Solenoid valves or Manual Spools for remote ports?

[brianidaho]

I'm looking at buying a new tractor in the near future, and can't convince myself that I want to spend the money that Kubota wants for remotes. I want 3 rear remote axes, near term use will be for a rear blade angle, offset and tilt. Given that I'm not exactly loaded, I'll probably do this myself.

As I see it, I can mount a 3 station manual spool valve up on the fender...this works, but requires a lot of plumbing for 6 lines going to the rear of the tractor, plus a large bank of valves somewhat in the way. Option 2 is to mount a manifold with 3, 3 position 4 way solenoid valves on the rear of the tractor, QDs could mount directly on the manifold. My only plumbing is the supply and return from PB port. Control would be via 3-position rocker switches. While this adds some wiring, it would probably be quite a bit less work, in that it's easier to route wires than hydraulic tubing. In addition, it's nice to wire in a second set of switches accessable from the rear of the tractor, it can make connecting attachments easier.

What are your thoughts? My concern with the solenoids is the loss of control or ability to "feather" the valve. It wouldn't work for a FEL, but I don't think it's a big issue here. I had a similar setup on my grey market Shibaura (tilt axis), and didn't see any negatives.

Thanks,
Bri

 

[kennyd]

This is an old story..."the factory setup is to much, I can do it cheaper", when the fact is, by the time you buy all the parts it is usually not that much cheaper, and it never looks as good as the factory stuff.

But-to answer your question directly, I would not be happy with solenoid valve for the rear. Not having the ability to feather the functions is a show stopper.

With that said, you can still mount a regular spool valve on the fender and mount the QD's just like you are talking about doing with the manifold.

 

[john_bud]

Get a 3 spool with PB, power it from the FEL valve's PB circuit. Then run it's PB to the valve block the FEL's was going to. No solenoid needed. If you can find a small one, you may be able to rig it in tight where the factory set go.

jb

 

[brianidaho]

This is an old story..."the factory setup is to much, I can do it cheaper", when the fact is, by the time you buy all the parts it is usually not that much cheaper, and it never looks as good as the factory stuff.

Kabota (at least the dealer I talked with) wants $900 per axis for remotes, talk about violation! I'm thinking 3 axes could be done for $500-600 easy, with the solenoid valve approach anyway. I tend to agree with you on the feather concern though.

 

[3RRL]

Personally, for the implements running off the rear remotes, I want the ability to "feather" their movement.
I can see where full flow would not be what I wanted when I set my implements. I use mine to set the hydraulic scarifier height on my boxblade, I set the top link via one set, I set the hydraulic guage wheels via another and so forth. I'd want the control for much of that stuff. I've got a solenoid valve to control the grapple up front and there are times when I wish I could feather it too.

My thoughts on the solenoid valve manifold and mounting the QD's directly to it is that it needs to be mounted in a position that is accessible and easy to remove and connect your hoses. Keep in mind that a lot of the rear remote locations shown in photos do not always allow you good access nor leverage when fighting a sticky connection when you have a big implement on the rear. I made my own set up and mounted them what I though was a good place. But even where I have them now, I wish they were more outboard. I would much rather have to have a foot longer hose than crawl between some big implement and the rear of the tractor to hook up the hoses.
So, with that in mind, you might need to run hoses to accomplish a good location for the rear remotes. If that's the case, then you'd only have to run 1 more hose on the manual spool valve (return to tank) vs the solenoid valves. The position my spool valve is located pretty good where it's easy to control from the cab plus reachable from the rear of the tractor. I think mostly though, you'd want to consider the control of flow.
Rob-

 

[Jeepnford]

Kabota (at least the dealer I talked with) wants $900 per axis for remotes, talk about violation! I'm thinking 3 axes could be done for $500-600 easy, with the solenoid valve approach anyway. I tend to agree with you on the feather concern though.

Have you checked into buying remote kits from Kabota? I bought two remotes from Messicks for my Case and had less than $900.00 in them self-installed. It was worth it to me since the hard lines were pre-bent and I didn't have to search for parts. I haven't done a lot of hydraulic work either.

