Differences in Quick Attach Bucket Mounts?

[Dougster]

Here I go again showing my lack of smarts, but can anyone explain to me the differences I am seeing in the lower rectangular mounting holes on various quick attach buckets and other such FEL attachments? I am seeing quick attach buckets with one small lower mounting hole on each side, two holes on each side (one small and one medium size), and some heavier buckets with two larger holes (one medium size and one very big). I am also seeing buckets with just one small hole on each side but in a different position that my loader mount accommodates. Mama Mia!

I always thought FEL "quick attach" was "quick attach"! Obviously I was wrong. I must assume from the size of the holes vs. attachment weight that this has something to do with different weight or strength ratings. Can anyone direct me to a website or document that explains the different lower mounting hole configurations that I am seeing on quick attach buckets and what they mean???

Dougster

 

[hazmat]

The only "universal" quick attach is the skid steer type (bobcat)

Others have "proprietary" quick attaches that are pin mounts - Deere, Kubota, ATI etc.

The only major downside to the skid steer quick attach is the weight which shouldn't be a problem for your machine. The minor downside is the cost (a couple hundred more $)

Here's a pic that show's RonJHall's pin type

Kubota quick coupler

And here is the skid steer type courtesy of islandtractor

skid steer qa

 

[hazmat]

PS - how do you get to claim "dumb" if you retired at 56 as a mechanical engineer (from a working stiff ME)... You must have done something right.

 

[Dougster]

Hi Stephen - Thanks for the reply but I'm not talking about the differences between universal quick attach and various tractor manufacturer proprietary mounts... I'm talking about differences I am seeing within the universal quick attach realm. Later I will post some pix of what I am talking about... significant differences in the lower mounting holes on supposedly universal quick attach buckets.

On your other point... my "early retirement" from my 33-year career in mechanical engineering was not by choice. I was laid off last year due to a lack of work in my industry and, in particular, my specialty area... along with a healthy dose of "new management" and company politics thrown in. It was not a joyous event by any means... and believe me, I am struggling.

Dougster

 

[hazmat]

Hi Stephen - Thanks for the reply but I'm not talking about the differences between universal quick attach and various tractor manufacturer proprietary mounts... I'm talking about differences I am seeing within the universal quick attach realm. Later I will post some pix of what I am talking about... significant differences in the lower mounting holes on supposedly universal quick attach buckets.

Dougster

Hmmm, you've got me stumped there. I'm looking forward to the pix.

Sorry about your "forced" early retirement. I just checked my company's website - seems we have some openings - send me a PM if you're interested.

 

[yzbdsbp]

I am also very confused on this whole subject....I recently purchased a Kubota 3240 with the "quick connect" or "skid steer" type connector on the FEL. Now I want to buy some pallet forks but dont have a clue where to start my Kubota dealer wants 800 for a set, but I see them all over ebay and the internet for alot less, but Im scared they wont fit when i get them because alot of pictures arent that detailed. I dont want to sound stupid on this topic but everyone here has been so helpful to me on decisions with the whole tractor buying process. I have learned alot here from everyone.

 

[Dougster]

Hmmm, you've got me stumped there. I'm looking forward to the pix. Sorry about your "forced" early retirement. I just checked my company's website - seems we have some openings - send me a PM if you're interested.

I'll have to gather up the pix and figure out the best way to post them. I'm sure there is a simple answer. I just don't happen to know it.

I'll also take the job thing off-line so as not to get too far off-topic.

Dougster

 

[Olmike]

The reason there are so many lower mounting holes is accomadate different sizes of skid steers. My 1835 case uses the narrow lower holes.Most Bobcat style use the wider set.Hope this helps. Mike

 

[Dougster]

The reason there are so many lower mounting holes is accomadate different sizes of skid steers. My 1835 case uses the narrow lower holes.Most Bobcat style use the wider set.Hope this helps. Mike

So the bottom line is that "universal" is not really so "universal"! You've still got to know the pin scheme, position and spacing of your loader to know if a given "universal quick attach" bucket will really work... yes?

