Flu419

[jcollings]

Looking for information on this model truck,
any input would be greatly helpful, in terms of the Ins and outs of the PTO or hydraulic system.

Thank you

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[jcollings]

Or if you own a 406,

Trying to find difference between the 2 different trucks on the PTO and hydraulic setups.

Thanks again

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[jcollings]

Well,
I guess from no reply that the unimog section isn't like the others.

Thanks

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[tennmogger]

Could be that a few searches could answer your questions? The answer you want is a little vague but I can try.

PTO: the 406 Unimog has external PTO available, front and/or rear, either 540 speed, or 540 plus 1000 rpm depending on the model PTO attached to the side of the transmission. The FLU-419 has no PTO except one used to drive the hydraulic pump. Not usable for an implement.

Hydraulics; 406 mogs typically have a front system used on the front loader (or whatever implement you run on the front. DITTO the FLU-419, however the 419 is not set up to add "whatever" to the front, just the Schmidt loader. Of course other implements could be adapted. The 419 has the same front pump but a different reservoir and plumbing setup.

406's can have other hydraulic systems too, typically a transmission bottom-mounted PTO driving a hydraulic pump, or a side mount PTO off the cascade housing. Depending on the spool/multi-valve setup (typically on the implement, not on the 406) this system can be used on the back-hoe, rear mower, etc. Note that the 406 has a three point mechanical attachment available, both the Case model and the German 'Ag Spec' model. So the 406 will accept whatever 3-point implements you desire and has PTO and/or hydraulic quick-connects to run them, just like a well-equipped tractor.

The FLU-419 has a control system (spool) for the back-hoe, but it is not intended to run anything else on the back, like 3-point implements. You can run hand tools off that system and the reel of hose is there for that purpose. There is no 3-point setup for the FLU. You are on your own if you want to attach anything except the Case 580-derrived back-hoe. The interface matches nothing else that I know of.

the 406 mogs have several transmission and clutch options, starting with a single clutch and 6 speed transmission (with either a 1-2, 3-4-5-6 shift pattern, or a 2x4 shift plate with two ranges of 4 gears). The FLU-419 has the 2x4 system but with air shift between ranges, I think. Someone please correct me on any of this.

A 406 can have a 'cascade' reduction gear set ahead of the 6 speed, with 3 more ranges. Therefore a well equipped 406 will have 24 forwards theoretically, with four locked out, so it's a 20 speed. That model often has a dual clutch to allow 'live' PTO driven implements.

No options on the 419 transmission.

Your question is not a simple one. Bottom line, in my opinion, The FLU-419 is great at what it does but is not as versatile as a 406 Unimog.

.

 

[jcollings]

Excellent description that's exactly what I was looking for in terms of the 2 different machines and non availability on the 419FLU compared to the 406 unimog having much more availability.
I know the FLU has a splitter which is a split rear gear I believe to shift 1st Then 1st high range when splitter is pushed up on the shifter and clutches depressed it engages.1st high , And so on throughout the gear ranges.

I did see this picture of a 406,
Attached pic...
Was seeing if that transmission PTO case mounted on the side of the transmission was the setup on the FLU419 to add front and rear PTO shafts futuristically for driving items.
By your description is clarified it is not set up that way.
I was looking at purchasing an FLU419 but but this ability might change my mind.
Also seen members comments on the belt driven front loader pump being weak only 6 or 8 gallons a minute and not as functional as needed, although other members describe it's 3000 pounds aledge quoted rated capacity working OK.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[tennmogger]

What usage do you have in mind for a Unimog?

 

[jcollings]

Well as original mogs are so versatile in all implement applications, I was under the impression that the FLU19 would be the same but as described a little different.
As a tractor type application would application would like to run a Bush hog out front.
I know that can be run hydraulically , with the minimal pump application on the front that the FLU19 has that possibly is a a issue.
I like the military issue type equipment generally until some of the engineers step in and make them more inconvenient than convenient ..... lol.
The backhoe on this unit seems like it's very worthy and strong.
Another nice tool.
But in terms of removing front and rear pieces of equipment was looking at what the functionality was in terms of adding other equipment to the machine.

