine to me. The implement with the lowest bottom pins is my old box blade, and they're probably at least 4 inches higher than the height of your arms in the picture.

After watching that video, I realized that I do need to make sure the load is going to be pulling into the hook and not against the retaining bar.

 

[ptsg]

Found some more pictures. Hopefully it helps or gives a couple more ideas.

 

[BCLoco]

Wow, are you sure that you want to remove the fantastic telescoping function? Can you install these and still retain the telescoping functions? I find that feature to be far more beneficial than the pin attachment mechanism.

The telescoping function isn't necessary with the hooks. From everything I've seen they're pretty self-aligning to start with, but if your alignment is off more than a bit you just use the hook to nudge the implement back or drag it ahead a little.

I don't think it's worth the expense of having the flat bar slotted, plus it will weaken it a little. I just plan on using mild steel, so it won't have quite the same strength as the forged piece it's replacing.

 

[BCLoco]

Found some more pictures. Hopefully it helps or gives a couple more ideas.

View attachment 2172559

View attachment 2172560

Those are great pics. And you don't use any bushing or spacer with the ball? This system is incredible.

The more I learn about it, the more I don't understand why pin-and-eye is still the dominant system in North America.

 

[jyoutz]

The telescoping function isn't necessary with the hooks. From everything I've seen they're pretty self-aligning to start with, but if your alignment is off more than a bit you just use the hook to nudge the implement back or drag it ahead a little.

I don't think it's worth the expense of having the flat bar slotted, plus it will weaken it a little. I just plan on using mild steel, so it won't have quite the same strength as the forged piece it's replacing.

After having Pat’s hitch for many years, I can say that I value the telescoping function more than the hooks. Having them both would be perfect.

 

[ptsg]

Those are great pics. And you don't use any bushing or spacer with the ball? This system is incredible.

The more I learn about it, the more I don't understand why pin-and-eye is still the dominant system in North America.

Nothing at all. Just the ball. Mine uses 45 mm balls, being Cat 1, the hole is 7/8" if I recall correctly. This is truly a great system. More and more tractor manufacturers have been offering these as standard here in Europe.

My tractor came with a set of balls. I've since machined 2 more sets so I wouldn't have to move the balls around. They can just stay in the implements. I'm still one set short though but that's for an implement I rarely use.

Using my homemade ball turning attachment here.

 

[BCLoco]

After having Pat’s hitch for many years, I can say that I value the telescoping function more than the hooks. Having them both would be perfect.

That's the benefit of connecting to balls rather than pins. This system can accommodate a wider range of angles. From everything I've seen, it renders the telescoping function moot.

 

[BCLoco]

Nothing at all. Just the ball. Mine uses 45 mm balls, being Cat 1, the hole is 7/8" if I recall correctly. This is truly a great system. More and more tractor manufacturers have been offering these as standard here in Europe.

My tractor came with a set of balls. I've since machined 2 more sets so I wouldn't have to move the balls around. They can just stay in the implements. I'm still one set short though but that's for an implement I rarely use.


View attachment 2172564

Using my homemade ball turning attachment here.


View attachment 2172565

You sir are an artist. That ball cutter is brilliant. Thankfully for me, the balls here are relatively inexpensive. Another plus for this system.

I hope it catches on here as well. Currently you generally only see these on larger tractors, or on some vintage tractors that used it for a time.

 

[ptsg]

You sir are an artist. That ball cutter is brilliant. Thankfully for me, the balls here are relatively inexpensive. Another plus for this system.

I hope it catches on here as well. Currently you generally only see these on larger tractors, or on some vintage tractors that used it for a time.

The balls are indeed very cheap. I could get them for $4 or $5 each but I've always wanted a ball turning attachment so this was a great excuse for that.

 

[jyoutz]

That's the benefit of connecting to balls rather than pins. This system can accommodate a wider range of angles. From everything I've seen, it renders the telescoping function moot.

It has little to do with the telescoping function. When you back up to an implement, if you aren’t 100% square, one arm will engage while the other is too far away to engage. This is where the telescoping arm allows you to pull the lift arm further back so it will engage the pins. Otherwise you have to keep jockeying the tractor to get perfect alignment or use a bar to move the implement into place. This is the same situation for both the standard and Eurohook system. There’s a photo that was posted that shows Eurohooks with a telescoping lift arm. You can have both.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

You can have both, I build them that way all the time. Having the hook ends, the extendable feature is not normally needed though.

