Forks and grapple compatibility?
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24
Like Tree58Likes

Thread: Forks and grapple compatibility?

  1. Top | #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:02 PM
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,894
    Thanks
    94
    Thanked 218 Times in 174 Posts

    Forks and grapple compatibility?

    I know this might be a bit of a stretch during the Chris to Curtis transition of Artillian but I don't need to know today or even this week so rather than calling and taking up the time of those buried in the work of ironing things out at Artillian-Curtis I thought I'd just post my question here.

    I'm in the decision making stages of my pre purchase of a fork frame, forks and a grapple. The question I have is instead of a full 3 wide grapple bed with 1 or 2 grapples on top can I mount one rake and the grapple in the center and still leave a fork on either end of the frame? What about the backrest? Can it be mounted on the frame with the grapple at the same time?

    My primary goal is brush pickup with this setup, any HD work would mean removing the forks, but I'm trying to get the best function and bang for my $ with the different options offered.

    Thanks in advance
    Gizmo2 and C-Range like this.
    2004-L130

    2013-2032r, Curtis Hard side cab (project), H130 FEL & 61"bucket, Artillian Modular Grapple on HD frame with Diverter, 2300# Artillian frame w/ 36" x 3" tines, 46BH 9" & 13" bucket, Frontier RB1060, HLA 1000 series 60" JDQA Snow plow, JD ballast box, RK QH, Homemade 3pt multi purpose hitch, 117W of extra LED lights on ROPS and side Brush guards, Ken's bolt on hooks-3x, Ideal Knife grooved R-4's.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to balrog006 For This Useful Post:

    Gizmo2 (03-08-2017)

  3. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

  4. Top | #2

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:58 PM
    Location
    Berlin, MA
    Posts
    4,598
    Thanks
    94
    Thanked 867 Times in 662 Posts
    Well, I'm not Chris but there should be no reason you can't mount a single rake + grapple and then put your forks on. There is plenty of room on both sides of the frame for forks.

    And if you look at his YouTube page, he has a video of a machine lifting a rock with the grapple and the frame has the backrest mounted on it in that video.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYa-6yZenEQ
    Levi and BigJim55 like this.
    D160 Mower/Bagger.
    2014 2032R tractor/H130 FEL w/Bolt-On Hooks/54" Snow Plow/iMatch Quick-Hitch/County Line 5' Scraper blade/County Line Carry-All/Artillian 42" Forks & QH Adapter/JD Ballast Box/Frontier SB1164 3PH Blower/Leinbach PHD/Wallenstien BX42 Chipper

  5. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JimR For This Useful Post:

    balrog006 (03-07-2017), C-Range (03-07-2017)

  6. Top | #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:02 PM
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,894
    Thanks
    94
    Thanked 218 Times in 174 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JimR View Post
    Well, I'm not Chris but there should be no reason you can't mount a single rake + grapple and then put your forks on. There is plenty of room on both sides of the frame for forks.

    And if you look at his YouTube page, he has a video of a machine lifting a rock with the grapple and the frame has the backrest mounted on it in that video.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYa-6yZenEQ
    Exactly why I posted here, I know lots of folks on GTT would be willing to offer their thoughts on my questions and when possible someone from Artillian will hopefully chime in as well.

    I am familiar with the demo vid of the prototype but wasn't sure if the timeline of it vs. the continuing design of the grapple vs. the backrest redesign and their current compatibility, so I asked.
    BigJim55 likes this.
    2004-L130

    2013-2032r, Curtis Hard side cab (project), H130 FEL & 61"bucket, Artillian Modular Grapple on HD frame with Diverter, 2300# Artillian frame w/ 36" x 3" tines, 46BH 9" & 13" bucket, Frontier RB1060, HLA 1000 series 60" JDQA Snow plow, JD ballast box, RK QH, Homemade 3pt multi purpose hitch, 117W of extra LED lights on ROPS and side Brush guards, Ken's bolt on hooks-3x, Ideal Knife grooved R-4's.

