Alternative third function

[currierej]

I added an add-a-grapple to my tractor, instead of using an electric third function I added an extra valve, instead of $700+ it cost me about $200 for the valve and fittings.
I used quick disconnects on the grapple and later I'm thinking about adding tee's to the lines and running lines to the rear. I would only be able to run the front or the rear one at a time, but that's still better than no hydraulics at all.

 

[npalen]

Which port is that where it's teed on the front side of the valve? (Just trying to visualize your circuitry)

 

[ovrszd]

I did a similar system on my first FEL 3rd function. Only drawback was not being able to do FEL functions and Grapple function at the same time due to lever location.

Nice work.

 

[npalen]

View attachment 539036
I added an add-a-grapple to my tractor, instead of using an electric third function I added an extra valve, instead of $700+ it cost me about $200 for the valve and fittings.
I used quick disconnects on the grapple and later I'm thinking about adding tee's to the lines and running lines to the rear. I would only be able to run the front or the rear one at a time, but that's still better than no hydraulics at all.

Are you able to run the loader and grapple at the same time by using both hands?

 

[CincyFlyer]

Are you able to run the loader and grapple at the same time by using both hands?

With open center systems, that's not possible if you add on a valve; the first valve in the "chain" takes all of the juice. Some valve blocks can allow some semblance of operating simultaneously, however.

 

[LD1]

Hopefully the only thing you "tee'd" is the return.

And the pic may be deceptive......but it looks like I only see 4 hoses going to that new valve.....it NEEDS to have FIVE. The two work ports are a given....running up to the grapple. But the other three need to be PRESSURE, POWER BEYOND, and RETURN/TANK.

If your setup is NOT like that.....I'd stop using it immediately. And that dont mean stop using the grapple......that means stop using the hydraulics period. Because if you didnt use a PB valve....you are pressurizing the tank passages in the new valve everytime you use the hydraulics.....and at best you will blow seals out of the new valve and it will leak. At worst....you will crack the casting and get a face full of high pressure oil.

 

[currierej]

The return to tank port is the one that's tee'd.
I wasn't able to find out if the original valve offered power beyond, so I bought a valve for the grapple that had power beyond.
The current system is pressure in to the new valve and a line from the power beyond port to the original valve

 

[LD1]

The return to tank port is the one that's tee'd.
I wasn't able to find out if the original valve offered power beyond, so I bought a valve for the grapple that had power beyond.
The current system is pressure in to the new valve and a line from the power beyond port to the original valve

Sounds correct then.

But if you were handy enough to do that.......an electric third-function would not have cost much more.....and you would have not had to remove your hand from the loader joystick to operate.

The only difference in cost would have been the cost difference of an electric valve vs the valve you have.......and the buttons/rocker switch. But you would have saved the money on one of the hoses as electric valve/subplate usually have pressure rated tank ports so no need for the PB line

 

[currierej]

I considered building my own electric setup, but this is my first time working with hydraulics like this, and in the future I want to use this as a base to add rear remotes

 

[MossRoad]

Nice job!

Just a question as to why it would cost $700 for an electric diverter, though?