Ordered a flail mower.

[Plant 175]

Give it a week or two, you'll be trimming trees and hedge rows with it too lol.

Hell he will have half the mountain cleared in two weeks

 

[mcmxi]

Hell he will have half the mountain cleared in two weeks

I don't have time for that. What with travel, work, building new sheds, taking care of my own property and cutting my friend's 12 acres I barely have enough time to build the custom rifles I'm supposed to be building.

 

[nebsteror]

I also ordered the same flail, from the same company, at about the same time as you, to put on almost the same tractor.

Mine arrived today, and it also was pretty beaten up in shipping. The local freight forwarded said they had to re-palletize it because the pallet it arrived on was disintegrated. The mower has some "road rash" on some of the bottom edges where it clearly was dragged or rubbed on something and took out some of the paint and the steel underneath.

My flap hangar rods are also bent just like yours, although I think they'll probably still work the way they are.

It'll take me a while to get it fully mounted up and running, but I appreciate your thread, given that you're a few weeks "ahead" of me.

 

[mcmxi]

I also ordered the same flail, from the same company, at about the same time as you, to put on almost the same tractor.

Mine arrived today, and it also was pretty beaten up in shipping. The local freight forwarded said they had to re-palletize it because the pallet it arrived on was disintegrated. The mower has some "road rash" on some of the bottom edges where it clearly was dragged or rubbed on something and took out some of the paint and the steel underneath.

My flap hangar rods are also bent just like yours, although I think they'll probably still work the way they are.

It'll take me a while to get it fully mounted up and running, but I appreciate your thread, given that you're a few weeks "ahead" of me.

Sorry to hear about the damage to your cutter too. I heard a similar story from the freight company as well re the need to move it to a different pallet. I'd really like to hear about your experiences with it once you get to use it. Any tips or tricks would be appreciated.

I don't know if you have an hydraulic top link and/or lift rod but I have both and have to give up one due to the flail requiring two rear remotes. I started out by replacing the hydraulic lift rod with the standard lift rod. After an initial test I replaced the hydraulic top link with the standard top link and reinstalled the hydraulic lift rod which I run on a valve with a "float" feature. My thought here is that floating the head to follow the terrain saves on the constant need for adjustment of the head if the ground isn't even close to level. Time will tell if this is the best approach but so far I think it's an improvement.

Overall though it's a fantastic cutter and I've really enjoyed my experience with it thus far.

 

[Dieseldonato]

Does the remote you have for angling the flail head have float? We were advised to keep it in float if the remote had it. And set the height with the three point hitch. Always seemed to work fairly well, so long as there wasn't an extream change in terrain angle. I can say after we started doing that we had a lot less wear on the skid shoes, and seemed ro get a more even cut from it. The hitch had a big hinge on it so it essentially would float on 2 points. The arm was free to move up and down till it hit its stop and the flail could move up and down to stay with the grade.

 

[mcmxi]

Does the remote you have for angling the flail head have float? We were advised to keep it in float if the remote had it. And set the height with the three point hitch. Always seemed to work fairly well, so long as there wasn't an extream change in terrain angle. I can say after we started doing that we had a lot less wear on the skid shoes, and seemed ro get a more even cut from it. The hitch had a big hinge on it so it essentially would float on 2 points. The arm was free to move up and down till it hit its stop and the flail could move up and down to stay with the grade.

You are absolutely right, I could run the head hydraulics on the valve with float. That option never occurred to me ... duh! I only have one remote with float due to the limitations of the MX but that valve can act as a centering detent valve if I need the head to be fixed (e.g. cutting a hedge) or as a float valve. This is why I didn't install the Outback Wrap indicators yet.

I'll try that when I get back next week and I think it'll be a lot more respsonive since just the head will float over the ground vs. the entire mower needing to react.

Thanks for the suggestion ... much appreciated. This is why I joined this forum.

I have to run. I'm heading off with the trailer on a 1,200 mile roundtrip to pick up the M6060.

 

[Dieseldonato]

Worked pretty good for doing road side mowing, the down side of the flail head in float was when you were pretty flat and had to transition in or out of a ditch. Then it was best to lower it in the ditch, then raise it up out when you were back on flat ground, instead of just letting it flop down hard or dig in when you were coming out. Besides that one thing I always let it float.

