Converting from pin-on the quick attach

[ScottNC]

David Brown 885 with the original Duham-Lehr loader. This loader uses a single, underslung dump/roll-back cylinder versus the more common dual cylinders on top of the lift arms. The loader works well and is in pretty good overall condition. I'm thinking of converting it to a quick-attach. The bucket was replaced with one from a skid steer while leaving the quick attach brackets on the bucket. There is also a set of forks modified to work with the bucket in place, but still retaining the quick-attach brackets as well. Before venturing out to make inquires to one (or all three) of the nearby attachment fabricators near me (Denton, NC), I thought I'd ask here to see if someone had some words of experience concerning the conversion of this particular loader or one like it with a single dump/roll-back cylinder. As always, thanks up front!

 

[DRussell]

David Brown 885 with the original Duham-Lehr loader. This loader uses a single, underslung dump/roll-back cylinder versus the more common dual cylinders on top of the lift arms. The loader works well and is in pretty good overall condition. I'm thinking of converting it to a quick-attach. The bucket was replaced with one from a skid steer while leaving the quick attach brackets on the bucket. There is also a set of forks modified to work with the bucket in place, but still retaining the quick-attach brackets as well. Before venturing out to make inquires to one (or all three) of the nearby attachment fabricators near me (Denton, NC), I thought I'd ask here to see if someone had some words of experience concerning the conversion of this particular loader or one like it with a single dump/roll-back cylinder. As always, thanks up front!

I converted an older Farmall pipe loader with a trip bucket to a hydraulic bucket dump with dual cylinders close to 30 years ago. Your setup wouldn't be too hard to convert to the dual cylinders. Weld some plates of steel on the side of the arms with holes through for the pins with the cylinder high enough for clearance as it extends and the bucket dumps.

General rule of thumb for hydraulic bucket dump is that the distance from center of the loader pin to the center of the dump cylinder pin on the bucket is half of the stroke length of the dump cylinder. Any good fabrication shop should be able to do the job.

 

[Larry986]

RRlund, who can be found on the Oliver forum has a Dunham Lehr loader that he did exactly that with. If you go there you can probably find a post with pictures, or ask him about it.

 

[rrlund]

RRlund, who can be found on the Oliver forum has a Dunham Lehr loader that he did exactly that with. If you go there you can probably find a post with pictures, or ask him about it.

I ended up making brackets and buying two new cylinders to convert it. If that single cylinder pulled to roll the bucket back, it would have been a different story, but it pushes. I couldn't make anything strong enough to take the stress.

 

[Larry986]

Thanks for the fast response Randy.

 

[SDMike]

David Brown 885 with the original Duham-Lehr loader. This loader uses a single, underslung dump/roll-back cylinder versus the more common dual cylinders on top of the lift arms. The loader works well and is in pretty good overall condition. I'm thinking of converting it to a quick-attach. The bucket was replaced with one from a skid steer while leaving the quick attach brackets on the bucket. There is also a set of forks modified to work with the bucket in place, but still retaining the quick-attach brackets as well. Before venturing out to make inquires to one (or all three) of the nearby attachment fabricators near me (Denton, NC), I thought I'd ask here to see if someone had some words of experience concerning the conversion of this particular loader or one like it with a single dump/roll-back cylinder. As always, thanks up front!

I did it to my 48 loader 7-8 years ago. I made it a twin tip, like a model 148 first. Bought the quick attach pieces off of ebay and fabricated the rest. Has worked well since then and wished I would have done it sooner.
Best of luck.
Mike

 

[ScottNC]

Not a good idea to install a quick-hitch while retaining the single cylinder? The heaviest load I deal with is an IBC on forks loaded with the odd sized firewood bits (left after slitting) that won't stack. It's been fine even though the IBC pallet only goes to the cutting edge of the bucket do to the way the forks mount.

A quick survey; two 2.25" cylinders are around $500 from Northern Tool. Combined, they'll have about one square more area than (what I think is a) 3" they're replacing. Assuming when switching to double cylinders, the two new cylinders should each be approximately half the cross section area of the single cylinder being replaced?

 

[DRussell]

Not a good idea to install a quick-hitch while retaining the single cylinder? The heaviest load I deal with is an IBC on forks loaded with the odd sized firewood bits (left after slitting) that won't stack. It's been fine even though the IBC pallet only goes to the cutting edge of the bucket do to the way the forks mount.

A quick survey; two 2.25" cylinders are around $500 from Northern Tool. Combined, they'll have about one square more area than (what I think is a) 3" they're replacing. Assuming when switching to double cylinders, the two new cylinders should each be approximately half the cross section area of the single cylinder being replaced?

I wouldn't go less than 3" for replacement bucket cylinders. I think Surplus Hydraulics or Bailey Hydraulics will be cheaper than Northern Tool.

When I redid the old Farmall pipe loader I used two 16" stroke cylinders from Tractor Supply. They worked fine.

 

[SDMike]

Not a good idea to install a quick-hitch while retaining the single cylinder? The heaviest load I deal with is an IBC on forks loaded with the odd sized firewood bits (left after slitting) that won't stack. It's been fine even though the IBC pallet only goes to the cutting edge of the bucket do to the way the forks mount.

A quick survey; two 2.25" cylinders are around $500 from Northern Tool. Combined, they'll have about one square more area than (what I think is a) 3" they're replacing. Assuming when switching to double cylinders, the two new cylinders should each be approximately half the cross section area of the single cylinder being replaced?

When looking at making the conversion, it seemed to make sense when making it, that twin tip was easier than trying to beef up the middle between the arms to accommodate the single tip. Also, when trying to roll back a round bale, the single tip just wouldn't cut it. Now, no issue. Surplus Center, as stated in another post, will be cheaper than Northern. If you have a tractor salvage yard nearby, ask them if they have any scrap loaders. You may get lucky finding a set of cylinders.
Best of Luck,
Mike