"Thank you Tennmogger" for your knowledge, I greatly appreciate it.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[Mullaney]

Well as original mogs are so versatile in all implement applications, I was under the impression that the FLU19 would be the same but as described a little different.
As a tractor type application would application would like to run a Bush hog out front.
I know that can be run hydraulically , with the minimal pump application on the front that the FLU19 has that possibly is a a issue.
I like the military issue type equipment generally until some of the engineers step in and make them more inconvenient than convenient ..... lol.
The backhoe on this unit seems like it's very worthy and strong.
Another nice tool.
But in terms of removing front and rear pieces of equipment was looking at what the functionality was in terms of adding other equipment to the machine.

"Thank you Tennmogger" for your knowledge, I greatly appreciate it.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

.
Like a lot of other things here - it takes a little time for just the right person to log on, read a little, discover the question and have a useful answer.

Glad @tennmogger had some useful answers! Not bad all considered... Two days for an answer on a machine that is a tiny fraction or what is represented here seems pretty impressive to me.

 

[jcollings]

Agreed,

Tennmoger is the knowledge base that is very helpful.
Dealing with different forms are indeed variable in terms of replies and pin point knowledge.
It is always nice to have superior input and correct answers that you can count on.

After dealing with a m923a2,
M998, m803a, m1031/1028
and all the associated forums.

Once again I'd like to thank the replies and All The great people and resources of this website.

Be safe and Thank you!


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[The FLU farm]

Not hydraulic related per se, but the 419 can accommodate a dozer blade or a forklift in the front, not only a loader.

For the rear, instead of the common backhoe, also a crane or trencher. But the size and shape of the toolboxes won't allow things to to be completely interchangeable between the different models of 419s, or at least not stowable as intended.

For using the rear PTO driven hydraulics up front, I simply plugged in extension hoses instead of the backhoe's connectors and ran a front mounted snow blower that way.

 

[jcollings]

So the truck can be driven with the PTO engaged, for the rear backhoe and feed hydraulics to the front to run an attachment, while underway or in movement forward or reverse?
Like a Bush hog ?

Thank you

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[The FLU farm]

Well, I ran a low flow skid steer snow blower that way for a few winters.

Keeping it at 1,800 to 2,000 rpm to make the 'blower run efficiently understandably made the fans come on, though. That has only happened once or twice while using the backhoe. Should be easy enough to add capacity to the system and fix that issue.

Another potential problem is speed. If you need high rpm to run the bush hog, you may be going faster than you'd like. It was borderline with the snowblower and I often ended up having to make two passes.

 

[tennmogger]

Great info Flufarm, using the high capacity rear pump to drive a front mower is a good idea. That's one application where on and off are sufficient control, and the PTO shifter would be that on-off. A possible consideration is how abrupt a shutoff is it when the PTO gear is disengaged or the clutch operated? Is it like 'deadheading' the hydraulics? With the huge momentum of the spinning rotary cutter, deadheading the hydraulics would be 'interesting". An over-run clutch between the hydraulic motor and the mower gearbox would allow the blade to spin down at it's normal rate even if hydraulic flow to themotor stopped abruptly.

There is a positive: if the rotary cutter bogs down or gets into a rock, whatever, and has to be stopped, hitting the clutch would stop power to it. Most of us instinctively hit the clutch when disaster is imminent so that action would be faster than any other operator action.

The front hydraulic pump is only 12 gpm if I recall correctly, and that is at high rpm. The reservoir would be too small for heavy continuous operation too.

Yes the FLU-419 has a single clutch which does, as pointed out, prevent keeping the PTO and hydraulics running while gears are changed. That's not too hard to work around though it might mean running in a slower gear to handle the spots of rough ground.

FLUfarm, would you know any model info of implements that fit the front of the FLU? Or were you saying such pieces could be fabricated? I ask for an application I am involved with for a local Sheriff Dept.


Bob

 

[jcollings]

I guess Flu419 only runs on a hydraulic pumps that runs the whole system correct, hence the two different hydraulic tanks??

