ROPS question - intended design?

   / ROPS question - intended design? #21  
I,ve only considered my 3 point as something to hook attachments to & raise& lower them.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #22  
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I,ve only considered my 3 point as something to hook attachments to & raise& lower them. )</font>

Uh, jumping in on the middle of this, I have to come to SoundGuy's defense. The 3 pt isn't plastered with labels because it is a safe device. We don't consider it "safety" equipment because it is a standard that has been around for 70 some years. His point was that the three point hitch was developed as a safer method of attaching implements than other, earlier implement attachment methods.

Back to ROPS -- Personally, I find my ROPS to be a complete and total pain in the butt. I have caught it on low hanging branches more than I have done anything else with it. I personally prefer my own "pucker factor" as a roll over protection. My limit is a lot less than the tractor's.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #23  
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( No, your post said

( The 3pt hitch was partially designed to stall a back flip, as long as it was properly connected.)
)</font>

I see you are into hair splitting. I paraphrased a bit... However, my post is backed up by a paragraph out of the safety section of my tractor manual.

Soundguy
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #24  
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Uh, jumping in on the middle of this, I have to come to SoundGuy's defense. The 3 pt isn't plastered with labels because it is a safe device. We don't consider it "safety" equipment because it is a standard that has been around for 70 some years. His point was that the three point hitch was developed as a safer method of attaching implements than other, earlier implement attachment methods.
)</font>

Thank you, At least someone is reading the text in the post past the first few words, before knee-jerk reacting and replying.

Soundguy
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #25  
[quoteBack to ROPS -- Personally, I find my ROPS to be a complete and total pain in the butt. I have caught it on low hanging branches more than I have done anything else with it. I personally prefer my own "pucker factor" as a roll over protection. My limit is a lot less than the tractor's. )</font>

Jeff,

Read this and this. Please don't rely on pucker factor as a preventive measure.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #26  
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I see you are into hair splitting. I paraphrased a bit... However, my post is backed up by a paragraph out of the safety section of my tractor manual.)</font>

The statements you reference in the safety section refer to the drawbar linkage, not the 3pt. I have read a lot of your posts on this board, and from them I have gleaned a huge amount of information, but when a statement like that is made, I have to say something. I don't consider it splitting hairs when it comes to giving advice or making incorrect statements that are presented as fact that could injure or kill somebody.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #27  
</font><font color="blue" class="small">(
Jeff,

Read this and this. Please don't rely on pucker factor as a preventive measure.

)</font>

Sorry, but nothing in either of those documents convinces me that common sense and good judgement aren't equal to or better than a ROPS. Knowing the limits of your equipment and staying well within them seem to me to be the best course of action. ROPS is here to stay, and I am not going to cut mine off, but when working around trees, I think it is as much of a safety hazard as it is a safety feature. Ah, yes, but you can fold it! But then what good is it? and it is then in the way. Also, aren't some fools going to develop a false sense of security and do things they wouldn't if they weren't "protected"? Sorry, but it just looks to me like something invented by a lawyer.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #28  
<font color="blue"> </font> The statements you reference in the safety section refer to the drawbar linkage, not the 3pt

<font color="black"> </font> And where do you supose that drawbar might be hooked to??? perhaps the 3pt lift arms? (yes)

<font color="purple"> </font> EDIT: Ok.. ( throwing hands up in the air ) for those with the real restrictive blinders on.. does it help if I re-state and re-clasify my previous post in high context.... the 3pt linkage/drawbar, as described inthe safety section of my tractor manual, is listes as a safety feature.. which I, to the ire of some readers here, called a safety enhancer, or may have also refered to it (3pt lift) as having been designed with safety in mind.??

That make it all hunkey dory for the lawyer types out there?? /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

Soundguy
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #29  
The three point IS a form of safety devise when compared to the other types of hitches of the era in which it was originally designed. The reason for this is that the top (third arm is above the center line of the axle) arm is under compression when working. The other designs of the day only had tension at work. With the third arm under compression, it was in effect pushing the front of the tractor down as it pulled the implement.
 
   / ROPS question - intended design? #30  
[quoteSorry, but nothing in either of those documents convinces me that common sense and good judgement aren't equal to or better than a ROPS. Knowing the limits of your equipment and staying well within them seem to me to be the best course of action. ROPS is here to stay, and I am not going to cut mine off, but when working around trees, I think it is as much of a safety hazard as it is a safety feature. Ah, yes, but you can fold it! But then what good is it? and it is then in the way. Also, aren't some fools going to develop a false sense of security and do things they wouldn't if they weren't "protected"? Sorry, but it just looks to me like something invented by a lawyer. )</font>

Jeff,

I don't know, I use mine to push low hanging braches out of the way when backing into densely wooded areas.
 
 
Top