  7. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

  8. Top | #4

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:20 AM
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,269
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 174 Times in 161 Posts
    I am going to say yes you can physically do it but your grapple is not going to work very well. The grapple tines are only like 20-24 inches long. The shortest forks Artillian sells now is 36 inches. So your forks are going to interfere with the ability to actually grab something, like a log. I have all of the implements you are referencing but have never set it up like that. I have 42 inch forks, which I really recommend. If you don't want the two rakes and just want a grapple I would say that it will work just fine. You will still be able to grab brush or a log with just the grapple, in fact the two rakes do not really add to that type of work other than to help balance a log. The only capability you would really lose is the ability to rake with a width of about the size of bucket. Instead you would only be able to rake the width of the one grapple/rake whatever that is (I have forgotten). Hope this helps.

    If I had the funds and bigger tractor, I would probably have a double grapple set up. I move a lot of logs with mine and having two grapples would help in a lot of scenarios I have been in. Everything works just fine with one grapple, so do not think I am unhappy. I just think two might give you a little bit more capability. I didn't go with two due to the weight since I have a SCUT and I am cheap!
    BigJim55 likes this.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to 69project For This Useful Post:

    C-Range (03-07-2017)

  10. Top | #5
    RIP Chris C-Range's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Last Online
    02-02-2019 @ 09:06 AM
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    148
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked 37 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by balrog006 View Post
    The question I have is instead of a full 3 wide grapple bed with 1 or 2 grapples on top can I mount one rake and the grapple in the center and still leave a fork on either end of the frame? What about the backrest? Can it be mounted on the frame with the grapple at the same time?
    "...can I mount one rake and the grapple in the center..." - Sorry, but this doesn't quite make sense. You can mount EITHER a Rake OR a Grapple at the center of the frame. Or maybe you are referring to the "Rake" as the lower portion of the "Grapple"? These are actually two different things. Rakes cannot be used to make a Grapple. They are basically just "bed extenders" but they are useful by themselves without a grapple at all, so they got named a "Rake". Capiche?

    To answer your question otherwise, sorry, but this is not really a workable idea. The fork blades hang significantly lower than the grapple bottom so you'll never get the tip of the grapple to engage your work. Instead, you'll get the fork tine under the work, but the Grapple tip will just hit it. You might be able to get some success with brush piles but the long length of the forks will end up just being a nuisance in the long run.

    The best way to save $ in your scenario is to just get one Grapple and pass on the Rakes to get started. If you find your work is taking too long, get the Rakes later on. You can always add, and the rakes don't cost that much to ship. They are light (40lbs per).

    Or, you can start out with just a Grapple, and later add another Grapple and a Rake instead. Then you'll have a double Grapple setup, a real attack dog. Twice the clamping force = twice the fun.

    So the bad news is don't try to mix FORKS and GRAPPLES. The good news is that you can start simple and add components as you go for the work at hand.

    Oh, and regarding the Backrest, the current Backrest cannot be used at the same time as a Grapple. The hydraulic hoses will interfere. Luckily, they detach from the fork frame in about 10 seconds. A Backrest would be unnecessary when using a grapple anyway.
    Last edited by C-Range; 03-07-2017 at 06:59 PM.
    mark02tj and JimR like this.
    Chris - 3720 TLB

  11. Top | #6
    RIP Chris C-Range's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Last Online
    02-02-2019 @ 09:06 AM
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    148
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked 37 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JimR View Post
    Well, I'm not Chris but there should be no reason you can't mount a single rake + grapple and then put your forks on. There is plenty of room on both sides of the frame for forks.

