Grapple Very Dissapointed with MIllonzi Grapple

[wedge40]

My problem with the Millonzi is the huge hole when its fully closed up. What if you are picking up a 3" x20'log?

That would be small, but stuff that small would get pushed into a pile and then picked up as bunch. Or I would take the chipper to the wood and turn it into mulch.

Wedge

 

[wkpoor]

I do see something about the Millonzi. The Bodozer relies on pure hydraulic clamp pressure to hold items. The millonzi has a flat pan to hold stuff and the clamp just keeps it in place.

 

[IslandTractor]

I do see something about the Millonzi. The Bodozer relies on pure hydraulic clamp pressure to hold items. The millonzi has a flat pan to hold stuff and the clamp just keeps it in place.

That is correct. The upper jaw on the Millonzi is powerful enough to hold stuff with hydraulic pressure but the design of the grapple allows you to use the lower tines as a scoop independently. I discovered how useful that was when I switched tractors and for a couple of weeks did not get around to getting longer hydraulic hoses that would permit full range of motion with the grapple. I could still put the lower tines under objects, pop them out of the ground and then use the (limited motion) top jaw to hold stuff in place.

The top jaw of the Millonzi is quite powerful though as I inadvertently discovered when I clamped on what I thought was a small rock sticking out of the ground and lifted it out. I pulled up a boulder that must weigh close to a ton (4ftx3ftx3ft granite) and when I got off the tractor to admire my work I realized I was pressing the boulder against the grapple bottom with only a single top tine.

 

[Westendorf-RR]

Just to be clear, the Westendorf is really not a full function grapple. You cannot curl or dump. It utilizes those mechanical actions to open and close the grapple jaws so the orientation of the grapple is always forward facing and fixed. It would be fine for moving logs around but clearly has some serious limitations. It would, for example, be very limited in stumping or root raking or picking up piles of debris. In addition, it costs more than the Millonzi LD48 so the only real advantage it offers is the ability to have a pseudo grapple with limited functions without needing to hook up hydraulics. That may well appeal to some folks and I don't mean to disparage the device but it really should not be discussed as a true grapple.

If you want to retain your dump and roll back, the hydraulic option is available in the 6000, 7000 and 8000 units. The most unique feature on both the mechanical and hydraulic units is the independent action of the teeth, this is a patented feature and you won't find it on any other unit. They don't open and close in unision. It allows them to conform to very lopsided loads with a tight secure grip. Are you certain your opinions of the limitations of the units are correct without having operated them? I've personally operated these and picking up piles of debris, brush or other objects is NOT hard or problemsome. It is very precise. It is not designed for stumping or root raking, but for more precise handling of objects. By using your lift cylinders and moving the tractor in relationship to the load counter acts not having the tilt feature. Especially since is can save upwards of $2000 in expense of replumbing your loader/tractor to accommodate a grapple. I would beg to differ that these are not - "true grapples".

 

[IslandTractor]

If you want to retain your dump and roll back, the hydraulic option is available in the 6000, 7000 and 8000 units. The most unique feature on both the mechanical and hydraulic units is the independent action of the teeth, this is a patented feature and you won't find it on any other unit. They don't open and close in unision. It allows them to conform to very lopsided loads with a tight secure grip. Are you certain your opinions of the limitations of the units are correct without having operated them? I've personally operated these and picking up piles of debris, brush or other objects is NOT hard or problemsome. It is very precise. It is not designed for stumping or root raking, but for more precise handling of objects. By using your lift cylinders and moving the tractor in relationship to the load counter acts not having the tilt feature. Especially since is can save upwards of $2000 in expense of replumbing your loader/tractor to accommodate a grapple. I would beg to differ that these are not - "true grapples".

I don't want to get into a semantic argument about what a "true grapple" is but I stand behind the points I made in the earlier post. That is not to say that the Westendorf grapple is not a useful tool and I certainly think that it is but it does involve some compromises and those should be clear to potential purchasers. You state that there is a hydraulic option. I'm sure that restores many of the features I said were limitations on the basic model but it obviously increases cost as well both for the hydraulic enhanced grapple and also to plumb the tractor.

