Cracked bell housing in a 2006 110TLB

[fried1765]

Thanks doc. Hope it works out. Been waiting a long time for one of these!


QUOTE=DocDryden;5688469]Some of the options that are nice to have

3 point hitch
View attachment 646905
Rear Aux Hydraulics




Foot Pedal control for thumb
View attachment 646906


Front hydraulic outlets

View attachment 646908

[/QUOTE]

Don't be in a hurry to jump, if you think you might do better.
A relatively large number of midsize TLB's were built through the 2000's.
Back in the mid 80's, I searched for 22 months for my Ford TLB, and more recently, I searched 8 months for my current Kubota L48.
I never did seriously consider the JD110 TLB due to the documented bell housing issue, and not knowing if a crack would be readily apparent.
Patience is an invaluable asset.

 

[trctr155]

Ok, going to look at a 2006 tomorrow. Has 2900 hours on it. Any words of wisdom you can share? What should I be on the lookout for?

If you're planning on running with 3point, then the rear hyd remotes are of value. As mentioned front hydros. aux lighting, b-hoe thumb. As previously mentioned the 110 is a real construction backhoe as opposed to a compact utility tractor.

 

[Nobhill]

As I have previously posted, the transmission bell housing on my 2007 110TLB broke nearly in two when it was just out of warranty. The damage occurred when I was attempting to pull out one of those T-bar fence posts with the loader. I didn't take the time to ensure that I was gripping the post from the center of the bucket since I wasn't expecting it to be too hard a pull. Unfortunately, I was unaware that the upper bolts on the boom stabilizer arms had come loose... again (this was a known defect in this model but the dealer didn't bother to advise me).

The resulting torque from the unbalanced lift was sufficient to twist apart the housing and bend the MFWD shaft. I had it repaired by the dealer for a modest $21k. (At that time, they advised me about their service bulletin recommending the application of Loctite on the stabilizer bolts.) Duh!!

I broke the new bell housing a couple of years later when I was carrying logs in the loader and hoe buckets at the same time along a bumpy downhill road. This time I got the housing welded at a shop, rather than opting for the genuine JD OEM quality part. Yes, it was cast iron but the guy did a spectacular job.

There was no way I was going to allow this to happen again. Although I realize I was being too hard on the poor little baby Deere, I was somewhat surprised at how fragile it is. Following re & re, I decided to bring in some reinforcement. After careful scrutiny (over a few cold ones), I realized that the only integral component holding the fore and aft sections of this machine together was a couple lengths of 1 1/2" x 4" (4 x 10 cm) steel tube. Since this 'frame' member was close to the vertical center of gravity of the machine, any loads lifted higher than the C of G would be borne by the only other substantial front-to-back structural component... the transmission bell housing!

I retro-fitted two lengths of 5/8" (15 mm) threaded rod running quasi-horizontally from front-to-back on both sides of the machine, attaching at points close to where the roll cage supports meets the chassis. I then cinched the rods tight to provide lengthwise tension at approximately 16" to 18" (40 - 45 cm) above the C of G.

Stepping over one of the rods to enter and exit the operator's seat was no problem and I've gotten used to it. The machine is still holding together and I have not had to do any major structural repairs since them. Now I have lots of time to fix leaks, change seals and weld broken attachments among other joyful remedial tasks.

Photos of much of this work in various stages are available if anyone is interested.

 

[Mkoz]

WOW, nob hill, you went thru a great deal with the backhoe.
I seem to keep coming back to the 110 even though it had this major flaw in its structure.
i would love to see your fix for the 110 if you would be willing to share.
thanks so much for all that you've shared.
Mark K

 

[ultrarunner]

I maybe wrong but my understanding is the problem is when both front are under load at the same time and the weak link is the bellhousing.

If you manage to pickup something too heavy with the loader the rear will raise... same with the backhoe.

With both loaded there is little give.

 

[Nobhill]

WOW, nob hill, you went thru a great deal with the backhoe.
I seem to keep coming back to the 110 even though it had this major flaw in its structure.
i would love to see your fix for the 110 if you would be willing to share.
thanks so much for all that you've shared.
Mark K

Do you mean the welding job (which I jobbed out) or the threaded rod reinforcement?

 

[Nobhill]

I maybe wrong but my understanding is the problem is when both front are under load at the same time and the weak link is the bellhousing.

If you manage to pickup something too heavy with the loader the rear will raise... same with the backhoe.

With both loaded there is little give.

Correct. It's obviously not meant for that kind of service. I should have bought a 310 or something a bit bigger. This machine is a good small farm or rural acreage general purpose tractor. I have used it for collecting firewood, excavation and minor demolition, which is beyond the scope of its capability.

The original issue was caused by an inherent defect in the design of the front boom stabilizer assembly. The fasteners should have been more secure.

 

[trctr155]

Correct. It's obviously not meant for that kind of service. I should have bought a 310 or something a bit bigger. This machine is a good small farm or rural acreage general purpose tractor. I have used it for collecting firewood, excavation and minor demolition, which is beyond the scope of its capability.

The original issue was caused by an inherent defect in the design of the front boom stabilizer assembly. The fasteners should have been more secure.

When I examine the rectangular frame tubes that connect the from loader masts to the rear, I notice there isn't any cross bracing. I have wondered about reinforcing them with heavy wall steel tubing, just for extra support? I can also see how a load imbalance would occur if those bolts weren't attached. Luckily mine are still tight, they have never loosened. But I would like to add some insurance.

 

[ultrarunner]

Maybe the reinforcement is acting like a truss?

 

[BeaconWoods]

Had the same problem with my 2009 4720 with 894 hours on it. The 4720 and the 110 TLB came off the same line (in Georgia?). Anyway, when you look at the clutch housings in the JD parts catalogs you are hard pressed to see any difference. I ran this way up the flagpole at Deere. I drive past the flagship parts warehouse on my way to work every day. I work in Moline, Illinois, home base for JD. So, I know quite a few mid level guys there who got me as far as the thing could go. No help from the green guys.

The problem is that the clutch housing is the only structural member between the front and rear axles. When outfitted with a loader and a 448 backhoe, that is a lot of strain on the cast iron tube. It is under 1/4" thick at many points around its circumference. The cost of the replacement housing was close to $4k. My dealer was as helpful as could be - advocated for me to Deere as well. He helped me quite a bit with the replacement parts.

Since we were in the middle of a major building project we needed another digging machine pretty quick. We looked at what Deere had - basically a 310 or something green with a backhoe attached. Since I also have a friend who is a Kubota dealer we went over to see him. We opted for the M62. The L48 is also a dandy machine. The loader and backhoe are built onto a frame which then attaches to the tractor. The hoe can be removed pretty easily and the M62 used for other utility work. It comes with a 540 rpm pto.

So - in summary - I would suggest steering clear of the 110 TLB. Look at the Kubota M62 and L48. Deere has nothing like them. Our M62 is up to almost 400 hours. So far, not a single problem. I will confess that I find the seats on my Deere stuff more comfortable and I like the hydrostatic control pedals on my Deere stuff a lot more the those on the Kubota. Another handy detail in favor of Kubota is that the maintenance intervals are twice as long as my Deere stuff.

In any case, it is hard to go wrong buying more cool hardware.