Pats Easy Change with MF extending lower links-does it fit?

[ovrszd]

Now this is an interesting twist, a least for me. This would be a deal breaker for me too. Mind sharing what the implements were, and is the problem unique to the implement or to an entire class of similar implements?

One was a Rhino blade. It's built for CAT I or II. The tabs are under the main beam, rather than sticking out forward of the main beam. The design of the PAT's prevented them from going under the beam far enough to catch the pin. The other was a Rhino SE6 brush cutter. The pins were set so low on the upright mast that the PAT's couldn't go under them to get hooked.

I've found the best solution is a Quick Hitch. Make necessary modifications to the attachments until they all fit the QH. Especially now that I'm in the CAT II size. You don't move a CAT II attachment around by hand until the 3pt will hook up!!! I modified the blade to fit my CAT II QH and don't use the Rhino cutter.

 

[gwdixon]

Now that I recall better (yeah, I'm old), ovrszd is correct about some applications being a problem. The two he pointed out 1) limited or no access from the bottom and 2) the implement pins being too low are definite issues.

1) On my little foreign flail mower the Pat's had to be slid in horizontally and then the clevis pins run through them. The deck flashing was in the way. That was solved by cutting away a small square in the flashing under the clevis to give Pat's access from below.

2) On the same flail mower the clevis was to close to the ground for the Pat's to get under. That was first solved by putting 3' pieces of 4 x 4 posts under the runners. Later, a removeable metal stand w/bracket was welded to the front of the implement to keep it high enough for the Pat's to get under. It was a cheap foreign mower so you get what you pay for.

The moral is that you might check your implements to make sure there is access from underneath and that the pins sit high enough that it will allow the Pat's to get under the pins.