Outdoors
Sponsored by

Building a FEL grapple

2,718 Views | 7 Replies | Last: 8 yr ago by SWCBonfire
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I've got a loader on my Ford 1600 that isn't very useful for all the logs and brush I need to move. I thought that it couldn't be very difficult at all to build a grapple that fits in place of the bucket. I was thinking a heavy "rake forks" bottom with maybe a three or four claw top with one hydraulic cylinder, maybe 48-52" wide total. Maybe 6-7 forks on the bottom 32 inches long or so mid braced and welded to a cross member at the rear. Get a 6-8" reach 2 or 3" hydraulic cylinder, a simple control valve and maybe a solenoid hydraulic flow switch or a bypass control valve and splice it into my loader hydraulics. The 1600 is fairly big for a compact tractor, but it isn't that big, so I have to keep weight reasonable so it still has plenty of lifting capacity. I've lifted well over 1000lb with it before, but probably shouldn't go over 1200-1500 regularly. The tractor only weighs about 2500-2600 without an attachment.

I was thinking about what steel tube to best use to keep construction simple and adequately strong. I think some 2x2" .180" square tube with adequate bracing at angles would be a good start, with maybe 1/2" bar stock for attachment flanges and such. I have all the fab equipment I need to manufacture it. I found a really nice design or two on the internet that I think I could imitate, but with a little more simplicity, and they actually used quite a bit of lighter gauge 1x2" rectangular tube.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Like this but with fewer angles so there is less welding, and a single wide center top jaw instead of dual jaws.
fightingfarmer09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Size of the tractor != hydraulic power. I worry the Ford 1600 would be underpowered to add anything some forks/spear and practice wouldn't handle in terms of brush. Also the more complex the tool the more weight it will add = less weight available to lift.

Fun project idea though.
MouthBQ98
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, from a Hydraulic standpoint, I have the tank capacity and it is only one additional small short stroke cylinder. The ability to grab and lift would make it much more useful, I would think even if I kept the cylinder small. I can make 1400 PSI at 4.5gpm with the existing pump. Not super fast, but enough to run one implement at a time with reasonable speed.
BrazosDog02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I have the BGR from this company on my 60hp tractor. Maybe another idea for your build.

https://www.armstrongag.com/rock-brush-equipment/

This is literally the best investment I have made at my place. I use it more than any other implement. Whether you build or buy, it'll change your life.

I test for capacity by picking up everything I want. If the loader goes up a foot and stops and the front wheels are smushed flat then the log is too big.
Na Zdraví 87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I too have a brush rake grapple from Armstrong on my JD 5320. I use that thing all over the ranch.
Allen76
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Its Texags fault that I have this long list of expensive stuff that I must own.
docb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Allen76 said:

Its Texags fault that I have this long list of expensive stuff that I must own.
Nah! Grapples are not too pricey.
SWCBonfire
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sounds way too light for regular work, but since you're on a small tractor you may get away with it.

I personally wouldn't use anything less than 1/4" thick tube, and even then I would use knife plates/gusset the hell out of it. The abuse that loader equipment gets repeatedly subjected to even with gentle use might surprise you.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.