Rotary Cutter Bending lift arms on brush hog

[gwdixon]

Do these photos relate to the OP?





The OEM frame was cut off, a tool bar welded to the front of the disk, and this A-frame mounted.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Do these photos relate to the OP?

View attachment 484123

View attachment 484124

The OEM frame was cut off, a tool bar welded to the front of the disk, and this A-frame mounted.

View attachment 484122

Good.

OP was a flash in the pan who burned out in 2 posts 3+yrs ago.​

 

[4570Man]

But they will float up so tractor does not force the implement down. The knuckle and the chain present the better scenario typically, but the chain will never reach a compression stop/limit like the knuckle - so the chain will never inhibit a backtipover incident, should the situation arise.

Not if the angle is extreme. The arms only have so much upward travel.

 

[tmajor]

The OEM frame was cut off, a tool bar welded to the front of the disk, and this A-frame mounted.

That's a whole different situation, where the tractor was big enough to lift more weight, than the implement was designed for ... there is more concrete added, than the whole unit weighed! The new frame, is much heavier.

Sometimes, "common sense" should enter the equation.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Not if the angle is extreme. The arms only have so much upward travel.

True.

 

[tmajor]

the chain will never reach a compression stop/limit like the knuckle - so the chain will never inhibit a backtipover incident, should the situation arise.

You are certainly, not trying to say, that some dude, vaping and listening to rap, while going up a 45° incline with his brush hog, should count on the 3/8" x 2" piece or two of steel to save him from "back tipping over", are you?

Here again, "common sense" plays a bit of a role.

 

[SPYDERLK]

You are certainly, not trying to say, that some dude, vaping and listening to rap, while going up a 45° incline with his brush hog, should count on the 3/8" x 2" piece or two of steel to save him from "back tipping over", are you?

Here again, "common sense" plays a bit of a role.

No. ... But in less extreme, usually traction based rear up, the small amt of extra resistance may be the deciding factor whether recovery is possible.

 

[LD1]

I have owned several different brands and styles of cutters over the years.

Had a bushhog brand model 105 that was a swinging a-frame and chain. No worries about bending straps, but yes, there is a slightly greater risk of backflip in certain cases. But it was a good cutter and followed the ground well.



I also had a KK 5' standard TSC mower. It had the 2" straps. They were bent as being discussed here. IT didnt have a swinging toplink. I converted it to chain style like the BH 105



My bushhog 306 is also rigid. When you cross uneven terrain, it dont mow well. But is built heavy. The whole 3PH will raise when crossing a dip instead of bending the straps. Because the straps are heavy. And made so they dont bend. 2x2x1/4" angle iron IIRC.



My new mower, is allowed to float. Allthough not at a clevis/swinging toplink hanger, but not a chain either. Woods DS96. It does have one of the straps bent, but that was due to careless chaining point when loading it, not from mowing.



Dad also has a international IM600 mower. Similar to My KK5'...but his is a 6'. It had the cheap flimsy straps but it also has the clevis swinging toplink. Allthough it dont have much travel and the straps were bent. I replaced them with angle iron like on my 306.

My thoughts are.....I dont care what "style" the mower has. If it is built right, you wont mess anything up. Cheap cutters with rigid connections and flimsy 2" x 3/16" straps.....thats not built right. If you are gonna build a rigid cutter.....those pieces need to be angle iron. Because the straps cannot handle compression....only tension.

A simple fix for the cheap straps on a rigid cutter......hydraulic toplink with a float valve:thumbsup:

 

[gwdixon]

The OEM frame was cut off, a tool bar welded to the front of the disk, and this A-frame mounted.

That's a whole different situation, where the tractor was big enough to lift more weight, than the implement was designed for ... there is more concrete added, than the whole unit weighed! The new frame, is much heavier.

Sometimes, "common sense" should enter the equation.

Indeed. My neighbor doesn't have much "common sense". You wouldn't believe the amount of repairs and welding he comes to me with. Almost all of it could have been avoided. But, I don't mind. He pays and I get the practice.

Also, as far as "common sense" goes, he is a Hill.. supporter.

 

[tmajor]

The reason I looked at this thread, was because my neighbor just got a tractor, in order to mow with his wife's uncle's 6' Woods brush hog. In the process of mowing, he managed to rip an interlock wire off, which i repaired for him.

In any case, he mentioned that he had bent the steel A frame on the B/H, as well as sheared the bolts off more than once. Being unfamiliar with the "swinging top-link" mechanism, at first glance, I suggested the chains, rather than the steel. In retrospect, I see now, how the swinging top-link works and I believe, his top-link was too short for the tractor/Brush hog set-up. Having only glanced at everything, I believe, he had the top-link well stretched out, probably to reach the swinging top-link assembly, and even then, every component was in alignment, rather than flexible. This configuration, would make the whole action of the swinging top-link similar to a rigid assembly. ... in other words, there was "no swing" available.

I'll have another look, and if applicable, suggest a longer top-link.