Bummer

Deerlope · Jun 13, 2007

Its my gut feeling that Kubota does not like putting a ROPS on there tractors but it is no longer engineers that are designing equipment. It is the "F"ing lawyers and the courts of this land. The new L seris Kubota's have go so many electronic features that you almost don't need a brain to operate one.
What I did to repair mine and I did it in about an hour. I pit a straight edge on a flat piece of steel near the base of the structure and I could only see about 1/16" deflection. So I rasied the loader and secure a come-a-along to it and the ROPS. Then I loosened all the bolts at the first joint just behind the tool box and started takeing up the slack. I actually took it too far but I put a 1/16" SS shim in and slacked off the come-a-long, tightened all the bolts and it is darn near perfect.

KennyV · Jun 13, 2007

Bob… I’m with you on this… Back in the early 60’s I to was haying with a H model… Today, there are too many people interested in protecting others from themselves. You are so right about the “false sense of security”. Just because the ROPS is there…How many people need to ask what is the ‘safe angle’ of operation? Those same people are looking for a gage to let them know…
If you “need” a seat PTO interlock to keep you from maiming yourself… Then you probably “need” a ROPS to keep from killing yourself. KennyV.

Deerlope · Jun 13, 2007

I just had a new Bush Hog finish mower delivered yesterday and the guy was telling me that he delivered 8 new tractors last week. He said that one new owner asked him how to use it and the machine also had a BH. Now that is scary. There are so many people operating tractors today that have never done it ever before. The new generation of weekend farmers will never know what it is like to get stuck 4 times in one day or what it is like to get the towing tractor stuck also.
I came up using horses, then tractors and believe me they both have their advantages. My first tractor was a 1945 JD "A", narrow front, hand clutch. You didn't have to be a musician to back it in the woods but it would have been a big help.
I am sure that I will hit my ROPS again and maybe next time it will come off but for now I need it to attach my homemade cab to.

N80 · Jun 13, 2007

KennyV said:
If you “need” a seat PTO interlock to keep you from maiming yourself… Then you probably “need” a ROPS to keep from killing yourself. KennyV.

This is getting truly bizarre. This type of thinking is supposed to go away by the time you turn 20. I have to tell my son every day, that just because you did something dumb, stupid or dnagerous and didn't get hurt doesn't mean it isn't dumb, stupid and dangerous.

What on earth is the point of telling us how it was done in the old days? The simple truth is that more people got hurt in more and more horrible ways back in the good old days. You know I owned a truck with no seat belts when I was young. And look, I'm still here today all in one piece! Does that justify not wearing or not installing seatbelts? OF COURSE NOT. Why is that so hard for some people.

Bob, the reason you can't bring perspective to this topic is that the perspective you're trying to bring is so distorted that it is meaningless to anyone with common sense. (I'm sorry that sounds harsh, but even with a good thesaurus I couldn't find a way to sugar coat it). A ROPS is a simple and totally passive safety device that saves lives. Period. The hassles it introduces into the world of work and play are minimal. There is just no justification to suggest to anyone that they permenantly remove their ROPS, and very little justification to continue to use a faulty one. (Now, if you want to remove your ROPS that is totally your business. But suggesting that someone else do it is something altogether different.

And it is even worse when someone suggests that the only reason we need ROPS is because there are too many silly people out there. That is rationally and historically unsupportable.

KennyV · Jun 13, 2007

I think the point is … DON’T DO dumb, stupid or dangerous things expecting someone ELSE to keep you safe.
If you are not responsible for your own safety why start looking for some manufacturer to keep you safe. Dumb and stupid things will always be done, there are just a lot of that type of person available. No matter what is incorporated in any system They are still going to be dumb, stupid or dangerous things that will get people hurt.
I DO NOT think operating a tractor without a ROPS is DUMB or STUPID. Nor do I feel all ROPS should be removed… It is just as Bob stated ‘a false sense of security’ for some… KennyV.

