Tires Upsized front r4 tires on L5030
- Thread starter slowzuki
- Start date
dantran1010
New member
Yeah, it binds/screams...
1stDeuce
Gold Member
So the OP did it to his L5030 and it worked fine for him, but your L5030 binds up "badly"?
Are your rear tires worn?
Are they the standard 17.5-24 size?
Are they loaded? (That would keep them from scrubbing as easily, making any bind much more noticeable...)
I did notice that 10 or 12 ply versions of 12-16.5's have a noticeably higher rolling circumference than the 6 and 8 ply tires...
What ply rating did you go with?
The OP also said that he mostly works in soft terrain, and runs fairly low pressure in the front tires... If his rear tires aren't loaded, they'll slip easier, and having low pressure on the fronts would reduce the rolling circ. If he's using 4wd with the loader, and turning a lot in doing so, excessive lead would also not be a problem, since the front tires must travel farther when turning.
BTW, unless it's very loose, a gravel drive or road can certainly be a hard surface when it comes to traction...
Are your rear tires worn?
Are they the standard 17.5-24 size?
Are they loaded? (That would keep them from scrubbing as easily, making any bind much more noticeable...)
I did notice that 10 or 12 ply versions of 12-16.5's have a noticeably higher rolling circumference than the 6 and 8 ply tires...
What ply rating did you go with?
The OP also said that he mostly works in soft terrain, and runs fairly low pressure in the front tires... If his rear tires aren't loaded, they'll slip easier, and having low pressure on the fronts would reduce the rolling circ. If he's using 4wd with the loader, and turning a lot in doing so, excessive lead would also not be a problem, since the front tires must travel farther when turning.
BTW, unless it's very loose, a gravel drive or road can certainly be a hard surface when it comes to traction...
dantran1010
New member
So the OP did it to his L5030 and it worked fine for him, but your L5030 binds up "badly"?
Are your rear tires worn? No
Are they the standard 17.5-24 size? Yes
Are they loaded? (That would keep them from scrubbing as easily, making any bind much more noticeable...) Not loaded
I did notice that 10 or 12 ply versions of 12-16.5's have a noticeably higher rolling circumference than the 6 and 8 ply tires...
What ply rating did you go with? 10 ply 33.01”
The OP also said that he mostly works in soft terrain, and runs fairly low pressure in the front tires... If his rear tires aren't loaded, they'll slip easier, and having low pressure on the fronts would reduce the rolling circ. If he's using 4wd with the loader, and turning a lot in doing so, excessive lead would also not be a problem, since the front tires must travel farther when turning.
BTW, unless it's very loose, a gravel drive or road can certainly be a hard surface when it comes to traction... I was on very loose millings test in 4wd.
Are your rear tires worn? No
Are they the standard 17.5-24 size? Yes
Are they loaded? (That would keep them from scrubbing as easily, making any bind much more noticeable...) Not loaded
I did notice that 10 or 12 ply versions of 12-16.5's have a noticeably higher rolling circumference than the 6 and 8 ply tires...
What ply rating did you go with? 10 ply 33.01”
The OP also said that he mostly works in soft terrain, and runs fairly low pressure in the front tires... If his rear tires aren't loaded, they'll slip easier, and having low pressure on the fronts would reduce the rolling circ. If he's using 4wd with the loader, and turning a lot in doing so, excessive lead would also not be a problem, since the front tires must travel farther when turning.
BTW, unless it's very loose, a gravel drive or road can certainly be a hard surface when it comes to traction... I was on very loose millings test in 4wd.
Last edited:
1stDeuce
Gold Member
20 ply??? For real? I hadn't seen tires higher than 14 ply, and for a CUT, 6 or 8 ply would be plenty...
The published height of the tire is not as important as the loaded rolling circumference. Ideally, you would want to choose a 12-16.5 with the lowest rolling circ if you were upsizing. I see Titan at 101', and Carlisle at 99.7. Doesn't sound like much, but that's a 1% difference, and when you're talking lead, everything counts. Even just running them so they have some sidewall flex probably provides another % or two...
It looks like making this switch for my tractor, and staying with 6ply titan Trac Loader tires would provide an 8% change in lead... Using a 6 ply Carlisle tire instead would provide a 7% lead change. Running the tires at lower pressure, I can probably get rid of another 1-2%, bringing me down to theoretical 5% change...
