pharmvet
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 535
- Location
- North East TX
- Tractor
- Ford 7710 II FWA, NH TB110 FWA w/ NH 46LB loader, JD 5303 2wd w/ loader
Im in the process of restoring a heavy duty 10' 3pt. disk. Im replacing the old ear/post attachment system with a clevis attachment system. Both of the ears are bent and one has a crack in it. I suspect that it is from repeatedly turning while the disk was in the ground. It just seems to me that the clevis method of attachment is stronger. This disk is very heavy and I really cant imagine it being used by a tractor with Cat I attachment system, however, the spacing and hole for top link attachment is definately CAT I. The posts (attachment for lift arms) are CAT II but I suspect they were retro-fitted. This brings me to my question:
Since Im cutting off the old ear and post system to replace it with a new clevis system, should I spread out the attachment points to 32" rather than the CAT I spacing of 26"? Would there be any advantage to this? I was thinking it would be more stable. What about while its being pulled? Any anvantage or dis-advantage to leaving it like it is, or spreading out the attachment points?
Since Im cutting off the old ear and post system to replace it with a new clevis system, should I spread out the attachment points to 32" rather than the CAT I spacing of 26"? Would there be any advantage to this? I was thinking it would be more stable. What about while its being pulled? Any anvantage or dis-advantage to leaving it like it is, or spreading out the attachment points?