Grapple ideas and how are these companies?

[shooterdon]

Not here to bash others but like deezler, I bought the MTL. I only move small trees, logs and brush and it has worked well. For a hobby user it has done a good job. IIRC I got both the grapple and pallet forks from MTL for less than a "good" grapple.

If I was working it hard or planned on it lasting 30 years I may have been able to justify a "good" one. I bought it when I was 70 and have 20 acres to take care of. Good enough was good enough.

 

[smokin joe]

I would also go with the lighter one or get a skinnier grapple. 100lbs may not sound like alot but its 1/3 more weight of the 300lb one. That's quite a bit.

For things like firewood logs and brush the lid width really dosnt matter much as generaly the stuff is going to hang outside the grapple. Owning a 3/4 lid grapple with really only 3 teeth on the lid I cant see where the lid design matter all that much. How ever I can see where the lower teeth and number of teeth matter.

What width is good for logs and firewood. Does narrower make it better? I'm looking 60" or 48"

 

[drumminj]

What width is good for logs and firewood. Does narrower make it better? I'm looking 60" or 48"

I have a 55" grapple with my L4701 (Homestead Implements). Works great for brush, logs for bucking/cutting up for firewood. I don't believe I've ever wished it was wider, but I suspect I'd feel similarly if it was 60".

 

[alexpops]

Your FEL lifts what? 1100 pounds? Any weight you add to the grapple via width/strength takes away from load. So how heavy are the logs you are lifting? Cut them shorter if they are too heavy & make more trips or get a lighter/narrower grapple that will still do the work. Brush? It's relatively light but bulky & everything hangs out the sides anyway so the width is mainly to control loss of "shorts" that don't get clamped down tight enough as you're moving to your burnpile.

 

[smokin joe]

Cool. That's what I was thinking. I'll go with the 48" virnig. Saves the most weight and I think it will do just fine.

Thanks all.

 

[drumminj]

the width is mainly to control loss of "shorts" that don't get clamped down tight enough as you're moving to your burnpile.

I'd suggest the tine spacing is a factor here as well, and one reason I went with a 55" grapple vs 60". Closer tine spacing = fewer things fall through, so the grapple works well for piles of small brush and leaves (what I've been working with this weekend).

 

[2manyrocks]

Not here to bash others but like deezler, I bought the MTL. I only move small trees, logs and brush and it has worked well. For a hobby user it has done a good job. IIRC I got both the grapple and pallet forks from MTL for less than a "good" grapple.

If I was working it hard or planned on it lasting 30 years I may have been able to justify a "good" one. I bought it when I was 70 and have 20 acres to take care of. Good enough was good enough.

I bought the 48" MTL Attachments grapple last year for my L2501. Seems like exactly the right size and weight for my L2501. Wish I'd bought one many years earlier.

 

[goeduck]

I have both wide and narrow grapples. Narrow is generally more useful and can lift more due to weighing less. Wide is better for moving long logs (more stable) and when using to haul trash (fallen shed or whatever).

 

[Torvy]

I have both wide and narrow grapples.

Show off!

 

[goeduck]

Show off!

Well I guess. 72" wide L bottom, 48" wide L bottom and 64" (I think) wide clamshell (root). I should have mentioned that I have multiple properties, hence part of the reason. The small 48" wide L grapple fits between the wheel wells of my pickup and is quick to transport, hook up and go.