Two hooks or three??

[Dargo]

Now, to confuse you a bit, here is another option. I'll readily admit that this wasn't my idea I borrowed this from someone else. After I'd welded 3 'weld on' (if you're paying them to weld them on, don't let them weld on 'pin on' hooks) hooks, I decided to copy what I saw a contractor using. That was a hitch insert welded on the center of his bucket. If he needed a hook, he just used an insert that had a hook on it. If he needed a ball to move a trailer, he just used an insert with a ball. Here's what I'm talking about (and, yes, you can see where I'd already welded a hook on before I saw his setup.

Also included is a picture of something I welded up for the 3 pt. hitch with scrap steel, but it isn't nearly as useful as the insert on the bucket. For me, it's easier on my neck to see what I'm doing in front of me rather than behind me.

 

[Tractor Factor]

Seriously nice work there, Dargo. I'm jealous of all you guys who are such talented welders.

And this is all WAY more than I ever wanted to know about hooks.

 

[Bob_Young]

You definitely want one in the middle, or close to it. However, the metal on the smaller tractor buckets is rather thin. Matt Jr.'s suggestion to anchor the center hook on a piece of angle iron welded to the bucket body is sound.

The dealer installed center hook on my B7610 is welded to the bucket lip only and the lip has sprung slightly from the loads I've had on it. On the MX5000 acquired later, the dealer did something like what Matt suggests and welded a piece between the bucket body and the bucket lip where the hook was to be attached.

With only two hooks (one at each end), plan on using both of them and trying to center the load whenever lifting anything heavy. Otherwise, you risk a turnover.
Bob

 

[BXpanded]

Originally Posted by Riptide23
I'm with froglick - I'd spring for the bxpanded hooks. Then you can put them wherever you want.

It isn't clear to me that there is significant clamping force with those, lack of which could translate to load side slip - and once going.....
They rely on friction in a "paint on paint" situation, which I think might be a problem - especially for those folk who wax their buckets, see other thread re; waxing rims.

Yeah, I know; lifting is lifting, is lifting, is vertical - but unless I absolutely KNOW that there is not going to be a horizontal force component or that there is significant clamping force I would be reluctant to trust a clamp on solution. One front wheel going over a bump might produce the sort of horizontal force component that I would be concerned about.

Reg, the possibility of sideways slippage was seriously considered in the design of the BXpanded hooks. Not to get into a discussion of the geometry of the system, but unlike screw type clamping systems, it is essentially a self tightening clamp. The heavier the load the tighter the clamping force. I'm attaching a photo of a quick simulation of a side hill situation. The loader is tilted 40 degrees from horizontal which is far steeper than a load carrying tractor can sidehill. (I wanted to tilt it farther but the loader tried to turn over on its side.) The load is only a little over 100 lbs but that's pretty much all I felt like handling after lifting the side of the loader.

 

[Reg]

Originally Posted by Riptide23
I'm with froglick - I'd spring for the bxpanded hooks. Then you can put them wherever you want.
Reg, the possibility of sideways slippage was seriously considered in the design of the BXpanded hooks. Not to get into a discussion of the geometry of the system, but unlike screw type clamping systems, it is essentially a self tightening clamp. The heavier the load the tighter the clamping force. I'm attaching a photo of a quick simulation of a side hill situation. The loader is tilted 40 degrees from horizontal which is far steeper than a load carrying tractor can sidehill. (I wanted to tilt it farther but the loader tried to turn over on its side.) The load is only a little over 100 lbs but that's pretty much all I felt like handling after lifting the side of the loader.

Thanks,
I can see how clamping force could be made a direct function of load, it wasn't obvious from the video I watched that these devices actually do that.
So, , , too bad they're Kubota bucket specific, but I'd guess you have a large enough market right there without having to design for every bucket lip profile.

 

[radioman]

If you already have 2 welded/bolted on, you could always get one BXpanded hook and use it in the middle. I am seriously considering taking my own advice. i have 2 bolt ons in each corner and sometimes its a bit tippy that way.

 

[LBrown59]

Hardly a Kubota specific question...
But I vote for three

Same here.
Three for me.

 

[California]

Another alternative: Hooks at the corners plus a trailer ball at the center. When you need a center pull, anchor the chain at the corner then take it around the ball like it was a saddlehorn. (And drop the chain down the back side of the bucket for the heaviest lifts). You might need to reinforce the lip of the bucket to support the ball.

You definitely need hooks at the corners so that you can lift using two points. This will keep the load from spinning around, perhaps smashing the grille, as it lifts clear of the ground. See my avatar. My elderly Yanmar has many scars illustrating this point... (But the scars were already there before I bought the tractor!)

 

[BigD23]

Going on 4 yrs of lifting w/3 hooks on a BX23 FEL, so far so good.....
Go for the 3.

Neat pic Volfandt.....

