Kubota Corp and weight boxes vs loaded tires

[Bob_Skurka]

slow . . . I don't know, but what you & Cliff said does make sense.

The only question I have is: why is Kubota doing this? Has there been a rash of damaged front ends, twisted front axles, broken steering hydraulics, etc???

Interestingly enough, the B2910 has loaded rear tires, Kubota frowns upon that. The TC24 has air in the tires (left over summer air from last season so I assume that is doubly bad) and I think NH recommends fluid fill or weights + a ballast box. The Ventrac has the engine in the rear and I've had enough weight in the loader bucket to make that machine tippy. . .but have winter air in those tires because there is no fluid in any of them.

 

[ronjhall]

I'll agree with you on the 2x4's with 2 people.
But on my CUT the weight in the tires has to pass through the same frame and housings as the weight box. As Bob stated the 3PH was designed to carry the load.
I'm sure all of our ideas have some affect on the tractor. Some good, some bad.

 

[ronjhall]

<font color="blue"> Interestingly enough, the B2910 has loaded rear tires, Kubota frowns upon that. </font>
On page 43 of my Operators Manual for a 2000 B2910 it gives information on properly loading the rear tires.
Has this been removed from later manuals?

 

[Bob_Skurka]

Ron, my statement was based on the new information presented in this thead regarding the apparent new position of Kubota and not wanting the tires loaded. My Kubota dealer loaded the tires when the tractor was purchased.

 

[slowzuki]

Warning! one paragraph of a bit of engi talk:

I'd need a diagram to explain this but loaded tires load the frame more heavily in shear but the 3point weight puts a much bigger moment on the frame. Give the casting isn't tall in profile, moments are harder to resist.

Out of engi talk mode!

I wonder if it has anything to do with the move to loaders having no forward bracing and rather running under the rear axle?

Maybe Kubota found tractors used with weight box have X% fewer warrantee problems and assigned the cause to the weight box?

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I'll agree with you on the 2x4's with 2 people.
But on my CUT the weight in the tires has to pass through the same frame and housings as the weight box. As Bob stated the 3PH was designed to carry the load.
I'm sure all of our ideas have some affect on the tractor. Some good, some bad. )</font>

 

[MadReferee]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( my statement was based on the new information presented in this thread regarding the apparent new position of Kubota and not wanting the tires loaded. )</font>

Has anybody seen this in writing from Kubota or is this just heresay handed down from a dealer who may or may not have his own agenda?

Until Kubota issues an official policy statement to its dealers and customers, I would not take this as gospel. Speculation and panic on the part of the uninformed public is bad and counter productive.

 

[familyman]

In any event, I would think an Easy Weight kit would possibly be more flexible than loaded tires or a weight box. Easier to on/off or modify the weight, nothing sticking out the back, etc.

 

[5030]

Bob:

At least you don't have your personal air in your tires. They'd probably melt from the heat.....hot air.....hehe /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

[Henro]

<font color="blue"> But on my CUT the weight in the tires has to pass through the same frame and housings as the weight box. </font>

Ron, I have to ask, does it?

I don't think so, at least in the static sense.

IF the tractor is sitting still, the tires are supported by the earth. And the frame and whatever is connected to the tractor is supported by the tires/wheels. The frame does not in any way feel the weight of the tires/rims/liquid. No more than it feels the weight of the earth under it.

Now in a dynamic situation things change. But by how much? Rotational forces increase at the square of the speed or something like that. But tractors are not nascar racers...wheel rpms are really quite slow.

Personally, I elected to fill all the tires on my two tractors. It just make sense to me to do so. I can't see how foam filling the front tires can have a worse effect on the tractor than using a loader....or how loading the rear tires with liquid can be worse on the tractor than using a rear implement weighing near the maximum recommended weight for the tractor.

 

[tractorman]

My biggest problem with the weight box is the scenario where a person has to go out and move one bucket of material and the weight box isn't on the tractor. That's the way accidents happen.