Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Attention Forum Users: On the 28th of December 2023 at 9:00am Central Time, we will be taking the forums down for maintenance while we prepare the new forums for your use. Please click here for more information.

Harry Ferguson Tractors Discussion Forum
:

ROPS compatibility with TO-20

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
Charlie

08-02-2006 11:02:42




Report to Moderator

I'm wondering what other tractors have the same axle configuration as the TO-20 and for which I might find a used or new ROPS for my TO-20.
Thanks. Also would be interested in knowing front wheel weight interchangeability.
Charlie (Madison, NH)




[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
Dave Tointon

08-12-2006 02:07:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Charlie, 08-02-2006 11:02:42  
I posted a question on this forum re Rops for my TE20 a couple of months ago. Concensus was very much in favour so I bought a set from Bare-co $500 (Australian) off the shelf. They were very easy to fit and a sound investment I reckon. After all What value do you place on your life??? 500 bucks is cheap!!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
charlie

08-12-2006 10:03:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Dave Tointon, 08-12-2006 02:07:18  
I did the same now. I'm tracking it en route and it should arrive Tuesday.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Dave Tointon

08-12-2006 14:52:40




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to charlie, 08-12-2006 10:03:42  
Good on ya mate!!!! Smart move.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

08-02-2006 21:17:54




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Charlie, 08-02-2006 11:02:42  
You might try searching the archives as this topic has come up before. ROPS are not generic. Each design is made for a specific tractor and there is a lot of engineering that goes into them. You can bolt a ROPS and a seatbelt from another tractor on to your TO-20 but that doesn't mean it'll protect you in a rollover.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charlie

08-03-2006 05:37:48




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Jerry/MT, 08-02-2006 21:17:54  
I think I've read most of the archived comments, but feel I can search a bit more widely than just the TO-20. Aren't some of the other Ferguson or Ford tractors so similar that there should be no real issue of structural integrity if the ROPS fits?



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

08-03-2006 10:35:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Charlie, 08-03-2006 05:37:48  
What I was trying to say in my post is that just because a ROPS fits a "similar" tractor, doesn't mean it's designed to protect the "similar "tractor in a rollover. While I am engineer (but not a structural engineer), I know that few inches difference in the location of center of gravity, different wheelbase, roll center height, etc, can make a signicant difference in the rollover loads that the ROPS has to react to protect the operator. ROPS are not a "one size fits all" device unless one actually designs a ROPS for every tractor in a given line and then selects to produce the ROPS design that will react the worse case rollover loads in the entire line. You can't do that without doing the design study. Because we live in such a litigous society, liability concerns keep people from manufacturings ROPS because of the expense involved in doing all the design engineering necessary to assure the ROPS will protect the operator (including verification testing).That and the relatively limited market that these older tractors offer, keeps the unit cost prohibitive. It's whole different case for the newer tractors. The liability is greater if the tractor manufacturer doesn't design a ROPS for his line of machinery because the technology is there to do so. I have a Ford 4610 with a ROPS, but my TO-30 has none. I'm am just as careful operating the 4610 as I am the TO-30 because I don't want to endanger myself or damage my equipment. These old tractors operated with very few (but not zero) rollover accidents per operating hour for many years by people being careful. I just don't think my TO-30 requires a ROPS.
ROPS/seatbelts give us the ability to have a greater margin of safety on an all ready pretty safe device.
I'm not trying to convince you not to buy a ROPS. I'm just trying to say that if you go through the expense of buying a ROPS, you should have the assurance the the ROPS was designed for your tractor and will work as it's supposed to should you encounter a rollover.(That's what your paying for isn't it?) In my book, just saying it's designed for use on a "similar tractor" is not enough.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Charlie

08-03-2006 10:55:24




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Jerry/MT, 08-03-2006 10:35:18  
Hi Jerry --
I appreciate those thoughts, but it still seems to me that there is room for middle ground. If someone offered you a ROPS for your TO30 for fifty bucks, I'll bet there's a fair chance you'd take it. But you've decided not to pay $500 or more to order one. Safety investment decisions are relative to perceived risk unless you're commercial, driven by OSHA, etc. I bushhog a couple of fields and about 2 miles of woods roads a year with my TO20 and handle the slopes and margins carefully, but if I could get a ROPS cheap for a very similar tractor in terms of weight and geometry, then I would take it. The design principles are not that hard to understand. The same Bareco ROPS for example, fits many tractors. But I'm not about to pay the price for a new one, in which respect I'm not different from many owners of old tractors.
Thanks again for your thoughtful comment.
Charlie

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Jerry/MT

08-03-2006 21:24:45




Report to Moderator
 Re: ROPS compatibility with TO-20 in reply to Charlie, 08-03-2006 10:55:24  
I'd pay nothing for it unless I was convinced it was designed for the TO-30. That's my point. Unless it's designed for the tractor it's attached to, one would percieve it to be a safety improvement when in fact, it really isn't.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy