Go Bottom Go Bottom

420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
momeyer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 16 Lebanon.MO
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-10          43654

Need to hear about some experiences with using pallet forks on a 420 FEL. Wanting to use pallet forks ILO of a bale spike to pick up round bales weighing approx 800#. Local dealer has quoted me about $1000 for the pallet fork attachment. Tractor is a 4300 and understand that I'll need ballast on the 3pt.

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
JackIL
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 18 Illinois
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-10          43658

I have a 420 loader on a 955 and use the JD pallet forks a lot (price of the forks was about $900). Each rear wheel has 180 pounds of cast wheel weights and I have a carry box on the 3 point with additional weight totaling about 500 pounds. I have never tried to lift anything close to 800 pounds.

The Specifications in the 420 Operators Manual indicates that with pallet forks the maximum capacity measured at the pivot pin is 640 pounds. Since this point is well behind the center of gravity of the bale, the maximum bale weight that could safely be lifted to full height would be much less.

I suggest you reconsider what you are trying to do. Based on the JD specs this loader and tractor are not big enough to handle 800 pound bales. It appears from the specs that the 460 loader on a 4700 or 4800 would be better suited. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-10-10          43663

Have you looked at a rear bale spear or rear pallet forks? I think that 800# is a lot of weight to hoist in front of the FEL, but the three point hitch will handle that with ease. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
TomG
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5406 Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-11          43685


No experience moving bales around myself, but I wonder how trying to run forks underneath bales would compare to spearing them. I suspect that using forks may be best as a two-person operation.

From an older discussion, Roger mentioned that compacts don't do too well with larger round bales (800-lbs. is small compared to many that go past here on the highway). In addition to the weight, they also are ungainly.

I agree that 800-lbs. of large ungainly weight is a little much for most compact loaders. However, depending on what's going to be done, 3ph spears might not lift high enough. In addition, there might be a problem releasing the bales if they're speared at one height and released at another because the spear angle to the ground changes as the 3ph lifts. If that's a problem a hydraulic top-link probably would fix it. It might be a problem because I believe that loaders used in haying sometimes have the float on the bucket rather than the lift.

If 3ph spears won't do the job then my 3ph forklift, especially if fitted with spears, probably would. It wouldn't be a cheap solution and would need a 3ph capacity around 1,500 lbs.

....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
paul ruff
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 11 iowa
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-11          43686

I have moved many round bales with a FEL in the past, We used a spear attachment rather than the pallet forks. The biggest advantage was safety, on pallet forks if you roll the bucket back to much you can roll the bale off the loader and on to the tractor and yourself. With the spear we had you could still move pallets and such, the spears were made of heavy guage 2" square tubing with a point on the end. They were made by a local manufacturing company and several times were used to move items weighing up to 6,000 lbs (2940 john deere with 148 loader). for counter weight we had a 3 pt bale mover on the back and would carry 2 bales at a time (load them on to several bale carrier wagons that carried 11 bales at a time and bring 12 bales home at a time)
If you go with the pallet forks always keep the loader level or slightly dumped.
paul ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
TomG
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5406 Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-11          43695

Paul's comment is good and true of carrying anything in loaders. Logs regularly roll off the back of buckets and on onto tractors since there's no back-back rest with slip-on bucket forks. The problem is compounded since the bucket rolls back as the bucket lifts unless the curl is adjusted. This issue is one of the reasons why I'm fond of my forklift. I even dumped a bit of gravel on my hood once when I was looking at my box scraper and thinking I was operating the hydraulic top-link but lifting the bucket instead.

Paul: I guess the days are gone, and happily so, when myself and cousins used to walk around with a hay-hook in each hand and fling small square bales 3 and 4 high on wagons. We used to complain about one older cousin who liked bigger bales (about 90 lbs.) than my uncle. The cousin used to think we should stack them higher too.
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-10-11          43697

Momeyer, I am confused. Are you talking about the type of forks that replace the bucket or the type that clamps onto the bucket? ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
MRETHICS
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 190 Star City, Indiana
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-11          43704

Don't do it!! Your tractor and FEL are not big enough. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, and please do not kill the messanger.

