Machinery Photo/Discussion Thread

davidk1394

Waffletraktor wrote: »

T series Deere’s are the only one remotely designed for Europe.

Are they the walker combines ?

Waffletraktor

davidk1394 wrote: »

Waffletraktor wrote: »

T series Deere’s are the only one remotely designed for Europe.

Are they the walker combines ?

It’s a straw walker but has an extra rotor/ drum compared to other similar sized walker models. Their not bad just don’t think their a nh**\claas rotary. Deere’s s series are for dry going in oz or the states

White Clover

Waffletraktor wrote: »

It’s a straw walker but has an extra rotor/ drum compared to other similar sized walker models. Their not bad just don’t think their a nh**\claas rotary. Deere’s s series are for dry going in oz or the states

Can you explain to a proper combine novice the difference between a rotary and straw walker machine?

funkey_monkey

Taken from the Garda Traffic on Twitter Thread:

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1154389381417000960

annubis

funkey_monkey wrote: »

Taken from the Garda Traffic on Twitter Thread:

https://twitter.com/GardaTraffic/status/1154389381417000960

hard to tell but is it not just hitched and using the strap in case it came off hitch?

Reggie.

annubis wrote: »

hard to tell but is it not just hitched and using the strap in case it came off hitch?

My thoughts aswell

funkey_monkey

Yes - that's what I thought too - although the angle of the drawbar looks odd, but might just be the angle that the photo was taken.
Unless the rules mean that a breakaway cable can only be used for activating the trailer brakes. Unless the tang at the top of the PUH is unable to prevent the trailer unhooking and the strap is used to catch the trailer when it unhooks?

Older trailers that don’t have a breakaway brake can have a secondary coupling (a chain or wire rope) fitted instead.

Ref: http://www.rsa.ie/PageFiles/4858/Road%20Safety%20Advice%20for%20Drawing%20Light%20Trailers.pdf (Page 20)

davidk1394

Waffletraktor wrote: »

It’s a straw walker but has an extra rotor/ drum compared to other similar sized walker models. Their not bad just don’t think their a nh**\claas rotary. Deere’s s series are for dry going in oz or the states

Two of my neighbors bought JD T series combines. One in from the UK. I thinks it’s a 550 hill master with all the bells and whistles.
Other neighbor bought a 560 new this year, hill master aswell. Both of them are happy with them so far

emaherx

annubis wrote: »

hard to tell but is it not just hitched and using the strap in case it came off hitch?

That's what it looks like. Although I'd doubt if the strap is suitable for that purpose, then again I'm not sure if that's the issue the Garda had.


I'm sure having an unsuitable secondary coupling is the same as having none as far as the law is concerned.

hopeso

annubis wrote: »

hard to tell but is it not just hitched and using the strap in case it came off hitch?

It is clearly attached to the pick up hitch, as it should be. OK, that strap would be as much use as baler twine to hold the trailer if it came off, but that's another matter. The frightening thing is how easy it could be for any of us here to be prosecuted for an unsafe vehicle simply because a guard hasn't a clue what he's looking at ...........

wrangler

hopeso wrote: »

It is clearly attached to the pick up hitch, as it should be. OK, that strap would be as much use as baler twine to hold the trailer if it came off, but that's another matter. The frightening thing is how easy it could be for any of us here to be prosecuted for an unsafe vehicle simply because a guard hasn't a clue what he's looking at ...........

seemingly only a certain type of chain will pass there, has to be made for the job

hopeso

wrangler wrote: »

seemingly only a certain type of chain will pass there, has to be made for the job

Yes, and where it's attached to the tractor is a requirement now too. The top link pin is not acceptable now. It needs to be attached at roughly the same height as the tractor's hitch to be legal..... Perhaps that's the issue the guard on the road had, and the desk jockey sending out the tweet got it wrong.....

emaherx

hopeso wrote: »

Yes, and where it's attached to the tractor is a requirement now too. The top link pin is not acceptable now. It needs to be attached at roughly the same height as the tractor's hitch to be legal..... Perhaps that's the issue the guard on the road had, and the desk jockey sending out the tweet got it wrong.....