Say you back up to the implement, you are 1-2 inches from being square. Simply back up the needed distance pushing the closest side back using the riser on the hook until the further side is back far enough to line up. Raise the 3pt and the draft arms are connected. This is very easy if you have a hydraulic side link, even on uneven ground. But even without there simply is good reason to have both the extendable ends with the hook ends IMO.

I suppose that if you were connecting on a cement floor and did not want to scratch the floor needlessly, then there would be a purpose for the extendable ends. But if that is-was the case, it would be best to set the implement down on some plywood.

Each to their own, it all works easier than the std draft arm pins-ball swivels.

 

[jyoutz]

You can have both, I build them that way all the time. Having the hook ends, the extendable feature is not normally needed though.

Say you back up to the implement, you are 1-2 inches from being square. Simply back up the needed distance pushing the closest side back using the riser on the hook until the further side is back far enough to line up. Raise the 3pt and the draft arms are connected. This is very easy if you have a hydraulic side link, even on uneven ground. But even without there simply is good reason to have both the extendable ends with the hook ends IMO.

I suppose that if you were connecting on a cement floor and did not want to scratch the floor needlessly, then there would be a purpose for the extendable ends. But if that is-was the case, it would be best to set the implement down on some plywood.

Each to their own, it all works easier than the std draft arm pins-ball swivels.

I guess it depends on the weight of the implement how much pushing you can do. I run cat 2 1000#+ implements.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

I guess it depends on the weight of the implement how much pushing you can do. I run cat 2 1000#+ implements.

So do I, I even have a couple of cat 2-3 implements up to 3500lbs. If your MX tractor can't push back 1000lbs, well good luck. I don't see an issue.
Just keep using your extendable ends as they are, easier than adding any hook-type connection at all and you're happy, so in your case, it doesn't really matter.

 

[jyoutz]

So do I, I even have a couple of cat 2-3 implements up to 3500lbs. If your MX tractor can't push back 1000lbs, well good luck. I don't see an issue.
Just keep using your extendable ends as they are, easier than adding any hook-type connection at all and you're happy, so in your case, it doesn't really matter.

I can always make it work without telescoping arms or claws. But when you could have both options, why not?

 

[BCLoco]

I can always make it work without telescoping arms or claws. But when you could have both options, why not?

I thought I answered that already, but I can put it in point form for clarity:

1. Telescoping arms are pointless on Euro hooks and using them would defeat the purpose of having a quick hitch system.

2. Expense. I'm keeping my existing ends, not modifying them. The flat bar I'm using instead would have to be milled or table cut to get the slot right, so that means paying a shop. I don't have the flame skills to pull that off in my own shop.

3. Strength. Cutting out the middle third of the flat bar for a feature I won't need or use is an unnecessary strength penalty. A mild steel profile is not going to be as strong as the equivalent forged steel piece. Leaving the flat bar a solid piece should negate the difference.

 

[jyoutz]

I thought I answered that already, but I can put it in point form for clarity:

1. Telescoping arms are pointless on Euro hooks and using them would defeat the purpose of having a quick hitch system.

2. Expense. I'm keeping my existing ends, not modifying them. The flat bar I'm using instead would have to be milled or table cut to get the slot right, so that means paying a shop. I don't have the flame skills to pull that off in my own shop.

3. Strength. Cutting out the middle third of the flat bar for a feature I won't need or use is an unnecessary strength penalty. A mild steel profile is not going to be as strong as the equivalent forged steel piece. Leaving the flat bar a solid piece should negate the difference.

Whatever floats your boat.

 

[D&D]

I thought I answered that already, but I can put it in point form for clarity:

1. Telescoping arms are pointless on Euro hooks and using them would defeat the purpose of having a quick hitch system.

2. Expense. I'm keeping my existing ends, not modifying them. The flat bar I'm using instead would have to be milled or table cut to get the slot right, so that means paying a shop. I don't have the flame skills to pull that off in my own shop.

3. Strength. Cutting out the middle third of the flat bar for a feature I won't need or use is an unnecessary strength penalty. A mild steel profile is not going to be as strong as the equivalent forged steel piece. Leaving the flat bar a solid piece should negate the difference.

I think he was suggesting to just cut off the ball end (in red) and keep both functions just in case