But if you do decide to try this anyway, make sure you have protection to keep the bale from rolling off the back of the forks, and killing your childrens father.

Ballast that tractor butt!!! and keep the weight as low as possible, so your wifes's husband does not topple over and kill himself.

Make sure the ROPS is in place, and use your seatbelt.

Consider other options mentioned in the replies to your post. You asked for advice, and you have lot's of good advice. Now, it's up to you to decide what to do. And remember:

The opinions posted on this board are not neccissarily the opinions of the members or management on this board. Opinions posted on this board, are for the most part, based on facts and expeieriance of both trained and untrained profesionals, your results may very. Void where prohibited by law. Past performance does not garrauntee future results, people can, and do lose money, life or limbs. These opinions are subject to change without notice. No
purchase necassary.

Again.....seriously...Don't do it!!!!

....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
Murf
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 7249 Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-10-11          43710

Let's see 800 # that far out in front of the loader on a 4300 / 420 combination.....

Have you given any thought to what kind of tractor you want to buy after you snap this one in half.....

Presuming you're still alive to talk about it....

Best of luck, and I REALLY mean it this time. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
momeyer
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 16 Lebanon.MO
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-16          43873

Well, many thanks for the input fellers. Thought the specs in my owners' manual said the lift capacity for the 420 FEL was 1100#. Intent was to use the pallet forks only for lifting small round bales (no heavier than 800#) into tubular feeders while spearing a bale with the 3ph as ballast. Guess with all this experience and practical advise, will have to reconsider. Maybe another solution is to use the pallet forks to lift the feeder over the bale after I position the bale on the ground with the 3ph. The price of the JD pallet forks, however, makes for a substantial investment just to lift a bale feeder. Many thanks. ....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
TomG
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5406 Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-17          43909

Just a word about lift capacity specs: I think most loader specs define lift capacity as weight at the pivot pins. Most 3ph specs define capacity as weight centered 2’ behind the lower link pins.

The idea of where the weight is carried was mentioned in this thread several times. The idea in relation to specs is that the spec is reduced when weight is carried that is centered in front of the pins. The main disadvantage of bucket add-on forks is that loads are carried far in front of the pins, which has the effect of reducing the lift specs a lot.

Forklift type bucket replacements are available where loads are carried closer to the pins. Many also have backrests to prevent loads from falling off the back of the forks. Who knows, maybe such a unit would get an 800-pound bale in the ballpark of a 1,100-lift capacity. However, the large diameters of the bales probably would still get the weight pretty far forward. Specs being specs, you’d want to be sure the 1,100 lbs. is a full-height rather than an off-the-ground spec.

Don't know! Even using bucket replacement forks 800-pound bales still sounds a bit much. Besides, a good forklift bucket replacement unit stops being an inexpensive solution. That's how I ended up with my 3ph forklift. The costs were about the same and the 3ph unit would lift more.
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo



420FEL pallet forks

View my Photos
kay
Join Date:
Posts: 1
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-10-17          43936

momeyer
I have the pallet forks for the Deere 4300 w/430 loader, and there is a receiver built into the fork frame that will take a bale spear. Seems talking with your dealer to look into it for you will help greatly answer your question. The forks I have are about equally useful as the bucket is, to the point I store the tractor without either attached. It is so quick to back out of the shed, and attach whichever (bucket or forks) to do the job I want to do - move brush, load gravel, dig rock, etc. Very handy attachment, and wish I would have purchased the forks much sooner. Your idea of dropping the feeder over the bale seems to make a lot of sense. It would then be in a new position in the lot each time too.
....

Reply to | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo


  Go Top Go Top

Share This
Share This







Member Login