Why keep roll over bars down?

[AchingBack]

Don't forget to add helmets, head restraints, knee pads, shoulder pads, chaps, face shields, gloves, etc. etc. etc.

a jock strap with a cup protector, and a partridge in a pear tree.

 

[Aquamoose]

Basically it boils down to who gets the blame (and loose money in the process). It's mostly the litigation mentality of this society that pretty much ruins it for all of us. The government basically says "yeah, Joe can sue Bob" rather than say "Tough luck Joe". I even have to put warnings on all my products just to cover myself from certain folks who has a cousin that spilled hot coffee on herself from McDonald's.

 

[k0ua]

My current tractor ROPS is up 100 percent of the time as it is supporting my steel canopy. I trim trees when needed. On my last tractor I utilized the folding feature of the ROPS as it was stored in a building that required it to be folded. Yes it can be a pain to have to stop each time to fold and unfold the ROPS, but it was something I just got used to doing. With my current "Kioti Den" building it has enough clearance I don't have to worry about it.

 

[ray66v]

I'm ok with ROPS but manufacturers should only make them 12"-16" higher than tallest expected operator based on the butt to head height of the average human. AVERAGE human, not you skyscraper freaks of nature. (Humor intended).

Manufacturers have nothing to do with it. The federal government, (OSHA), mandates the height of a ROPS.

It's so many inches, (I think 36" or so), above the highest point a set can be set at. This was determined through extensive testing.

It's not just there to protect in a rollover. They are made high enough, to help prevent the tractor from rolling. Including flipping over, backwards.

They are working on self deploying ROPS, (think spring or pneumatic driven), due to the numbers of accidents because operators are not putting the ROPS up.

Self deploying ROPS will likely add to the cost of a tractor. And, may require re-certification, or replacement, at some interval, which will add to operating costs, and, or, reduce resale value.

 

[ovrszd]

This has been discussed before. The height thing doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The height above my head on all three of my tractors is different. The largest tractor being the shortest. On a side roll it would likely end on it's top or go right on over to opposite side or wheels. Least likely to do such would be the little JD.

 

[ray66v]

This has been discussed before. The height thing doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The height above my head on all three of my tractors is different. The largest tractor being the shortest. On a side roll it would likely end on it's top or go right on over to opposite side or wheels. Least likely to do such would be the little JD.

Believe what you want.

Roll-over protective structures (ROPS) for tractors used in agricultural operations. - 1928.51 | Occupational Safety and Health Administration

 

[burzynsr]

Originally Posted by ovrszd
This has been discussed before. The height thing doesn't hold up under scrutiny. The height above my head on all three of my tractors is different. The largest tractor being the shortest. On a side roll it would likely end on it's top or go right on over to opposite side or wheels. Least likely to do such would be the little JD.



Last time I checked the ROPS was supposed to protect the operator no matter what position the tractor ends up. I would rather have a ROPS up and roll completely from upright back to upright than have no ROPS and roll only 90 degrees. Who cares how far the tractor rolls. The whole idea is to keep a human alive. No matter if they are brilliant or stupid.

 

[ovrszd]

Not sure why my comment made anyone believe I don't understand the intention of rops.

My point is/was on my Kubota there is no way the rops is tall enough to limit the severity of the roll. And if you draw a straight line from the top of the rops to the top of the hood it becomes obvious there is no room for a driver inside the triangle safely.

I'll dig thru my pics and try to find a side shot of each of my tractors. You can then form your own opinions about the effectiveness of each.

 

[DavesTractor]

Not sure why my comment made anyone believe I don't understand the intention of rops.

My point is/was on my Kubota there is no way the rops is tall enough to limit the severity of the roll. And if you draw a straight line from the top of the rops to the top of the hood it becomes obvious there is no room for a driver inside the triangle safely.

I'll dig thru my pics and try to find a side shot of each of my tractors. You can then form your own opinions about the effectiveness of each.

We find that different manufacturers interpret the regs differently. On average, it seems the Japanese built Mahindra tractors have shorter ROPS relative to similar size Korean built Mahindra tractors. Not sure if that holds true across the board.

We know of a handful of rolled tractors, not including the fatal I mentioned above. On a late model tractor with a loader and ROPS, a side roll often happens when an operator has the bucket loaded and up in the air too high and is on a bit of a side hill and then turns. On the rolls with which I am familiar, they have all gone just 90 degrees. The ROPS and the loader arresting the roll at that point.