Dougster

 

[Dougster]

Here is one example...

Note the lower pin hole sizes and layout.

Here is another example with different size holes...

Yet another...

Note only two single small pin holes.

 

[Olmike]

Yep, thats what my stuff looks like. Just measure the width of your pins & compare that to the lower holes.You can also modify the lower slots to fit your Q/A if you need to.

 

[Dougster]

Yep, thats what my stuff looks like. Just measure the width of your pins & compare that to the lower holes.You can also modify the lower slots to fit your Q/A if you need to.

Well... therein lies a key point: Do you have to match the holes to your loader's pins exactly? And if so, if the hole on the bucket is positioned okay but is somewhat larger, do you need to use some sort of bushing or adapter?

Dougster

 

[Olmike]

Your lock-down pin is tapered & forces the two parts together so side movement is not a problem. Is that what you're asking?

 

[Dougster]

Your lock-down pin is tapered & forces the two parts together so side movement is not a problem. Is that what you're asking?

Not exactly. Side movement of the bucket itself on the loader should not be a problem because of the tight fit of the top edge of the QA mount. I am concerned about how the small bottom pins fit into the relatively large rectangular pin holes on the bucket. Take a look at this picture first:

This "bottom & pins" arrangement on this adapter is essentially the same as the "bottom & pins" arrangement on my loader with 33 inch on center pin spacing and pins that are maybe 1 inch wide by 3/4 inch thick and only tapered slightly at the tip. Now take a look at this grapple picture again:

The quick attach mount on this grapple is like the one on a new bucket I am considering. The holes that match-up at 33" on center are the larger outer holes. Those holes are 5 inches wide by 1-1/2 inches front to back with my 1 inch by 3/4 inch pins falling about in the center (laterally) of those big ugly holes. There is no way this particular bucket is going to be held tightly at the bottom without some sort of spacer or surgery.

And so I ask: Is that kind of "mismatch" normal or not? Does it matter or not?

Dougster

p.s., By comparison, my current QA bucket's mount looks a lot like this set of add-on QA brackets:

Note the single set of smaller holes that approximately match my loader's pins in size. -d

 

[SPYDERLK]

Does anyone have a connection with skid steer? Buying skid steer compatible implements has always worked for me and it is the outer hole set that fits. The inner hole set must be for an older model s/s or to fit some other manufacturer. someone truly knowlegeable in skid steer would know.
larry

 

[Dougster]

Does anyone have a connection with skid steer? Buying skid steer compatible implements has always worked for me and it is the outer hole set that fits. The inner hole set must be for an older model s/s or to fit some other manufacturer. someone truly knowlegeable in skid steer would know.
larry

Same in my case on the outer holes. My pins fall into those outer holes no matter how narrow or wide they seem to be on a given attachment. My real bottom line question is "How much slop is too much slop in terms of pin fit into... in some cases... some relatively wide slots? And, if fit is important, should I endeavor to do something about it?

But the good news after all this posting is that... as of tonight... I have decided on another bucket with a much better pin fit. I finally got some pix from the seller late today and it looks really good. God and unpredictable weather willing, I'll be picking up my new heavy-duty bucket late next week!

Dougster

 

[skipmarcy]

Not exactly. Side movement of the bucket itself on the loader should not be a problem because of the tight fit of the top edge of the QA mount. I am concerned about how the small bottom pins fit into the relatively large rectangular pin holes on the bucket. Take a look at this picture first:

This "bottom & pins" arrangement on this adapter is essentially the same as the "bottom & pins" arrangement on my loader with 33 inch on center pin spacing and pins that are maybe 1 inch wide by 3/4 inch thick and only tapered slightly at the tip. Now take a look at this grapple picture again:

The quick attach mount on this grapple is like the one on a new bucket I am considering. The holes that match-up at 33" on center are the larger outer holes. Those holes are 5 inches wide by 1-1/2 inches front to back with my 1 inch by 3/4 inch pins falling about in the center (laterally) of those big ugly holes. There is no way this particular bucket is going to be held tightly at the bottom without some sort of spacer or surgery.

