Why would I want or not want a "float" on a rear remote?

[MossRoad]

What were you doing when that happened?

Lifting my brush cutter mounted on the FEL arms, setting it down on a multi-flora rose, having the deck hang up on a branch, thinking I wasn't pushing the joystick far enough forward, then going past the detent and into float, and down goes the deck onto the bush too fast.

Also have had it happen when working my forks in thick brush, and when using my log tongs on the FEL arms.

I could imagine it happening when someone is using it on a top link, standing behind their tractor and reaching over and operating the valve from the ground to get it to nudge something when trying to hook up the 3pt arms and dropping an implement on their feet.

Sure, you can blame operator error, bad decisions, lack of attention or knowledge, etc.... but it's better to engineer out as many of those things as possible in the first place. It's very easy to say "don't do that". It's a lot harder to get people to practice safe operating habits. And even those that do end up getting hurt eventually. How many stories have we all read with the headline "Lifetime farmer dies in farming accident"?

 

[sixdogs]

When disconnecting a rear remote tool I put the circuit into float before uncoupling. This releases any pressure in the circuit. So barring heat expansion the tool witth recouple easier.

Thank you.

 

[sixdogs]

Well it would help if you told us and idea of what you want the second remote for? And what do you use your first remote with? And is it a float?

Simplest answer is ....get float. There is no difference in operating a valve with float and one without. The float just adds an extra feature IF it is ever needed. But effects nothing else.

Mtnveiwranch gives an excellent reason for wanting float on a side link doing road work. Probably not related to his area but most certainly related to ohio....same principal as he describes but moving snow with a rear blade. Sure the 3PH control the up-down to follow the contour of the area to be plowed.....but it offers no left-right contour-following ability.

Float can also be used on the toplink. How many threads do we see on here about people suggesting putting a piece of chain in place of the toplink to allow the tail of an implement (specifically bushhog) to follow better. Many dont understand this, because MOST newer mowers have this built in. Either a swinging toplink clevis, or a chain from the a-frame to deck...or some other type of pivot. But there are still MANY MANY old cutters out there that are rigid. Ever seen old (lighter duty) cutters with the straps that go to the deck all bent up? .....Yep thats because someone tried to cross a swale or something and the tailwheel had no ability to raise independently.

Another time I like float is when pulling the transport disc. On a second pass, when I want more smooting action and less penetration.....I let the transport wheels float. Basically making the disc lighter....but not allowing the wheels to raise the disc's in the air if the ground is a little rolling.

You may get a float valve and NEVER use the float function. Which is fine....doesnt hurt you one bit in any other function. But for the little cost difference, its there if you ever need it.

I have tractors with one or two sets of remotes and all are standard. I use for basic agricultural application of opening and closing cylinders and that's all. No top N' tilt or anything like that. There are some implements now that have two or three cylinders so that takes me to the next level.

On my bucket loader, I very specifically wanted the float so I could back drag and smooth dirt out before I went over it with other equipment.

 

[LD1]

I am just gonna ignore the comments about accidental engagement of float. Its meaningless to argue that point any more than has been done.

IF no TNT or no plans for one ever....no float really isnt a benefit unless you have a scenario like I use with my disc. For a leveling and smoothing pass and dont want full penetration....I let the transport wheels float. that takes some weight off the discs so they dont cut as deep. and I can cruise a bit faster to throw around and level the dirt out better. But that is just my unique usage of float. Most modern farm equipment...either up or down is sufficient.

 

[LouNY]

I am just gonna ignore the comments about accidental engagement of float. Its meaningless to argue that point any more than has been done.
Most modern farm equipment...either up or down is sufficient.

Incorrect look at any no-till drill or corn planter, single action cylinder on the travel wheels,
look at a hay tedder with lift arms and a flex frame, single action cylinders,
any single action cylinder will work much better with a valve in float when not being extended.
if you have a back blade with hydraulic tilt float will let the blade float and stay in ground contact when plowing snow,
many older sickle bar mowers had a single action cylinder.
And as others have mentioned if you ever get a hydraulic top link float will handy some times.

 

[RickB]

It's not playing. Until he says what he has plans to use it for, it's a legitimate question and concern. Heck, he might want to run a motor with it, for all we know.

Running a motor is a GREAT reason to have a valve with float. It is a very common practice to use float position to stop flow to a motor instead of instantly locking the motor by selecting neutral or hold. You get the same functionality as a dedicated motor spool and retain the versatility of a common spool valve with no need for a crossover relief in the motor circuit.

This discussion is really disappointing. All this grasping at improbable happenstances to bolster closed minded points of view. Buy what you want and if you buy less than what current or future circumstances demand, live with it.

 

[/pine]

...
This discussion is really disappointing. All this grasping at improbable happenstances to bolster closed minded points of view...

Too bad that you find it disappointing that all this "grasping at improbable happenstances to bolster closed minded points of view"...because you obviously can't comprehend that rather than what you describe, it is nothing more than actually answering the OP's question...!

The OP did not ask for just the positives they asked for opinions on both "want" or "not want"...people do accidentally bump things...and it's not always an "improbable happenstance"...@#$% happens...if it is something that has been experienced and relates to the question it has merit...does not mean someone is "closed minded"...just the opposite imo...

You've been around this forum as long as anyone and are respected...maybe you're just getting cynical but did you not really expect some diverse opinions?...this is TBN..!

Like I stated before...one of the biggest factors involving accidentally engaging a lever into a detent is the ergonomic location of the valves...poorly design/placement of the valves/levers is culpable...

On a tangent view...methinks it's less probable that a tractor owner would want to be running some sort of hyd. motor than they would something like a log splitter...some are too proud to use a bungee...

 

[RickB]

Too bad that you find it disappointing that all this "grasping at improbable happenstances to bolster closed minded points of view"...because you obviously can't comprehend that rather than what you describe, it is nothing more than actually answering the OP's question...!

The OP did not ask for just the positives they asked for opinions on both "want" or "not want"...people do accidentally bump things...and it's not always an "improbable happenstance"...@#$% happens...if it is something that has been experienced and relates to the question it has merit...does not mean someone is "closed minded"...just the opposite imo...

You've been around this forum as long as anyone and are respected...maybe you're just getting cynical but did you not really expect some diverse opinions?...this is TBN..!

Like I stated before...one of the biggest factors involving accidentally engaging a lever into a detent is the ergonomic location of the valves...poorly design/placement of the valves/levers is culpable...

On a tangent view...methinks it's less probable that a tractor owner would want to be running some sort of hyd. motor than they would something like a log splitter...some are too proud to use a bungee...

I think it fair to say my comprehension of hydraulic valve functionality is on par with many here and exceeds that of a few. But that’s neither here nor there.
Whether or not a particular valve has detents in the operating positions is rarely dependent on whether the valve also incorporates a float position. It’s a separate discussion, or should be. There simply are no comments here that I feel successfully articulate any valid reason for a buyer not to choose a remote valve with a float position.
Edit: there is a slight possibility that I am developing a bit of cynicism.

 

[FTG-05]

I put three RR on my L4330. One of the valves has the float option. I use it all the time, especially when bushhogging.

TNT for the win.

Install at least one float; I don't think you'll regret it.

 

[sixdogs]

I'm the OP on this and went in thinking no float, no way, never and have been educated sufficiently to get one float. Thank you all.