Tractor Forum banner
21 - 30 of 30 Posts
Mars, you struck upon a great point. I remember right from the start, that my pins just kept falling out, and I put in large nails and they worked for a long time, but from what your saying, the nails must have broke and came out. I feel a bit DOOF now, thinking all this time that that's just the way it was supposed to be and never really gave it a moments thought. I just figured that the attachment was the tie together! Dah! Guess I need to come up with a better solution than the cheap cotter pins that were designed into the system. Thank you for the explanation breakdown! As usual, you deliver a great presentation!
 
I guess it's the sunshine or diesel exhaust, but I had always thought that the bucket or attachment acted as the tie together, and hadn't made the connection that it was that shaft at the pivot point. I had been made aware of the fact that the pins at the pivot point were breaking when the pivot shaft kept slipping out one side or the other. From a mechanical standpoint, I failed to make the connection, until you, Mars pointed it out, that the pivot rod was the tie point between the rams as is I'm sure the attachment is also. I'm making the connection now, as I really hadn't thought about it much, and just kept replacing the pins and cursing JD, but the pins are a sort of safety mechinism to prevent damage from occuring in the event, as I often do, you point load on one corner or the other, of the bucket. That being said, I have a question for you, as I kept beefing up the pins more and more with each break.......Would putting large, say 3/8 grade 8 bolts in the pivot rod in place of the cotter pins implimented by the design lead to damage? I had always thought that the two rams just worked independently of each other with the attachment off and just got used to it, but in light of your enlightenment... (thanks alot:lmao:) Now suddenly it bothers me and I want to figure a way of keeping the rams tied together. Or should I? Perhaps I should just keep them seperated and live with it? What's your take on that? I'm stewing it over now! The lights are on in fab lab now!
 
I guess it's the sunshine or diesel exhaust, but I had always thought that the bucket or attachment acted as the tie together, and hadn't made the connection that it was that shaft at the pivot point. I had been made aware of the fact that the pins at the pivot point were breaking when the pivot shaft kept slipping out one side or the other. From a mechanical standpoint, I failed to make the connection, until you, Mars pointed it out, that the pivot rod was the tie point between the rams as is I'm sure the attachment is also. I'm making the connection now, as I really hadn't thought about it much, and just kept replacing the pins and cursing JD, but the pins are a sort of safety mechinism to prevent damage from occuring in the event, as I often do, you point load on one corner or the other, of the bucket. That being said, I have a question for you, as I kept beefing up the pins more and more with each break.......Would putting large, say 3/8 grade 8 bolts in the pivot rod in place of the cotter pins implimented by the design lead to damage? I had always thought that the two rams just worked independently of each other with the attachment off and just got used to it, but in light of your enlightenment... (thanks alot:lmao:) Now suddenly it bothers me and I want to figure a way of keeping the rams tied together. Or should I? Perhaps I should just keep them seperated and live with it? What's your take on that? I'm stewing it over now! The lights are on in fab lab now!
The only reason you need to have the ends of the loader arms tied together is so that they work in unison when you are changing loader attachments. Before I fixed the connecting rod pins I had to fully extend the dump cylinders to get them lined up with the hooks on the bucket, pallet forks or bale spear. If you never change attachments you don't need both pins. One is enough to hold the rod in place.
If you want everything to work in unison the replacement pins have to be a tight fit otherwise there will be too much movement.
BTW The spring pins that I used are not working so well. They have started to work their way out of the holes after only 30 hours of use. I will try bolts next.
Mars
 
The only reason you need to have the ends of the loader arms tied together is so that they work in unison when you are changing loader attachments. Before I fixed the connecting rod pins I had to fully extend the dump cylinders to get them lined up with the hooks on the bucket, pallet forks or bale spear. If you never change attachments you don't need both pins. One is enough to hold the rod in place.
If you want everything to work in unison the replacement pins have to be a tight fit otherwise there will be too much movement.
BTW The spring pins that I used are not working so well. They have started to work their way out of the holes after only 30 hours of use. I will try bolts next.
Mars
That's what I've always done too Mars because the right cylinder always moves faster than the left, at least on my machine, so it becomes a video game of skill to an extent! I just wonder if by replacing the pins with bolts as you're now talking about and I started thinking about too now , if flex in the attachment and the hookups, especially when there is more weight on one side than the other, will just start wollowing out the holes in the carrier, the pivot shaft, and or shear the bolts in time. This design really doesn't have a positive tie together it seems, in the event of flex. It's obvious that there must be some twisting at work here, even though I actually have the heavy duty bucket on the loader whenever I'm not using my forks. Just wondering if everyone has this issue or is it just in this series of loaders. I kind of get the impression that when you lift something heavy, the rams act like a car rearend in a way, that the fluid goes to the ram with the least weight if the load happens to be shifted to one side, since the pins are the only thing keeping both rams in unison, aside for the attachment, which surely must flex between the attaching hooks and the pins at the bottom of the quick change. Am I making sense? ;)
 
After giving it some thought, I've decided to run with the following. The carriers on my loader are cast, so I'll leave the cotter pin holes, which are on the order of about 3/16 of an inch, intact. I'll slip the pivot rod out each end enought to drill the cotter pin hole in the rod itself out to around a half inch or less, then sleeve the holes with small pieces of rubber tubing, then put it all back together with pins that tightly fit the cotter pin holes in the cast carriers, through the enlarged and rubber sleeved holes bored through the pivot rod, then into the cast carriers on the opposite sides of the pivot rod. The rubber sleeves will allow things to flex in operation, yet return the carriers to alignment when the attachment has been removed. The rubber will still allow the pins to fluctuate enough to avoid damage to the parts of the loader or the pins themselves. What do you think Mars? I'm on my way out to get the ball rolling with a look at the design to make sure I'm not missing something obvious. Toss in your input guys!
 
Okay, the operation went very well. Inserted a piece s of 1/4 fuel line into each bored out hole on the pivot rod, and drilled and inserted threaded 1/4 inch socket headed screws coupled with all metal locknuts through the standard sized holes in the cast carriers. The carriers can be flexed now, enough to compensate for flex between the two carriers, and the fuel line inserts act as a spring loaded buffer and return the carriers, which have about 3 inches of spring loaded flex each direction, back to center. No more lost or broken pins at this moment, but I'll report back on this thread after about 50 hours of use.
 
Here are a few pictures of the operation. The bucket of oil is refuse oil from my 316 mowers oil changes, and I parked it below the holes to be bored out. As I drill, I occassionaly dip the bit in the oil every few seconds and the excess runs out and drips back in the bucket. You can see the 1/4 fuel line in the pivot shaft. I did both sides like this.
 

Attachments

loader cylinder

The 541 loader on my 5410 has the same problem with the cylinders going out at different rates when the bucket is off. A bit of a nuisance when hooking up, but usually works. I don't think there is a shaft to keep them even on my loader.
 
Discussion starter · #30 ·
I want to thank everyone for the information. I fixed my 410 loader last night. I finally had time to look at it. Well I do have a rod that goes across to hook the 2 arms together and sure enough it was missing one of the pins on the right side. This was the cylinder that was going out first. I put a 1/4 inch bolt into the hole and it solved the problem. This is just a temp fix. I am going to go get 2 new pins most likely a little bigger because my holes are ob-long gated. I belong to a bunch of old car forums and these type of forums are the best place for information like this.

Thanks again

Jason
 
21 - 30 of 30 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top