And so I ask: Is that kind of "mismatch" normal or not? Does it matter or not?

Dougster

p.s., By comparison, my current QA bucket's mount looks a lot like this set of add-on QA brackets:

Note the single set of smaller holes that approximately match my loader's pins in size. -d

I bought the QA adapter for my loader 2 years ago thru Mahindra - it's the KMW ML112 loader, and the matching 6' bucket to go with it. It is the univ. skid steer type, not a brand - specific rig. It uses the outer holes. I also bought an aftermarket universal skid steer weld-on plate to convert my old bucket to QA too and the holes all matched the OEM plate on the new bucket just fine. I did have a problem with both buckets - since the taper on the pins faces to the rear and the pins don't go down terribly far and are tensioned down with spring force, the buckets would want to come loose at the bottom when back-dragging. I simply went beside the pins/holes to good metal and drilled a hole to put a 5/16" diameter pin thru and secured with a hairpin. Adds an extra minute to changing buckets but they stay put now. Don't know if this is a problem with any others or just a slight manufacturing flaw in my particular adapter, but it was a simple fix. As far as lateral movement of the bucket, the pieces of metal on the sides of the bucket plate, as shown in those red brackets you show will keep the bucket from moving much at all side to side. That grapple you show only has short pieces on the sides at the top - might work OK but then again it may give a little slop. I would make sure your attachments have the full strips down the sides like those red brackets.

 

[Dougster]

I bought the QA adapter for my loader 2 years ago thru Mahindra - it's the KMW ML112 loader, and the matching 6' bucket to go with it. It is the univ. skid steer type, not a brand - specific rig. It uses the outer holes. I also bought an aftermarket universal skid steer weld-on plate to convert my old bucket to QA too and the holes all matched the OEM plate on the new bucket just fine. I did have a problem with both buckets - since the taper on the pins faces to the rear and the pins don't go down terribly far and are tensioned down with spring force, the buckets would want to come loose at the bottom when back-dragging. I simply went beside the pins/holes to good metal and drilled a hole to put a 5/16" diameter pin thru and secured with a hairpin. Adds an extra minute to changing buckets but they stay put now. Don't know if this is a problem with any others or just a slight manufacturing flaw in my particular adapter, but it was a simple fix. As far as lateral movement of the bucket, the pieces of metal on the sides of the bucket plate, as shown in those red brackets you show will keep the bucket from moving much at all side to side. That grapple you show only has short pieces on the sides at the top - might work OK but then again it may give a little slop. I would make sure your attachments have the full strips down the sides like those red brackets.

Interesting idea on the addition of those 5/16" pins. Obviously, I'd prefer that everything fit and worked perfectly right out of the box, but I will be doing *lots* of backdragging with my new HD bucket (one of the main reasons I am buying it) and I could still have a problem despite my selection of a bucket with much better fit and significantly less pin slop. I will keep your fairly simple & easy solution in mind.

At this point, I have already turned my attentions back to my Piranha grapple and the pin fit issue there. While I will not be back-dragging with the grapple, it would not hurt to tighten up the pin fit there either. I don't think the added pin solution would work on my grapple. I think the answer there is to spot weld in some carefully selected bar stock to make the fit perfect... spot welding only so it can come out easily later should my "fleet" of QA vehicles expand or change!

Dougster

 

[Slippy]

Here are some pictures of the Universal QA on my TC40DAss. Noticed that there is only about a 1/4 of an inch gap between the tractor QA and the implement QA plate if it is centered. Really no need to worry about side movement. So, the pin on the tractor QA can be at different locations center to center, thats why the std skid steer QA attachments have the "universal" holes. What seems critical to me is the distance outside to outside of the QA set up on the loader itself. If those "feet" if you will, that set inside the frame of the QA plate on the implement are not the right size, then it is not going to work.