I played with the tractor again last night, and it appears that it is ever so slightly pushing the front tires in 4wd, they are not leading... I think even a 7-8% change would be OK for my tractor...
If a person wanted to counter the front lead change, you could also bump from 17.5-24's to 16.9's. That would provide a 4-5% increase in rolling circ for the rear that would mostly cancel out the increase in front rolling circ... It would also level the tractor back out some, which would be good for the loader.
Still, bummer that it didn't work out for you...
The published height of the tire is not as important as the loaded rolling circumference. Ideally, you would want to choose a 12-16.5 with the lowest rolling circ if you were upsizing. I see Titan at 101', and Carlisle at 99.7. Doesn't sound like much, but that's a 1% difference, and when you're talking lead, everything counts. Even just running them so they have some sidewall flex probably provides another % or two...
It looks like making this switch for my tractor, and staying with 6ply titan Trac Loader tires would provide an 8% change in lead... Using a 6 ply Carlisle tire instead would provide a 7% lead change. Running the tires at lower pressure, I can probably get rid of another 1-2%, bringing me down to theoretical 5% change...
I played with the tractor again last night, and it appears that it is ever so slightly pushing the front tires in 4wd, they are not leading... I think even a 7-8% change would be OK for my tractor...
If a person wanted to counter the front lead change, you could also bump from 17.5-24's to 16.9's. That would provide a 4-5% increase in rolling circ for the rear that would mostly cancel out the increase in front rolling circ... It would also level the tractor back out some, which would be good for the loader.
Still, bummer that it didn't work out for you...
Last edited:
dantran1010
New member
rScotty
Super Member
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2001
- Messages
- 8,258
- Location
- Rural mountains - Colorado
- Tractor
- Kubota M59, JD530, JD310SG. Restoring Yanmar YM165D
Too bad it didn't work out. I guess you are 2wd for awhile. Binding & screaming in 4wd is clearly a case of your tractor yelling a warning to your bank account.
Might as well get some loaded rolling circumference (RC) measurements while the tires are mounted. Then you will at least have some more info. I think your idea was good, but tires wrong.
Easiest way to get RC measurement is to find a hard surface, put a dab of wet paint on the tire tread, and drive a few hundred feet. Get off, go back, use a tape measure to find average distance between paint spotches on the ground. The distance covered in one tire revolution is your loaded rolling circumference. It's good information to have.
rScotty
Might as well get some loaded rolling circumference (RC) measurements while the tires are mounted. Then you will at least have some more info. I think your idea was good, but tires wrong.
Easiest way to get RC measurement is to find a hard surface, put a dab of wet paint on the tire tread, and drive a few hundred feet. Get off, go back, use a tape measure to find average distance between paint spotches on the ground. The distance covered in one tire revolution is your loaded rolling circumference. It's good information to have.
rScotty
OP
slowzuki
Elite Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 4,155
- Location
- New Brunswick, Canada
- Tractor
- Kubota L5030 HSTC, MF 5455, Kubota M120, Allis Chalmers 7010
I'm very sorry to hear this, I ran them for years/ hundreds of hours without issue. Loaded rear tires, loader on the front. Still have the worn out R4's on rims out in the tire pile but swapped to 15.50 wide R1's a couple of years ago for more floatation, they are about 33" tall. These do bind/whine a bit on pavement, fine on dirt or in the field. Tractor has around 3000 hours on it now, the original rear R4's are down to only about 1/2" tread now so keeping an eye out for new rear tires soon.
majorwager
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2017
- Messages
- 1,044
- Location
- western new york
- Tractor
- kubota mx 5100 IH 484 ford 1620 lull 844b
Dantran,
You are not the first to report a failed result w/ this same upgrade, It is one reason I chose an MX over the L series kubota.
A similar post appeared just last year. Tire dealer might exchange them if it was NOT an on line purchase,
You are not the first to report a failed result w/ this same upgrade, It is one reason I chose an MX over the L series kubota.
A similar post appeared just last year. Tire dealer might exchange them if it was NOT an on line purchase,
OP
slowzuki
Elite Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 4,155
- Location
- New Brunswick, Canada
- Tractor
- Kubota L5030 HSTC, MF 5455, Kubota M120, Allis Chalmers 7010
I'm beginning to wonder if there is a serial number break where they fixed the lagging front axle ratio the L5030's had with R4's. My L5030 is an early model. Mine used to bind badly with the original R4's.