Ballast On the subject of ballast

[WranglerX]

You already have a 700 pound box, just make second box, maybe 2 x 2 x 2 (anything 8 cubic feet capacity if not a true "box") and fill with concrete, maybe 1200 pounds... IF 700 lb box is to light change it to heavy box... Personally at age 75 I m not going to fuss with adding or subtraction (suitcase weights and such) to get good balance....

Dale

 

[Rebeldad1]

.I upsized the cylinders on my loader and I think it would be equivalent to the 430 loader capacity.

I found on my current tractor the lift capacity is limited by the pumps ability.
by adding larger cylinders does that give your pump the ability to lift more?
does it slow down loader control speed?
What is the load capacity of your front end?

After breaking a tractor frontend twice because the loader was stronger than the tractor I have upgraded to a tractor with greater lifting ability. If the bigger tractor cant lift what I am doing on a regular basis I will get a bigger tractor again. Experience and a lot of age has made me watch what I am doing more closely

OP...If I found myself in a situation where I keep feeling the tractor is going to tip over I would have to rethink why and correct my positioning of the tractor and correct it... not add more counterbalance. or widen the stance more than the tractor was built for.
The good news it because of the compact tractor craze there are a buttload of larger tractors availabe at a great price.


Its really hard to tip a piece of equipment over if its carried low to the ground

 

[MF RED in MT]

Thank you for the idea on the hitch! I like that. A little extra weight at the aft end of that ballast box can help, too. If I end up keeping this box, I知 definitely going to follow this advice.

But your idea on front tire ballast is incorrect, I think. The front axle is on a free pivot, at least on all of my tractors, so theyæ±*e essentially a tricycle. That weight in the front tires does absolutely zero for side-hill stability until the tractor has tipped to a point where the uphill front wheel lifts off the ground. Given the amount of travel in the front axle pivot, that will not happen until the tractor is already well past the point of no return.

If your tractor has some sort of suspension or shock absorber to limit the force or rate of front axle pivot, then the physics are different, but mine do not. They pivot completely freely, until they hit a stop, but that stop is likely too far past the tipping point to save me on a side-hill scenario.

Glad to offer ideas, consider all of it free, ha.

I believe you are correct about my front loaded tires, but it was only $100 for all 4 tires (as SCUT's have small tires) and I knew it wasn't going to make much of a difference and now I know it will make less of a difference...

I know those suitcase weights are pricey, so as a option you could get a number of 1/2" plates (lighter and easier to handle then 3/4" plates) and add them on the back with a "U" shape/or square cutout on the bottom of the plates (that would be able to rest on top of the hitch) and add them to the ballast box as needed (should require some type of mechanical fastener to secure), just another thought.

again, good luck with your choice of ballast, KC

Also, we do not have to always fill/use the front bucket to the max.

 

[Jchonline]

What about 3 pt forks for the heavy logs?

 

[WinterDeere]

by adding larger cylinders does that give your pump the ability to lift more?

Yes. Your tractor has a fixed pressure limit, likely close to 2500 PSI. On a 2" cylinder, that pressure would develop 7850 lb. force. Increase to a 3" cylinder and it generate 17,663 lb. at the same pressure. However, your other loader components were only designed to handle the force created by the OEM cylinders, at rated pressure.

does it slow down loader control speed?

Yes, by the same R^2 ratio, as the tractor is limited to a fixed flow rate, likely somewhere in the range of 5 - 10 GPM for a typical modern hydro CUT. The 3" cylinder will take 2.25x longer to travel the same distance as a 2" cylinder, at a given flow rate.

OP...If I found myself in a situation where I keep feeling the tractor is going to tip over I would have to rethink why and correct my positioning of the tractor and correct it... not add more counterbalance. or widen the stance more than the tractor was built for.

This tractor is made to carry substantially more weight than I am discussing, here. In fact, the question is about ballasting with less than the weight recommended by the manufacturer, or more specifically, making the majority of that ballast removable.

Also, we do not have to always fill/use the front bucket to the max.

Definitely, but the primary justification for stepping up to this machine (versus just another new 2-series or equivalent predecessor) is that extra capacity. I don't need that extra capacity every day, but there are definitely times when I do. This is why I like so many of the ideas, including yours, for making the ballast solution flexible and tunable.

What about 3 pt forks for the heavy logs?

Yep, I had to settle for doing that a lot on my JD 855. One of the primary reasons for going with the 320R loader over the 300R loader on the 3033R is so that I should not have to resort to that nearly as often!

 

[WinterDeere]

I致e seen at least two mentions of corrosion issues with RimGuard, despite their marketing that it痴 not corrosive, at least by comparison to CaCl2. Can someone who痴 been reading this forum more regularly than me give me the straight dope on RimGuard? Has it been living up to or falling short of the claimed performance?

 

[ovrszd]

Rimguard advantage - weight
Rimguard disadvantage - cost

 

[WinterDeere]

Rimguard advantage - weight
Rimguard disadvantage - cost

Of course, but that wasn’t the question.

RimGuard disadvantage - corrosion?

Some believe it is so.

 

[ovrszd]

Of course, but that wasn’t the question.

RimGuard disadvantage - corrosion?

Some believe it is so.

Then don't use it.

 

[LouNY]

One alternative is a weight rack for your 3 point;
Category 1 Hitch

My preference is for bolt on weight for the wheels,
I just do not care for the long term aggravation of liquid filled tires (flats).
As far as corrosion, rim guard is pretty much non corrosive you can get minor rusting of the wheels,
in 40-50 years it might be an issue.

Bolt on weights for the wheels can be removed if needed to, not real easy but doable.
A rear ballast box or weight rack can weigh what ever you wish it to, or can be adjustable.