3 point attachment survey

[Runner]

I have two #3's. iMatch on the rear and modded HF for the front.

 

[Big Bri]

I have two #3's. iMatch on the rear and modded HF for the front.

whats the difference between the imatch and the HF model.

 

[winston1]

I have a #3 HF quick hitch. I had to modify several implements and made a homemade top adapter. I can swap implements in 5 minutes or less. Well worth the effort if you swap regular as I do. Only thing I didn't modify was my Yanmar 1300 tiller. To much involved with it.

 

[Runner]

"whats the difference between the imatch and the HF model."

Well, my opinion only, for whatever that's worth:

The HF is a knock-off of the JD iMatch. It is not built to the same tolerances and, therefore, doesn't fit attachments as well as the iMatch. Just for example, the two plates that hold the upper hook get in the way of some of my attachments, so one of the mods was to cut a couple of inches off of them.

Also, the pieces that hold the bottom hook latches are not carefully positioned, and they also get in the way of the lower pin connections.

With some effort, it works basically the same, but just not a smoothly as the iMatch.

If I was doing the front quick hitch project again, I would bite the bullet and use a regular iMatch for it.

 

[Mighty Dodge]

I have a HF hitch and all my stuff fits it just fine. The problem isn't with the hitches it's that different implement mfgs. use different dimensions for their stuff.

M.D.

 

[rambler]

The HF is a knock-off of the JD iMatch.

I realize JD is well thought of and often for good reason, but a quick hitch has been around a long time, and was not invented by JD. JD 'knockedoff' the idea from someone else as well....... The whole 3pt deal was designed by the Ford/Fordson/Fergison people, which JD as well as all other ag manufaturers have 'knocked off'. So don't give JD too much credit!

On the big heavy 100+ tractors I really like a quick hitch. Easy to deal with, both the tractor & implement are far too heavy to budge around.

On a compact size trator, there are far too many non-standard implements that don't allow a top hook to slip into the top pin. For those I like either of the other 2 options about equally. The sliding arms seem to bust the levers for me over time, don't have enough experience with Pats to say it will last 20 years....

If one has all standard implements that work with a quick hitch, the quick hitch wins. If you have to deal with a lot of pto or non-standard top link issues then it becomes cumbersome.

I have regular 3pt, 3 tractors with (now busted) sliding arms, a cat 1 HF quick hitch, a cat 3n Warrior brand quick hitch, and a set of Pat's.

The large cat 3n quick hitch is a lifesaver for dealing with the big heavy equipment; of the rest I think I like the HF cheapie quick hitch. It's built cheap, which means it's very light to take off or put on to make the non-standard stuff work, or to take off if I want to use a trailer or what have you & not have it in the way back there. Sometimes Cheap & underbuilt has it's advantages!

--->Paul

 

[texasjohn]

My kubota came with extendable arms, don't know why not standard on all makes.

Added Pats system... IMHO should have been standard like on early Case tractors

Added hydraulic top link...IMHO should be standard

Added PVC pipe extender arms so can adjust arm height and top link length while hooking up implement...can't be standard because of safety cops, but should be.

This setup fits any implement I have

It doesn't get any better. Can't hook up with less.