Any reason not to turn implement 3 point hitch pins inward? PIC

[KYKub]

I have a back blade with 3pt pins that are so far apart I have to lengthen my 3pt arms almost as far as they will go to mount the blade. I noticed at Rural King tonight that almost all their implements have pins facing inward, not outward like my blade. Here is a pic I snapped at Rural King tonight.



It seems like this would make it easier to mount. Is there any reason not to turn the pins on my blade so they face inward?

Thanks.

 

[KennyV]

Inside will be Easier to hook up...
Outside will be more stable tilting....
But on most implements it will not make much difference.

 

[Wagtail]

I have a back blade with 3pt pins that are so far apart I have to lengthen my 3pt arms almost as far as they will go to mount the blade. I noticed at Rural King tonight that almost all their implements have pins facing inward, not outward like my blade. Here is a pic I snapped at Rural King tonight.

View attachment 465972

It seems like this would make it easier to mount. Is there any reason not to turn the pins on my blade so they face inward?

Thanks.

I understand what you're asking, however the reason the pins are facing inwards is for 'shipping' purposes. So that they either don't get "whacked"/bent or for compactness on a pallet. Implements are designed/measured to semi-rigid standards, mostly to attach to your 3PT arms, in your category (ie: Cat1). There's 'some sway' factored in so that you can fit the arms on, but I don't believe that you'd be able to get both arms 'on' if the pins are facing inwards. Although you may be able to accomplish it with a LOT of swearing and a bloody big mallet.

If you were to hook the implement to a 3PT quick-hitch, you'd have to face them outwards.

But if you want to mount them inwards... go for it.

 

[Ed of all trades]

Is it doable, yes. Will it work, yes. Will it be easier? I don't think so. It will be harder to pull the arms out onto the pins than to push and kick ect. from the outside IMHO. Try it, it won't hurt anything but I doubt you will like it. Ed

 

[oosik]

The only problem, I could see, would be the attachment - as Wagtail mentions. Otherwise, the slight difference in overall "width" should present no structural concerns.

Most all of my implements require that I adjust the overall width of my lower 3-point arms also. For me, its a simple adjustment of the sway chain attachment point on the lower arms.

 

[sixdogs]

On many implements that are both cat I and cat II usable, the pins go in for one and out for the other. It's a common thing so no problem other than a slight loss of stability on some implements.

EDIT--Here are two pics of the same implement. One is on a cat I tractor with pins in and the other a cat II tractor with the pins outward.





Sorry pics are so huge. I forgot to reduce size.

 

[KYKub]

Thank you for the replies. Given the mental image of a task requiring a "big bloody mallet," I think I'll let well enough be and just spread the 3pt arms when I attach the implement. Thanks for the collective wisdom that it's possible to turn pins inward, just unnecessary and probably would result in no advantage.

I wonder if anyone can help with three semi-related questions: 1) How much "play" should there be in 3pt arms while an implement is attached? See below how there is space for movement of the arm? Is this normal? Should I tighten the arms on the implement?



2) The top link has quite a bit of room to move also. Are there bushings or something like that I should use to prevent that movement? Does it matter? Here's a picture:



3) Finally, what is the best order in attaching an implement? Top first, or side arms?

Thanks for your help. I should have been more attentive when I worked with my dad on the farm as a kid!

 

[downslope]

Thank you for the replies. Given the mental image of a task requiring a "big bloody mallet," I think I'll let well enough be and just spread the 3pt arms when I attach the implement. Thanks for the collective wisdom that it's possible to turn pins inward, just unnecessary and probably would result in no advantage.

I wonder if anyone can help with three semi-related questions: 1) How much "play" should there be in 3pt arms while an implement is attached? See below how there is space for movement of the arm? Is this normal? Should I tighten the arms on the implement?

View attachment 466240

2) The top link has quite a bit of room to move also. Are there bushings or something like that I should use to prevent that movement? Does it matter? Here's a picture:

View attachment 466241

3) Finally, what is the best order in attaching an implement? Top first, or side arms?

Thanks for your help. I should have been more attentive when I worked with my dad on the farm as a kid!

Always attach the side arms first. You can then raise the the 3-pt lift, if necessary, to make it easier to attach the top link. If the implement and/or tractor is not setting level on the ground or floor always attach the arm to the implements "low" side first, then you can use the hydraulic lift to raise a little and the other side will slide on.

You could always try turning the pins inward; if it makes it easier to attach then leave it, otherwise put them back. Should only take a few minutes.

 

[valkyrie9901]

I would think if the pins were on the inside, as you put a strain on the attachment it would pull the arms inward and they would put a lot os pressure on the retaining pins...JB.

 

[ovrszd]

I would think if the pins were on the inside, as you put a strain on the attachment it would pull the arms inward and they would put a lot os pressure on the retaining pins...JB.

I believe this is why tbey are generally outward.