Ballast Will 328lbs of wheel weights make a useful difference?

[Z-Michigan]

Last summer I bought a Kioti DK40SE HST, downsizing from my previous tractor, a Deere 5105.

In comparing the tractors:
Deere: 4700lbs tractor weight, R1 ag tires, rears filled (1500lbs) for about 7000lbs including FEL.
Kioti: 4000lbs tractor weight, R4 tires, tires not filled, roughly 4700lbs including FEL

Downsizing was generally a good move, but recent snow has shown that my Kioti has little traction compared to my Deere. The Deere had unstoppable traction and plenty of counterbalance, but it caused severe turf damage, and was a bit bigger than I needed 90% of the time. I also really like the HST on my new tractor.

I have two issues with my current setup: lack of traction when doing heavy FEL or rear blade work, and needing a little more weight on the rear to balance FEL weight (I have always had a heavy implement on the back doing FEL work, but even more counterbalance would be helpful).

I know the R4 tires are part of the issue, but they aren't readily changeable, and they make a huge difference in summer/fall causing far less ground damage. I am currently looking only at adding weight.

I have two real options:
-fill rears, approx 1000lbs added
-Kioti iron wheel weights, 82lbs each, max two per side or four total = 328lbs

Cost is fairly similar between those options. I have a strong preference for the wheel weights because I don't want to add 1000lbs and lose that ballast someday when the tires need replacing. I really need to know - will I find a useful difference in traction, and rear counterbalance (vs. FEL), by adding just 328lbs? Would it be worth trying just two weights initially (164lbs) or should I go straight to four?

 

[LD1]

Last summer I bought a Kioti DK40SE HST, downsizing from my previous tractor, a Deere 5105.

In comparing the tractors:
Deere: 4700lbs tractor weight, R1 ag tires, rears filled (1500lbs) for about 7000lbs including FEL.
Kioti: 4000lbs tractor weight, R4 tires, tires not filled, roughly 4700lbs including FEL

Downsizing was generally a good move, but recent snow has shown that my Kioti has little traction compared to my Deere. The Deere had unstoppable traction and plenty of counterbalance, but it caused severe turf damage, and was a bit bigger than I needed 90% of the time. I also really like the HST on my new tractor.

I have two issues with my current setup: lack of traction when doing heavy FEL or rear blade work, and needing a little more weight on the rear to balance FEL weight (I have always had a heavy implement on the back doing FEL work, but even more counterbalance would be helpful).

I know the R4 tires are part of the issue, but they aren't readily changeable, and they make a huge difference in summer/fall causing far less ground damage. I am currently looking only at adding weight.

I have two real options:
-fill rears, approx 1000lbs added
-Kioti iron wheel weights, 82lbs each, max two per side or four total = 328lbs

Cost is fairly similar between those options. I have a strong preference for the wheel weights because I don't want to add 1000lbs and lose that ballast someday when the tires need replacing. I really need to know - will I find a useful difference in traction, and rear counterbalance (vs. FEL), by adding just 328lbs? Would it be worth trying just two weights initially (164lbs) or should I go straight to four?

I personally dont think you will notice a lick of difference with only adding 164lbs per tire UNLESS you drop the FEL.

And even if you fill the tires, you should STILL have a counter weight on the 3PH anytime you have the FEL on. Wheel weights and tires do absolutly NOTHING to take weight off the front. A counderballast on the 3PH does.

And I wouldn't bat an eye at filling the tires. It is cheap. And given the larger size of the rears, you wont notice much more rutting/tearing up of the yard than you already do.

And YES, R4 are probabally your main problem.

 

[ovrszd]

Adding two weights would be like having a man stand on the drawbar, adding four would be like having two men aboard. As the above poster said, it won't make a lick of difference.

Go for the fluid. If you change tires you can pump out the fluid and reuse it.

I do 90% of my loader work with no 3pt ballast, just filled rears.

 

[RFB]

Z,

My 5030 probably is close to your Kioti in size/weight. The before and after on loaded tires is incomparable, and I also normally keep a subframe BH on in summer, and a 1000 lb snowblower on in winter.

I cannot imagine one cart-mobile walmart shopper worth of weight really adding much.

 

[TripleR]

I find myself pretty much in agreement with LD1. I have the tires filled on our L5030 and M8540 and both need added weight on the back to gt the full use out of the FEL. I "can" do it, but it is much more stable in the hills with something on the back.

 

[RickB]

You are fighting two problems; less weight and the bigger footprint and less aggreassive tread of the R4's.
Buy the liquid ballast. The cost may seem equal, but you won't get equal benefit. It really is not an apples-to-apples comparison. The liquid ballast costs probably 1/3-1/2 what the iron does on a per-pound basis. And pounds are what you are buying.

 

[djradz]

Liquid, no doubt - Rim Guard hopefully,

 

[Stonehaller]

I have a Case DX45 which is similar in size to your Kioti. I have R4s loaded with beet juice and I am quite happy with the traction in the snow. I too have doubts that the 328 lbs of wheel weights would be enough. I have a FEL but mainly clear snow with a 7' back blade and use the FEL for moving piles. The only bad thing about the loaded tires is that the tires leave impressions in the lawn unless the ground is pretty dry. It is nice having the blast there all the time for loader work. A heaping 72" bucket of sand will make the back end light, but on level ground it is manageable. I generally put the box blade or brush hog on for extra ballast if I am moving something extra heavy.