    And if you look at his YouTube page, he has a video of a machine lifting a rock with the grapple and the frame has the backrest mounted on it in that video.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYa-6yZenEQ
    Hi Jim,

    The backrest in the video is the old version, no longer available. But you are correct, there would be plenty of space on the fork frame to add the forks beside a center mounted grapple if someone chose to do so.
    BigJim55 and JimR like this.
    Chris - 3720 TLB

  12. Top | #7
    RIP Chris C-Range's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Last Online
    02-02-2019 @ 09:06 AM
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    148
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked 37 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 69project View Post
    I am going to say yes you can physically do it but your grapple is not going to work very well. The grapple tines are only like 20-24 inches long. The shortest forks Artillian sells now is 36 inches. So your forks are going to interfere with the ability to actually grab something, like a log. I have all of the implements you are referencing but have never set it up like that. I have 42 inch forks, which I really recommend. If you don't want the two rakes and just want a grapple I would say that it will work just fine. You will still be able to grab brush or a log with just the grapple, in fact the two rakes do not really add to that type of work other than to help balance a log. The only capability you would really lose is the ability to rake with a width of about the size of bucket. Instead you would only be able to rake the width of the one grapple/rake whatever that is (I have forgotten). Hope this helps.

    If I had the funds and bigger tractor, I would probably have a double grapple set up. I move a lot of logs with mine and having two grapples would help in a lot of scenarios I have been in. Everything works just fine with one grapple, so do not think I am unhappy. I just think two might give you a little bit more capability. I didn't go with two due to the weight since I have a SCUT and I am cheap!
    Very well said.

    AS USUAL!
    BigJim55 and JimR like this.
    Chris - 3720 TLB

  13. Top | #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:02 PM
    Location
    West Michigan
    Posts
    1,894
    Thanks
    94
    Thanked 218 Times in 174 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by 69project View Post
    I am going to say yes you can physically do it but your grapple is not going to work very well. The grapple tines are only like 20-24 inches long. The shortest forks Artillian sells now is 36 inches. So your forks are going to interfere with the ability to actually grab something, like a log. I have all of the implements you are referencing but have never set it up like that.
    Have you tried? Im not sure I'd agree that just because the forks are longer than the grapple's reach it will "interfere" with grabbing something... Yes the grapple may not clamp something on the end of the forks outside of its reach but curling the forks will also hold a lot of logs and brush won't the addition of a grapple on top of the pile just serve to help hold it all together?

    Quote Originally Posted by 69project View Post
    I have 42 inch forks, which I really recommend. If you don't want the two rakes and just want a grapple I would say that it will work just fine. You will still be able to grab brush or a log with just the grapple, in fact the two rakes do not really add to that type of work other than to help balance a log. The only capability you would really lose is the ability to rake with a width of about the size of bucket. Instead you would only be able to rake the width of the one grapple/rake whatever that is (I have forgotten). Hope this helps.
    I also think Ill get the 42"s, and I was hoping the forks would both widen the carrying capacity and help to balance the load-since Im already buying them why not use them more than just "forking" things?

    Quote Originally Posted by 69project View Post
    If I had the funds and bigger tractor, I would probably have a double grapple set up. I move a lot of logs with mine and having two grapples would help in a lot of scenarios I have been in. Everything works just fine with one grapple, so do not think I am unhappy. I just think two might give you a little bit more capability. I didn't go with two due to the weight since I have a SCUT and I am cheap!
    I have a 2R series and Im trying to be frugal, the bill for what I have in my cart is already quite large. Yeah the Cadillac of grapples would be a full rake with dual grapples... maybe later...

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Range View Post
    "...can I mount one rake and the grapple in the center..." - Sorry, but this doesn't quite make sense. You can mount EITHER a Rake OR a Grapple at the center of the frame. Or maybe you are referring to the "Rake" as the lower portion of the "Grapple"? These are actually two different things. Rakes cannot be used to make a Grapple. They are basically just "bed extenders" but they are useful by themselves without a grapple at all, so they got named a "Rake". Capiche?
    Please see the picture from Artillian's site below, they call the lower part of the grapple unit a "rake", unless I'm missing something?

