Quick-release loader buckets

[hayden]

Is anyone using a skid-steer style quick-release loader bucket? My local dealer sells ATI brand loader buckets and quick-release frames so you can easily switch to any skid-steer attachment. Anyone have experience with these? Any drawback compared to a pin mount loader bucket?

 

[MChalkley]

It's not a Kubota, by my EarthForce has a skid-steer style loader quick-attach. They're pretty bullet-proof. No real disadvantages, other than the fact that any mechanical device needs lubrication and periodic maintenance. In my opinion, the advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.

ATI makes good quality stuff, too.

 

[HalseyGreen]

I have a little JD 790 and was looking at the same concept, a way to making changing from bucket to pallet forks, etc. eaiser and faster. Checked with one of the local dealers and he asked about the lifting capacity of the loader, and was I willing to give up a couple hundred pounds, being the weight of the tractor and additional metal for the bucket. Since my full height capacity is only around 800 pounds now, I didn't think it was a good idea and I am now looking at the 4000 series design.

 

[MChalkley]

HalseyGreen - That's a disadvantage I didn't think of. Based on the extra backing plates I bought to adapt some 3-point implements I have, I'd estimate that they weigh about 75 pounds. But you probably save 25 pounds or so of steel in the pin brackets, etc. Net 50, there. The weight of the additional stuff on the loader itself is probably another 75 pounds. So, I'd say the weight penalty for the whole deal is closer to 125 pounds than 200. Either way, though, if you're looking at 800 total capacity, it's most likely not an acceptable trade-off.

 

[BBearden]

Hayden,

I wanted a grapple, so I have the quick attachment. I love it. I can change buckets in less than a few minutes. The bucket and grapple have the necessary features to attach directly to the loader. This is my first tractor, so I can't compare to the other types.

 

[Westbilly]

I want a grapple on my 2410, can you post a pic so I can tell what it looks like.

 

[hayden]

I recall someone saying that the quick-attach buckets wiggled around a bit under some conditions where a pinned bucket has zero wiggle room.

Have you found this so?

 

[MChalkley]

Hayden - I'm sure there's more play in a quick-attach loader implement than a standard one, but there's sure not enough there to make any difference. At least not with new stuff. I can't say for sure what will happen when it gets a lot of wear on it, but the way the design works, I can't see it getting sloppy. I don't know how much weight the quick-attach plates are designed to take, but today I put the 1.5 cu. yd. (struck) bucket on, and scooped up a full heaped bucket of crusher run, which should've been 1 3/4 cu. yds. according to the figures D&E gave me, and it didn't even whimper. The quick attach didn't have any play in it and the EF-5 snatched it up easily. (I could see the weight in the bulge of the front tires, though.) As a practical matter, I don't think play in the quick-attach is anything to worry about.

 

[Kent]

Check this thread

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.tractorbynet.com/cgi-bin/compact/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=implement&Number=90313&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1#Post90313>http://www.tractorbynet.com/cgi-bin/compact/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=implement&Number=90313&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1#Post90313</A>

 

[AndyR]

Pete,
I keep running into the load limit on the L3710 as it is. Why cut capacity? It just soo much fun /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif to change buckets. I guess if you are doing light work it would be OK but I hate to give up the power.

 

[radman]

I have a quick attach Kasco adapter for my L3710 and it fits tight. Some mounts are actually very tight when mouted. I have little to no wiggle room on my bucket and other attachments.

 

[Anonymous Poster]

I purchased a new B21 in October with the ATI quick attach and ATI bucket with bolt-on cutting edge. After a year of research, this configuration seems to be the wave of the future. This is especially true with a larger tractor -- like the L48. The universal attachment gives you a world of options. I've seen skid-loader operators use 3-4 implements and make 20-30 changes in a day. Down the road I imagine that there will be a convergence of skid-loader and tractor implements. More importantly for tractor owners, the technological dynamism seems to be coming from the skid-loader segment.