 

[dynasim]

I would buy a factory installed single port, and put the solonoid valve on the single port(to turn it into a multiport valve). You may be able to do this off of the loader function(I would use the curl circuit).

In essence, use the solonoid to multiplex an existing full function valve, retaining the ability to feather.

Not that the the lines for the things you are talking about can be small(and therefore less obtrusive to run long distances) because they are not speed sensitive.

Chris

 

[brianidaho]

I would buy a factory installed single port, and put the solonoid valve on the single port(to turn it into a multiport valve). You may be able to do this off of the loader function(I would use the curl circuit).

In essence, use the solonoid to multiplex an existing full function valve, retaining the ability to feather.

Not that the the lines for the things you are talking about can be small(and therefore less obtrusive to run long distances) because they are not speed sensitive.

Chris

That's an interesting thought. A three-position rocker swith would allow selecting of what pair of ports is active, while actual throttled flow is controlled by the factory single port. That could be a pretty slick setup. The cost might well approximate the factory 3-spool setup though. I'm heading to the dealer tomorrow to get a good look at the factory setup, and to verify costs. Still torn, if the dealer wants $2500, I'm doing something different-I've done enough with industrial hydraulics to see that kind of cost as way out of line for what's involved.

 

[SPYDERLK]

I'm looking at buying a new tractor in the near future, and can't convince myself that I want to spend the money that Kubota wants for remotes. I want 3 rear remote axes, near term use will be for a rear blade angle, offset and tilt. Given that I'm not exactly loaded, I'll probably do this myself.

As I see it, I can mount a 3 station manual spool valve up on the fender...this works, but requires a lot of plumbing for 6 lines going to the rear of the tractor, plus a large bank of valves somewhat in the way. Option 2 is to mount a manifold with 3, 3 position 4 way solenoid valves on the rear of the tractor, QDs could mount directly on the manifold. My only plumbing is the supply and return from PB port. Control would be via 3-position rocker switches. While this adds some wiring, it would probably be quite a bit less work, in that it's easier to route wires than hydraulic tubing. In addition, it's nice to wire in a second set of switches accessable from the rear of the tractor, it can make connecting attachments easier.

What are your thoughts? My concern with the solenoids is the loss of control or ability to "feather" the valve. It wouldn't work for a FEL, but I don't think it's a big issue here. I had a similar setup on my grey market Shibaura (tilt axis), and didn't see any negatives.

Thanks,
Bri

I like your idea. Cleanliness and flexibility of the setup is important in so many situations. Feathering can be accomplished by incremental switching and line restictors for the apps you describe. Im looking at this option for expanding my remote setup.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-buying-pricing/69977-remotes-top-tilt.html - - see posts by ct tree guy.
larry

 

[brianidaho]

spyderlk, I need to spend some more time following that thread. I'm initially going with the factory setup for the first 2 remotes, it gets me the body/fitting required to get at power beyond, it seems that there is no plugged power beyond port on this tractor. So rather than removing a $.59 plug, you get to buy and install an expensive adapter. I think I'll go with a hybrid setup, 2 "manual" factory remotes now + some solenoids at a future date. A 3-station hydraulic manifold runs about $100 from Surplus Center, each D03 solenoid is about $110. McMaster Carr has some waterproof, NEMA-rated rocker switches, as well as joysticks. I eventually want Top-N-Tilt, plus hydraulic angle, offset and possibly gauge wheels on my blade, and would someday like a grapple, so there is plenty of opportunity to play. In addition, if you need maintained hydraulics (say for a splitter), you can wire a maintained contact switch in parallel with a momentary contact one.

With respect to flow restrictors, you can also mount adjustable flow control valves, that way you can tune the response to your needs.

I'm thinking a nicely integrated panel with rockers for hydraulics plus switches for extra lights could be nice.

Buying the tractor is just the start of the money drain....

I should note that the factory 2 remotes runs $1200, painful, but not quite as bad as I feared. The block to get to power beyond adds to the cost of the first axis, after that it's just valves. The valves mount off the back of the tractor, there is a linkage that allows the handles that actuate them to extend up through the factory slots next to the seat. I'll be studying this a lot more once it's delivered.