FEL Road Maintenance Cutter

[Complete Turf Care]

12.1 GPM, uses one rear remote supplied with the lever in the Forward position and the return is “T” back in to the return coming from the loader functions just below the floorboard.

Could you post pics of how you added the 'T'? I had a similar issue with my laser leveling blade on my Kubota L5740. I had a welder build the fitting shown in the pics below. I could not find a place on the Kubota to put a 'T'. And several Kubota mechanics could not help me.

 

[Duerwood Willis]

We have had many customers to exactly what you have done and works well. On the New Holland there was a return hose from the loader functions, we cut the hose, added compression fittings and installed the “T”. I will try to get some pictures today.

 

[yanmars]

I have a Mahindra 4510 (45 HP) MFWD tractor with a Mahindra quick attach on my front end loader. Also two rear factory hydraulic remotes (never used). Would this be a relatively simple attachment as described and the cost? Any dealers in the Ohio area? Thanks

 

[Todd727]

For the guys asking for skid steer models, I just found this the other day:

Piston Motor Swing Boom Cutter – By CID Attachments

NEW CID Xtreme Swing Boom Cutter Brush Hog Cutter For Skid Steer For Sale - YouTube

CID Swing Boom Cutter PriceBrosEqAG - YouTube

 

[JWR]

A pair of rear remotes is nothing more than two directional valves that operate opposite from one another. Only one is open at a time therefore the other is closed. This prevents proper rerun of the fluid, returning to the sump can be done so many ways to include to the many plugs, hydraulic fill point, drain, dip stick tube, etc. we have seen many different paths.

Thanks for the bump!

I ran a (too large, requiring too much flow) cutter on my 81 horse MF 2660 a few years back. It ran from one of the rear remotes using the same connectors and lines that I normally use to operate my 4-in-1 pinch bucket. 1) I don't see the problem -- why are you saying NOT to run an LS2 off lines from a remote? The return certainly is there via the remote back into the sump. What's so good about bypassing the RCV for return? 2) I see where another vendor provides an "H" connector between the two lines feeding his hyd motor driven front cutter. That provides a return path to the motor avoiding the "jerk and squeal" when one shuts down the flow. Isn't that universal enough it could be used with your Lane Shark?

 

[lpigott]

The method they recommend is simple and works great with less moving parts (valves) and restrictions. My return line is plumbed in neatly to where my FEL lines return to the sump. Supply comes from a rear SCV and I added another set of QDs separate from my 3rd function ones on the front of the FEL.

 

[JWR]

Hey lipigott, I am impressed. Nice. I still do not understand the need to bypass the "normal" return flow line back via the remote. I'm sure at some point the company will reply to me and explain things.

 

[Duerwood Willis]

Hey lipigott, I am impressed. Nice. I still do not understand the need to bypass the "normal" return flow line back via the remote. I'm sure at some point the company will reply to me and explain things.

The difference between what you had previously ran on your tractor and our product is your attachment didn’t require a continuous flow. Rear remotes are simple directional valves, I’ll do my best to explain this. To simplify this let’s stick to one set of remotes and will reference one as P1 (port 1) and P2 (port 2). The only time p1 & p2 are in the same position is when not in use. So let’s say p1 is open and is used to supply a constant hydraulic flow to our hydraulic motor, p2 would be considered closed. Even when in the closed position fluid can be forced through the closed valve allowing your previously used attachment, when trying to do this with our product it is a huge restriction that will generate heat that could potentially damage all hydraulic components. The biggest difference is continuous vs intermediate use.

 

[DocDryden]

I still do not understand the need to bypass the "normal" return flow line back via the remote. I'm sure at some point the company will reply to me and explain things.

I was wondering the same thing.

 

[JWR]

The difference between what you had previously ran on your tractor and our product is your attachment did not require a continuous flow. Rear remotes are simple directional valves, Ill do my best to explain this. To simplify this lets stick to one set of remotes and will reference one as P1 (port 1) and P2 (port 2). The only time p1 & p2 are in the same position is when not in use. So lets say p1 is open and is used to supply a constant hydraulic flow to our hydraulic motor, p2 would be considered closed. Even when in the closed position fluid can be forced through the closed valve allowing your previously used attachment, when trying to do this with our product it is a huge restriction that will generate heat that could potentially damage all hydraulic components. The biggest difference is continuous vs intermediate use.

I hear you but have a little different spin on it. The company did reply today and I have gotten a better explanation of why Lane Shark advocates the low resistance dump of fluid back to the sump. My MF2660 (and darn near all tractors) are using open center hydraulics. I like to call them "one track mind" hydraulics because that is exactly what they are. Any device being activated/driven by one of the remotes or devices in the chain shuts down all the others. [Forget technical exceptions like partial flow diverters for the moment.] What this means is that when one raises the loader frame your cutter is going to shut off. But hold on, that varies in several ways. Spartan for example uses what they call an "H connector" (apparently with a check valve in the cross member of the H) that allows momentum driven motor fluid to recirculate without the motor slamming to a screeching stop when something else (like raising the loader frame or curling/tilting the cutter) is done. That creates an adequate illusion of 2 things being driven at the same time, which they are really not. Operationally that is fairly smooth. What Lane Shark advocates is a T into the return path of the loader control valve or anywhere that effectively provides a zero (small) restriction return path to the sump rather than via the RCV. That method of plumbing has the same effect as the "H connector" in that it provides a low resistance path for the momentum driven flow from the motor AND avoids concerns with heat generation, damage to the RCV, seals and other hydraulic components during continuous use.

I disagree with your comments somewhat, in that the RCV's (at least on my tractor) do not mind continuous flow at all. Using an RCV that way with too much flow might well be risky behavior as described above for seals, heating, etc. Contrary to what you said, my previous much larger cutter (5' diam., 3-bladed, 1300lbs, wanting 14 to 20 gpm flow...) DID REQUIRE continuous flow while running the cutter and worked fine in that regard. The problem was my tractor did not produce enough flow-at-pressure and there were too many restrictors including long small inside diameter lines and probably the restriction imposed by going back thru the return path of the RCV.