Help-A-Newby... auxiliary hydraulics skidsteer hack

[Tazza]

Thanks for the advice, guys.
I keep sitting here thinking and now I have created a new wrinkle. My head is buzzing with goofy ideas and I believe it might be cool (and simple) to hack the bucket attachment pins with a cylinder so that I could change attachments without leaving the seat. It's just an opposing, inline pair of pins arrangement to release/attach the bucket, etc. I'm just thinking that since I'm in the middle of this anyways, maybe I could pull that off pretty easily by purchasing a 4-spool valve instead. They have two that should work - neither has a float detent (but as mentioned, not a deal-breaker) and one has 12GPM max with the desired relief valve range (and ooooh, it's a stack), and another one with 20GPM max monoblock but it has no relief valve, and also would be slightly easier to mount. Can a relief valve be added to a valve block or is it more complicated than that? The one without the relief valve is about $160 less so would absorb the cost of the relief valve if it's possible to just add one into the system or whatever.
Or of course, is this just getting stupid and I should be slapped? Don't hold back.

The hydraulic bucket changing would be nice, Trihonu did it with an electric servo http://www.skidsteerforum.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=54&frmView=ShowPost&PostID=22705
Not sure what a hydraulic diverter valve would cost, but if you hooked it up to the aux line it may be easier than hooking up another linkage to the spool.

 

[vinito]

The hydraulic bucket changing would be nice, Trihonu did it with an electric servo http://www.skidsteerforum.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=54&frmView=ShowPost&PostID=22705
Not sure what a hydraulic diverter valve would cost, but if you hooked it up to the aux line it may be easier than hooking up another linkage to the spool.

Well that's a good idea. Surplus center has one that would work for around $100. --- http://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulics/Hydraulic-Valves/Selector-Valves/1-2-NPT-20-GPM-DOUBLE-SELECTOR-VALVE-9-4128.axd --- An additional spool would cost about the same I guess, but maybe I can chew on it for a while and find a selector valve for cheaper. I like the one you linked to. I'll think it through and decide which might be the better way to go for me. Either way though, I could add it later and just go for the 3-spool valve setup for now. I do like that. One of the 3-spool valves I linked to previously seems like a more exact match to the stock valve on the machine than what I could find in 4-spool valves too. Thanks again for the suggestion. I like it.

 

[vinito]

Well that's a good idea. Surplus center has one that would work for around $100. --- http://www.surpluscenter.com/Hydraulics/Hydraulic-Valves/Selector-Valves/1-2-NPT-20-GPM-DOUBLE-SELECTOR-VALVE-9-4128.axd --- An additional spool would cost about the same I guess, but maybe I can chew on it for a while and find a selector valve for cheaper. I like the one you linked to. I'll think it through and decide which might be the better way to go for me. Either way though, I could add it later and just go for the 3-spool valve setup for now. I do like that. One of the 3-spool valves I linked to previously seems like a more exact match to the stock valve on the machine than what I could find in 4-spool valves too. Thanks again for the suggestion. I like it.