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Range View Post
    To answer your question otherwise, sorry, but this is not really a workable idea. The fork blades hang significantly lower than the grapple bottom so you'll never get the tip of the grapple to engage your work. Instead, you'll get the fork tine under the work, but the Grapple tip will just hit it. You might be able to get some success with brush piles but the long length of the forks will end up just being a nuisance in the long run.
    Im not sure how you mean its not workable, for example how specifically do you mean that the forks "hang lower" than the tip of the grapple? Are you referring to the bend at the rear of the forks where the grapple mounts to the frame? Or are you thinking if I pointed the unit down and tried grabbing a pile from the top? I don't think the former is accurate from what I've seen in pictures on Artillian's site and videos online of them in action. I'm aware that the length of the grapple and rake is different than the length of a set of 36" or 42" forks, but I don't plan on grabbing pointed "down"... my intent was to slide into piles level, just like one would pick up a pallet with just the forks, clamp what I could and curl to pick up the rest then pick up the whole mess and move it where I wanted. In this scenario I don't think that anything hangs lower than anything else nor do I think the length of the forks vs the grapple would be a hindrance.

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Range View Post
    The best way to save $ in your scenario is to just get one Grapple and pass on the Rakes to get started. If you find your work is taking too long, get the Rakes later on. You can always add, and the rakes don't cost that much to ship. They are light (40lbs per).
    Again a grapple set includes a lower rake.

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Range View Post
    Or, you can start out with just a Grapple, and later add another Grapple and a Rake instead. Then you'll have a d<script id="gpt-impl-0.573723685583019" src="https://securepubads.g.doubleclick.net/gpt/pubads_impl_111.js"></script>ouble Grapple setup, a real attack dog. Twice the clamping force = twice the fun.

    So the bad news is don't try to mix FORKS and GRAPPLES. The good news is that you can start simple and add components as you go for the work at hand.
    I realize its a modular system and components can be added or moved around in the future, Im just trying to get the best system for me at first then I can add later if I have additional needs and funds.

    Quote Originally Posted by C-Range View Post
    Oh, and regarding the Backrest, the current Backrest cannot be used at the same time as a Grapple. The hydraulic hoses will interfere. Luckily, they detach from the fork frame in about 10 seconds. A Backrest would be unnecessary when using a grapple anyway.
    Could you provide a source for this? I didn't see anything regarding compatibility here or on Artillian. How bad is the interference of the hoses that you are referring to? The backrest is pretty open, it does not seem like it would be that troublesome to route flexible hoses thru it to get from the grapple to my 3rd function connects?

    I personally don't think a backrest is unnecessary at any time while using forks or a grapple for much of anything.... I've had too many things roll back off piles, off pallets, out of bins and boxes, etc. to trust lifting things up without the added safety of something like a backrest between them and my tractor and me!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails IMG_2592.PNG  
    Last edited by balrog006; 03-07-2017 at 08:27 PM.

  14. Top | #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:20 AM
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,269
    Thanks
    71
    Thanked 174 Times in 161 Posts
    No, I have not tried this set up because it never occurred to me to try. Once you have a grapple you will never go back to forks to grab brush or logs. I started out with forks and once I bought the grapple, I only use the forks for picking up pallets or similar loads. The grapple is so much more efficient at that task than a set of forks, at least for me.

  15. Top | #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Last Online
    Today @ 07:58 PM
    Location
    Berlin, MA
    Posts
    4,598
    Thanks
    94
    Thanked 867 Times in 662 Posts
    Hey ummm... Balrog.... "C-Range" is Chris from Artillian. C-Range is his new username on GTT and the business itself is using the old Artillian account.
    Gizmo2 and BigJim55 like this.
    D160 Mower/Bagger.
    2014 2032R tractor/H130 FEL w/Bolt-On Hooks/54" Snow Plow/iMatch Quick-Hitch/County Line 5' Scraper blade/County Line Carry-All/Artillian 42" Forks & QH Adapter/JD Ballast Box/Frontier SB1164 3PH Blower/Leinbach PHD/Wallenstien BX42 Chipper

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to JimR For This Useful Post:

    C-Range (03-08-2017), Gizmo2 (03-08-2017)

  17. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •