So you think converting a Pin-On to QA is Easy!

[k0ua]

Update, I used it this weekend and Monday to push over several trees, (4 to 6 inch, 30 foot high) dug up a bunch of rocks, moved 10 tons of gravel, and cleared off many square feet of ground. All is well, nothing is "sprung" or cracked or bent. I like it better for digging than the factory QA bucket ( I did buy one when I converted) because it is narrower. I like the factory 66 incher when carrying materials. I may put a toothbar on this older narrower (58 inch) bucket later. Yeah if I had a plasma, I think I could have done things a little quicker. I am glad I did not give up, and cleaned it off, it even looks good now. Thanks for all the kind words.

James K0UA

 

[SixHoeBob]

How did you orient the receiver plate to match the dump and curl angles of the original pin bucket mount. Seems to me if you maintain the same angle as established by the existing pins it should be the same. If using the original ears that would just require grinding or plasma cutting excess material so you could maintain the angle.

Obviously you don't want the bucket a foot further forward but really 3-6 inches would make no practical difference. Remember there are lots of bucket styles that project much further forward than standard buckets.

3-6 inches will make a tremendous difference. Every little bit of mechanical advantage/disadvantage, affects the tractor/loader performance. Even leaving the 1/4 plates on the back of the bucket would have some affect, but it would not be noticeable.
KOua did a thorough job, and it looks presentable. :thumbsup:

 

[IslandTractor]

3-6 inches will make a tremendous difference. Every little bit of mechanical advantage/disadvantage, affects the tractor/loader performance. Even leaving the 1/4 plates on the back of the bucket would have some affect, but it would not be noticeable.:

Depends on the loader. For a BX with 500 lbs lift at baseline it might make a tremendous difference. For a loader with 2500 lbs lift at pivot pins moving the midbucket point 3-6 inches would only cut 10-15% of lift capacity. As the vast majority of loader work does not require max lift it really is not such a tremendous difference in work done.

 

[ovrszd]

3-6 inches will make a tremendous difference. Every little bit of mechanical advantage/disadvantage, affects the tractor/loader performance. Even leaving the 1/4 plates on the back of the bucket would have some affect, but it would not be noticeable.
KOua did a thorough job, and it looks presentable. :thumbsup:

Yep, plus the farther the bucket is from the front axle the more difficult to control when cutting grade.

Here's a couple pictures of two different designs. The first is my Brother's Kubota L514 loader. Second is my Rhino 1495 loader. Notice how much closer to the front axle the loader frame sits on the Rhino. The Rhino bucket is QA and a considerably larger bucket but yet the cutting edge isn't any farther forward. If we switched buckets the Kubota loader would extend the bucket 3-4 inches at least. Also, even with longer arms, the Kubota loader lost lift height, not sure how that happened.

 

[ovrszd]

I am glad I did not give up, and cleaned it off, it even looks good now.

James K0UA

Patience is a virtue, especially when fabricating!!! Great job!!

 

[SixHoeBob]

Yep, plus the farther the bucket is from the front axle the more difficult to control when cutting grade.

Here's a couple pictures of two different designs. The first is my Brother's Kubota L514 loader. Second is my Rhino 1495 loader. Notice how much closer to the front axle the loader frame sits on the Rhino. The Rhino bucket is QA and a considerably larger bucket but yet the cutting edge isn't any farther forward. If we switched buckets the Kubota loader would extend the bucket 3-4 inches at least. Also, even with longer arms, the Kubota loader lost lift height, not sure how that happened.

The answer to the loss in lift height is the length of the lift cylinder, and more so the lift cylinder pin is located lower on the loader tower. In other words, it is the loader geometry. The capacity of the 514 is 514 kgs (1131 lbs).
What is the lift capacity of the Rhino loader? Is it 680 kgs (1495 lbs)? How long does it take each loader to lift from the ground to full height.
Are there any reasons not to go with a Rhino loader?