I felt almost secure to pull the trigger on the 3-spool valve but I thought I'd let it simmer for a little while. Then I called a hydraulics vendor our department deals with and told him about the flow rate issue. He wasn't sure enough to suggest specs, but he referred me to another shop to call and I haven't reached them yet. But he did think that 7gpm pump to 20gpm valve ratio sounded "workable but excessive". He said he thought that I wouldn't want to go any higher than that for the valve. So I'm wondering what would be an ideal flow rate on the valve to match the pump? I searched and searched the net and the closest I could come up with is one forum post mentioning a P/V ratio of 1to1.25 and some hydraulics supplier literature mentioning a 1to2 ratio in the middle of a string of other confusing info, but neither was clear, specific or definitive. On the phone I talked to a couple guys who clearly were just "guessing with their best radio voice" while trying not to really say anything (like a politician, hehe).
So neither ratio is close to 1to3 either like my machine nearly is. I'm not throwing out Tazza's thought that the choice of the valve they installed might be at least partially based on what they had available at the time, i.e. maybe they used the same valve in several different machines and dubbed it "close enough". I'm wondering if my little loader, as adequate as it briefly seemed to my totally rookie untrained eye, would have better progressive control if it had say a 12 to 15 gpm max valve on it?? I see several 12GPM but the sources I'm looking at seem to jump from 12 up to 25 and I've already been "warned" not to go any higher than my existing 20. I for sure don't want it to be touchy and jerky. I could be missing a lot, but if a valve can handle 25GPM, then wouldn't it let full flow from the 7GPM pump at less than 1/4 of it's throw? If I went with a 12GPM valve, it would be a 1to1.6 valve to pump ratio. Maybe that's not enough of some kind of margin I'm not considering?
Does anybody have any reasonable firm numbers on this? It seems to me that if the pump should have 2 or 3 times the flow rate of the pump, that would be a caveat that a lot of DIY folks would know about and there would be more than a few solid conclusions to be found. It is important to pick the proper valve to match your pump and flow rate would be a biggie. I found several discussions about pressure, but in reality that's a pretty easy one as far as I can see. I know that pressure and flow rate are related dynamically, but in so far as picking a valve that won't break because the pressure was under-specified is relatively easy. Matching flow rate would be very important to how a system functions, but when you look it's only tumbleweeds & crickets.
Well I guess I'm hopefully on the verge of learning something at least. So far I'm pretty perplexed. Very much thanks for any help.

 

[SkidRoe]

I felt almost secure to pull the trigger on the 3-spool valve but I thought I'd let it simmer for a little while. Then I called a hydraulics vendor our department deals with and told him about the flow rate issue. He wasn't sure enough to suggest specs, but he referred me to another shop to call and I haven't reached them yet. But he did think that 7gpm pump to 20gpm valve ratio sounded "workable but excessive". He said he thought that I wouldn't want to go any higher than that for the valve. So I'm wondering what would be an ideal flow rate on the valve to match the pump? I searched and searched the net and the closest I could come up with is one forum post mentioning a P/V ratio of 1to1.25 and some hydraulics supplier literature mentioning a 1to2 ratio in the middle of a string of other confusing info, but neither was clear, specific or definitive. On the phone I talked to a couple guys who clearly were just "guessing with their best radio voice" while trying not to really say anything (like a politician, hehe).
So neither ratio is close to 1to3 either like my machine nearly is. I'm not throwing out Tazza's thought that the choice of the valve they installed might be at least partially based on what they had available at the time, i.e. maybe they used the same valve in several different machines and dubbed it "close enough". I'm wondering if my little loader, as adequate as it briefly seemed to my totally rookie untrained eye, would have better progressive control if it had say a 12 to 15 gpm max valve on it?? I see several 12GPM but the sources I'm looking at seem to jump from 12 up to 25 and I've already been "warned" not to go any higher than my existing 20. I for sure don't want it to be touchy and jerky. I could be missing a lot, but if a valve can handle 25GPM, then wouldn't it let full flow from the 7GPM pump at less than 1/4 of it's throw? If I went with a 12GPM valve, it would be a 1to1.6 valve to pump ratio. Maybe that's not enough of some kind of margin I'm not considering?
Does anybody have any reasonable firm numbers on this? It seems to me that if the pump should have 2 or 3 times the flow rate of the pump, that would be a caveat that a lot of DIY folks would know about and there would be more than a few solid conclusions to be found. It is important to pick the proper valve to match your pump and flow rate would be a biggie. I found several discussions about pressure, but in reality that's a pretty easy one as far as I can see. I know that pressure and flow rate are related dynamically, but in so far as picking a valve that won't break because the pressure was under-specified is relatively easy. Matching flow rate would be very important to how a system functions, but when you look it's only tumbleweeds & crickets.
Well I guess I'm hopefully on the verge of learning something at least. So far I'm pretty perplexed. Very much thanks for any help.

