Backhoe Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230

   / Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230 #31  
This is interesting discussion of the reliefs, but the important points are these (I think, correct me if I'm wrong):

1. Either of the rear A-B connectors can provide around 7-8 gpm at full flow, with maximum pressure of about 2500 PSI (not that you would get that pressure at full flow).
2. Either connector will provide "unrestricted flow" when used as the return.
3. If a check valve is used to protect backhoe hydraulics, reverse flow will bring the line to system pressure, but there is a relief valve to protect the deadheaded pump and other upstream hydraulics in that case.

Have I missed anything?

You have not. the rest is just static.
 
   / Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230
  • Thread Starter
#32  
Thanks for helping me understand what's going on with the tractor hydraulics. I'm feeling a lot better about my choice to use the rear hydraulics instead of plumbing a new power-beyond tap and fluid return line.

Still, the discussion about which relief valves protect what parts of the hydraulic system was enlightening.
 
   / Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230
  • Thread Starter
#33  
Well, it turns out that Woods managed to forget the hydraulic kit order somehow. Sheesh!

I've cancelled that part of the order and will be having the hoses made up for me. Considerable savings over what I was being charged, and better suited for using the rear hydraulics, anyway.

There are a couple of ways I could set the hydraulic lines up, and I think the following configuration will do the job. Could somebody look at this and verify that I'm not screwing anything up?

Supply-side:
1/2" ISO 7241-1 Series A Quick Connect Coupling (Male) with 1/2" NPTF (Female) threaded connection; connects to
1/2" NPTF Hose Fitting (90 Degree); connects to
3/8" Heavy Duty Hydraulic Hose, 5000 psi working pressure, 2.8" bend radius, assembly length 50"; connects to
1/2" JIC Female Hose Fitting (straight); connects to
1/2" JIC Male fitting provided on backhoe control bloc inlet. (Note: Woods parts diagram identifies this as 3/4" JIC)​

On the return-side:
1/2" ISO 7241-1 Series A Quick Connect Coupling (Male) with 1/2" NPTF (Female) threaded connection; connects to
1/2" NPTF Male x 1/2" NPTF Male 90 Degree Elbow; connects to
1/2" NPTF Female x 1/2" NPTF Female Check Valve; connects to
1/2" NPTF Male Hose Fitting (straight); connects to
3/8" Heavy Duty Hydraulic Hose, 5000 psi working pressure, 2.8" bend radius, assembly length 48"; connects to
1/2" JIC Female Hose Fitting (straight); connects to
1/2" JIC Male fitting provided on backhoe control bloc return. (Note: Woods parts diagram identifies this as 3/4" JIC)​

I estimated the length required for the hoses during backhoe operation, then added 12" to allow slack for connection while mounting the backhoe onto the tractor. I subtracted 2" for the extra length from the inline check-valve. The check valve is installed right at the quick-connect to make sure it's obvious which is the return and which is the supply hydraulic line.

Have I done anything obviously wrong with this, and are there any suggestions for ways to do it better?

Thanks!

Note: This has been edited to show the correct fittings at the backhoe as 1/2" JIC (JIC-8), NOT the 3/4" JIC indicated in the Woods parts diagram.
 
Last edited:
   / Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230
  • Thread Starter
#35  
I would consider 1/2" hose for the return.

Woods recommends the 3/8" hose, but I realize the 1/2" would provide better flow. I was considering the 1/2" hose, but the 3/8" is just a little more flexible. Any reason other than the flexibility issue to NOT use the 1/2" hose for both supply and return? Tractor pressures are well within the ratings of either the 1/2" or 3/8" hoses, and I think the cost is just a few $ more.

Update: I think I'll go with the 1/2" hose. The price is actually cheaper to go with that, even though the hose itself costs more. The 1/2" hose fittings turn out to be less expensive than the smaller 3/8" fittings.

And another update...:banghead: It seems that the Woods parts diagram and description is, shall we say, misleading. The connection at the backhoe is a JIC-8 male fitting. It measures 3/4 inch on the threads, but is considered to be a 1/2" fitting, even though the Woods parts diagram shows it to be 3/4" JIC. Grrrrr!
 
Last edited:
   / Rear Hydraulics or Power Beyond Tap for Woods Backhoe on CT230
  • Thread Starter
#36  
A final (I guess) update here. I went with the 1/2" hose, and it's definitely a bit stiffer than the 3/8". The setup with the check-valve in the return works quite well.
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

2015 Volkswagen Jetta TDI Sedan (A50324)
2015 Volkswagen...
2019 JOHN DEERE 317G SKID STEER (A51242)
2019 JOHN DEERE...
RoGator RG1100C (A51039)
RoGator RG1100C...
2016 John Deere 6110M Utility Tractor (A50657)
2016 John Deere...
Lincoln Electric Vantage 300 Welder/Generator (A49461)
Lincoln Electric...
2021 Kubota SVL97-2HFC Compact Track Loader (A50657)
2021 Kubota...
 
Top