 

[nebsteror]

I configured all of my remotes with float and had assumed I should probably float the angle hydraulic to let it ride along unimpeded. However, on my tractor, physically putting the valve into float requires the control lever to be pushed all the way through the "send fluid in one direction" to get it into the float detent. And doing that sends that little hydraulic arm on a pretty wild ride, to say the least.

So I think to avoid hammering the whole mechanism (and the tractor) I'll have to add a flow constrictor or something on that remote.

 

[nebsteror]

Sorry to hear about the damage to your cutter too. I heard a similar story from the freight company as well re the need to move it to a different pallet. I'd really like to hear about your experiences with it once you get to use it. Any tips or tricks would be appreciated.

Same!

I don't know if you have an hydraulic top link and/or lift rod but I have both and have to give up one due to the flail requiring two rear remotes. I started out by replacing the hydraulic lift rod with the standard lift rod. After an initial test I replaced the hydraulic top link with the standard top link and reinstalled the hydraulic lift rod which I run on a valve with a "float" feature. My thought here is that floating the head to follow the terrain saves on the constant need for adjustment of the head if the ground isn't even close to level. Time will tell if this is the best approach but so far I think it's an improvement.

Yes, I have 3 remotes and ordered the tractor with TnT. And so far I have just disconnected the "tilt" circuit and kept the "top" engaged, because that seemed like it would be the more useful geometry to keep dynamic. I have no idea what I am doing, though.

My strategy also assumes that the tilt arm will stay locked out and not sag. I don't know if that is realistic to expect or not. I guess I'll have to remove the hydraulic if it won't hold fast when not in circuit.

Another thing I guess I could do is put a manual diverter on the third remote and use that to re-adjust the tilt arm if it just leaks down slowly or something. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that should need adjusting very often on the articulated flail.


Did you figure out which of the two holes on the implement to use for the top link? There's a fix hole and also a slot that would allow the whole thing to slide through a small range. The documentation is silent on which one we're supposed to use, when.

 

[Dieseldonato]

I configured all of my remotes with float and had assumed I should probably float the angle hydraulic to let it ride along unimpeded. However, on my tractor, physically putting the valve into float requires the control lever to be pushed all the way through the "send fluid in one direction" to get it into the float detent. And doing that sends that little hydraulic arm on a pretty wild ride, to say the least.

So I think to avoid hammering the whole mechanism (and the tractor) I'll have to add a flow constrictor or something on that remote.

If it's set up like the ferri mower I used they have a adapter plug that can be swapped out for one with an orifice to help tame the cylinder speed down a notch. Had a pretty small hole in it, but it sure slowed down the cylinder. Local hydraulic shop had them on hand.

 

[nebsteror]

If it's set up like the ferri mower I used they have a adapter plug that can be swapped out for one with an orifice to help tame the cylinder speed down a notch. Had a pretty small hole in it, but it sure slowed down the cylinder. Local hydraulic shop had them on hand.

That sounds perfect. Seems like some kind of adapter with an adjustable (needle?) valve might be a thing, too. But I think reducing the flow by a factor of 5 would be pretty good, ha ha.

 

[nebsteror]

Okay, six hours of mowing in, on all manner of slopes and flats.

I've settled, so far, on keeping the top link hydraulic available and the link pinned to the fixed mounting point on the mower.

I set the skids to the tallest setting, because I'm mowing mostly pasture filled with rocks and don't care what my "lawn" looks like that much.

I don't seem to need to adjust the top link once I get it at "about right;" it seems to hold the unit at a good angle vis a vis the rear roller and the active parts of the machine. I tried adjusting a little in or out, but other than at the extrema it seems to mow about the same.

Since I have a tilt hydraulic on my 3pt hitch as well, I had to remove those lines. Interestingly, it seems not to have drifted down, but rather is holding the position I set it to at the start. That's nice, because it means I don't necessarily have to remove the tilt arm to use this mower!

I've learned to feather the two mower hydraulics well enough that I no longer feel like I need a flow reducer on either. If I did add one, it would be on the one that sends the mower out in the plane of the earth; i.e., the offset. That hydraulic seems to have a harder job to do in general, and the unit sometimes shudders/stutters a little coming in and especially when going out. Slower is better for sure.