Sorry if I come off blunt, but I think that you are over thinking this.
With 7.25 gpm on tap, your machine will not be jumpy.
The 3-spool 20 gpm valve that you are looking at will work just fine. If not, you are a machinist - you can change the linkage ratios on the control sticks to make it more progressive.
Over sizing the valve is not a bad thing. Can you go too big? Maybe, but there is no magic ratio. Like I said in one of my previous posts, it needs to be sized to accept the return flow from your largest cylinders while they are retracting.
Who am I and what do I know? I am a mechanical engineer with 25 years experience, designing hydraulic systems, as well as many other automotive systems, for a large multinational heavy equipment company. If that makes you feel any better....
FWIW - SR

 

[Tazza]

Sorry if I come off blunt, but I think that you are over thinking this.
With 7.25 gpm on tap, your machine will not be jumpy.
The 3-spool 20 gpm valve that you are looking at will work just fine. If not, you are a machinist - you can change the linkage ratios on the control sticks to make it more progressive.
Over sizing the valve is not a bad thing. Can you go too big? Maybe, but there is no magic ratio. Like I said in one of my previous posts, it needs to be sized to accept the return flow from your largest cylinders while they are retracting.
Who am I and what do I know? I am a mechanical engineer with 25 years experience, designing hydraulic systems, as well as many other automotive systems, for a large multinational heavy equipment company. If that makes you feel any better....
FWIW - SR

I too don't understand why your sales dood said that you shouldn't over size the valve, there really is no reason why having more flow available through the valve would be a bad thing. Having a restriction is an issue though, it causes heat.

 

[vinito]

I too don't understand why your sales dood said that you shouldn't over size the valve, there really is no reason why having more flow available through the valve would be a bad thing. Having a restriction is an issue though, it causes heat.

Thanks for the replies.
I understand what you are suggesting SR. What I meant by "jumpy" was referring more to the fact that if the spool travel limits flow from 0 to 25 GPM, then it will reach 7 GPM in about 1/3 the full travel so if nothing else were changed, then the hand levers could be touchy in the center, then have no effect for the remaining 2/3 of the travel. However as you say, I could change the levers such that the full travel of them only moves the spool 1/3 (or whatever) each side of center. I am probably overthinking it. But at this point, since I'm changing the valve completely, if I just choose a valve with the correct parameters first then it would eliminate later operations only made necessary by choosing the "wrong" one first. One thing I'm certain of is that I would rather overthink it than underthink it (did I just make up a new word there?). I've done the underthinking plenty too many times before. It just seems like here at the start of the project is a good time for me to make an effort to learn something which will help to gurantee success, and maybe even improve on the original if that is possible.
One thing I find useful in engineering something is to make up a thought experiment by imagining a huge extreme and considering the possible effects. So if I have a pump with 5 GPM max output and a valve with 100 GPM max flow, then the control around center would certainly be touchy, i.e. difficult to feather. This negative effect would persist to decreasing amounts as you approach some kind of "ideal" sized valve, then as you went past it to the too-small range, the valve would have restriction problems, with heat being generated and control problems of a different sort too.
So there should be some kind of range around the "perfect" size valve which will still work fine. That's all I'm trying to figure out. This range might be 1X the pump flow or 5X the pump flow. I don't know.
I have done more digging and calling. For what it's worth, I will relay to the forum that I found three internet papers that mentioned that it is common for engineers to oversize a valve. And by that I don't mean it's considered "good practice" to oversize a valve but that a better sizing could have been done, but for fear of going too small an engineering choice is made to choose "too large" because the valve can still be made to function with other adjustments. So it could be said that though mabe not best, it is indeed better to oversize a valve to avoid problems that undersizing would create, then compensate later to make it function. If you don't have the time, $$ and equipment to R&D every choice but you can get close on paper, then that actually seems reasonable to me.
From the calls I have made to valve supplier tech departments this week, it appears that for my purpose a 12GPM valve should work well and not cause problems. This is what was recommended, and I got groans from these guys when I said I was considering 24 or 25 GPM valves. Note that my current valve is 20GPM so those others, which somewhat surprisingly were the next step up that I could find, are reaching out even further.
I'm starting to feel more ready to pull the trigger, but I'm sure you all know the feeling when you are getting info from two opposing ends of the spectrum. I still feel a little like the knot in the center of a tug-of-war rope (OK that's exxagerated, but still).
I'm going to sit down tomorrow, write some stuff down and lay out a solid priority list for what I want to do to this machine just to make sure I'm not jumping the gun. What I'm kind of trying to do here is to think through a little toward my end goal and modify things here at the beginning in such a way that I don't get bit in the arse later because I screwed up 5 links earlier in the chain. I'm sure this won't be put off though because there are so many things I want to be able to do with this machine that depend on having auxiliary hydraulics. On thing I want to do pretty early-on (for instance) is to build a solid framed cage to keep the soft-headed operator from having a really bad day. So that will be happening pretty soon too.
So for what this is worth, this is what I'm considering now: (link)
With this I can choose the configuration, so I can have a float spool, and I can add one or more to the stack later if I dream up some other goofy idea or just need to change something. That might be good for a novice like me.

