This thing is amazing at plowing snow!!

[Sigma.40]

After several issues (leveling link breaking, no traction) were corrected, my 52 8N plowed better than I ever could have asked for! We got close to 30 inches in two days. This thing cleaned up my 150 x 150 "driveway" like nothing I ve ever owned. With the back blade, it pulled absolutely insane amount of snow and ran like a champ doing it!

At first, I could not get traction. I ve never put chains on tires (let alone tires that are 4ft tall) and failed at my solo attempt to get them on a few weeks ago. My older daughter and I thought we got them on yesterday morning but they both fell off after two swipes. We ended up flattening the tires, getting the chains tightly on and then airing them back up. I had traction better than I ever would have imagined. Thanks to everyone who helped me in my last post. Merry Christmas!

 

[Joe in MI]

Glad to hear you got it straightened out! They are very capable machines, as long as you take into consideration what they are, and what they are NOT. If you ever have the opportunity to put a front blade on it, DO IT! It cut my time in half, but is also way more fun since you don t have to turn around and look behind you all the time.

My driveway is about 500 feet long and like you, I have a large area to clear in addition to that.

 

[Sigma.40]

I saw a few front blades earlier in the year. I wish now that I bought one. Of course, there are none near me now. I ll keep my eye out.

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 21:35:48 12/24/22) After several issues (leveling link breaking, no traction) were corrected, my 52 8N plowed better than I ever could have asked for! We got close to 30 inches in two days. This thing cleaned up my 150 x 150 "driveway" like nothing I ve ever owned. With the back blade, it pulled absolutely insane amount of snow and ran like a champ doing it!

At first, I could not get traction. I ve never put chains on tires (let alone tires that are 4ft tall) and failed at my solo attempt to get them on a few weeks ago. My older daughter and I thought we got them on yesterday morning but they both fell off after two swipes. We ended up flattening the tires, getting the chains tightly on and then airing them back up. I had traction better than I ever would have imagined. Thanks to everyone who helped me in my last post. Merry Christmas!

Even a little "N" tractor beats a shovel every time :!:

 

[Ultradog MN]

Agree that Ns make awesome little snow
movers.
Do you have ballast on your rears?
Am guesstimating on the numbers here but
adding cast iron weights or fluid in your
tires will gain you 25-30% more traction
than chains alone.
And if you have a chance to buy a front
snow plow for your tractor do it!
Front plow is more effective and a whole
lot easier on your neck than a back blade.

 

[Jerry9N]

My trick for chains is to put them on Thanksgiving weekend.
It's usually relatively warm, and beats trying to fight with
them in the cold. I don't need the tractor for much that time
of year anyway, and come spring it's too muddy to do much,
so no rush to take the chains off.

 

[Leroy]

About 3-4 years ago when I had to leave the farm I about gave mine away at
auction. Think I got $10 for it. And think I had it for over 70 years. Had
homemade weights out of concrete guessing at weight about 3-400 pounds each
and could still spin the wheels.

 

[Sigma.40]

(quoted from post at 11:15:21 12/25/22) Agree that Ns make awesome little snow
movers.
Do you have ballast on your rears?
Am guesstimating on the numbers here but
adding cast iron weights or fluid in your
tires will gain you 25-30% more traction
than chains alone.
And if you have a chance to buy a front
snow plow for your tractor do it!
Front plow is more effective and a whole
lot easier on your neck than a back blade.

No ballast. My 39 has ballast in the tire but it doesn t run so that doesn t do me any good. Once the chains were on properly, I had zero traction issues as it is, though. We had snow drift that were 4+ feet tall and it rove right through them like they weren t there!

I really really need new rear tires. I’m going to try to get through this winter with what I have, but next summer I’ll look into getting new tires that are filled. My current ones have plenty of tread but they are dry rotted and cracked like nothing else.

This post was edited by Sigma.40 on 12/25/2022 at 08:37 pm.

 

[Sigma.40]

The 1st time I tried to put them on alone, I was outside in the snow and cold. This time, with my daughters help, we were in the well heated garage.

 

[Kirk-NJ]

Yes These old ford can move a lot of snow.

<a href=https://imgur.com/o97S7A0>

</a>

 

[Abbby]

I am interested in putting a plow on the front of my 9N but would like to raise and lower with a winch versus using the cable system. I have 12 volt. Anyone have this setup and can they show some pics?

