The same functionality but so different, KOOI®-ReachForks vs. Single Pantograph
Every engineer knows when you look at both figures that the more parts in a machine, the more complex the whole and the more maintenance the system requires. But does the customer know this too? Why not using KOOI®-ReachForks instead of a single pantograph.
Maybe we overlook something, but telescopic forks have several distinct advantages over a pantograph:
- More affordable.
- Less energy required.
- Easy to install.
- Easily to swap.
- Excellent visibility.
- Reduced weight (approx. 35-45%).
- Improved residual lifting capacity.
- Virtually no extra lost load thickness compared to standard forks.
- Shorter mast height due to absence of moving auxiliary pantograph mast.
- No hinged parts, bearing, rollers meaning reduced maintenance costs.
- Double-pallet transport without need for extra-long forks.
- Easy to install onto other equipment such as fork positioners or side-shifts.
- Improved residual lifting capacity due to fork positioner mounting on mast, hence reduced risk of tipping.
Do the reachforks also have disadvantages? No drawbacks that outweigh all the benefits, but the critics will say:
- The reachforks are thicker. That is right when handling 2000 kg (4400 pounds), the forks on a pantograph are 45mm (1.77”) and the belonging reachforks are 54mm (2.12”) which is problem for almost all pallets.
- The reachforks have more deflection: True, but the deflection can easily be compensated with the same tilt function. Do not forget that the pantograph also deflects due all its own weight is being positioned in a forward position when extending. Also all hinge-point will have their play as well and needs to be compensated.
- The reach forks are slower. That is not true because the handling cycles are the same.
- A heavier mast must be used when using reachforks. That is also a misunderstanding since the moment (force x arm) remains the same.
With all these advantages, reachforks for this application cannot be ignored anyway.