Flat face hydraulic connectors are better?

[flingwing1969]

Yes, my G3038H.

These are the only FF I have on my tractor. I've only had one time when one of my ag style held pressure - can't recall the circumstances but I know it had to do with my rear remotes and hooking up my hoe, a quick tap with a board on the tip of the ag and the pressure was relieved immediately - just a drop of oil so it wasn't much being held in.

When I crack the line to relieve pressure in it, there is never a spurt or a his or anything, only a drip or two as I make the connection with the line cracked. I suspect, therefore, that the pressure is being held down the line from the FEL remotes. Again really no pressure, just a completely full line that is not allowing return to the tank.

Yes, I have tried to reconnect immediately after disconnecting and sometimes I can, sometimes I can't.

I suspect that, because there is not too much pressure, I might be able to fab a tool to give me mechanical advantage in making the connection without the need for cracking the line fitting. I think I mentioned a friend of mine has an older Bobcat and finds that the FF on it are difficult to connect as well - he made a tool to allow him to complete the connections more easily - and the Bobcat has a switch to relieve pressure and I thought their FF connectors have an internal pressure release as well - push in on the fitting.

Yes, it is puzzling but it is also a fact.

 

[LD1]

I don't like FF couplers either.

Had them on my grapple....switched back to 7241 iso B's.

I may be way off base....but here is my thoughts....

FF couplers came about as being cleaner and low/no spill. IE: eco-friendly. I am thinking this was a push from Uncle sam.to solve a problem where a problem didn't exist. Kinda like the new crap gas cans.

The problem is without a way to spill a little fluid...they indeed lock up under pressure.

Sure, non-FF couplers can lock up....but it is less likely due to the little fluid that is spilled. And if they do lock up...they are exponentially easier to bleed.

As far as cleanlieness of the couplers itself....simple 99 cent caps work wonders.

Yes there ARE connect under pressure couplers. Supposed to be able to connect and disconnect under full system pressure just as easy as zero pressure. But I have never used them.

For me, it's simple economics. A set of 1/2" ag style (non-ff) cost around $10. A set of FF run around $50. And connect under pressure FF run $80-$100 a set.

So are the connect under pressure FF couplers better than AG's....probably. are they worth 10x the price....not to me. Are standard FF better than AG's....well not IMO. Even if cost was the same...I wouldn't do it. Again, I had a set of FF on the shelf for my grapple. For all intents and purposes they were free. I spent $10 a set and put standard couplers on after fighting with them if that tells you anything.

 

[flingwing1969]

I don't like FF couplers either.

Had them on my grapple....switched back to 7241 iso B's.

I may be way off base....but here is my thoughts....

FF couplers came about as being cleaner and low/no spill. IE: eco-friendly. I am thinking this was a push from Uncle sam.to solve a problem where a problem didn't exist. Kinda like the new crap gas cans.

The problem is without a way to spill a little fluid...they indeed lock up under pressure.

Sure, non-FF couplers can lock up....but it is less likely due to the little fluid that is spilled. And if they do lock up...they are exponentially easier to bleed.

As far as cleanlieness of the couplers itself....simple 99 cent caps work wonders.

Yes there ARE connect under pressure couplers. Supposed to be able to connect and disconnect under full system pressure just as easy as zero pressure. But I have never used them.

For me, it's simple economics. A set of 1/2" ag style (non-ff) cost around $10. A set of FF run around $50. And connect under pressure FF run $80-$100 a set.

So are the connect under pressure FF couplers better than AG's....probably. are they worth 10x the price....not to me. Are standard FF better than AG's....well not IMO. Even if cost was the same...I wouldn't do it. Again, I had a set of FF on the shelf for my grapple. For all intents and purposes they were free. I spent $10 a set and put standard couplers on after fighting with them if that tells you anything.

Can't argue with that, except that I don't like or dislike the FF couplers - I really don't have enough experience with them to form an opinion, I only have the one set.

 

[Fallon]

I have issues with my FF connectors on my 3rd function, even with cycling the valves with the machine off before hitching & before unhitching. Had to crack threads a few times to bleed off impliments. As it's PHD & plow with single acting cylinders I only need to crack one. The connectors are a lot cleaner than the ag style on the back.

I have had issues connecting my rear ag style QDs though. When the 3pt is lifted with an impliment on, my TnT cylinders can't be connected. They get pressurized by the impliment weight & leverage. Dropping the 3pt let's me hook up though. I'd assume I'd have similar issues to the FF connectors because of this if I messed with my TnT QDs more often or they had thermal pressure issues.