Your estimate of $2000 to plumb a tractor for hydraulic function at the FEL is considerably higher than just about anyone actually pays for that even if they have all work done by a dealer and use the most expensive electric over hydraulic valve options. It is possible to rig hydraulics from an existing rear remote for less than a couple of hundred dollars in hose and connectors. Most people will shell out about $700 or so for a diverter valve kit and if they choose to have a dealer make the connections then another hour or two of skilled labor charges. The folks at WR Long have talked hundreds of naive owners through the installation however so professional installation charges are easily avoidable.

You did not state the cost of the base grapple in this thread but I recall from an earlier thread that the base non hydraulic Westendorf grapple costs more than $1000. If so then there are "true grapples" from both Millonzi and WR Long that cost less or the same.

If I were primarily moving logs and wanted no part of hydraulics then the Westendorf base grapple would certainly be on my list. Many folks here are using grapples in land clearing however which does often include root raking and stumping so my point remains that potential purchasers simply be clear on the potential limitations of a mechanical only grapple style such as yours. There are some workarounds for not having a curl/dump function but let's be clear that those functions add a whole lot of flexibility to grapple work.

 

[Westendorf-RR]

Each unit has it's function and it's application. If someone wants an inexpensive grapple without having to modify their tractor, the mechanical units are ideal at around $800-$900. We restored the hydraulic option for those that are equipped for hydraulic attachments such as larger loaders and skid steer users and they want to pay more... as you stated adding hydraulics adds cost. My estimate of $2000 said "up to"... that is if you add new 3-spool valve manifold and joystick plumbed into the tractor. If you want to rig the hydraulics you can do it for less. I will agree with your last statement of flexibility, and if you are using the units for land clearing and stumping, we'd consider you a heavy user and we'd recommended you go with the heavy duty hydraulic 8000 unit that retains the tilt feature and is built with heavy steel tubing supports. If you are using the grapple in the spring and fall to clean out a grove, pick up a few downed trees or clean up the yard, the mechanical units are a great cost saving alternative.

 

[jmc]

The most unique feature on both the mechanical and hydraulic units is the independent action of the teeth, this is a patented feature and you won't find it on any other unit. They don't open and close in unision. It allows them to conform to very lopsided loads with a tight secure grip.

Seems like there are a lot of products out there with two separate grapple arms, each with their own cylinder. Does your patent cover something in addition to that? Got a patent # handy?

John

 

[3RRL]

Not only that, getting the two jaws to work independently seems more like a function of hooking the two cylinders up in parallel. I mounted dual bucket grapples in parallel and they work like that. I'm pretty sure there's no patent for parallel hook up, is there?

 

[Westendorf-RR]

It has to do with the bottom part of the unit not just the top teeth. All other units on the market are mounted on buckets or a rigid set of lower teeth. Ours does not utilize a bucket so both the lower and upper teeth are independent of each side. I should have stated that more clearly. When you can get rid of the bucket you increase your visibility, you also move the load closer to the tractor for more lifting power and capacity. Our hydraulic models have rigid bottoms, but the mechanical units feature two independenly operated claws in the patent. The patent should be on US patent site under Westendorf. It is hard to envision, so I tried to illustrate with a series of photos. First a loader approaching the load, photo of what happens once the teeth encounter resistance as they close, and finally how the teeth have pivoted on the mechanical linkage unevenly around the load for a secure hold. The teeth alternate when they close based on the path of least resistance to conform around the uneven load. A couple of other photos also showing solid grasp on very uneven loads as trees are not very often even.

 

[jmc]

Our hydraulic models have rigid bottoms, but the mechanical units feature two independenly operated claws in the patent.

The other unclear item is in a previous post you say BOTH the mechanical and hydraulic units have the patented independent lower jaws. Still, that is a mechanical difference from the usual setups and I can see why you would encourage someone to reserve judgement before trying it.

Off hand, the traditional independent arms will handle a tapered load and the rigid lower structure will level up the load as you close the jaws if one side of the load is higher than the other. I can visualize your patented feature maintaining the cocked load position after closing and then you have to carry the load higher to keep it from dragging?

John