Once set up, I've found I mostly like to leave the 3pt set lowest (so, "floating" basically) and also set the tilt articulation hydraulic into float, too. On most terrain that seems to just leave the whole machine out there to roll with the punches as they were.

Where that becomes infeasible is once it's time to turn, though! The skids just eat into the ground if I don't lift the machine at least a bit. So I find myself re-engaging the tilt hydraulic to lock it out, then lifting a bit and pivoting into the next straight line.

If I'm mowing a large, relatively flat area, I can leave the tilt hydraulic locked off "flat" and just raise and lower the 3pt on the corners.

I'd be interested in seeing how the machine did without the skids or with them somehow set even less aggressively. I feel like I have enough lumpy areas that the skids can't account for (when the convex hump is in between the two skids), and the mower just basically levels that area with those big hammers. I'm sure the skids reduce a lot of diving bottom-out in varied terrain, though.

I've run over a number of rocks and not cracked or really done much to the hammers yet. I plan to go around and pick up all the rocks now that I can see them so plainly.

I found one piece of wire trash somewhere in my field and wound it up real quickly on the mower. I was ready for that, though, and a hundred snips later the thing just fell right off.

I feel like this size (158cm) is about right for my tractor -- it's stable with just forks on the loader on even some decent slopes and side slopes. I think bigger would start to make it less fun/carefree when extended.

That said, I would love an extra foot of offset and/or to have the pivot point for the tilt further outboard of the mower, like the Ferris and a couple of other units have. The issue with my rather wide tractor is that I can't get very far out over a ditch (or up onto an adjacent upslope; same thing) because of the geometry. Even an extra 8 or 10 inches would make a big difference. I knew this might be an issue when I was eyeballing the various units online, but this model was what was available in time for spring.

I also wouldn't mind have a fixed unit of substantially greater width for the big flat field areas. I guess maybe 6.5 feet or 7 feet would be fine there, and then even a small 4-foot unit that had amazing articulation would work for the weird, trouble areas.

But for a single implement and 10 acres, this seems like a pretty happy medium.

 

[mcmxi]

Did you figure out which of the two holes on the implement to use for the top link? There's a fix hole and also a slot that would allow the whole thing to slide through a small range. The documentation is silent on which one we're supposed to use, when.

I'm using the fixed hole but the slot would allow the mower to articulate more if say backing up to a bank. The slot might be a better option over the fixed hole since it would allow the entire cutter to respond more quickly to changes as compared to assuming that the entire 3-point would move up if the head encounters resistance when moving rearward.

 

[mcmxi]

Okay, six hours of mowing in, on all manner of slopes and flats.

I've settled, so far, on keeping the top link hydraulic available and the link pinned to the fixed mounting point on the mower.

I set the skids to the tallest setting, because I'm mowing mostly pasture filled with rocks and don't care what my "lawn" looks like that much.

I don't seem to need to adjust the top link once I get it at "about right;" it seems to hold the unit at a good angle vis a vis the rear roller and the active parts of the machine. I tried adjusting a little in or out, but other than at the extrema it seems to mow about the same.

Since I have a tilt hydraulic on my 3pt hitch as well, I had to remove those lines. Interestingly, it seems not to have drifted down, but rather is holding the position I set it to at the start. That's nice, because it means I don't necessarily have to remove the tilt arm to use this mower!

I've learned to feather the two mower hydraulics well enough that I no longer feel like I need a flow reducer on either. If I did add one, it would be on the one that sends the mower out in the plane of the earth; i.e., the offset. That hydraulic seems to have a harder job to do in general, and the unit sometimes shudders/stutters a little coming in and especially when going out. Slower is better for sure.

Once set up, I've found I mostly like to leave the 3pt set lowest (so, "floating" basically) and also set the tilt articulation hydraulic into float, too. On most terrain that seems to just leave the whole machine out there to roll with the punches as they were.

Where that becomes infeasible is once it's time to turn, though! The skids just eat into the ground if I don't lift the machine at least a bit. So I find myself re-engaging the tilt hydraulic to lock it out, then lifting a bit and pivoting into the next straight line.