 

[Tazza]

Thanks for the replies.
I understand what you are suggesting SR. What I meant by "jumpy" was referring more to the fact that if the spool travel limits flow from 0 to 25 GPM, then it will reach 7 GPM in about 1/3 the full travel so if nothing else were changed, then the hand levers could be touchy in the center, then have no effect for the remaining 2/3 of the travel. However as you say, I could change the levers such that the full travel of them only moves the spool 1/3 (or whatever) each side of center. I am probably overthinking it. But at this point, since I'm changing the valve completely, if I just choose a valve with the correct parameters first then it would eliminate later operations only made necessary by choosing the "wrong" one first. One thing I'm certain of is that I would rather overthink it than underthink it (did I just make up a new word there?). I've done the underthinking plenty too many times before. It just seems like here at the start of the project is a good time for me to make an effort to learn something which will help to gurantee success, and maybe even improve on the original if that is possible.
One thing I find useful in engineering something is to make up a thought experiment by imagining a huge extreme and considering the possible effects. So if I have a pump with 5 GPM max output and a valve with 100 GPM max flow, then the control around center would certainly be touchy, i.e. difficult to feather. This negative effect would persist to decreasing amounts as you approach some kind of "ideal" sized valve, then as you went past it to the too-small range, the valve would have restriction problems, with heat being generated and control problems of a different sort too.
So there should be some kind of range around the "perfect" size valve which will still work fine. That's all I'm trying to figure out. This range might be 1X the pump flow or 5X the pump flow. I don't know.
I have done more digging and calling. For what it's worth, I will relay to the forum that I found three internet papers that mentioned that it is common for engineers to oversize a valve. And by that I don't mean it's considered "good practice" to oversize a valve but that a better sizing could have been done, but for fear of going too small an engineering choice is made to choose "too large" because the valve can still be made to function with other adjustments. So it could be said that though mabe not best, it is indeed better to oversize a valve to avoid problems that undersizing would create, then compensate later to make it function. If you don't have the time, $$ and equipment to R&D every choice but you can get close on paper, then that actually seems reasonable to me.
From the calls I have made to valve supplier tech departments this week, it appears that for my purpose a 12GPM valve should work well and not cause problems. This is what was recommended, and I got groans from these guys when I said I was considering 24 or 25 GPM valves. Note that my current valve is 20GPM so those others, which somewhat surprisingly were the next step up that I could find, are reaching out even further.
I'm starting to feel more ready to pull the trigger, but I'm sure you all know the feeling when you are getting info from two opposing ends of the spectrum. I still feel a little like the knot in the center of a tug-of-war rope (OK that's exxagerated, but still).
I'm going to sit down tomorrow, write some stuff down and lay out a solid priority list for what I want to do to this machine just to make sure I'm not jumping the gun. What I'm kind of trying to do here is to think through a little toward my end goal and modify things here at the beginning in such a way that I don't get bit in the arse later because I screwed up 5 links earlier in the chain. I'm sure this won't be put off though because there are so many things I want to be able to do with this machine that depend on having auxiliary hydraulics. On thing I want to do pretty early-on (for instance) is to build a solid framed cage to keep the soft-headed operator from having a really bad day. So that will be happening pretty soon too.
So for what this is worth, this is what I'm considering now: (link)
With this I can choose the configuration, so I can have a float spool, and I can add one or more to the stack later if I dream up some other goofy idea or just need to change something. That might be good for a novice like me.

I don't know enough about the engineering side of hydraulics to know if the flow would be an issue like that, but you have chosen a valve very close, so it should work well.
I hope you are going to be taking lots of pictures of the change out.

 

[vinito]

I don't know enough about the engineering side of hydraulics to know if the flow would be an issue like that, but you have chosen a valve very close, so it should work well.
I hope you are going to be taking lots of pictures of the change out.

Yea, thanks for the reminder. I build stuff all the time and not always, but usually I forget to take pictures along the way, so I'll try to make an extra effort to remember.
I wish I knew more about the engineering of it too, but I've talked to several people so far and I'm pretty sure this valve stack I'm getting should work OK. I noticed this weekend that the valve I linked to is 12GPM nominal and 16GPM max, so that's getting pretty close to the original which was possibly larger than it needed to be.
I'm glad I waited a couple days too because you can pick the segments from a drop-down list and originally I only saw one with a float position. So I was "trial picking" the segments and I always picked that one. It would have been the wrong one. The correct one is down at the bottom of the list and I just noticed it last night. I need to start paying better attention.
I'll be ordering the valve as soon as I can. I just need to check my current connections to see if I need to order any adapters or anything so I can start the change-over as soon as I get it here. More schooling - I'll figure it out easy enough, but they have several types of inlet/outlet connections of course and I'm not sure what is on mine for sure yet.
Thanks for the reply. Always appreciated.

 

[vinito]

Yea, thanks for the reminder. I build stuff all the time and not always, but usually I forget to take pictures along the way, so I'll try to make an extra effort to remember.
I wish I knew more about the engineering of it too, but I've talked to several people so far and I'm pretty sure this valve stack I'm getting should work OK. I noticed this weekend that the valve I linked to is 12GPM nominal and 16GPM max, so that's getting pretty close to the original which was possibly larger than it needed to be.
I'm glad I waited a couple days too because you can pick the segments from a drop-down list and originally I only saw one with a float position. So I was "trial picking" the segments and I always picked that one. It would have been the wrong one. The correct one is down at the bottom of the list and I just noticed it last night. I need to start paying better attention.
I'll be ordering the valve as soon as I can. I just need to check my current connections to see if I need to order any adapters or anything so I can start the change-over as soon as I get it here. More schooling - I'll figure it out easy enough, but they have several types of inlet/outlet connections of course and I'm not sure what is on mine for sure yet.
Thanks for the reply. Always appreciated.

On Sunday I was thinking things through and came to realize that since this machine needs other things too, and I didn't have any auxiliary attachments yet anyway, I should really better put off buying and installing the new valve. I was OK with that. My first priority changed to finding some forks so I could build that attachment and have the capability, which I could use all the time around here.
Then last night somebody put their little auger attachment on Craiglist for cheap. I just now got back home and put it in the garage with the skidloader.
OK, so much for plans. And I have a pretty big fence project in the queue which I would have needed to rent an auger to do. So now, just a couple days later, the priority has changed right back to what I was doing before and I'll be ordering the new valve stack this week after all.
Oh well. It will be sweet to use my own auger for the fence, and this one will cost about the same as one day with the rental unit. Not sure if I'll actually be able to dig holes until spring, but I can test it and it will be completely ready whenever the weather and soil is.
I guess this is just a ramble. But I will take some photos of the auger project as I go - it will need to be adapted to fit my machine, but that's a relatively simple project once the hydraulics are sorted out.

