Why SSQA?

[Turbys_1700]

I just traded in a perfectly good 1720 New Holland with a nice Stoll FEL for a Workmaster 50 in part due to the SSQA feature on the FEL. I know that I stepped up from a compact to a utility sized tractor but the SSQA is so nice to change from bucket to forks. I'm getting a grapple and the hydraulics for my tractor this week so that will be another nice feature of the SSQA. Like RickB stated in the larger CUT or utility units most manufacturers have utilized this type of attachment system. Noting wrong with the JD system but your options are for Deere attachment compatibility units only.

 

[k0ua]

I am a grapple user too. I used mine just yesterday to pick up whole 30+ foot trees and take them to the brush pile. Sure I have forks too, they are great for picking up pallets. Can you stack logs and brush on forks? sure you can. You get off and stack it carefully, and go very slow so it doesn't fall off, or you put on your grapple, grab a mouthful and take off for the pile. I had tractors for decades before I bought a grapple. In fact looking a people's grapples here on TBN is what prompted me to get one. They sure are handy.

 

[CADplans]

The SSQA has one major drawback compared to the JD system,,, IT IS HEAVY!!
So, if the SSQA is heavier, that means less load in the bucket,, each and EVERY bucket full.

The JD quick attach has one major drawback,, those linch pins used to hold the bucket on.
If you get any where NEAR a twig,, that twig will grab the linch pin, it is GONE.

If I had a dime for every linch pin I have lost over the last decade,,,
I could afford a cup of coffee at Starbucks,,, :laughing:

(NOTE: I have a SSQA on my IH 584,, I did a DIY install of a SSQA takeoff)

 

[jibe717]

Maybe so. But probably not in the way you think. I may be wishing I had more horses and the ability to run a small square baler for a few hundred bales a year. I doubt the 39 horses in this thing will do that.

I'm somewhat of a rookie, but I've also spent the last 15+ years making do with an 8N so I know something about what has to happen.

That tractor will pull a small square baler. Just stay out of big hills since the weight of the baler and possibly wagon will push you around into spots that you don't want to be in. You have enough HP however.

 

[Btown]

The SSQA has one major drawback compared to the JD system,,, IT IS HEAVY!!
So, if the SSQA is heavier, that means less load in the bucket,, each and EVERY bucket full.

The JD quick attach has one major drawback,, those linch pins used to hold the bucket on.
If you get any where NEAR a twig,, that twig will grab the linch pin, it is GONE.

If I had a dime for every linch pin I have lost over the last decade,,,
I could afford a cup of coffee at Starbucks,,, :laughing:

(NOTE: I have a SSQA on my IH 584,, I did a DIY install of a SSQA takeoff)

Some aftermarket ones are heavy about 150-175 lbs but most stock ones are relatively light 70-90 lbs. I put a heavier one one on my tractor and it did not effect the performance much at all. It does make my life much easier and is well with the minuscule loss of performance. I have lost some lynch pins off of three point equipment, I think that is the weak point of the JDQA system. The I'd one probably takes about 10 seconds more to attach than the SSQA. Plus I usually have a lunch pin close on one of my fingers and they hurt. If I had the JDQA I would buy the black stronger lynch pins.

 

[Musdalen]

I'm pretty sure I can solve the lynch pin problem. That doesn't worry me at all.

The weight of the SSQA does, but not a whole lot. I don't really know what these things can lift in terms of the objects that I want to move. I know it's rated for 1598 lbs or something like that (or 1150 lbs on the on-line) specs, but I have no idea what a 10 ft ash log weighs and relative to those numbers. Saturday. I'll simply try to pick it up.

The grapple - that is one sexy, attractive, t-rex of toy. I can see why folks might want one. Maybe even me. I wonder if JD even makes one. I suspect I'd have to add a couple more hydraulic lines up front to run it. But anyway, that's the biggest argument for the SSQA.

Thanks for the comments on the hay baler. I don't know if I'll ever do it, but I have 2 horses, and if we move from the acreage we have now to one with hayable land, then I would give it a shot. I'd pick up bales separate.

Steve, your long set of comments were great. You have me thinking about not only grapples but weight. I am trying to NOT fill the tires. My 8N has loaded tires and it's super helpful of course. But the wife wants to ditch the lawntractor and mow with the 3039. I like the idea of one less motorized piece of equipment to store and maintain. But driving the 3039 on the lawn with loaded R4 industrial tires will be a bit much I think. So, I was thinking I would put chains on it in the winter (which are pretty useful anyway). And then I have a 3 point box that I used to use for hauling stuff years ago. I would rebuild that into a large rear weight in place of loaded tires to use whenever I'm working with the FEL. I will definitely opt for a Quick Hitch on the 3 point to make that whole on-off thing easier.

This thread has turned out to be much longer and more useful than I thought it would be. Many thanks to all. I look forward to Saturday to see what this little green bug of a tractor can really do.

 

[k0ua]

You will be able to find plenty of grapples with the JDQA setup. Yes they of course will require the hydraulic lines run up to the front, but that is doable.

Here is a handy calculator to get an idea of how much that log is going to weigh.

Timber and Lumber Calculators at WOODWEB

 

[Musdalen]

James, thanks... 1150 lbs with my guesses on dimensions. If that's correct, it should be a good test. I may need to put something like the mower on the rear to help with balance.

It's a heck of a lot of money for these green things but it is sort of fun to shop around. Learn a little bit everyday.

 

[k0ua]

James, thanks... 1150 lbs with my guesses on dimensions. If that's correct, it should be a good test. I may need to put something like the mower on the rear to help with balance.

It's a heck of a lot of money for these green things but it is sort of fun to shop around. Learn a little bit everyday.

Oh, absolutely, you will need a heavy rear weight on the rear. Don't even attempt picking of a log of that size without proper ballast. I know you are trying to avoid liquid ballast, and you can do without it in many circumstances, BUT if you don't have it, be SURE to always keep proper ballast on the 3pt when doing any loader work. I have about 800 lbs in my ballast barrel now and sometimes wish for more. I also have liquid ballast in the tires. There is nothing more disconcerting than having one or both of the rear tires off of the ground.

One example of when only liquid ballast will help you is when you are doing some kind of rear blade work. You often lose traction when blading dirt or gravel or something, and the blade itself doesn't help you as it is on the ground and resisting your forward motion. But the liquid ballast can mean the difference in moving forward or spinning your wheels. I can understand your reluctance to add liquid ballast because of wanting to keep your tractor light on the lawn.

 

[Musdalen]

James, the rear blade issue I see coming. I blade snow - at least in the old days before it went the way of the dodo - with te rear blade. And loaded tires are hard to beat for that. However, with 4x4 and chains and the FEL on the front, maybe I get by that way okay. This whole idea of mowing the lawn with the 3039 is misguided I think but I would like to dump the lawn buggy.