For Grapple, Diverter setup or Rear remote?

[andrewj]

Hi folks. I am planning to get a loader/grapple and cannot decide between a WR long diverter or just getting a cheaper grapple and running a hose to a rear remote. I won't morn the loss of the one handed button control on the joystick, and I don't mind having to remove my hand from the joy to reach back for a remote handle.

What do you guys think? the money is around 500 bucks for a diverter, around 900 for the remote.

 

[tjkadar]

I've thought about this a bit myself for when I purchase a grapple. Originally, I had thought about hooking it up to my rear remotes, but after reading a few things, I'll be going with the diverter valve. This way, I don't have to worry about tying up my remotes for the grapple if I'm running a implement that requires the use of the remotes. Seems to be a cleaner installation too.

 

[kennyd]

My vote is for the Electric Diverter.

 

[Highbeam]

Electric diverter. Heck, it's even cheaper. Who wants to deal with super long hoses zip tied along your tractor front to rear? Then if you ever remove the loader, you have to remove those hoses too. Moving your hand off the loader control every time might get to be a serious pain in the rear.

Too bad its 500$. The remote will also have some other uses that make the 900$ hit not so bad but I don't think I would want to use it for the grapple.

 

[1bush2hog]

I opted to try the longer lines off my rear remotes. It would be nice to have the button added to my remote, but so far I haven't minded moving my hand from remote to rear lever - then again I am not using the grapple 8 hours a day every day either. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I can always spend the extra money and add the diverter/button setup on at a later date if I want.

Guess it all depends on amount of usage and money you have available at the time. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

 

[jdgreg]

I vote for an electric diverter. I had plumbed in a manual diverter valve when I had the grapple on my old 1700. It was a real PITA to use. For occasional or infrequent use, it might be ok, but I was moving a lot of large brush piles, and the manual valve was just too cumbersome and awkard. When I got my 4210, one of the first things to go on was a Fasse valve kit I got at my dealer. Here's the thread with pics. With this setup, I can quickly change the valve direction and actually get both functions working together to curl up/clamp down, or reverse to dump. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Scozz]

My tractor had two sets of rear remotes. No way I could justify the money and work involved for a diverter valve. I simply disconnected one set of rear remotes and ran them forward. Used Quick connects at the loader frame so it can still be easily removed (not that it ever has). $100.00 and I have hydro for my plow and graple ... Scozz

 

[Highbeam]

500$ for the WRLong diverter, or Fasse, but then the grapple itself will add a hefty chunk to the cost.

If you were to use the rear remotes to power the grapple then you could mount a log splitter to the bucket.

 

[Highbeam]

Oooh, I am drooling over that ATI grapple. I would like the double jaw one though but at 250 lbs vs. 137 for the single I am not sure. Anyone willing to share cost on these grapples? Single or double jaw?

 

[texbaylea]

I elected to go with rear remotes. I have 3 with 2 sets of QDs to the rear and 2 sets going forward. One remote has teed lines for use either front or rear. I had QDs installed at the loader frame to enable loader removal which I rarely do. I usually just drop whatever attachment I have on the loader for mowing or whenever I am not using the loader.

Vernon

 

[jinman]

The diverter is by far the most elegant setup. Since you don't have rear remotes available, I think I'd do the diverter. I have three rear remotes and opted to run hoses forward, but if I ddn't have the remotes, I'd have gone with the diverter.

BTW: I recommend 1/4" hoses and a 0.030 orifice to the grapple. It really makes a big difference in control. I can run my grapple really slow or fast because I'm controlling the flow so closely. The 1/4" hoses will also balloon less and your grapple will hold it's grip much better if your diverter holds a good seal.

 

[LeRoi]

I have the WR Long diverter setup for grapple and 4n1 bucket and I can recommend it without reservations. You can open/close, raise/lower and curl/uncurl all at the same time without removing your hand from the loader control.
I have used my grapple almost exclusively since I purchased my tractor and I have no complaints about the solenoid valve to control the grapple.
HTH
Leroy

 

[Highbeam]

"You can open/close, raise/lower and curl/uncurl all at the same time"

Not if you have a diverter. You must divert a function so you lose one of those from the list at any one time. But I will agree that you get the pleasure of leaving your hand on the knob all the time.

 

[TechJ]

I went the route of longer lines as I had 3 valves with one of them already connected to an electric diverter in the rear.

Still not cheap as I used the nylon non-abrasive sleeving...total cost was about $200.

If I didn't have the diverter in the read I woudl have gone with one on the loader side so that I wouldn't lose the rear implement valve.

 

[PineRidge]

My vote is for the Electric Diverter also. It's a lot handier than taking your hand off the joy-stick.

 

[Gumby6]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Not if you have a diverter. You must divert a function so you lose one of those from the list at any one time. )</font>

I have an electric solenoid controlled 3rd function on my loader control. One handle controls all.

I have yet to use it on a grapple as it is new and I am waiting on the grapple implement. But, the way this was explained to me by the hydraulics mechanic at the dealer. He installed the hydraulic control after the primary loader functions, using power beyond secondary(?) to supply the valve. He indicated that I would not lose function of the lift and curl on the FEL, but the amount of power left for the 3rd function depended on the requirements of the first 2 functions. If the lift/curl functions aren't too demanding the grapple (3rd function) should have sufficient pressure to also operate.

It remains to be seen (in operation), but he seemed to know his business.

This may not be the same as a "diverter" although they function similarly by electric control. I would think it makes a big difference where the flow originates.

For reference I have the Woods 1009 loader on a NH TC30.

 

[CT_Tree_Guy]

Hoiya LeRoi -

Hey, maybe you don't have a diverter, but a dedicated hydraulic solenoid for powering your grapple cylinders. With all due deference to what some others have stated here, a diverter is not quite as convenient as a hydraulic solenoid controlled by an electric switch. There is one less step involved in controlling the grapple, and you don't lose any functions, at least not 100%. With a dedicated solenoid setup, you're obviously going to be taking some hydraulic power away from the rest of the system when you're operating your grapple cylinders, but no one function is going to be completely unavailable to you.

Cost? Still less than a remote.

Food for thought contained in:

Remotes and Top and Tilt?

To grapple or not to grapple?

5030 "skidder" pics - the "tree-bota" in action

 

[jpm]

another way is if you have a power beyond port you can get
a 1,2 or 3 spool valve to run the grapple for way less than
$500. and more ports for other things