 

[ovrszd]

It's my uneducated, experience only thought that the type of coupler isn't going to make it easier/harder to connect/unconnect if the problem is residual pressure.

FF connectors are cleaner.

Pioneer AG connectors are easier to relieve pressure if the male connector is involved.

 

[flingwing1969]

I have issues with my FF connectors on my 3rd function, even with cycling the valves with the machine off before hitching & before unhitching. Had to crack threads a few times to bleed off impliments. As it's PHD & plow with single acting cylinders I only need to crack one. The connectors are a lot cleaner than the ag style on the back.

I have had issues connecting my rear ag style QDs though. When the 3pt is lifted with an impliment on, my TnT cylinders can't be connected. They get pressurized by the impliment weight & leverage. Dropping the 3pt let's me hook up though. I'd assume I'd have similar issues to the FF connectors because of this if I messed with my TnT QDs more often or they had thermal pressure issues.

Yes, I don't know why it's true, but it is. I can't say it is a "feature" of FF couplers because I have had occasional residual pressure in ag style as well but the FF are certainly very consistent in this regard. As I said, relieving the pressure in the ag style is very easy, a tap on the end of the male, and a dowel in the female and a tap and the pressure is gone. No such possibility with the FF, but the pressure is slight and can be overcome with a mechanical advantage, just not with my apparently puny hands/arms. I'm thinking a Vice Grip pliers sort of like this, sized to fit over both couplers and then squeeze might do the trick.

 

[Industrial Toys]

It's funny how anything so oily can rust so quickly. I got FF connectors on various equipment like jack hammers that were rusted solid but not to look at. Soaking them in brake fluid (for years) did not free them up.

If I have an implement sitting outside longer then I should, I will walk over and spray the FF couplers with a good light lubricant every now and then. And often before I put something away for a while. It seems to help.

 

[Texasmark]

I知 figuring out some front end loader attachments and was told that using flat face hydraulic connectors is better for continuous flow applications. Is that true? I知 trying to figure out if I should change the connectors on the 3rd valve on the tractor or pushback and change the two attachments I知 looking at.
Right now the cost would be a push. Trying to make the right choice for the future.

Thanks.

I have both kinds for loader and remotes on several tractors. When buying new I attempted to decide which serves be better and it's a toss up.

On flow, some have suggested to me to adapt up and back down to the next diameter sized connection. On flow restrictions per se, an orfice is not as restrictive on flow as would be an undersized conductor for some distance so it's not apples and apples when deciding on connections.

Last, OEMs specify their equipment when qualifying tests are conducted and posted in spec sheets. Pretty much says what the equipment is capable of.

 

[flingwing1969]

It's funny how anything so oily can rust so quickly. I got FF connectors on various equipment like jack hammers that were rusted solid but not to look at. Soaking them in brake fluid (for years) did not free them up.

If I have an implement sitting outside longer then I should, I will walk over and spray the FF couplers with a good light lubricant every now and then. And often before I put something away for a while. It seems to help.

Good advice. Carry a can with you all the time and hit it a lick now and then.

 

[TSO]

I have FF couplers on my Terex/ASV track machine. I don't have any problems with the connections and I prefer them to the ball Ag style couplers. Like others have already mentioned, I find them much easier to clean and they do seem to leak less fluid.

On that machine, I have a button on top of the hydraulic block that relieves pressure from the couplers. (See pic) It works fantastic and quickly relieves pressure on the machine side of the connection. The only time I have any issues is if there is still pressure in the line on the IMPLEMENT side of the connection. In that case, a few attempts to make the connection will usually bleed enough fluid out of the hoses on the implement side to ease up on the pressure and I can make the connection.

On my tractor, I have the ball Ag style connectors on my rear remotes. I don't mind them, but I wish there was a relief button because it is annoying to have to turn off my machine to relieve the pressure. My tractor also has the flat tappet style Ag connections, which are used on the quick disconnects for the loader circuits. I don't really like these as I find that they occasionally (rarely, but has happened) unseat themselves. I think they are there too limit the flow rate to keep the loader from moving too quickly. I have had thoughts about replacing them and experimenting with a faster connector, but haven't gotten around to it.

To the OP... I'm wondering if your problem doesn't have anything to do with the connections on the tractor side, but instead has to do with the pressure staying in the lines on the implement side of your setup. Maybe it would help if you try to relieve the pressure on that side of things first. Maybe get yourself a spare male and female connector that you can keep unattached to anyting, but that you can insert into the circuits which are under pressure, and let it flow out of the open-end to relieve that pressure....?