From The information I have researched the backhoe PTO runs a 30 gallon a minute pump the front loader runs off a belt drive pump and that's like 8 to 11 gallons per minute is that correct.


Thank you

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[The FLU farm]

FLUfarm, would you know any model info of implements that fit the front of the FLU? Or were you saying such pieces could be fabricated? I ask for an application I am involved with for a local Sheriff Dept.

I don't know the model numbers off the top of my head, but the forklift for an HMMH uses the same mounts, as does the dozer blade for an HME.
And I would imagine that there are many other implements that also fit, since the MB 4-94 I recently sold had the same style mount, in addition to the DIN plate.

After converting one loader to Quick Tach, I can hook all kinds of skid steer compatible things to that one, including the snow blower.

 

[peakbagger]

FLU farm has just about all the variations that will hang off the front mounting plate. I was told but have not confirmed that the MB94 uses a different front mount system. The 419 is basically a beefed up MB94 that was run through military trials and beefed up until it passed. It has got a heavily reinforced frame. There are photos of an ultrarare snowplow that fit up the 419 front mounting plate somewhere on the web and possibly in this forum.

It is interesting to note, the 419 was designed to fight a ground war in Europe against the Soviets, by the time most of the 419s were delivered the Soviet Union did not exist. The military pulled them from the fleet about 5 or 10 years early. No doubt if they still were stored away a boat load would be going to Ukraine to fight the war they were designed to fight.

 

[The FLU farm]

I was told but have not confirmed that the MB94 uses a different front mount system.

Never did try if a 419 implement would fit, but what was on my MB 4-94 sure looked the same. Think I even measured a couple of distances just to see if they were the same.

Haven't removed a backhoe yet, but as I recall, the rear mounts also looked a lot like a 419's. Makes sense since this particular MB 4-94 was born with a loader and backhoe.

 

[DREAD KT]

I purchased my FLU-419 a few months ago for my small ranch in Texas. Haven't been able to do too much with it yet, except fix the fuel system that was sucking air. Now that I got that fixed, I am looking around at implements. I just did some calculations: Horsepower = Pressure (PSIG) × Flow (GPM)/ 1714 and worked out that it can barely achieve 36 HP at the rear PTO and about 11 HP at the front. This is at 2000 RPM. This means that I could barely run a 40 HP mower or bush hog at the back and would have to moving at a good clip to do it. Looking at adding a Cat 3 or 4 3-point hitch just for that and I figure that I am just as well off with tow-behind implements that I can share with my M274 Mule when it arrives from the shop. I see that there are some Cat 0 and Cat 1, 3-point hitches you can add to a 2" hitch receiver. That is another avenue I want to explore if anyone can recommend a solution for adding a hitch receiver below the pintle mount without removing the pintle or messing with it. I have seen similar solutions for the Deuce but I don't have a need for that (I also have an M109A4 RV conversion). Thoughts?

 

[The FLU farm]

The rear hydraulics will run a low pressure skid steer snowblower, but as you mentioned, the SEE will go a bit fast when the 'blower is at an efficient rpm.
That's one reason I got a skid steer to run that snow blower instead.

Been meaning to put a receiver below the pintle hook, but like many other things, haven't got around to it yet. As I recall, there's enough room for it with the backhoe deployed, which is about the only potential issue.

 

[NJRICK]

FLU farm has just about all the variations that will hang off the front mounting plate. I was told but have not confirmed that the MB94 uses a different front mount system. The 419 is basically a beefed up MB94 that was run through military trials and beefed up until it passed. It has got a heavily reinforced frame. There are photos of an ultrarare snowplow that fit up the 419 front mounting plate somewhere on the web and possibly in this forum.

It is interesting to note, the 419 was designed to fight a ground war in Europe against the Soviets, by the time most of the 419s were delivered the Soviet Union did not exist. The military pulled them from the fleet about 5 or 10 years early. No doubt if they still were stored away a boat load would be going to Ukraine to fight the war they were designed to fight.

FLU419 was replaced years ago . JLB makes replacement