That's what my wife keeps telling me.......
I just bite the dollar problem and buy the Land Pride bushings. Have them on all implements (10). If you buy the LP QH it comes with the first set. I buy the longest ones and trimm off to fit the pin length. I found the Cat1/Cat2 bushing to be a sloppy fit in the hooks.
Ron
Actually it's just the opposite. If you try to put a CAT I implement on a CAT II hitch you will need a bushing for the implement. If the width would work, you could hitch a CAT II implement to a CAT I QH without a bushing. But I've never saw the width work out.
And as discussed above, CAT I QH's are built with the lower hooks at CAT II size. So, again, if you want a tight fit, you will always need a bushing.
My CAT II QH has CAT III sized lower hooks.
I used a Pat's on a CAT I tractor. It's a great product for a tractor without extendable lower links. But it's not even close to a QH. Shouldn't even be considered as the same type of tool. There is not physical way possible to pick up a 3pt attachment with a Pat's without leaving the tractor seat. In my experiences, extendable lowers are just as easy to use as Pat's. But to each their own.![]()
I should of said in the begining that I have rulled out the Pat's hitch and would rather this not become a debate about QH vs Pat's. There are many, many threads on that.
I will definitely stay with a cat1 QH.
The LP/Speedco/HF are not the same exact thing but the same pin diameters etc.
So I need a bushing for the top link? I want a tight fit and do not want to use one size too small pins.
Actually it's just the opposite. If you try to put a CAT I implement on a CAT II hitch you will need a bushing for the implement. If the width would work, you could hitch a CAT II implement to a CAT I QH without a bushing. But I've never saw the width work out.