 

[ovrszd]

We find that different manufacturers interpret the regs differently. On average, it seems the Japanese built Mahindra tractors have shorter ROPS relative to similar size Korean built Mahindra tractors. Not sure if that holds true across the board.

We know of a handful of rolled tractors, not including the fatal I mentioned above. On a late model tractor with a loader and ROPS, a side roll often happens when an operator has the bucket loaded and up in the air too high and is on a bit of a side hill and then turns. On the rolls with which I am familiar, they have all gone just 90 degrees. The ROPS and the loader arresting the roll at that point.

As in all regulatory guidance, personal interpretation can change the results!!!!

An FEL with the bucket up at all would help stop the roll for sure.

 

[dickfoster]

We find that different manufacturers interpret the regs differently. On average, it seems the Japanese built Mahindra tractors have shorter ROPS relative to similar size Korean built Mahindra tractors. Not sure if that holds true across the board.

We know of a handful of rolled tractors, not including the fatal I mentioned above. On a late model tractor with a loader and ROPS, a side roll often happens when an operator has the bucket loaded and up in the air too high and is on a bit of a side hill and then turns. On the rolls with which I am familiar, they have all gone just 90 degrees. The ROPS and the loader arresting the roll at that point.

Makes sense and is why I'm uber careful on my mostly sloping property. I still haven't taken the tractor on much of it. I'm too ah skeered if it's steep but I'm working up to it gradually. Straight up and down is not much of a problem, some of it requiring 4WD to climb, but that side hill stuff still pegs my pucker factor meter. I always keep the loader low whether it's loaded or not. Lower CG is always better. I wish there were a way to widen the track width but I think spacers would void some warranty. I know wheel spacers aren't good for wheel bearings and axle shafts.

 

[IH782]

Tree limbs! If everyone kept their ROPs on and up there would be more roll overs by tree than what is saved by ROPs ask any commercial mower.... first thing they do is take off their ROPs.

:thumbsup: we lower ours. If you catch a limb it will pick the front right off the ground.

 

[gb1498]

Sounds like a great option instead of all or nothing.

My ROPS is 1.5" too tall to fit inside the shop where I keep it unless folded.

Already had one incident where it was dark and late driving into the shop and forgot to fold it.... the ROPS hit the framing and the tractor popped a wheelie never missing a beat... in the blink of an eye it was inside.

Concrete floor and concrete ceiling... my only alternative is to leave it outside... zoning prohibits new accessory buildings.

Keep a tennis ball dangling from a string which has kept me from making the same mistake again.

I did this once too I just got the tractor and thought it should fit then was in a rush to get it inside after washing I it and forgot to measure first and was driving in kinda slow and popped the front wheels off the ground and took me by surprise to say the least so I backed up lowered it and called myself some names lol and pulled it in I think the tractor should be fine everything looks ok it’s a Mahindra emax 20s what do you guys think

 

[bcp]

ROPS folded down will reduce wind resistance at top speed, allowing you to go about 0.0002 MPH faster when driving into a 40 MPH headwind.

Bruce

 

[bcp]

POPS too high for the door is not a tractor problem, it is a building code problem.



Bruce

 

[confederatemule]

I keep mine down because of tree limbs. Limbs can, and will, turn the tractor over sideways and flip it backwards. I have had this happen to me more
than once.

 

[RalphVa]

I keep watching videos and lots of people keep the roll bars down. Is there a reason this is done? Maybe simple question, just trying to learn if I am missing some performance gain. Mine are up and have never thought about lowering them.

Keep mine either in 90 degree position (i.e. straight back) or in 45 degree position. On the Kubota B, the 45 degree position allows it to go underneath my garage door without bashing it and causing $3,000+ damage and to also function as ROPS.

 

[npalen]

I'm still waiting to see, in the marketplace, a hydraulic fold option for the ROPS.

 

[ruffdog]

 

[ptsg]

I'm still waiting to see, in the marketplace, a hydraulic fold option for the ROPS.

There are gas spring assisted ones. I believe that actually turned into a requirement for the European market in 2018 but don't quote me on that. I just started seeing all 2018+ tractors with the gas spring attached to the ROPS.