The Magic Backhoe???

[SPYDERLK]

Well, I'm finding it hard to believe that merely bypassing the FEL control valve and not utilizing a rear remote set is going to increase my available pressure at the backhoe by very much. I just don't get it. But I am now more willing than ever to fully instrument it and find out. This may not be the end of the story... I haven't spoken directly with the owner yet... but I find it hard to believe that this #15087 hydraulic kit alone could cost $600.00.

Dougster

According to the gauge I have on my pump outlet it costs 700psi to flow 17gpm back to the reservoir thru the FEL, 3pt, and remote valve bodies in the centered position. Assuming this holds in the remote valve flow position, an arrangement to bypass this entire restriction would make the BH faster and stronger at speed, but wouldnt affect overall strength much at lower pump delivery rates where line losses are a lot lower. My line losses seem to be around 200psi at 12gpm. Still some to gain - just not as much.
larry

 

[Tim_in_IA]

maybe the magic backhoe attachment is just a garden hose that shoots water into the hole every now and then to reduce friction???

 

[Dougster]

According to the gauge I have on my pump outlet it costs 700psi to flow 17gpm back to the reservoir thru the FEL, 3pt, and remote valve bodies in the centered position. Assuming this holds in the remote valve flow position, an arrangement to bypass this entire restriction would make the BH faster and stronger at speed, but wouldnt affect overall strength much at lower pump delivery rates where line losses are a lot lower. My line losses seem to be around 200psi at 12gpm. Still some to gain - just not as much.
larry

Those numbers are amazing Larry. Since I run the backhoe at 2,000 to 2,650 engine RPM (+/-) depending on the task at hand, and since I assume that my valves and lines are proportionally smaller than yours, it appears that similar high losses could be happening here as well. If so, there might be something to this "MMM" after all... but there is no way I am paying $600.00 for some hoses, fittings, brackets and a selector valve. I don't care if they are made out of gold.

All I can say is that tests, Tests, TESTS are badly needed here.

Dougster

 

[Dougster]

maybe the magic backhoe attachment is just a garden hose that shoots water into the hole every now and then to reduce friction???

Nope. I already tried that mod. Just made a muddy mess!!!

Dougster

 

[Savagepike]

In theory there is a way to increase the power of the backhoe (or fel for that matter) by manipulating the "plumbing", but it seems to me it would make the hydraulics move at a snails pace. More power and much slower vs. adequate power and sensible speed. I'll stick with the latter... but I think everything could always use just a little more power though

 

[Dougster]

In theory there is a way to increase the power of the backhoe (or fel for that matter) by manipulating the "plumbing", but it seems to me it would make the hydraulics move at a snails pace. More power and much slower vs. adequate power and sensible speed. I'll stick with the latter... but I think everything could always use just a little more power though

Well, it sounds like you are talking about larger diameter cylinders. Not sure how much I could do with that on the backhoe since I would be decreasing the design margins in the various structural components and hardware. I've wanted to take a close-up look at a 609 to see how much (if any) of the structure and hardware remains the same as my 509, but I've not yet had the opportunity. All I know right now is that they share the same buckets and a few other misc. features and options.

On the other hand, I've thought long and hard about increasing the diameter of the boom lift cylinders on my FEL by one notch. Every time I walk by a slightly beefier KMW loader, I find myself eyeballing (and sometimes even measuring) the lift cylinders for a potential fit. But until Jeremy changes his mind and gives me his explicit permission, I better obey his orders and stick with the lift cylinders that are on there now.

Dougster

 

[JerryG]

Doug,
Do you have a shop manual that shows the pressure and flow available at the remotes?

 

[shvl73]

On the other hand, I've thought long and hard about increasing the diameter of the boom lift cylinders on my FEL by one notch. Every time I walk by a slightly beefier KMW loader, I find myself eyeballing (and sometimes even measuring) the lift cylinders for a potential fit. But until Jeremy changes his mind and gives me his explicit permission, I better obey his orders and stick with the lift cylinders that are on there now.

Dougster

Aw, just go for it!
Though the risk could be your own modified version of a curved boom loader!

 

[Dougster]

Doug, Do you have a shop manual that shows the pressure and flow available at the remotes?

I do not. The shop manual that I do have (it's the "old sheet metal" version) is silent on that point.

Dougster

 

[Dougster]

Aw, just go for it! Though the risk could be your own modified version of a curved boom loader!

Oh wonderful!!! NOT!!!

No, I'm listening to Jeremy. He is Da Man and he says to leave it alone. It's pretty obvious that I not currently meeting the full published lifting capability spec, but I attribute that to a likely "too low" setting on the tractor's pressure control circuit. Again, this is something I need to check out and have adjusted if necessary.

Dougster