 

[Tazza]

On Sunday I was thinking things through and came to realize that since this machine needs other things too, and I didn't have any auxiliary attachments yet anyway, I should really better put off buying and installing the new valve. I was OK with that. My first priority changed to finding some forks so I could build that attachment and have the capability, which I could use all the time around here.
Then last night somebody put their little auger attachment on Craiglist for cheap. I just now got back home and put it in the garage with the skidloader.
OK, so much for plans. And I have a pretty big fence project in the queue which I would have needed to rent an auger to do. So now, just a couple days later, the priority has changed right back to what I was doing before and I'll be ordering the new valve stack this week after all.
Oh well. It will be sweet to use my own auger for the fence, and this one will cost about the same as one day with the rental unit. Not sure if I'll actually be able to dig holes until spring, but I can test it and it will be completely ready whenever the weather and soil is.
I guess this is just a ramble. But I will take some photos of the auger project as I go - it will need to be adapted to fit my machine, but that's a relatively simple project once the hydraulics are sorted out.

Not a ramble at all. You saw a deal, you bought it.
I think of it as an investment. It will save you the cost of hiring a machine later to drill the holes and the best part, you can do it when you want to, no need to race around getting it done on the weekend so you can get it back to the hire mob.
It just means you have to get the valve done earlier than you expected.

 

[vinito]

Not a ramble at all. You saw a deal, you bought it.
I think of it as an investment. It will save you the cost of hiring a machine later to drill the holes and the best part, you can do it when you want to, no need to race around getting it done on the weekend so you can get it back to the hire mob.
It just means you have to get the valve done earlier than you expected.

I received the new valve a couple days ago. I have Monday off so I would like to maybe get it installed this weekend and give it a whirl. Besides the valve though, I have to make some new attachment clevis things and a mounting plate for the valve itself, plus ultimately a whole foot control mechanism for the new auxiliary spool though that can be deferred to another weekend if I run out of time. Adapting the control rods shouldn't be a big deal nor the valve mounting plate. I could still operate the aux. valve with the included handle temporarily just to test it out at least.
So I might make some progress this weekend after all. Replacing the valve might have another benefit too. I noticed that the lifting arms drop pretty fast (probably 6 inches per minute at least !) when in center or machine is off. That is most likely a cylinder issue I suppose, but since the valve is also a possible source I might get lucky. Even if it turns out to be cylinder(s), that seems like a simpler fix than getting into a valve repair would be. Maybe not, but conceptually a cylinder is easier to understand than a valve, at least to my brain.
I'll post if I make any progress on this front.

 

[walio123]

I received the new valve a couple days ago. I have Monday off so I would like to maybe get it installed this weekend and give it a whirl. Besides the valve though, I have to make some new attachment clevis things and a mounting plate for the valve itself, plus ultimately a whole foot control mechanism for the new auxiliary spool though that can be deferred to another weekend if I run out of time. Adapting the control rods shouldn't be a big deal nor the valve mounting plate. I could still operate the aux. valve with the included handle temporarily just to test it out at least.
So I might make some progress this weekend after all. Replacing the valve might have another benefit too. I noticed that the lifting arms drop pretty fast (probably 6 inches per minute at least !) when in center or machine is off. That is most likely a cylinder issue I suppose, but since the valve is also a possible source I might get lucky. Even if it turns out to be cylinder(s), that seems like a simpler fix than getting into a valve repair would be. Maybe not, but conceptually a cylinder is easier to understand than a valve, at least to my brain.
I'll post if I make any progress on this front.

Bought a valve. The site, which you have given written that is set at the factory to 2000psi. Many different machines I've seen. Even if they are from one brand has a very large pressure difference with which they work. Usually they are within 1800psi -3300 psi. Do you know what your pump pressure down to work? Not bad to think on that.

 

[vinito]

Bought a valve. The site, which you have given written that is set at the factory to 2000psi. Many different machines I've seen. Even if they are from one brand has a very large pressure difference with which they work. Usually they are within 1800psi -3300 psi. Do you know what your pump pressure down to work? Not bad to think on that.