 

[SixHoeBob]

Depends on the loader. For a BX with 500 lbs lift at baseline it might make a tremendous difference. For a loader with 2500 lbs lift at pivot pins moving the midbucket point 3-6 inches would only cut 10-15% of lift capacity. As the vast majority of loader work does not require max lift it really is not such a tremendous difference in work done.

I would not want to give up 10-15% of the breakout capacity on my 933C Cat, or any of my other machines.

I am going to stick with any loss in capacity is bad.

The extra time spent fabricating is already a fading memory for KOua, the loss in capacity would be permanent.

"Every job is a self portrait of the person doing it" ~ Norman Rockwell

 

[IslandTractor]

I would not want to give up 10-15% of the breakout capacity on my 933C Cat, or any of my other machines.

I am going to stick with any loss in capacity is bad.

The extra time spent fabricating is already a fading memory for KOua, the loss in capacity would be permanent.

"Every job is a self portrait of the person doing it" ~ Norman Rockwell

Fine but just remember that skid steers almost all have very long buckets that cut their breakout capacity. If you are digging roots constantly then it might be an issue but for general use with a moderately powerful loader it is not.

 

[SixHoeBob]

Fine but just remember that skid steers almost all have very long buckets that cut their breakout capacity. If you are digging roots constantly then it might be an issue but for general use with a moderately powerful loader it is not.

All three of my skid steers (443 BC, 555,885NH,) have long lip/low profile buckets. The loaders were designed to use those buckets, so the breakout force is correct. I have short lip tooth buckets for the loaders, so the breakout forces are still correct.
I bought a used Case grapple bucket, and welded a 555 adapter plate to the back of it because that was easiest. The 555 would struggle to curl the empty grapple bucket from the full dump position. Eventually, I cut the adapter plate off the grapple. Then I recessed the adapter plate into the back of the bucket. After much cutting and grinding, I now have a grapple bucket properly matched to the loader.

Anybody can do it wrong, but why not do it right?

Just because I have 40-50 (forty to fifty) different buckets, doesn't mean I have a clue. But then on the other hand, maybe I do.

 

[IslandTractor]

Just because I have 40-50 (forty to fifty) different buckets, doesn't mean I have a clue. But then on the other hand, maybe I do.

OK, you win the "who has the most buckets?" contest.

My original point seems to be lost here: there is a simplier way to make this pin to QA conversion. Koua spent an inordinate amount of time converting his bucket. He had several simple options. 1) He could have welded a partial QA receiver plate directly to the correctly angled pin mount directly in about half an hour at the cost of about three inches of bucket length forward displacement. (I was probably exaggerating in my estimate that this would cost 10-15% of max lift/breakout). 2) He could also have simply cut the pin ears off and ground them flat then welded on a receiver. No particular reason to have actually removed the base of the pin mount fitting and that would have saved hours of work. That would have ended up being virtually the same as what he ended up with and would have taken very little time with plasma, torch or even grinder. If the new FEL mounted QA adapter was angled differently than the original pin mount then he'd have to account for that by cutting the pin mount at a complementary angle. Again, not a time consuming thing with plasma, torch or grinder. (and I note that James hasn't commented whether his curl or dump limits have changed, if not then no reason for this step).

Why did I bother to point this out in my original post? At least one poster stated that he had been considering a conversion to QA but this thread had disuaded him. There is no reason to do as complicated a job (very nice job BTW) in order to convert the pin on to QA. IMO, the differences in performance would be so slight that most people would be happy just weldiing onto the unmodified pin mounts. If the performance loss really bothers you then spend an hour cutting down the ears to flush. Who uses their bucket for max lift and max breakout routinely in CUT work anyway? I max out with my grapple but almost never with my bucket. Skidsteers are different. Most CUTs are moving dirt, digging, moving debris etc and on a day to day basis don't use the last few percent of capacity often at all. If you do then you need a bigger CUT/loader.

Finally, I'd just like to be clear that I don't mean to criticize what James chose to do but rather to simply point out there are quick and easier ways to get the same basic result of bucket conversion.