Torque forces from Top N Tilt with Pat's Easy Change

[Piston]

Quick question for Pat's easy change system. Well, maybe a couple :laughing:

I did a quick search but didn't see it specified, and it's probably in the 11 pages of the Pat's sticky thread, but....I haven't found it.

Can Pat's system be used with a hydraulic side link? I know it sort of sounds like a stupid question but it looks like if I was using it for say my box blade, and I tilted my box blade as much as I can, so one side is way up and the other way down, does the 'hook' arrangement of Pat's system apply a large torque force to the immovable 3pt hitch pin on my box blade?

Also, what about the stabilizer bar, is it rigid? If so, then when I tilt my side link up/down and the distance between my link arms actually gets larger, I'd be putting a pulling force on the stablizer bar?

So I guess my main question is, are there any problems using Pat's easy change system when using a side link to it's full extent?

 

[jenkinsph]

Good question, I have wondered the same thing about the Pat's EC. I do know with the IMatch the swivel balls are still utilized. I allow for a small amount of play on my tractors stabilizers for the tilt function. Hasn't been an issue so far.

 

[gwdixon]

I have the Pat's and a T&T. No problem whatsoever.

The spreader bar should probably be taken out after you hook up the implement. It is not strong enough to take tractor forces. It is adjustable so maybe loosening the adjustment screw would allow it to slide back and forth. The only sliding back and forth would be the movement of the Pat's on the implement's lift pins - which is very restricted by the lynch pins.

Also, the forward ball on the 3PH lift arms still functions as normal so the stabilizer arms will turn when a box blade is angled (high/low). The geometry of the box blade or other implement doesn't change when using the T&T with Pat's - it is set. The distance between your link arms at the implement's attachment points will remain the same. The tractor's 3PH arms make the adjustment at the ball (tractor end).

 

[Code54]

That is a good question - I had a Pats QH on my last machine and found I had two implements that the pins were slightly bent??? I think it was due to the angles that I often do my dirt work on. Did the PATS cause it, I really don't know but it is possible. The flip side is the PATS made it so much easier on that tractor to hook stuff up I would use them again and if I had to replace a pin here and there I wouldn't personally care.

 

[Piston]

I'm thinking about getting the Pats system but I'm a little worried about the pins being torqued bad on the box blade. It is a heavy duty box blade where the pin is secured on both sides, not like my landscape rake or something where the pin is just secured on one side and you slide the 3pt arm onto it, so I don't think the pin would give, i think something else would give first.

I usually have the box blade on but will be switching back and forth a lot to the rake for a while when I'm clearing my land, and if the Pats system works well with the side link fully extended/retracted then I'll get it. I'd like to hear more from the Pats users that use the angles to the max....

 

[joe48]

Just a thought; it's always good to ask questions on TBN, someone always has a good answer or idea or another resource.
But did you consider asking the Pat's EC people directly about the maximum tilt angles that they would recommend for their units?

I have a set of PEC units on my tractor and love them, makes life so much easier, worth every penny. I have bent pins on my box blade and on my KK tiller, I rarely use the manual tilt only to level an attachemnt. I have to say the bent pins have to be from my hard use, and I see no ill effects on the PEC's.

 

[Piston]

......But did you consider asking the Pat's EC people directly about the maximum tilt angles that they would recommend for their units?

Nope :laughing:

TBN is my life line for these types of things, I've yet to find a more reliable source. :thumbsup:

 

[gwdixon]

I'm thinking about getting the Pats system but I'm a little worried about the pins being torqued bad on the box blade. It is a heavy duty box blade where the pin is secured on both sides, not like my landscape rake or something where the pin is just secured on one side and you slide the 3pt arm onto it, so I don't think the pin would give, i think something else would give first.

I usually have the box blade on but will be switching back and forth a lot to the rake for a while when I'm clearing my land, and if the Pats system works well with the side link fully extended/retracted then I'll get it. I'd like to hear more from the Pats users that use the angles to the max....

The clevis type lift pins usually have a lot more side-to-side motion than the unsupported lift pins. Definitely take out the spacer bar in that circumstance.

As stated in post #3 - the tractor's lower lift arms will rotate to rotate with the implement.

Most T&Ts don't have as much linear movement as the screw type adjustment so binding would be extremely difficult to obtain. The Pat's will be just fine.

And, yes, I have used the CAT 2 Pat's tilted to the max with a large and heavy 88" box blade and a heavy 85" blade (see signature).

If you will be switching implements back and forth a lot, as you state, the Pat's would be ideal.

Besides, if you don't like them for some reason you can sell them in a heartbeat with very little monetary loss.

 

[scrappy isb67]

Also, the forward ball on the 3PH lift arms still functions as normal so the stabilizer arms will turn when a box blade is angled (high/low). The geometry of the box blade or other implement doesn't change when using the T&T with Pat's - it is set. The distance between your link arms at the implement's attachment points will remain the same. The tractor's 3PH arms make the adjustment at the ball (tractor end).

the tractor end balls only allow for side to side sway on every tractor I have dealt with. the lower 3ph arms cannot rotate because the links that connect the rockshaft to the lower arms have no provision in them at the lower arms to allow the lower arms to rotate in relation to the tractor. if the tractor end of the arms were to rotate they would put a large amount of side loading on the rockshaft links /tilt cylinder. the implement end of the lower links is the only place that the implement can rotate in relation to the tractor.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Piston, more than likely you would be fine with the Pats QH. Most of these things are not built with all that tight of tolerances. Take a look at the ball ends with your box blade level and then look at them with maximum tilt. That will give you an idea of how much the arm ball actually rotates.