Hydraulic Fitting Question

[ETpilot]

Yesterday I made a mistake due to a dumb field mouse. I had my FEL with forks pointed down searching for wood debris in tall grass. I saw this mouse and sort of chased it along my route. Well the forks struck high ground and the bucket rolled to its limit causing the tractor to slow. I immediately raised the bucket and rolled it but I saw fluid spraying all over. I just shut down. Turns out one of the roll hoses rotated and it created a hole in the hose.

So I took the hose to NAPA and they made a new hose. I also kept the old hose. When I was ready to install, I checked one hose against the other and found the size of the new fitting different from original. Original fitting has a 3/8 opening. The new hose fitting has a 1/4 opening. This will, I imagine, cause a disparity between the 2 cylinders and may cause a problem due to flow rate. So I need opinions on this. New hose is not installed. I may have to take it back. The picture shows the different sizes.

 

[ptsg]

I suppose the right fitting on the picture is the old one, right? If you look deeper, the hole starts with 3/8", then it goes to 1/4". Just different brand fittings, machined slightly different. I think it'll be fine.

 

[RickB]

The more immediate problem is the one on the left LOOKS like an ORFS fitting and the one on the right LOOKS like a JIC fitting.

 

[Zebrafive]

The more immediate problem is the one on the left LOOKS like an ORFS fitting and the one on the right LOOKS like a JIC fitting.

That's what I thought too, first one ORFS, second one a little harder to tell for sure, not enough contrast, but I still think JIC.

1/4" ORFS has the same size threads as 3/8" JIC

 

[RickB]

Q

That's what I thought too, first one ORFS, second one a little harder to tell for sure, not enough contrast, but I still think JIC.

1/4" ORFS has the same size threads as 3/8" JIC

If that is the case, take the hose back and get one made using the correct fittings. On their dime.

 

[LouNY]

good eyes :thumbsup:

 

[RickB]

good eyes :thumbsup:

I’ve made a couple hoses with wrong fittings in my day.

 

[RNeumann]

With the reflection it’s hard to tell if they are the same type of fitting- they probably are. The flow difference between the two won’t make any difference on a CUT. Plus the old one has a step down in size that looks real close to the new one.....it’s negligible.

 

[LD1]

I think its just the lighting. But as to the hole size, if they are indeed the same and both JIC fittings, there is no issues at all

 

[ETpilot]

Thanks for the replies. This hose is for the roll cylinder on a Ford 7210 loader. After reading the replies I took another closer look at the hoses. Definitely not an ORSF fitting. I had to look that one up. No O ring. New fitting is a flared fitting, JIC.

Using a transfer punch I measured the port opening. New fitting definitely 1/4 inch opening, hose is 3/8 inch. Old fitting has a 3/8 inch opening. Using the transfer punch a 19/64 inch was the only one I could get inside. Only a .0468 difference from 1/4 inch. Best I can figure. So flow wise I may be ok. In any event, I am taking the hose back and see what they say. I am probably ok with this hose.

 

[Zebrafive]

I am glad you got the correct fitting. I'll blame the camera flash on washing out detail on the first fitting.

 

[/pine]

Agree the lighting is an issue looking at the pic...FWIW though only the male end of an ORFS fitting has an O-ring...

 

[RickB]

Agree the lighting is an issue looking at the pic...FWIW though only the male end of an ORFS fitting has an O-ring...

That’s true, I took it that there was no oring at the other side of the connection. Glad the fitting is correct, I don’t see the porting as a problem at all.

 

[ETpilot]

Thanks all. Picture was not the best. But I learned about the other fitting. NAPA said I will not have a problem. That if I did encounter a problem, to bring the hose back. After all the review I feel better now. Going to install the hose now. Thanks.