That's not entirely true, it needs to be attached as low as possible on many older tractors that is still the top link pin. But it has to be fit for purpose which the strap is not.

emaherx

hopeso wrote: »

The frightening thing is how easy it could be for any of us here to be prosecuted for an unsafe vehicle simply because a guard hasn't a clue what he's looking at ...........

Well if he's looking for a suitable secondary coupling then there isn't one in the picture, which is an offence by itself unless that strap is activating an emergency brake. (Which it doesn't look to be.)

hopeso

emaherx wrote: »

Well if he's looking for a suitable secondary coupling then there isn't one in the picture, which is an offence by itself unless that strap is activating an emergency brake. (Which it doesn't look to be.)

Absolutely.....That strap is not suitable in any way as a secondary coupling. If he was pulled for that, fair cop....But the tweet above clearly states that he was pulled for hauling the trailer with that strap, which is clearly not the case......

hopeso

emaherx wrote: »

That's not entirely true, it needs to be attached as low as possible on many older tractors that is still the top link pin. But it has to be fit for purpose which the strap is not.

That's not my understanding of it, although I may be wrong. There are pictures in the RSA handbook showing where the chain needs to be attached. From memory, the top link pin is clearly forbidden. There aren't many tractors new or old with a suitable anchor point that low down, which is why the safety chain is fastly disappearing in favour of breakaway systems that activate the trailer brakes.....

emaherx

hopeso wrote: »

Absolutely.....That strap is not suitable in any way as a secondary coupling. If he was pulled for that, fair cop....But the tweet above clearly states that he was pulled for hauling the trailer with that strap, which is clearly not the case......

Doubt the gaurd who pulled him is responsible for the tweet. But yes I agree the tweet is either wrong or misleading however the vehicle is not fitted with the required equipment to make it road legal.

funkey_monkey

Section 4 here is interesting. In the UK trailers for which the rear lights/reflectors are covered by the dropped rear door is not allowed.
Famous brand too...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/individual-vehicle-approval-iva-for-light-trailers-help-to-get-a-pass/individual-vehicle-approval-iva-for-light-trailers-help-to-get-a-pass

emaherx

hopeso wrote: »

That's not my understanding of it, although I may be wrong. There are pictures in the RSA handbook showing where the chain needs to be attached. From memory, the top link pin is clearly forbidden. There aren't many tractors new or old with a suitable anchor point that low down, which is why the safety chain is fastly disappearing in favour of breakaway systems that activate the trailer brakes.....

From RSA handbook

Despite the fact that many older trailers may be equipped with a
safety chain following the arrangement shown in Figure 18 below,
the RSA advise that, if possible, this type of secondary coupling chain
should not be used in future. The chain is too long and too high on the
rear of the tractor.

My reading of this is; if possible should not be used, but they except the limitations on older machines.

hopeso

emaherx wrote: »

From RSA handbook


My reading of this is; if possible should not be used, but they except the limitations on older machines.

I must have just looked at the photos, with the big green tick on the lower chain, and the big red X on the higher mounted chain. I certainly didn't read the entire booklet at the time anyway....

whelan2

Got this delivered the other day

emaherx

whelan2 wrote: »

Got this delivered the other day

That tractor will never drive it!

whelan2

emaherx wrote: »

That tractor will never drive it!

Ha

Mooooo

whelan2 wrote: »

Got this delivered the other day

What model is that and how much of a mix would it hold?

whelan2

Mooooo wrote: »

What model is that and how much of a mix would it hold?

Mech fibre 350. Supposed to hold up to 7 tonnes. Replacing a 170 we had for 14 years

Reggie.

whelan2 wrote: »

Got this delivered the other day

Oh shiney

davidk1394

Last minute repairs.com, on a serious note though. Has anyone with a Lely or other brand baker break many tines on the pickup ? I’m after replacing a lot of the original tines.

Reggie.

davidk1394 wrote: »

Last minute repairs.com, on a serious note though. Has anyone with a Lely or other brand baker break many tines on the pickup ? I’m after replacing a lot of the original tines.

Hateful job. Have you them set too low

Mooooo

whelan2 wrote: »

Mech fibre 350. Supposed to hold up to 7 tonnes. Replacing a 170 we had for 14 years

Well wear

davidk1394

Reggie. wrote: »

Hateful job. Have you them set too low

I thought that too. When I take off the tines, the inside of the tine rusted and the bit that broke is still shiny if get what I mean