Smallest/least expensive tractor with closed center hydraulics.

[LouNY]

JD beat them to the market by a few decades. I saw this at a place that builds trailers, shortly after I purchased my tractor with plans to build a forklift attachment. When I saw it I felt totally vindicated in my silly idea. That was before I discovered this forum and the fact lots of people have already done what I wanted to do.

View attachment 570071View attachment 570072View attachment 570073View attachment 570074

I don't know how many of that style where "factory" there were several outfits that made conversions, they where popular around here with the orchards.

 

[strantor]

I don't know how many of that style where "factory" there were several outfits that made conversions, they where popular around here with the orchards.

I don't know either, but I strongly suspect that the machine I posted was born in that orientation. If you Google "John Deere 480-B" you will see loads of pictures of machines exactly like it.

 

[4570Man]

The tiny slick wheel forklifts are only for concrete and nothing else. The forklifts with larger air tires do decent in gravel and hard dirt.

 

[4570Man]

My Kubota multitask the loader smoothly. My backhoe multitask the boom and loader smoothly. The same for my CTL.

 

[MossRoad]

JD beat them to the market by a few decades. I saw this at a place that builds trailers, shortly after I purchased my tractor with plans to build a forklift attachment. When I saw it I felt totally vindicated in my silly idea. That was before I discovered this forum and the fact lots of people have already done what I wanted to do.

View attachment 570071View attachment 570072View attachment 570073View attachment 570074

Look where the forklift mast is attached on that machine. I don't think it's the 3pt hitch. I think its to the frame, as are the two huge tilt cylinders.

I'd go get some more pictures of how that thing is configured and try to copy the design.

 

[RickB]

I don't know how many of that style where "factory" there were several outfits that made conversions, they where popular around here with the orchards.

John Deere
International Harvester
Case
Allis Chalmers.
All manufactured rough terrain forklifts based on tractor chassis.
Mastercraft bought Ford skid units and manufactured forklifts around them.
All from the top of my head, I bet I missed some.

 

[strantor]

Look where the forklift mast is attached on that machine. I don't think it's the 3pt hitch. I think its to the frame, as are the two huge tilt cylinders.

I'd go get some more pictures of how that thing is configured and try to copy the design.

You're absolutely right, it's fixed to the rear (I mean front) axle. This page has heaps of pics.
I thought about doing the same thing. If I were to remove the 3-pt and bring the mast in as close in as I can get it, and mount it directly to the axle where the ROPS mounts, that would be awesome. It would make the tractor more stable, make maneuvering inside my shop much easier, all around good. But my axle is only rated 4,600lb and there's probably already 1,500 lbs of tractor sitting on it. I add another 1,500lb for the mast, and then my lifting capacity is only 1,600lbs. I'm going to be moving around CNC machines, very heavy. I would be much more comfortable with the forklift's axle handling the weight and the tractor just keeping the mast vertical.

 

[4570Man]

Look where the forklift mast is attached on that machine. I don't think it's the 3pt hitch. I think its to the frame, as are the two huge tilt cylinders.

I'd go get some more pictures of how that thing is configured and try to copy the design.

I’ve seen a bunch of those most of which didn’t look homemade. And the mast doesn’t hook on the 3point hitch. I’m guessing the manufacturers built a kit similar to the Case CK series to built them.

 

[MossRoad]

You're absolutely right, it's fixed to the rear (I mean front) axle. This page has heaps of pics.
I thought about doing the same thing. If I were to remove the 3-pt and bring the mast in as close in as I can get it, and mount it directly to the axle where the ROPS mounts, that would be awesome. It would make the tractor more stable, make maneuvering inside my shop much easier, all around good. But my axle is only rated 4,600lb and there's probably already 1,500 lbs of tractor sitting on it. I add another 1,500lb for the mast, and then my lifting capacity is only 1,600lbs. I'm going to be moving around CNC machines, very heavy. I would be much more comfortable with the forklift's axle handling the weight and the tractor just keeping the mast vertical.

I don't know what machine you are thinking about adding this to, but I'll tell you this from my own personal experience.

I drove a Ford forklift about 30 years ago, for about 6 years. It was a 4 speed manual transmission. I hated it!!! Trying to do precision loading into airplanes with a clutch, out in the elements, was just plain horrible. I do not recommend anyone, ever, owning, operating, or promoting a forklift with a manual transmission and clutch. They are inherently dangerous and unnecessary in today's world of hydrostatic transmissions.

I also operated a large, 20 ton unit loading a C130 for about a year. It was hydrostatic, and had a forward pedal on the right, a reverse pedal on the left, and a wide brake pedal in the middle. THAT was a nice setup, as you could ride the brake with the opposite foot of the foot that was controlling direction. Just a perfect setup and pleasure to drive.

I've also operated many 10,000 pound forklifts and clamp trucks over the past 30 years and all were hydrostatic.

 

[strantor]

I don't know what machine you are thinking about adding this to, but I'll tell you this from my own personal experience.

I drove a Ford forklift about 30 years ago, for about 6 years. It was a 4 speed manual transmission. I hated it!!! Trying to do precision loading into airplanes with a clutch, out in the elements, was just plain horrible. I do not recommend anyone, ever, owning, operating, or promoting a forklift with a manual transmission and clutch. They are inherently dangerous and unnecessary in today's world of hydrostatic transmissions.

I also operated a large, 20 ton unit loading a C130 for about a year. It was hydrostatic, and had a forward pedal on the right, a reverse pedal on the left, and a wide brake pedal in the middle. THAT was a nice setup, as you could ride the brake with the opposite foot of the foot that was controlling direction. Just a perfect setup and pleasure to drive.

I've also operated many 10,000 pound forklifts and clamp trucks over the past 30 years and all were hydrostatic.

It's an LS XR4140H, with the H standing for hydrostatic. When I was tractor shopping I was looking at barebones machines, standard transmission. I didn't want to pay for any bells & whistles. When I got to the LS dealership, they didn't have any manual transmissions on the lot at the time but they were selling the hydrostatic for less than the manuals I was comparing to. I figured "why not." I didn't have time to order one to my specs so I took what they had and paid extra for the hydro even though I didn't feel that I needed it. But you're absolutely right, I can see how that would be dangerous. A lot more is going on when loading/ unloading than driving a car down the road. I have on a couple of occasions began to feather the wrong pedal (FWD instead of REV or vise versa) while distracted by trying to coordinate the FEL, and I can see where a similar mistake on a manual (like dumping the clutch) would be disastrous. I'm glad I have the hydro and I wouldn't go back now.