 

[FiremanKyle]

Nice Plow/ Tractor. I'm also in MI
My Dad got a front blade, Dearborn Dozer
style (no spring) when he bought his in
the mid 80's, he never used it. I've got
some updates though to get it operating:
cable replacement, brace & mount
straightening and weld fabricating for
those broken spots, maybe a new bar. Next
year should be better, hopefully in use.

 

[Royse]

Abbby, another option is one of the self-contained snowplows for
the smaller pickups. No winch or cables at all, just a 12V electric
motor that both lifts them and angles them.
You would need a solid mounting system for it though.

 

[Kirk-NJ]

Go to the other N tractor site and in the tool bar click on the
How To section then click on snowplow by Dan

 

[Dave G9N]

(quoted from post at 06:03:42 12/26/22) I am interested in putting a plow on the front of my 9N but would like to raise and lower with a winch versus using the cable system. I have 12 volt. Anyone have this setup and can they show some pics?

wouldn't recommend this exact design. I think it puts too much torque on the front axle. It is also only 6' wide, which makes it hard to get close to the mailbox. It might give you some ideas about a better design. The guy I bought the tractor from used it with a back blade. I need to replace the missing fairlead. The back blade was mostly a ballast weight for traction, but also to get snow out of some tight places like inside corners that the dozer blade has trouble with. I find the combination handy.

The winch control is not up to the task of switching 170 amps too many times. I am considering a 500 amp solenoid to replace the switch, but the darned things are the size of a brick. A 250 amp solenoid should last 2000 cycles, but you rack them up quickly if the driveway isn't straight and narrow.

Sigma:
Next time you go to put the chains on, get a couple pieces of twine and use the tractor to lift and wrap them around the tires for you. It was much easier than heaving them over the wheels by hand. https://youtu.be/AjLe55vaoM8?t=143

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 03:40:26 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 06:03:42 12/26/22) I am interested in putting a plow on the front of my 9N but would like to raise and lower with a winch versus using the cable system. I have 12 volt. Anyone have this setup and can they show some pics?

wouldn't recommend this exact design. I think it puts too much torque on the front axle. It is also only 6' wide, which makes it hard to get close to the mailbox. It might give you some ideas about a better design. The guy I bought the tractor from used it with a back blade. I need to replace the missing fairlead. The back blade was mostly a ballast weight for traction, but also to get snow out of some tight places like inside corners that the dozer blade has trouble with. I find the combination handy.

The winch control is not up to the task of switching 170 amps too many times. I am considering a 500 amp solenoid to replace the switch, but the darned things are the size of a brick. A 250 amp solenoid should last 2000 cycles, but you rack them up quickly if the driveway isn't straight and narrow.

Sigma:
Next time you go to put the chains on, get a couple pieces of twine and use the tractor to lift and wrap them around the tires for you. It was much easier than heaving them over the wheels by hand. https://youtu.be/AjLe55vaoM8?t=143

IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

 

[Dave G9N]

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 15:45:16 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

I own a couple loader tractors and just looking at those one arm loaders makes me pucker.

TOH

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 12:58:42 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:45:16 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

I don't quite understand those things. I mean, look how beefy they are built. By the pound, why not just build a regular two armed loader? Was there something special that the one armed loader was especially good for?

This post was edited by Caryc on 12/28/2022 at 02:02 pm.

 

[Royse]

(quoted from post at 15:58:42 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:45:16 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

I own a couple loader tractors and just looking at those one arm loaders makes me pucker.

TOH

I had a one armed loader on a 960, it worked well, albeit mine was a trip bucket model.
Finding mounting brackets to put one on an N series I think would be the challenge now days.
I'll just settle for what I have now, although it may get different tires.

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 14:45:07 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:58:42 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:45:16 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

I own a couple loader tractors and just looking at those one arm loaders makes me pucker.

TOH

I had a one armed loader on a 960, it worked well, albeit mine was a trip bucket model.
Finding mounting brackets to put one on an N series I think would be the challenge now days.
I'll just settle for what I have now, although it may get different tires.

