Fluid or Weights???

[vtsnowedin]

I can tell you with Rim guard beet juice when you start out at a highway gear it takes about a couple of revolutions for the centrifugal force to spread the liquid evenly around the perimeter of the tire. so you get a couple of whoop whoops and then it evens right out.

 

[Tx Jim]

I can tell you with Rim guard beet juice when you start out at a highway gear it takes about a couple of revolutions for the centrifugal force to spread the liquid evenly around the perimeter of the tire. so you get a couple of whoop whoops and then it evens right out.

That scenario sounds as if fluid is not filled to the recommended 75% fill.

 

[Tx Jim]

Point is sloshing is as much of a COG factor as liquid vs cast ballast, zilch.

I'm sure glad you're employed at a NUCLEAR PLANT in Canada and not in Texas if you actually believe that BS.

 

[vtsnowedin]

That scenario sounds as if fluid is not filled to the recommended 75% fill.

Nahh it is just viscous enough to cling to the sidewalls and get dragged up and to the top before falling back down. Once you get up to speed the force pushes the fluid out to the outside of the tire, leaving the 25% void centered around the axle.

 

[ovrszd]

Problem is it's not an ideal world.
Center of gravity is a non issue . The center of gravity is changed more by the amount of fuel in the tank. And if the driver is skinny or a fat &$$. The sloshing of liquid ballast is more liable to flip the tractor.I'm not buying the story that only two weights 95lb per rear wheel fits. A set of dry tires with 920lbs of cast ballast will pull more and ride better than the same tires with 92bs of liquid weight.

Your paragraph is simply inaccurate. To think fuel in the tank will have a larger impact on COG than tire weight is kinda na?e. And to think the driver has a greater impact than a weighted tire is even more na?e. Sloshing liguid ballast would not have a measurable effect in flipping a tractor until it already starts the roll, then of course, it's significance is irrelevant. Lastly, how did you decide that equal liquid ballast/cast weights would result in a better pull for the cast weight tire??

The cost difference alone outweighs (sorry) any advantage cast weights may have. So, I added 1500lbs to my tractor for around $200 using fluid. 1500lb of cast weights would have cost me in the neighborhood of $1500 at my Kubota dealer. :confused3:

Cast weight=$1.00 p/lb. Fluid weight=.13 cents p/lb.

 

[ovrszd]

Exactly. Maybe a few ounces splash up over the rim, but the majority of it is going to stay down. And assuming it is properly filled to 75%, the vast majority of it is at or below the axle line, so it has lowered the overall COG of the tractor considerably. Width of the track and COG is of the utmost importance to stability on a hill.

This point right here is generally overlooked in these discussions.

Cast weight always, always has 50% of it's weight above the axle center line. Fluid weight never does. The percentage below the axle line varies depending on how full the tire/wheel is. Less full, more weight below axle center line. If flipping is your concern use fluid with your tires half full.

 

[ovrszd]

Nahh it is just viscous enough to cling to the sidewalls and get dragged up and to the top before falling back down. Once you get up to speed the force pushes the fluid out to the outside of the tire, leaving the 25% void centered around the axle.

Funny story about this phenomenon. In my kid years we had small Fords with fluid filled tires. When roading my brother and I always coasted down the hills. You learned real quick how fast that tractor could coast before the fluid would start "riding over the hump". You go past that speed and that little tractor would literally jump clear off the ground. You'll only do that ONCE.

 

[TripleR]

All good points, but I keep going back to the initial concern about tire repairs. My brother and I have experience with all forms of ballast and have plugged endless numbers of tires, my brother began his professional career as a tractor mechanic at the age of seventeen. When we began clearing our farm, we had to put tire sealant in everything that went in our woods or we were plugging thorns several times a day. For our uses, fluid in the tires simply did not work.

We now have about nine tractors and a backhoe and use combinations of fluid, nothing, cast centers, weights and combinations. We no longer have the thorns, but if we did, we would go back to what worked for us best initially which was not fluid filled tires and sealant, great now, but not so much otherwise. I can't think of anything more unstable on a slope than a flat.

 

[buickanddeere]

Sloshing liquid is an issue with tanker trucks. That's why they put baffles in them. There's isn't enough room in a tractor tire or enough speed for the liquid to gain any momentum to have much change in the COG.

Is that not what I said ???

 

[buickanddeere]

Your paragraph is simply inaccurate. To think fuel in the tank will have a larger impact on COG than tire weight is kinda na?e. And to think the driver has a greater impact than a weighted tire is even more na?e. Sloshing liguid ballast would not have a measurable effect in flipping a tractor until it already starts the roll, then of course, it's significance is irrelevant. Lastly, how did you decide that equal liquid ballast/cast weights would result in a better pull for the cast weight tire??

The cost difference alone outweighs (sorry) any advantage cast weights may have. So, I added 1500lbs to my tractor for around $200 using fluid. 1500lb of cast weights would have cost me in the neighborhood of $1500 at my Kubota dealer. :confused3:

Cast weight=$1.00 p/lb. Fluid weight=.13 cents p/lb.

So I missed a zero while thumbing the message on my phone............ The fact is that if all other parameters are identical. A dry tire with 500lbs of cast weight will pull more than the same tire with liquid ballast.