Loader To top off the loader bucket or not? That is the question.

[RaydaKub]

WHOA!

60,648 POUNDS whooo wheeee that's one heavy sucker.

Unless it's s typo

That was my thought. I seem to recall the big 4wd tractors in the 70's weighing in at 30,000 or so. How do you pack that much weight into that small a package?

 

[LD1]

You may be able to get a bucket with a deeper bottom. This would allow you to get more roll back. I have the same issue with my 463 loader and I end up switching to a 72" Cat skidsteer bucket when I need to move piles.

Thats odd. I think the 463 loader has sufficient rollback. At least enough to get a good heaping bucket.

 

[Xfaxman]

WHOA!

60,648 POUNDS whooo wheeee that's one heavy sucker.

Unless it's s typo

That was my thought. I seem to recall the big 4wd tractors in the 70's weighing in at 30,000 or so. How do you pack that much weight into that small a package?

Typo, 10,648. Sorry.

 

[Tomtint]

Thats odd. I think the 463 loader has sufficient rollback. At least enough to get a good heaping bucket.

I actually had to move a pile if brush the other day with my loader, I do not have a grapple ( that mould eliminate the problem) and it was difficult to push into the pile and pick up anything at all. It took about 35/40 minutes to pick it all up and load the back of the dump. If I had the cat bucket on, I believe the longer bottom would have helped. ..either way, it beats the shovel

 

[LD1]

Well brush is a pain without forks or a grapple. I dont think a few more degrees rollback would help.

Bigger bucket, maybe........

But for dirt work (which is what the bucket is designed for) I think it has plenty of roll back.:thumbsup:

 

[Zebrafive]

Yep, it seems to. Drawbar pull is listed as 6970 pounds. Operating weight is 60648 lbs and it always has been able to pull or push itself out of any motion impaired situation!

Like this one, got in a soft spot by the pond drain valve.
View attachment 342920 View attachment 342921
Couldn't pull it uphill with the stump bucket.

First push back.
View attachment 342923 View attachment 342924 View attachment 342925

Second push back.
View attachment 342926 View attachment 342927

Third push back, the rear is on solid ground, see the dirt on top of the receiver hitch, it was buried on the first push.
View attachment 342928

That self extraction was impressive! Thanks for posting

 

[john_bud]

Spent a few hours working a 2 bottom plow and then followed up by rototilling. The mind was wandering as it does, but .... I had no big question to cogitate , now that the question of bucket filling has been put to bed

 

[Xfaxman]

That self extraction was impressive! Thanks for posting

Thanks and you're welcome. It wasn't the first time, it won't be the last time!

It can also pull itself out by extending the boom and hooking a chain to an immovable object, then retracting the boom as you drive forward.

 

[jimmysisson]

My 2120 has what I think is a factory QA on the 7109 loader. The bucket rollback is pitiful, really. I don't use it much so haven't done anything about it. The grapple has taken over many "bucket" chores.
I can't see any way to increase the rollback except to cut the QA off the bucket, weld in some tapered spacers, and reweld the QA. It's just not worth it to me for how much I use it. Maybe this was an early QA design?
Jim

 

[jgayman]

That was my thought. I seem to recall the big 4wd tractors in the 70's weighing in at 30,000 or so. How do you pack that much weight into that small a package?

I suspect minimum use of plastics and using heavy steel in place of cast aluminum throughout the tractor contributes a lot to the overall weight of the tractor. I am always amazed when I compare the construction of my JD 2720 to my old Ford 9N.