Aw c'mon...you're just showing off now. But, if I had that thing I'd show it off too.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 17:45:07 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:58:42 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 15:45:16 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 03:41:09 12/28/22)
IMO a hydraulic cylinder is easier, cheaper, and better suited to the tractor.

TOH

didn't say that it works well...

It came with the tractor and a number of other implements. If I was buying just for the plow, I would have gone with the one armed bandit.

I own a couple loader tractors and just looking at those one arm loaders makes me pucker.

TOH

I had a one armed loader on a 960, it worked well, albeit mine was a trip bucket model.
Finding mounting brackets to put one on an N series I think would be the challenge now days.
I'll just settle for what I have now, although it may get different tires.

Heck Royse - you ain't even got the shine offa the tires yet. What flavor of red is that?

 

[Ultradog MN]

That has to be an 8N with 9N front wheels.
Ford built mounting kits for most of the
small fords from 48 to 75 including the
Fordson Dextas but never for the 9/2Ns.
There was no way to mount one on the 9/2s.
On the 8N there was a bracket that mounted
between the steering box and transmission.
One of the main selling points for them was
it took about 5 minutes to put it on or
take it off.
And they were surprisingly handy.
I had several of them - both trip style and
all hydraulic. They were a very cool piece
of engineering.

 

[Royse]

Heck Royse - you ain't even got the shine offa the tires yet. What flavor of red is that?

Massey Ferguson. The industrial tires lack the traction I think it should have, even when loaded. But the creature comforts are awesome!

This post was edited by Royse on 12/28/2022 at 03:12 pm.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 19:06:50 12/28/22)

Heck Royse - you ain't even got the shine offa the tires yet. What flavor of red is that?

Massey Ferguson. The industrial tires lack the traction I think it should have, even when loaded. But the creature comforts are awesome!


This post was edited by Royse on 12/28/2022 at 03:12 pm.

I see MF has the same pitiful excuse for a gtille guard as Kubota. I put a stick through mine the first week I had it.

I teally dont have sny complaints with the R4s but I am not plowing tons of deep snow..

TOH

 

[Royse]

(quoted from post at 19:36:00 12/28/22)

(quoted from post at 19:06:50 12/28/22)

Heck Royse - you ain't even got the shine offa the tires yet. What flavor of red is that?

Massey Ferguson. The industrial tires lack the traction I think it should have, even when loaded. But the creature comforts are awesome!


This post was edited by Royse on 12/28/2022 at 03:12 pm.

I see MF has the same pitiful excuse for a gtille guard as Kubota. I put a stick through mine the first week I had it.

I teally dont have sny complaints with the R4s but I am not plowing tons of deep snow..

TOH

Not tons of snow here yet either, but that little Kubota in front of me is 4x4 with
chains on all four tires, snowblower on the front and got stuck several times.
The drift is about 100 yards long and over 4 ft deep in spots.
That's a Ford F-150 King Ranch 4x4 at the bottom we were digging out.
If a vehicle is stuck in the road like that truck was, the county
won't plow the road. Assumably due to liability issues.
Nice to have neighbors I guess.
We wished each other a Merry Christmas once the two of us got
the road cleared and I was able to pull the truck out.

 

[Dave G9N]

(quoted from post at 14:39:45 12/28/22)
I don't quite understand those things. I mean, look how beefy they are built. By the pound, why not just build a regular two armed loader? Was there something special that the one armed loader was especially good for?

think Knuckle47 explained it on the trip bucket thread:

(quoted from post at 21:09:13 12/25/22) I have a 1947 8N with a Dearborn loader attached. ... I will be 70 in 3 weeks ... [b:fcf9cc8f6e]The jungle gym of pipes[/b:fcf9cc8f6e] will eventually be a bit more than I can handle but moving snow will always be a big benefit.

nd Ultradog:

(quoted from post Dec 28, 2022 2:55 pm)
One of the main selling points for them was it took about 5 minutes to put it on or take it off.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 17:39:45 12/28/22)
I don't quite understand those things. I mean, look how beefy they are built. By the pound, why not just build a regular two armed loader? Was there something special that the one armed loader was especially good for?

This post was edited by Caryc on 12/28/2022 at 02:02 pm.

It was an early and bad attempt by Ford at a quick attach step through design. It was especially good at unbalancing the tractor.