If I'm mowing a large, relatively flat area, I can leave the tilt hydraulic locked off "flat" and just raise and lower the 3pt on the corners.

I'd be interested in seeing how the machine did without the skids or with them somehow set even less aggressively. I feel like I have enough lumpy areas that the skids can't account for (when the convex hump is in between the two skids), and the mower just basically levels that area with those big hammers. I'm sure the skids reduce a lot of diving bottom-out in varied terrain, though.

I've run over a number of rocks and not cracked or really done much to the hammers yet. I plan to go around and pick up all the rocks now that I can see them so plainly.

I found one piece of wire trash somewhere in my field and wound it up real quickly on the mower. I was ready for that, though, and a hundred snips later the thing just fell right off.

I feel like this size (158cm) is about right for my tractor -- it's stable with just forks on the loader on even some decent slopes and side slopes. I think bigger would start to make it less fun/carefree when extended.

That said, I would love an extra foot of offset and/or to have the pivot point for the tilt further outboard of the mower, like the Ferris and a couple of other units have. The issue with my rather wide tractor is that I can't get very far out over a ditch (or up onto an adjacent upslope; same thing) because of the geometry. Even an extra 8 or 10 inches would make a big difference. I knew this might be an issue when I was eyeballing the various units online, but this model was what was available in time for spring.

I also wouldn't mind have a fixed unit of substantially greater width for the big flat field areas. I guess maybe 6.5 feet or 7 feet would be fine there, and then even a small 4-foot unit that had amazing articulation would work for the weird, trouble areas.

But for a single implement and 10 acres, this seems like a pretty happy medium.

An excellent write up and so many great points. A wider fixed offset model for larger open pasture would be good, and a bit more offset on this model would be nice too, but all in all I'm with you and feel that this is a good implement for the sorts of things we do. I think the RCR1884 I have is faster in my field but there's way more chance of high centering and scalping the ground.

Some laminated wheels rather than skids might be a nice feature and I'm sure they'd help with cornering. The skids tend to dig in if the ground is uneven on a turn.

It'll be a few weeks before I get to cutting fields but I'll be ready.

 

[Dieseldonato]

Few thoughts. The skids are more so if the mower hits an uneven spot, not nessisarily supposed to be riding along on the ground at all times. Try setting them a bit higher and using the three point to keep them just off the ground. Second you can swing your three point arms to one side to offset them. Had to do it on the T4.75. Just needed that extra foot of reach. It's a bit of a pain without help. I'd hook up the ferri lift it up about a foot get out and slid it over and drop the pin in one of the stabilizers for the three point. Don't know how the rear of your tractor is set up.
Oh just had another thought on the skid shoes. I did end up making a set that had an upward angle on the front to help with them digging in. Seemed to work decent. If those hammers are made anything like the ferri hammers they are pretty darn tough they should be mostly trouble free.
Happy mowing!

 

[Plant 175]

totally agree mcm! I was completely suckered by Jon "a ritter bit will do" into the artillian grapple. Hook-line-and-sinker... They are looking out for their interests first, and often time the product being hawked leaves a lot to be desired. There is a lot going on 'behind the scenes'... I'm a slow learner.

Those slopes on either side of your driveway are steep! how is going straight up and down them with the machine, perpendicular to the driveway? is that even possible?

not trying to high jack this thread but was wondering what you meant about being suckered In on Artillian. I looking for a grapple and was looking at Artillian and others for my B2601

 

[B737]

not trying to high jack this thread but was wondering what you meant about being suckered In on Artillian. I looking for a grapple and was looking at Artillian and others for my B2601

do not buy the artillian grapple. It is overpriced, it is clunky, it does not save any time when you already have SSQA, actually wastes time, it's heavy. I'm married to the thing unfortunately.

If I had to do it all over again id have gotten the Precision Manufacturing 322 (double lid). Or EA, but having double lids is huge.

my full rant is here,

Why the Artillian grapple kind of sucks...

This is just my experience, YMMV... I set out to buy a grapple for my BX that did not have SSQA. The Artillian modular system seemed to make sense, it wasnt the lightest but it was versatile. I thought by configuring rake-grapple-rake I'd save a little money, and save a little weight. About...

www.orangetractortalks.com

 

[Plant 175]

Thanks for the feedback