Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    122
    Location
    Maine
    Tractor
    Kubota B7510

    Default Weight distribution

    When a typical compact tractor is sitting on a flat surface with an FEL on the front, rear tires loaded, how is the weight distributed? How much is on the front tires, how much is on the rear tires?

    Thanks,
    Jim

  2. #2

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    Now you asked a question with so many variyables that no one could answer. but lets wait and see.

  3. #3
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    58
    Location
    Outside Atlanta, Georgia
    Tractor
    NH TC33D HST

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    Seems like a reasonable question to me, and I'm an engineer (formerly automotive, now aerospace). Note that he said "typical". He's not looking for exact weights to the pound, just a rough percentage front/rear. I have read that a bare compact tractor is typically 33% front / 67% rear.

    After having my tractor for 6 months and reading these forums for about a year now I've concluded that these tractors are not well designed for the uses that they're put to.

    With very heavy duty rear axles and tires, and relatively light front axles and tires, they're obviously designed for 3-point draft applications with ground engaging implements. But my impression is that most are purchased with a FEL and that is the most commonly employed implement. Even if the FEL isn't used most often, it is usually left attached. In my case (NH TC33D with 7308 FEL) the FEL adds 800 Lb to the front end of a 2500 Lb tractor, and I'm sure it biases the weight distribution significantly forward. BTW, I have 600 Lb liquid ballast in the rears but it still isn't enough to keep the back end down without carrying the rotary cutter, which severely limits maneuverability in all my trees.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    Even though your an enginier, and gess who diesingns these things, i'll agree these tractors aren't designed for what we do to them. I have seen broken front axeles and i have said in the past to keep front wheels turned in there are guys that will say turn them out but i don't think they realize the stress the front end will take expecally if the axle hits the stops on one front wheel. Yet we all want more lift on loader, well mine lifts enough i don't want more and mine will last! but back to the weight the loader just blew the bias out the window as did loaded tires the wheights you put are recomended not an auctal. i'll bet the tractor stock is probly off the mark. close maybe! Cat enginers suck they down size parts and when they break there is always an update kit to fix it,at first its the operator then after a couple times the update kit, then they still don't admit it was a problem! I'm not picking on you just stating enginers mak mistakes even in the const. field i see scewd up plans every day,water will run up hill acording to the plan.

  5. #5
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    58
    Location
    Outside Atlanta, Georgia
    Tractor
    NH TC33D HST

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    Dang! I couldn't have said it better. Literally.

  6. #6
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    303

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    I have read that a bare compact tractor is typically 33% front / 67% rear.


    being an engineer, you should stand back and look at a bare tractor. i belive you have your %'s reversed, there is alot mor weight on the front axle, then the rear. this is from the age old design of rear mounted accessories..

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    435
    Location
    Parker, Colorado
    Tractor
    Kubota B7800

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    </font><font color="blue" class="small">( there is alot mor weight on the front axle, then the rear. this is from the age old design of rear mounted accessories.. )</font>

    Kind of wondered about the aformentioned weight distribution myself. Figured there must be a reason why the big old engine sits on the small front wheels and the big wheels just hold the Farmer [img]/forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img].

    Mike

  8. #8
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    3,044
    Location
    Windham County, Conn
    Tractor
    Ford 2120 , New Holland TN75D, Hitachi UH083LC Excavator

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    I've been following this discussion and I think it's going in the wrong direction [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] Acording to everything I've read, static weight distribution should be set as close to 60% rear 40 % front as possible when equiped as going to be operated. Many of the posts I read on this board just don't run enough rear ballast to use their loaders at full capacity. As I've said before, the specs on my Ford 2120 require filled tires AND metal wheel weights AND a rear implement to use loader at rated capacity. Most of the smaller New Hollands require both filled tires and either metal weight or an implement to use the loader at rated capacity. No compact tractor should be set up with more weight on the front axle than the rear. The front tires don't have the load handling capacity of the rears, and neither does the axle. Stability will be an issue. Also when you look at a tractor, the rear definately weighs more. The larger rear tires, trans,and rear axle/ differential definately out weigh the engine. lighter front axle and other misc parts. Also the rear carries all the heavy 3pt, towing hardware and in most cases the fuel tank.
    Just the thoughts of another engineer.

    Andy

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    435
    Location
    Parker, Colorado
    Tractor
    Kubota B7800

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    Well, let me qualify this by stating that I am not an engineer. Nor an expert. nor even qualified to comment on this but hey what the heck.

    Seems to me that Andy's post goes a long way towards asking a question I have seen in older threads. Are these tractors really designed to use a FEL to it's capacity?

    When I think about the older tractors I think about a great big lever. As much weight as possible was placed forward of the rear wheels to off set the weight and drag of any implement placed on the back of the tractor. If I am wrong then I apologize and ask for enlightenment.

    So, as I read Andy's Post it appears to me that to use a FEL we have to readjust that weight distribution through ballast, and implements. to offset the added front weight of the loader itself. Giving us the 60% rear, 40% front set up. THEN, the added load in or on the FEL cannot exceed the difference of the two.

    Am I in Left field? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img]
    Are we (well not me yet [img]/forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]) overloading these CUTs

    Mike

  10. #10

    Default Re: Weight distribution

    I myself am noy going to worry about the weight dis. if i can move it without lifting a tire i'm going with it. you'd spend more time adding and loosing wheight than it would take to do the job. My bias is set to 4 wheels on the ground,no matter front or back. It's worked for 40 yrs. why change cause an enginer said thats the way it has to be, i think they should build them like they used to in stead of thiner and lighter,and if it brakes well make it heavyer atitude. the old designers made them to last and hold up, period.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
© 2014 TractorByNet.com. TractorByNet is a registered trademark of IMC Digital Universe, Inc. Other trademarks on this page are the property of their respective owners.