TOH

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 09:42:47 12/29/22)

(quoted from post at 17:39:45 12/28/22)
I don't quite understand those things. I mean, look how beefy they are built. By the pound, why not just build a regular two armed loader? Was there something special that the one armed loader was especially good for?

This post was edited by Caryc on 12/28/2022 at 02:02 pm.

It was an early and bad attempt by Ford at a quick attach step through design. It was especially good at unbalancing the tractor.

TOH

That was my first thought when looking at it.

 

[Ultradog MN]

Say what you will but if you never used
one...
They were not only step through but quick-
tach as well. I hated plowing and mowing
with a loader clanking around on the front.
Yes they caused the right rear to lift but
not as bad as you think.
And that is what ballast is for.
I would take one of these 10 to 1 over a
jungle jim loader.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 15:14:55 12/29/22) Say what you will but if you never used
one...
They were not only step through but quick-
tach as well. I hated plowing and mowing
with a loader clanking around on the front.
Yes they caused the right rear to lift but
not as bad as you think.
And that is what ballast is for.
[b:040a0aba0d]I would take one of these 10 to 1 over a
jungle jim loader.[/b:040a0aba0d]

Thats not saying much. It was a poor design that required uneven ballasting and it was quickly abandoned.

In todays world quick attach loaders are the norm. This one is well balanced and will come off and park itself in a couple minutes. The guy in the video does it in 30 seconds.

1) Raise boom slightly, unpin hinged parking stands and re-pin in lowered position
2) Remove two latch pins on towers and place in self storing hole on loader
3) Lower boom and use down pressure to lift boom out of sockets on towers.
4) Back tractor out to slightly to clear loader frame.
5) Disconnect the 4 hydraulic quick connects and hoses
6) Drive away from parked loader

TOH

Utube Video

This post was edited by TheOldHokie on 12/29/2022 at 03:33 pm.

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 12:28:30 12/29/22)

(quoted from post at 15:14:55 12/29/22) Say what you will but if you never used
one...
They were not only step through but quick-
tach as well. I hated plowing and mowing
with a loader clanking around on the front.
Yes they caused the right rear to lift but
not as bad as you think.
And that is what ballast is for.
[b:76123245e3]I would take one of these 10 to 1 over a
jungle jim loader.[/b:76123245e3]

Thats not saying much. It was a poor design that required uneven ballasting and it was quickly abandoned.

In todays world quick attach loaders are the norm. This one is well balanced and will come off and park itself in a couple minutes.

1) Raise boom slightly, unpin hinged parking stands and re-pin in lowered position
2) Remove two latch pins on towers and place in self storing hole on loader
3) Lower boom and use down pressure to lift boom out of sockets on towers.
4) Back tractor out to slightly to clear loader frame.
5) Disconnect the 4 hydraulic quick connects and hoses
6) Drive away from parked loader

TOH

This post was edited by TheOldHokie on 12/29/2022 at 12:29 pm.

Yeah, that's great but, will you buy me one?

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 16:39:22 12/29/22)

(quoted from post at 12:28:30 12/29/22)

Yeah, that's great but, will you buy me one?

No but I am sure you could afford to buy your own.

TOH

This post was edited by TheOldHokie on 12/29/2022 at 03:38 pm.

 

[Ultradog MN]

You might keep in mind that those loaders
were a 1959 design. They were sold for 16+
years.
ONE loader that fit most of the tractors
Ford built for 27 years.
They were cheap, effective and had some
good features.
Ford sold a bunch of them, they did a lot
of useful work and they were better
balanced than you seem to allow.
That is a pretty good run.
Were they as effective as the shiney new
Kubota you show in your photo?
No they were not.
63 years of engineering advances has a way
of improving machines.
It's just too bad that in the same 63 years
some people never get beyond their peevish
disdain for machines they have never
operated.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 07:06:17 12/30/22) You might keep in mind that those loaders
were a 1959 design. They were sold for 16+
years.
ONE loader that fit most of the tractors
Ford built for 27 years.
They were cheap, effective and had some
good features.
Ford sold a bunch of them, they did a lot
of useful work and they were better
balanced than you seem to allow.
That is a pretty good run.
Were they as effective as the shiney new
Kubota you show in your photo?
No they were not.
63 years of engineering advances has a way
of improving machines.
It's just too bad that in the same 63 years
some people never get beyond their peevish
disdain for machines they have never
operated.
&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143876.jpg&gt;

I have never operated any of the 80 year old jungle gym pipe loaders. That does not mean my peevish disdain for those things which were sold for over a decade is unfounded.