Don

 

[N80]

If you already have 2 welded/bolted on, you could always get one BXpanded hook and use it in the middle. I am seriously considering taking my own advice. i have 2 bolt ons in each corner and sometimes its a bit tippy that way.

How much do those things cost? The rings I got (pictured in the post above) cost about $9 (rated at 11,000 pounds) plus a couple bucks for high grade bolts:

Buyers Heavy-Duty Forged D-Ring — 1/2in. Dia. w/ 2-Hole Bracket | D-Rings | Northern Tool + Equipment

 

[Egon]

I'd go with the three hooks. Reason being is that I have just acquired a new used tractor and had some modifications made to the bucket as shown on the attached picture. Just wish I could have found the proper weld on hooks.

 

[SnowRidge]

How much do those things cost? The rings I got (pictured in the post above) cost about $9 (rated at 11,000 pounds) plus a couple bucks for high grade bolts:

Buyers Heavy-Duty Forged D-Ring — 1/2in. Dia. w/ 2-Hole Bracket | D-Rings | Northern Tool + Equipment

This is a perfect example of BS marketing. Those rings aren't rated at 11,000 lbs. That is their average breaking point, which is something you don't even want to come near to with your load, lest you find the actual breaking point. Look further down the ad and you will find the real rating. It's 4,080 lbs, just a hair over two tons.

Plain and simple, you never want to exceed the rated safe working load. Those are two ton rings. They are not even safe for use with loads normally handled by grade 40 3/8 chain. The most you can safely use is grade 40 5/16 inch chain, which is rate at 3,900 lbs. Bottom line, those D rings are limited to loads of 3,900 lbs or less.

 

[N80]

This is a perfect example of BS marketing. Those rings aren't rated at 11,000 lbs.........Look further down the ad and you will find the real rating. It's 4,080 lbs, just a hair over two tons.

This is my tractor:

Not this:

That means that one of these hooks will handle more than twice what my loader is rated at, 4 times what it is rated if I use two and 8 times more than I will ever lift with one, and probably 20 times more that what any BX is going to lift. So yes, the spec my be deceitful, but the fact is that the unit far exceeds its intended or even possible use.

 

[SnowRidge]

This is my tractor:

Not this:

That means that one of these hooks will handle more than twice what my loader is rated at, 4 times what it is rated if I use two and 8 times more than I will ever lift with one, and probably 20 times more that what any BX is going to lift. So yes, the spec my be deceitful, but the fact is that the unit far exceeds its intended or even possible use.

That's not the point. The point is Northern is lying by giving the breaking strength as the main rating, while listing the SWL down the page, and too many people don't understand the difference. From the web page you linked to:

Protect your gear and equipment from banging around in your trailer. Heavy-duty steel ring and 2-hole mounting bracket have an 11,000-lb. rated capacity.

You yourself called them 11,000 lb rings. They aren't, but someone who doesn't quite understand all this stuff will go out and buy these things thinking it is safe to use them to secure an 11,000 lb load. It isn't, not by a long shot.

 

[Evil the Weasel]

Now I know why there are no factory hooks on buckets.

 

[N80]

That's not the point.

I understand your point. My point is that these hooks, if you look at the specs that matter, way exceed any stress that will be put on them by lifting with a CUT loader. In fact, one of them would support the weight of my whole tractor.

The point is Northern is lying by giving the breaking strength as the main rating, while listing the SWL down the page, and too many people don't understand the difference.

Yep, if I pick up 11,000 pounds they might break.

You yourself called them 11,000 lb rings.

And you are right, I honestly did not research the specs. But knowing that the heaviest thing I'm ever likely to lift with them will weight less than 1000 pounds, the 11,000 pound break limit is still pretty sufficient info to suggest that they will be more than sufficient.

They aren't, but someone who doesn't quite understand all this stuff will go out and buy these things thinking it is safe to use them to secure an 11,000 lb load. It isn't, not by a long shot.

Agreed. I would hope that anyone in a position to be securing 11,000 pound loads would be aware of this type of thing, but there are a lot of careless folks out there.

 

[SnowRidge]

George, I have noticed a tendency of the chain stores and their suppliers to highlight the breaking strength of tie downs and chain hardware, instead of the safe working load (SWL) or working load limit (WLL), which are the same things, as far as I know. Sometimes the SWL isn't even mentioned.

I think this is a despicable practice, and while I am not one to favor excessive government regulation, I think this is one area we need more of it. Lifting and tie down equipment should only be rated by its safe working load, not its breaking strength, and that should be a government mandate.

 

[N80]

Agreed. That sort of regulation is hardly intrusive, it would simply assure that the proper and necessary info is provided honestly.

And as the saying goes, if men do not govern themselves...a government will.

 

[Egon]

The chances are very good that one is already under a controlling agency's jurisdiction whenever one ventures forth on public property with his tractor on a trailer.

The same may well apply to construction sites.