Forks Comparison Test--Attachable Loader Forks

[jinman]

Sorry glenmac, I have been pretty preoccupied this week and failed to see your post until now. Here are the photos of my forks. I really don't have anything to add to your comments except to say that I wish my forks were 1' shorter or I could adjust the length. That would really be helpful.

Out of the box:

JimI

 

[jinman]

Mounted on tractor:

JimI

 

[glennmac]

Thanks, Jim. Mine work the same way except I have 24" load stops in front of the chains.

 

[jinman]

Now here is an interesting difference between my chain-on forks and your clamp-ons. The taper at the end of the forks is reversed. Yours is on the bottom and mine is on the top. I noticed Harv's is the same as yours. I wonder if glenmac's are like mine or if his taper is also on the bottom. Hmmm...wonder why?


JimI

 

[DFB]

Jinman,

Interesting point you got there./w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Just some early mornin' speculating here.

Maybe the thought behind it is that for outdoor work the tips won't dig in so easily or to follow along the contour of the ground better, or just so it won't catch on the lower board on a pallet, riding up and over as you push under instead.

Standard forklift forks are usually tapered along the bottom edge too.


Bird, your loader forks are different yet, what do the tips on yours look like?

DFB

 

[Bird]

<font color=blue>Bird, your loader forks are different yet, what do the tips on yours look like?</font color=blue>

DFB, mine are standard 4" wide 4' long fork lift forks on which I did some welding and modification to mount them on the front of the bucket. So they're tapered on bottom side, like you said.

Bird

 

[glennmac]

Just went out and measured mine.

Total length = 73"

Length protruding from bucket lip = 52"

Width of fork (and loadstops) = 6" (uniformly)

Height of load stops = 25 1/2"

Thickness of fork = tapers uniformly from 5" at rear to 1" at end. The bottom of the forks are completely flat, so all the taper is on the top surface.

Final taper at end = like Jim's, from top to bottom but slightly shorter, about 1 1/2", like a one-surface chisel

The forks are hollow. They are not painted. All surfaces covered by the baked on polyester urethane powder, which is a light grey in color and seems quite chip resistant.

 

[jinman]

Just so we know that not all forks are created equal, I went out and measured my forks.

Total length = 81"

Length from mounting bracket
(where binder attaches)
to the tip = 52"
Taper length = 4"
Flat portion (top) = 48"

Width of hollow fork = 4"
Thickness of fork = 2"

Those are the major dimensions and quite different from yours, glennmac (and everyone else's for that matter).
One thing I noticed while measuring mine. The attached chain is very rusty. I think they could have used nickel plated chain for the price I paid. It doesn't effect functionality, but it sure makes it nicer to handle if you don't get rust all over you./w3tcompact/icons/frown.gif

JimI

 

[jinman]

Good points, DFB. The engineer (or wannabee engineer) who designed my forks probably thought about sliding under something and lifting it. He was also avoiding the top boards on the pallet rather than the bottom. Oh well, some folks see a glass half empty, and..../w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif Do you think we will find someone with arrow shape like ===> before it's over?/w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif

JimI

 

[cowboydoc]

Interesting that so many of these are hollow steel. That may be why JD is more expensive. They are solid steel and heavy as heck.

 

[jinman]

Yeah, funny isn't it? I'm no mechanical or materials engineer, but I'm sure tubular steel is stronger pound-for-pound than solid steel. Also, I believe many forklifts have gone to tubular steel, although many are also solid. Do you suppose it's spring steel? Maybe some materials types can jump in here with some facts. My guess is that both our forks can lift more than the capacity of our loaders, so this discussion is probably purely academic. It surely is interesting though.

JimI

 

[Bird]

Yeah, mine are solid, too, and each one weighs 90 lbs. so on a small tractor that does lower the payload you can handle.

Bird

 

[tpaulson]

jinman
I noticed on your picture of attachable forks that the bucket on your TC has a thick and wide cutting edge.

Did that cutting edge come on your TC or did you put it on?

I got my TC45D in August and bent the bottom of the bucket within the first 2 hours of light loader work. My bucket has a 3/8" x 3.5" cutting edge. My bucket is a standard weight bucket. I ordered a heavy duty bucket, but NH screwed up and shipped the wrong one. It turns out the only difference between a standard bucket and heavy duty are vertical cutting edges and pre-drilled holes for a tooth bar(about 30lbs difference in shipping weight). NH buckets seem pretty weak if you ask me. I think they should have at least a 1/2" cutting edge to make the bottom of the bucket stronger.

I will be making attachable forks and putting on a thicker cutting edge soon. I think the forks would bend the bucket more with the current cutting edge.

Tim

 

[MarkV]

Tim,

Your grapple set up looks pretty interesting. Any chance of getting some information and photos?

MarkV

 

[Egon]

Fellows:
With those forks on the bucket I would assume you would be able to pick up an object like a log. If you raise the bucket high enough and maybe tilt back what keeps the log from rolling back and sitting in your lap?
Egon

 

[cowboydoc]

Egon,
There isn't anything to prevent that! Ask Harv about that /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif. He had a scare with a log that rolled back on him. I spent the extra cash and got the regular fork attachment for my jd 4600. It has it's own framework and has the forks come up in the back with a brace so whatever you have on the forks can never come back on top of you. I lift 1500 lb. round bales with them and never a problem at all. My friend has a jd 4020 with bucket forks and he lifts the same bales and his bucket in bent in a half moon from them. Definitely limited with the clamp ons. For an extra $300 for me I can use mine just like a forkloader.

 

[Harv]

<font color=blue>Ask Harv about that</font color=blue>

No, don't ask!!! /w3tcompact/icons/blush.gif Too painful and embarrassing!

Fact is, it was a simple case of stupid that I almost paid dearly for. As it was, I had merely to hose off my tractor seat after re-starting my heart.

Just keep in mind that as you raise your bucket higher and higher, you need to compensate the angle to keep it and your forks from tipping back on you. Intellectually, I knew that, of course, but being a newborn tractor owner at the time, I lost track of that little detail as I was steering and lifting to avoid obstacles -- watching the obstacles instead of my payload.

Although I have never repeated that particular mistake, I am entertaining notions of attaching some vertical members to the back of the forks. Best way to do that involves welding, which is still beyond my abilities at this point.

I have overloaded the forks to where the rear wheels came off the ground, but the bucket shows no sign of damage so far. In fact, I've been very impressed with the durability of that bucket on my little L2500.

 

[Egon]

Fellows:
I asked that question as I have a bolt on set of forks for my 7100 [two pieces of steel signpost] and then added to pieces of flat iron on the top of the bucket to catch anything rolling back. By the way this was done as one of the fork attachment procedures before I had any surprise.
Egon

 

[jinman]

Tim, the cutting edge is a NH option for the heavy duty bucket. I paid $175 for it. It really helps and adds strength to the front edge. It's also reversible (has two finished cutting edges). I've also been shown a supplier who makes a tooth bar which can be bolted on with the cutting edge in place. That's probably my next purchase.

JimI

 

[jinman]

Tim,
Here is a link to the photo of my cutting edge.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forumfiles/13-38821-CutterBar1.JPG

JimI