I am well aware of the vintage of Ford's one armed loader. Read what I said - the one arm design is an antiquated and ill conceived attempt at a quick attach step through loader. Just like the jungle gym it was a bad design and was abandoned.

I have owned and operated an old Sauder quick attach step through design. It was state of the art in 1940 but it too was horribly unbalanced with excessive front overhang and suffered the same fate.

Bad designs are bad designs. This is a simple physics problem and after a little experimentation the designers came up with far better configurations.

TOH

[b:afe0499cfd][u:afe0499cfd]PEEVISH POSTSCRIPT:[/u:afe0499cfd][/b:afe0499cfd]

I love the SSQA adapter plate retrofit to the old one arm loader in your picture. I will peevishly categorize that as putting lipstick on a pig.


This post was edited by TheOldHokie on 12/30/2022 at 07:02 am.

 

[Ultradog MN]

Another design feature on these loaders was
the bucket was purposely built to hang over
more to the left side of the tractor.
This was to allow the narrow manure bucket
to clean tightly against barn foundations
and feed lot walls.
They could have centered it more but I
suppose they figured the tractor could
handle the extra overhang.
I have some original literature on these
loaders that mentions this and has an
actual photo of one cleaning along a
foundation but can't find it now. Below is
a copy of an original drawing that shows
that feature pretty well however.

By the way,
Regarding that photo of the loader with the
forks...
I did state earlier that Ford made these
loaders both with trip buckets and
hydraulic buckets.
You must have missed that and your
discerning eye also missed that the one in
the photo has the hydraulic style bucket.
Your comment (I love the SSQA adapter plate
retrofit to the old trip bucket... putting
lipstick on a pig.) proves this.
That kind of haphazard observation on your
part is an example of why I can never take
your ipse dixit opinions as fact.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 15:59:52 12/30/22) Another design feature on these loaders was
the bucket was purposely built to hang over
more to the left side of the tractor.
This was to allow the narrow manure bucket
to clean tightly against barn foundations
and feed lot walls.
They could have centered it more but I
suppose they figured the tractor could
handle the extra overhang.
I have some original literature on these
loaders that mentions this and has an
actual photo of one cleaning along a
foundation but can't find it now. Below is
a copy of an original drawing that shows
that feature pretty well however.

&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143930.jpg&gt;

By the way,
Regarding that photo of the loader with the
forks...
I did state earlier that Ford made these
loaders both with trip buckets and
hydraulic buckets.
You must have missed that and your
discerning eye also missed that the one in
the photo has the hydraulic style bucket.
Your comment (I love the SSQA adapter plate
retrofit to the old trip bucket... putting
lipstick on a pig.) proves this.
That kind of haphazard observation on your
part is an example of why I can never take
your ipse dixit opinions as fact.

Now you are grasping at straws in defense of what - an old Ford loader design that I dislike and have disparaged?

Note that the trip bucket reference was corrected at 7:02 AM PST when I noticed my error.

I offer opinions and I offer facts. They are not one and the same.

TOH

This post was edited by TheOldHokie on 12/30/2022 at 12:16 pm.

 

[Ultradog MN]

Here's the deal TOH.
I know a little about those one arm
loaders.
Have had a few, played around with them,
built brackets for them, worked them.
I understand their capabilities and their
drawbacks and think they are a pretty cool
piece of engineering.
I never said they were the alpha and omega
of loaders. They were designed a long time
ago and progress hasn't stopped since they
were designed.
But you took one sniff at a photo of one
and decided they were junk. And you are
bound and determined to prove they are junk
but have no facts to carry your argument.
They are junk because You said so. That's
your ipse dixit right there.
I know a wee bit about other loaders too.
For Ns, for Hundreds and for Thousands.
This one is not mine but I have been
'storing' here and using it for 5 years.
It will lift 4500 lbs to full height.
Bucket calacity is 1/2 yard.
It'll easily lift your SCUTS AND CUTS- with
the loader full of dirt - and get it out of
the way.