The forks and spear are all what is called Universal skid steer, or for bob cat.

Pic 03: QA with pins in
Pic 04: QA with pins out
Pic 05: QA with universal two sets of holes, the larger holes to the outside are the holes the New Holland QA pins go in.
Pic 06: New Holland bucket with one set of holes
Pic 09: Shows how far to the outside of the QA attachment the loader QA is placed
Pic 26: QA plate to be welded on any non QA implement for use with Universal skid steer
Pic 08: Shows exactly where the pins come through into the QA attachment. Although there is room on both sides of the hole, the QA implement cannot move side to side because of the tight fit of the QA loader in the frame of the QA plate on the implement, best seen from the other side ( see pic 09).

You can see in picture 08 on the bottom of the loader arms where the paint is worn off. I have never had a problem with the pins popping out when back dragging. Athough I have never gotten down and looked, I suspect that as I uncurl the bucket off the loader arms when backdragging, it raises the pins at the same time so that the pins will not drag or be pushed back through. This would eliminate the problem Skipmarcy was talking about. So, I suspect that when you weld on a QA plate you should be careful that it is not too low so that the pins will hit the ground.

 

[Dougster]

Here are some pictures of the Universal QA on my TC40DAss. Noticed that there is only about a 1/4 of an inch gap between the tractor QA and the implement QA plate if it is centered. Really no need to worry about side movement. So, the pin on the tractor QA can be at different locations center to center, thats why the std skid steer QA attachments have the "universal" holes. What seems critical to me is the distance outside to outside of the QA set up on the loader itself. If those "feet" if you will, that set inside the frame of the QA plate on the implement are not the right size, then it is not going to work.

The forks and spear are all what is called Universal skid steer, or for bob cat.

Pic 03: QA with pins in
Pic 04: QA with pins out
Pic 05: QA with universal two sets of holes, the larger holes to the outside are the holes the New Holland QA pins go in.
Pic 06: New Holland bucket with one set of holes
Pic 09: Shows how far to the outside of the QA attachment the loader QA is placed
Pic 26: QA plate to be welded on any non QA implement for use with Universal skid steer
Pic 08: Shows exactly where the pins come through into the QA attachment. Although there is room on both sides of the hole, the QA implement cannot move side to side because of the tight fit of the QA loader in the frame of the QA plate on the implement, best seen from the other side ( see pic 09).

You can see in picture 08 on the bottom of the loader arms where the paint is worn off. I have never had a problem with the pins popping out when back dragging. Athough I have never gotten down and looked, I suspect that as I uncurl the bucket off the loader arms when backdragging, it raises the pins at the same time so that the pins will not drag or be pushed back through. This would eliminate the problem Skipmarcy was talking about. So, I suspect that when you weld on a QA plate you should be careful that it is not too low so that the pins will hit the ground.

Excellent pix Slippy... much better for illustrating the "pin fit" issue I was posting/asking about as well as variations in the pin hole arrangements attachment-to-attachment. I'd still like to get hold of the industry standard for QA mounts & attachments to understand why I'm seeing so many variations.

In particular, your "Pic 08" shows how small the QA pins are compared to the rectangular holes in that attachment. Perhaps lateral motion is quite effectively prevented by the adapter fit at the top... as I have previously noted... but it still seems like those pins could have some axial play... i.e., front to back play... at least that is the case on my grapple and one of the HD buckets I was considering... if not my light-duty bucket. I'll admit, however, that my concern is based on measurements I've taken off the loader and attachments... and not direct observations of the pin fit while in use.

But it sounds like you are saying that this "fit" issue is really nothing to worry about unless, indeed, there is a problem back-dragging (the only mode of use likely to cause a "loss-of-bucket" problem) in which case there may be wear/damage or manufacturing tolerance issues or both. Am I stating your position accurately?

Dougster