why shouldn't I do this to the 3PTH? geometry?

[oldboyscout]

I just added carter&sons quick attach brackets to my lift arms. They are mounted on top, not out behind. I realized however that effectively makes the pins close enough to the top link that it's like using the lower mount point for the top link -- and my manual says to avoid that.
Any ideas why?

 

[RPW]

A picture would help but by your description I'd hazard that it would make the attachments place their weight at an unacceptable angle that your tractor wasn't designed for.

 

[Baby Grand]

I just added carter&sons quick attach brackets to my lift arms. They are mounted on top, not out behind. I realized however that effectively makes the pins close enough to the top link that it's like using the lower mount point for the top link -- and my manual says to avoid that.
Any ideas why?

Huh?
If I understand you:
1) You didn't change the mounting point geometry of the attachment(s), so the height between the aft ends pivots of the drag links and the top link when it's hitched will be the same.
2) You didn't change the forward position of the drag links and the top link attachment points to the tractor.

So ... I think your implement may raise a few inches higher, and will not drop as far by the same amount. But the 4 bar linkage formed by the pivot points is about the same as before. If your range of motion is acceptable, I wouldn't sweat it. If not, then you may be able to shorten the length of the lifting links by repinning in different holes or turning the turnbuckles to get a more favorable range of motion.

A picture of your 3pt with QA brackets installed would really help.

 

[oldboyscout]

yes it does lift higher, and I think a steeper angle , but I'm not sure. I think the arms go plenty low for everything I deal with (for now?)

 

[SPYDERLK]

What B/G said ... :thumbsup:
larry

 

[oldboyscout]

no I didn't move the top link to the lower mounting point, but moving the eyes of the lift arms up looks like I essentially did the same thing. i.e. the distance between the top link and lift arms is shorter now.
I don't understand why using the lower top link mount is discouraged.

 

[Andrewnewy]

Moving from top to bottom of the top link is for the Draft control, This changes from tractor to tractor, if you tractor doesn't have Draft then it doesn't matter. use what ever works.
If it does have Draft, the hole closest to the Draft sensor will need more pressure on it to react, compared to the one furthest away. However this does change with different tractors, Don't think I've seen to many that are the same.

 

[North Country]

Huh?
If I understand you:
1) You didn't change the mounting point geometry of the attachment(s), so the height between the aft ends pivots of the drag links and the top link when it's hitched will be the same.

The height's the same on the implement, but the geometry *on the tractor* is different. The top link will be at a steeper angle when the drafts arms are in the same height, or the draft arms will be lower when the top link is at the same angle.

Be careful with PTO shaft lengths. The same draft arm height will now make a sharper PTO angle and your max PTO angle has increased. Don't poke a hole in the tranny...

Your 2nd biggest change is that you may not be able to get implements as far into the ground when you drop them completely.

 

[kthompson]

agree with Andrew it has to do with the third arm either with draft or the strength of the hitch point. It looks to be on a Kubota and mine that has draft reads about like you are talking as yours does.

You may have looked at and done this but you probably have two holes in the arms for the lift linkage and is you use the holes nearest the top of the arms get the lift point where it was.

BTW, interesting set up you added there.

 

[90cummins]

Only problem I see is the possibility of the driveshaft hitting the front edge of the mower when fully raised. That could do serious damage to the tractor pto internals.

tim