Half of the argument here is whether you
know more about Ford one arm loaders or I
know more about them.
The other half of the argument is am I
gonna let you bs me and others here with
your Opinions about them.
I am not the one grasping at straws here.
You are.

Truce okay?
I just made Rice Krispie bars.
Have a couple.
And Happy New Year to you - you and all the
board.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 19:06:47 12/30/22) Here's the deal TOH.
I know a little about those one arm
loaders.
Have had a few, played around with them,
built brackets for them, worked them.
I understand their capabilities and their
drawbacks and think they are a pretty cool
piece of engineering.
I never said they were the alpha and omega
of loaders. They were designed a long time
ago and progress hasn't stopped since they
were designed.
But you took one sniff at a photo of one
and decided they were junk. And you are
bound and determined to prove they are junk
but have no facts to carry your argument.
They are junk because You said so. That's
your ipse dixit right there.
I know a wee bit about other loaders too.
For Ns, for Hundreds and for Thousands.
This one is not mine but I have been
'storing' here and using it for 5 years.
It will lift 4500 lbs to full height.
Bucket calacity is 1/2 yard.
It'll easily lift your SCUTS AND CUTS- with
the loader full of dirt - and get it out of
the way.
&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143943.jpg&gt;

Half of the argument here is whether you
know more about Ford one arm loaders or I
know more about them.
The other half of the argument is am I
gonna let you bs me and others here with
your Opinions about them.
I am not the one grasping at straws here.
You are.

Truce okay?
I just made Rice Krispie bars.
Have a couple.
And Happy New Year to you - you and all the
board.

&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143945.jpg&gt;

Ohh my - is your ego bruised. I am sooooo sorry. Takecanother sugar bill and chill.

TOH

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 16:42:15 12/30/22)

(quoted from post at 19:06:47 12/30/22) Here's the deal TOH.
I know a little about those one arm
loaders.
Have had a few, played around with them,
built brackets for them, worked them.
I understand their capabilities and their
drawbacks and think they are a pretty cool
piece of engineering.
I never said they were the alpha and omega
of loaders. They were designed a long time
ago and progress hasn't stopped since they
were designed.
But you took one sniff at a photo of one
and decided they were junk. And you are
bound and determined to prove they are junk
but have no facts to carry your argument.
They are junk because You said so. That's
your ipse dixit right there.
I know a wee bit about other loaders too.
For Ns, for Hundreds and for Thousands.
This one is not mine but I have been
'storing' here and using it for 5 years.
It will lift 4500 lbs to full height.
Bucket calacity is 1/2 yard.
It'll easily lift your SCUTS AND CUTS- with
the loader full of dirt - and get it out of
the way.
&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143943.jpg&gt;

Half of the argument here is whether you
know more about Ford one arm loaders or I
know more about them.
The other half of the argument is am I
gonna let you bs me and others here with
your Opinions about them.
I am not the one grasping at straws here.
You are.

Truce okay?
I just made Rice Krispie bars.
Have a couple.
And Happy New Year to you - you and all the
board.

&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143945.jpg&gt;

Ohh my - is your ego bruised. I am sooooo sorry. Takecanother sugar bill and chill.

TOH

C'mon guys...a very smart man once said "Cain't we all jus git along here"? :mrgreen:

I know just enough about one arm loaders to know I don't want one. So, who cares?

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 21:54:57 12/30/22)

(quoted from post at 16:42:15 12/30/22)

(quoted from post at 19:06:47 12/30/22) Here's the deal TOH.
I know a little about those one arm
loaders.
Have had a few, played around with them,
built brackets for them, worked them.
I understand their capabilities and their
drawbacks and think they are a pretty cool
piece of engineering.
I never said they were the alpha and omega
of loaders. They were designed a long time
ago and progress hasn't stopped since they
were designed.
But you took one sniff at a photo of one
and decided they were junk. And you are
bound and determined to prove they are junk
but have no facts to carry your argument.
They are junk because You said so. That's
your ipse dixit right there.
I know a wee bit about other loaders too.
For Ns, for Hundreds and for Thousands.
This one is not mine but I have been
'storing' here and using it for 5 years.
It will lift 4500 lbs to full height.
Bucket calacity is 1/2 yard.
It'll easily lift your SCUTS AND CUTS- with
the loader full of dirt - and get it out of
the way.
&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143943.jpg&gt;

Half of the argument here is whether you
know more about Ford one arm loaders or I
know more about them.
The other half of the argument is am I
gonna let you bs me and others here with
your Opinions about them.
I am not the one grasping at straws here.
You are.