Regarding ATI - they're very innovative. The weight of the ATI quick-attach and bucket was only slightly more than the Kubota bucket alone. I have the exact numbers somewhere if you're interested. The cost of the new B21 was only $300 more with the ATI configuration. Now that was a no-brainer. With respect to their other implements, they've made 32"and 42" forks for the B21 and have been able to reduce the weight to 200 lbs. for the 2,000 lb. rated forks. That's a major technological achievement from the perspective of this small tractor owner because you can move them by hand, if necessary. The only comparable forks come from Northern - about 275 lbs for 2,000 lb. rated forks. However, ATI charges $680 for the forks while Northern's generic forks cost about $500-600.

I'm surprised that this forum has not had more discussion about the universal attachment technology. It has parallels with the PC industry because it fosters innovation on an open platform. I looked at postings from the past 18 months and found very little comment on this area. In the mid-1980s, IBM wanted you to purchase its $5,000 PC that was 1/2 design cycle behind the $2,000 generic PC that had better components. Everybody makes "generic" PCs there days. Today the major tractor makers want you to purchase their buckets and lock you into their implements. Is the quick-attachment system, a.k.a. "Bob-tach", the wave of the future?
According to my dealer, if you purchase a new L48 with a universal attachment system carrying the Kubota name, the system is made by ATI. I think that the convergence has begun.

 

[MChalkley]

DoctorK - Quick-attach systems are definitely getting more and more popular. I'm certainly enjoying mine. One of the reasons you don't see more discussion of them here is that the vast majority of tractor owners here own tractors with FELs that have less than 1,000 lbs of total capacity (that's a supposition, not necessarily a fact), and most folks with that size tractor aren't willing to give up 10-25% of their FEL's capacity for the ability to switch implements, especially since they already have the ability to switch implements on the rear via the 3-point hitch.

Still, as the QA plates become more and more standardized and the weight penalty becomes less and less, as with ATI's new ones, as you mentioned, you'll see more and more smaller tractors going with them. They're a big advantage if you need more versatility in the capabilities of your FEL, that's for sure.

 

[radman]

DoctorK
I agree with you. Universal quick-attach is the way to go. I have been saying this in posts for the past 2 years. I have Kasco Uni-hitch and it is great. Probably very similar to ATI. I now use a bobcat hydraulic post-hole digger and forks for mine. I also made a work platform and boom for my loader. With a $75 mounting plate from bobcat, the plates can easily be welded to numerous different devices and mounted on the FEL. After hooked on, flip to levers and ready to go. Takes less than a minute to unhook and hook on. Proprietary quick-attaches like JD, almost demand you buy their stuff which again is higher in $.
The current limitation for a bob-tach type hook up is the maximum lift of about 2500 lbs which is why they don't use them on larger FEL's

 

[MChalkley]

radman - There's now a heavy-duty version of the "Bobcat" style of QA that is rated for 6,000 pounds and is backward-compatible with the lighter duty ones, too. That's what's on my EF-5, which as a rated lift capacity of 4,850 pounds and a breakout force of 9,370 pounds.

In fact, I just got the parts for the hydraulic locking system from EarthForce, who got them from their sister company Bobcat, a few days ago. They were supposed to be installed when I got it, but they weren't ready, so I'm doing the installation myself.

 

[radman]

Come to think of it your right. Bobcat does make a small 4 wheel loader that probably uses a heavy duty QA. However, on most smaller bobcat attachments like pallet forks, hydrailic auger etc, the standard mounting plate is not heavy enough for the lifting force of your EF-5 and bigger equipment. Is the mounting plate on your bucket heavier than the standard bobcat type plate?

 

[MChalkley]

radman - <font color=blue>Is the mounting plate on your bucket heavier than the standard bobcat type plate?</font color=blue>

I'm not sure how much difference there is, because I don't have any mounting plates that I know are "standard" duty. It's 3/8" steel, I'm pretty sure, and has a number of braces and extra pieces welded on. I'll have to look at a "standard" one next time I go past a skid steer dealer. I had several extra mounting plates ordered by my dealer to use for the Brush Brute, tiller, and soil pulverizer, and was assured they were rated for more than 5,000 pounds.