N80 · Jun 14, 2007

KennyV said:
I think the point is … DON’T DO dumb, stupid or dangerous things expecting someone ELSE to keep you safe.

I just don't see how that relates to a ROPS. How is having or keeping a ROPS expecting someone else to keep you safe? You have a ROPS. You keep the ROPS. The safety is in your hands.

If you are not responsible for your own safety why start looking for some manufacturer to keep you safe.

Right. That is why the owner keeps and maintains his ROPS and does not rely on someone else to do it.

Dumb and stupid things will always be done, there are just a lot of that type of person available. No matter what is incorporated in any system They are still going to be dumb, stupid or dangerous things that will get people hurt.

I agree, but don't understand your point. It seems like your point is that smart people don't need a ROPS. And that simply has no basis in reality or rational thought. The bottom line is that a smart, prudent person keeps and maintains his safety equipment.

It is just as Bob stated ‘a false sense of security’ for some… KennyV.

That doesn't make sense to me. If that is true, we need to do away with seatbelts, smoke detectors, fire escapes, safety glass, hard hats.....the list goes on.

And the fact is, the ROPS does give security and has been proven to do so. It won't protect you from everything. That sense would be false. But thinking that just because you are smart and alert you don't need a ROPS, well, THAT is a false sense of security.

riptides · Jun 14, 2007

Bob_Young said:
OK, I'm not going to win this. Thought I might be able to bring some perspective to the discussion, but apparently not.

And I think it is a valueable perspective. But I think they are there for a more positive than negative reason. You mentioned looking out for your wheels, you could extend this to look out beyond your wheels to the operations of your machine in immediate surroundings.

Don't forget about pulling stuff down hill or uphill, it is not just about your tractor traversing a slope or finding a hole. You get a FEL up high enough and take a sharp turn at speed and your over.

KennyV said:
.... dangerous.....

Education comes at a price. A lot of new operators are not taught in person these days. So how do they learn?

I had no idea on load issues pushing tractors, I was not aware of the danger.

Accidents happen, and they are just that. Accidents.

-Mike Z.

BTDT · Jun 14, 2007

And the fact is, the ROPS does give security and has been proven to do so. It won't protect you from everything. That sense would be false. But thinking that just because you are smart and alert you don't need a ROPS, well, THAT is a false sense of security.
__________________
Does this apply to Soundguy and Farmwithjunk and their restored tractors that didn't have ROPS originally? I don't see anyone getting on their case to upgrade their tractors. I have an old M, H, Farmall, and my newer Ford 1300 doesn't have ROPS, don't plan on one either.

N80 · Jun 14, 2007

Everyone has got to decide for themselves. I have less strong feelings about retrofitting older tractors. It is more costly and difficult to do that, and sometimes impossible. My farmer neighbor has all old tractors. I think only one of them has anything like a ROPS. He almost rolled that one recently. (I thought I posted this already but don't see it.) He is no raw beginner and he's a sharp guy. He has no plans to spend the money on retrofitting his tractors with ROPS. I doubt you could even get one for his Cases. And by the way, his kids and wife drive them too.

If it were me, I would get them retrofitted if I used them a lot. Especially if my family members were using them. I've recommended that he should too. He shrugged it off (I'm a doctor, he's a lifelong farmer...why should he listent to me?)

But, I do think retrofitting an old tractor and repairing a new tractor ROPS are different things.

But you bring Chris up....he's the nuns and orphans guy when it comes to replacing a damaged ROPS. If you want to know how he feels about it, ask him.

In the end, I see no difference between a ROPS on a tractor and a seat belt in a car. Would you ever suggest that anyone remove a damaged seatbelt and not replace it? If you had an old car that you drove as primary transportation would you add seatbelts if it didn't come with them? Would you tell you newly driving child that if they are just real smart and real careful that they don't need to wear their seatbelt? Get it?