SSQA build using Bob Tach rebuild kit

[SPYDERLK]

Alright man I thought I knew what I was doing. Now I'm more confused then ever .


...when the loader arms are lowered to be level with the ground and the curl cylinders are retracted all the way what is the angle that the face of the latch boxes should be at?

I find the optimum will vary per attached implement. You will have to choose a number. 10 degrees past/behind vertical is about right. ... A tinybit more if you can afford the reduced dump angle. ... My Mahindra 7520 is about -5 and is ~ OK -- Id like more and will be increasing it. The Woods loader on the Kubot L3450 is 0/90 and its problematic on many implements. Harder to make a change there though.

 

[downsizingnow48]

I find the optimum will vary per attached implement. You will have to choose a number. 10 degrees past/behind vertical is about right. ... A tinybit more if you can afford the reduced dump angle. ... My Mahindra 7520 is about -5 and is ~ OK -- Id like more and will be increasing it. The Woods loader on the Kubot L3450 is 0/90 and its problematic on many implements. Harder to make a change there though.

Well said. It is a compromise depending on what you will be using.

 

[mikefromnh]

So if I make new ears for that put the latch boxes at -5 to -10 degrees when the loader is down and the curl is retracted I should be within 'spec' for most attachments?

Then I can Mount the attachment plate on the bucket at an angle that gives me the roll back I want. And it should all work with other SSQA tractors/attachments?

 

[SPYDERLK]

So if I make new ears for that put the latch boxes at -5 to -10 degrees when the loader is down and the curl is retracted I should be within 'spec' for most attachments?

Then I can Mount the attachment plate on the bucket at an angle that gives me the roll back I want. And it should all work with other SSQA tractors/attachments?

,,,,,,Yes, that is my experience. ... -5 works, but not quite enuf rollback on forks when working low or downhill. Other implements are better but still could benefit from more. Based on this I would stay on the high side of 5 and maybe close to 10. ... You could go "shopping" and check several different tractors at a dealership - or - PM some of the dealers on TBN.

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

There is always the option of building more roll back into the individual attachments as best suits them --- unless you are just buying off the shelf.

If you simply cut the blue line in your pic and welded the new plates on there for both sides, you would have exactly the same roll back as you have now, just an extra couple layers of plate in between. If you have oodles of dump angle to sacrifice to gain additional roll back, I'd consider following 1/2 the blue and 1/2 the red lines along the back of the bucket keeping the ears as big as you can. Fill in the triangle that is left between the 2 tips of the now removed ear to get back to a straight surface to weld onto your new QA plate.

I'd really think twice about making new ears. Why cut those perfectly good ones off, toss them in the scrap only to make them again???

 

[Xfaxman]

There is always the option of building more roll back into the individual attachments as best suits them --- unless you are just buying off the shelf.

If you simply cut the blue line in your pic and welded the new plates on there for both sides, you would have exactly the same roll back as you have now, just an extra couple layers of plate in between. If you have oodles of dump angle to sacrifice to gain additional roll back, I'd consider following 1/2 the blue and 1/2 the red lines along the back of the bucket keeping the ears as big as you can. Fill in the triangle that is left between the 2 tips of the now removed ear to get back to a straight surface to weld onto your new QA plate.

-----------------

That is true, but you might not have enough rollback. You could not use most standard SSQA attachments.

Most fork frames do not have any extra angle built in.

mikefromnh, could you post a side view picture of the bucket on the ground, fully curled back?

 

[mikefromnh]

The pic I posted already had the curl cylinders retracted all the way. It doesn't have much roll back as is.

Here are a couple more

The cylinder rods could be shortened 3-4" but that seems more trouble then it's worth.

If i cut on the blue to save the ears then I would have to add a wedge shape piece to them get the right angle on the latch boxes, I would then have to add an opposing piece to the bucket to get the angle right for the adapter plate.

It seems like less cutting and welding to just make new ears and cut the existing ears at the proper angle for the adapter plate.

 

[downsizingnow48]

Doesn't seem to have much roll back at all. Are those alternate pin holes for the curl cylinder, would it have more roll back using them? If so, would that be a better starting point for planning the ssqa modification?

 

[Xfaxman]

The pic I posted already had the curl cylinders retracted all the way. It doesn't have much roll back as is.

------------------------------.

OK, next raise the loader all the way, dump the bucket all the way and take a side view.

This is what the Toolcat looks like with a straight fork frame :

 

[CDN Farm Boy]

If i cut on the blue to save the ears then I would have to add a wedge shape piece to them get the right angle on the latch boxes, I would then have to add an opposing piece to the bucket to get the angle right for the adapter plate.

Yes, that's exactly what i was trying to describe.

It seems like less cutting and welding to just make new ears and cut the existing ears at the proper angle for the adapter plate.

I have to disagree with you on that one. Cutting 8 triangles and welding them in vs cutting 4 new plates for the ears, drilling 8 big holes in the perfect location and then adding the build-up for the pin bosses.