My service manual specifies the relief valve pressure should be set from 1900 to 2000 psi. I guess it wouldn't hurt to buy a pressure gauge for checking hydraulics stuff since I may could use it from time to time now. If I had a gauge I could double-check the factory setting, but as long as they did it correct I should be OK at factory setting.
Thanks for the caution though.

 

[vinito]

My service manual specifies the relief valve pressure should be set from 1900 to 2000 psi. I guess it wouldn't hurt to buy a pressure gauge for checking hydraulics stuff since I may could use it from time to time now. If I had a gauge I could double-check the factory setting, but as long as they did it correct I should be OK at factory setting.
Thanks for the caution though.

I assembled the valve stack today just to have that done. Dead simple of course, but now I can see what I'm working with so that's cool.
Then I came up and made a to-do list for the storm of projects I've dreamed up for this thing. It's not depressing or overwhelming, but it's a fair chunk of time. I knew that it would be this way and surprisingly this time it's not 5 times the project I was guessing it would be. Came to about what I figured so that's good. I think a simple list might help keep me working the priorities in a logical order at least. Plus it just might keep me from adding anything more to it until these items are checked off. It can become unwieldy in short order if I'm not careful.
First I'm focusing on getting the aux hydraulics working so I can then check out the operation and power of the auger in hopes that it's adequate as-is. Then I'll be adapting the trailer so I can load and haul the machine. Then I'll work on updating the attachments to the quick-attach setup. There are several sub-parts to each of those three categories naturally.
Once those are done the machine will at least be pretty versatile. Heck, it will even be worth more. Any future repairs and upgrades should pretty much be one-at-a-time things which will be easier on my psychology.
First on the list is installing the new valve and aux hydraulics. I'll post progress pictures.

 

[walio123]

I assembled the valve stack today just to have that done. Dead simple of course, but now I can see what I'm working with so that's cool.
Then I came up and made a to-do list for the storm of projects I've dreamed up for this thing. It's not depressing or overwhelming, but it's a fair chunk of time. I knew that it would be this way and surprisingly this time it's not 5 times the project I was guessing it would be. Came to about what I figured so that's good. I think a simple list might help keep me working the priorities in a logical order at least. Plus it just might keep me from adding anything more to it until these items are checked off. It can become unwieldy in short order if I'm not careful.
First I'm focusing on getting the aux hydraulics working so I can then check out the operation and power of the auger in hopes that it's adequate as-is. Then I'll be adapting the trailer so I can load and haul the machine. Then I'll work on updating the attachments to the quick-attach setup. There are several sub-parts to each of those three categories naturally.
Once those are done the machine will at least be pretty versatile. Heck, it will even be worth more. Any future repairs and upgrades should pretty much be one-at-a-time things which will be easier on my psychology.
First on the list is installing the new valve and aux hydraulics. I'll post progress pictures.

I'm glad people like you. I passed many times on this road. Only tell you that these projects sometimes go quite expensive.But always give me pleasure that I am able to bring them to an end. I see you on the right track - planning. Plan properly and consistently doing things well and think carefully sequence of work and what and when to buy. Good luck and do not give up.

 

[vinito]

I'm glad people like you. I passed many times on this road. Only tell you that these projects sometimes go quite expensive.But always give me pleasure that I am able to bring them to an end. I see you on the right track - planning. Plan properly and consistently doing things well and think carefully sequence of work and what and when to buy. Good luck and do not give up.

Thanks for the encouragement.
Yes this machine will certainly end up being an expensive project, but I knew that even when I first purchased it. I paid a bit too much for it in the condition it is in and I figured I'd spend another couple grand on it suiting it to my wants. I'm sure a better deal on a better machine would have come up eventually, but I don't know how long that might have taken and I feel like the sooner I get started, the better.
Also I am completely new to skidloaders and I figured the money spend on the machine would be cheaper than tuition at a technical college or something. Approaching hobbies this way has worked out pretty well for me several times before. And at the end, I should have a really cool machine of my own to use on a whim. It has come in pretty handy a few times already and it does work OK as it is, just not great. My ongoing trick will be to not get in so deep that it doesn't operate for long periods of time. It would be great if nothing I took apart would stay that way for more than a day or two. I think I might be able to pull that off - it just takes more careful measuring ahead of time.