Truce okay?
I just made Rice Krispie bars.
Have a couple.
And Happy New Year to you - you and all the
board.

&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143945.jpg&gt;

Ohh my - is your ego bruised. I am sooooo sorry. Takecanother sugar bill and chill.

TOH

C'mon guys...a very smart man once said "Cain't we all jus git along here"? :mrgreen:

I know just enough about one arm loaders to know I don't want one. So, who cares?

Apparently Jerry cares.

TOH

 

[Royse]

"C'mon guys...a very smart man once said "Cain't we all jus git along here"?"

Another smart man once said "I'm not hard of hearing. I'm hard of listening." :lol:

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 16:06:47 12/30/22) Here's the deal TOH.
I know a little about those one arm
loaders.
Have had a few, played around with them,
built brackets for them, worked them.
I understand their capabilities and their
drawbacks and think they are a pretty cool
piece of engineering.
I never said they were the alpha and omega
of loaders. They were designed a long time
ago and progress hasn't stopped since they
were designed.
But you took one sniff at a photo of one
and decided they were junk. And you are
bound and determined to prove they are junk
but have no facts to carry your argument.
They are junk because You said so. That's
your ipse dixit right there.
I know a wee bit about other loaders too.
For Ns, for Hundreds and for Thousands.
This one is not mine but I have been
'storing' here and using it for 5 years.
It will lift 4500 lbs to full height.
Bucket calacity is 1/2 yard.
It'll easily lift your SCUTS AND CUTS- with
the loader full of dirt - and get it out of
the way.
&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143943.jpg&gt;

Half of the argument here is whether you
know more about Ford one arm loaders or I
know more about them.
The other half of the argument is am I
gonna let you bs me and others here with
your Opinions about them.
I am not the one grasping at straws here.
You are.

Truce okay?
I just made Rice Krispie bars.
Have a couple.
And Happy New Year to you - you and all the
board.

&lt;img src=https://www.yesterdaystractors.com/cvphotos/cvphoto143945.jpg&gt;

My MF202 workbull has a set of forks like those that someone adapted to fit it.

 

[TheOldHokie]

(quoted from post at 02:50:20 12/31/22)

My MF202 workbull has a set of forks like those that someone adapted to fit it.

Look a little closer at the way the forks are mounted. The one arm loader has been modified with the addition of a skid steer quick attach (SSQA) adapter plate. The SSQA system allows you to quickly swap standardized interchangeable buckets/implements with a simple scoop and go operation. Yours appear to be traditional pin on style forks.

While originally devrloped for skid steer loaders SSQA has become a standard offering on farm tractor loaders. Naturally JD felt compelled to design their own incompatible quick attach system. There is also a EURO standard just to make things worse. Here is a short video to help explain how they work.

https://youtu.be/IIIp_1PPxE8

TOH

 

[Ultradog MN]

Fear not TOH. My ego is not bruised and my
feelings are not hurt.
I would first have to respect you for you
to accomplish that.

 

[Caryc]

(quoted from post at 01:06:03 12/31/22)

(quoted from post at 02:50:20 12/31/22)

My MF202 workbull has a set of forks like those that someone adapted to fit it.

Look a little closer at the way the forks are mounted. The one arm loader has been modified with the addition of a skid steer quick attach (SSQA) adapter plate. The SSQA system allows you to quickly swap standardized interchangeable buckets/implements with a simple scoop and go operation. Yours appear to be traditional pin on style forks.

While originally devrloped for skid steer loaders SSQA has become a standard offering on farm tractor loaders. Naturally JD felt compelled to design their own incompatible quick attach system. There is also a EURO standard just to make things worse. Here is a short video to help explain how they work.

https://youtu.be/IIIp_1PPxE8

TOH

As I said, someone adapted a set of forks to fit this tractor. I was happy to get both forks and bucket when I purchased this machine. Removing the bucket and installing the forks is no big deal once you figure how to do it properly.

 

[gears]

God bless us every one.... quicktach, one armed or otherwise....

Happy New Year all.