 

[walio123]

Thanks for the encouragement.
Yes this machine will certainly end up being an expensive project, but I knew that even when I first purchased it. I paid a bit too much for it in the condition it is in and I figured I'd spend another couple grand on it suiting it to my wants. I'm sure a better deal on a better machine would have come up eventually, but I don't know how long that might have taken and I feel like the sooner I get started, the better.
Also I am completely new to skidloaders and I figured the money spend on the machine would be cheaper than tuition at a technical college or something. Approaching hobbies this way has worked out pretty well for me several times before. And at the end, I should have a really cool machine of my own to use on a whim. It has come in pretty handy a few times already and it does work OK as it is, just not great. My ongoing trick will be to not get in so deep that it doesn't operate for long periods of time. It would be great if nothing I took apart would stay that way for more than a day or two. I think I might be able to pull that off - it just takes more careful measuring ahead of time.

buying auger without having an aux.hydraulics is like putting the pan on the fire without being caught fish.Not a mistake, you can always sell it, if just unexpected expenses arise the money for augery would have been useful. I see you're quite enthusiastic, go ahead.

 

[vinito]

buying auger without having an aux.hydraulics is like putting the pan on the fire without being caught fish.Not a mistake, you can always sell it, if just unexpected expenses arise the money for augery would have been useful. I see you're quite enthusiastic, go ahead.

I happened to run across a cheap hydraulic auger so I snapped it up. I was planning on adding the aux hydraulics anyway, partly because I could use an auger and would have rented one if I didn't own one by the time I needed it. I don't know if this one works right yet, but it should be close and I can improve it if need be.
Figured out the mount for the new valve so far. I just need to draw up what I measured for the linkages so I can machine the new attachment arms and hook it up. It should be a pretty easy assembly once the parts are ready - maybe an hour from "now to new".

 

[vinito]

I happened to run across a cheap hydraulic auger so I snapped it up. I was planning on adding the aux hydraulics anyway, partly because I could use an auger and would have rented one if I didn't own one by the time I needed it. I don't know if this one works right yet, but it should be close and I can improve it if need be.
Figured out the mount for the new valve so far. I just need to draw up what I measured for the linkages so I can machine the new attachment arms and hook it up. It should be a pretty easy assembly once the parts are ready - maybe an hour from "now to new".

It's been the typical Holiday Haywire for a while now, but I finally had a little time today to make a little progress. Hopefully I will maintain enough free time for the next couple weeks and get a bunch more done.

Just need to attach the linkages and I can prime it and try it out. The existing ball ends are worn and they are cheap from McMaster Carr, so I ordered all new replacements. It will be good to minimize the slop. It should be nice and tight with the new ends.

 

[vinito]

It's been the typical Holiday Haywire for a while now, but I finally had a little time today to make a little progress. Hopefully I will maintain enough free time for the next couple weeks and get a bunch more done.

Just need to attach the linkages and I can prime it and try it out. The existing ball ends are worn and they are cheap from McMaster Carr, so I ordered all new replacements. It will be good to minimize the slop. It should be nice and tight with the new ends.

Oops. Almost forgot the other cool part.

It's just band-aid & bubblegum right now, but I'll do a proper job of it soon. I was thinking it would be good to machine a manifold block for the ends to make it solid. But it's there and all connected. Soon I'll be able to try that little auger out.
Also have a little story. I got to use the machine right before I dug into this valve:
Next-door neighbor had three tree trunks to load onto a trailer for milling into lumber. The last one was pretty large so I flipped the bucket at it to roll it near his trailer. Then we chained it under the bucket to lift it. The machine has enough poop for the job but not enough fat, so the neighbor and his dad both stood on the back of the machine and that was enough mass to keep the machine from tipping forward. I guess that means I've now tested the power of the hydraulics to its limit because I went past the tipping point, and the auxiliary weight plates are attached on the back already. I feel pretty good about how the machine worked for that.