Buying Advice Ballast Box vs Wheel Weights vs Filled Tires

[Diavolicchio]

Thanks for all of the great input, guys.

Grandad4, your suggestion for a second garage door at the opposite end of the garage just makes good sense. I think the novelty of having to back the Jeep out of the garage every time I need to use the tractor would wear off pretty quickly, not to mention the extra work of having to clean the whole garage floor if the tractor wheels have mud in the treads.

Philip8N, it was really helpful to see a photo of your ballast box filled with concrete. I'm going to do the exact same thing. Given my space constraints though. I'll keep the ballast box on blocks, just outside the garage.

Texasjohn, I'll likely do most of the things you've suggested. Thanks for being so thorough.

Jonyyuma, adding an extra foot to the garage would be the obvious solution, but I was trying to address the space contraints without having to resort to spending an additional $12,000 to extend the garage (and guest apartment above it) by a foot, all in order to accommodate a $200 ballast box. There are a number of costly changes I'd have to make to the overall design just to add 12" to the structure. I appreciate your suggestions though.

To everyone else, thanks for taking a minute and offering your input. Much appreciated.

The garage (with the second garage door added) will now look like this:

Thanks again,



John

 

[number two]

Are you getting the cab model,B3030HSDC?You said B3030HSTC.If,so be aware that the cab model does not really go under a standard 7' garage door without a little modification and then it's very tight.Good Luck!

 

[Diavolicchio]

Number Two:

You are correct. That was a typo. I meant B3030HSDC. Actually, it should've been B3030HSDCC, with the second C referring to the Cold Weather package.

The garage was designed to have 9' ceilings and doors that measure 12'W x 8'H and 9'W x 8'H respectively.

I appreciate the correction.


John

 

[k3nn3y]

John I see you live in Maine. I e/mailed one of our members (Luremaker) about the ballast box he showed on this site. You should look at it. I think it is a lot better set up then the ones they sell in this part of the USA. He lives in Canada and sent me the model # for it LM8244 My dealer tells me it is Canada Kubota number. It works so simply. You might check it out.

 

[Diavolicchio]

k3nn3y:

That's a cool looking ballast box. I'll check it out. I'm curious how it prices out relative to the standard orange bucket.

Would you mind verifying the model number though? I Googled it and the only thing that came up in the way of a LM8244 Ballast Box was your mention of it. Thanks.


John

 

[PHILIP8N]

Here are some pics after I painted the top Kubota Orange. If I may say so myself, big improvement. This is concrete paint and sealer, and the only way to get this was to custome mix it. Unfortunetely, I did not even use a pint out of this $25 gallon. Philip.

 

[Grateful11]

Here are some pics after I painted the top Kubota Orange. If I may say so myself, big improvement. This is concrete paint and sealer, and the only way to get this was to custome mix it. Unfortunetely, I did not even use a pint out of this $25 gallon. Philip.

I really like the looks of that box but what will yo do if one of the side pins gets broken off?

 

[PHILIP8N]

I really like the looks of that box but what will yo do if one of the side pins gets broken off?

I will deal with that if and when it ever happens. Good motto to live by. The ballast box is not something you are going to bang around. It just hangs there as weight. If it does ever happen, I will post back with some creative welding! Philip.

 

[fdmars]

Just a thought on ballast box, I took the idea from this site and added 3" PVC tubes to my ballast box, easy way to carry rakes, shovels and things...The barn look great, am sure you will enjoy your new "tool"

 

[Reg]

I suggest you
a) don't buy a tractor with a fragile front axle, i.e. just avoid tractors with front axles that NEED load relief when the bucket is loaded to it's full capacity.
{Same with front tires, R4s are load rated higher than R1s}
b) Plan for storing with SOMETHING on the back of it, whether that is a mower, tiller, hoe, whatever.
You will almost certainly MANY TIMES finish the day and want to NOT mess with taking off whatever is on the back.
c) Load the rear tires ANYWAY - add a USEFUL implement on the back if/when you need it, but don't waste money on buying or lugging around dead weight.
This doesn't have to be an "or", or" it can be "and", "and".
The "not" is a tractor with a fragile front axle and light rated front tires.

 

[RoyJackson]

Filled tires are great to aid stability to a tractor...not much for traction though (although I'm sure filled tires to add to traction).

Filled tires on my 8N are night and day. Makes a BIG difference in traction. On plow day, impressed many folks with larger JD's, AC's, and Cases. Philip.

Y'know...after thinking about it, I don't think I've ever used a tractor that didn't have filled tires (with the possible exception of an old Farmall my father owned many years ago).

 

[TripleR]

Y'know...after thinking about it, I don't think I've ever used a tractor that didn't have filled tires (with the possible exception of an old Farmall my father owned many years ago).

We have an old Case 995 on which we never filled the tires and our Ford 600 with loaded tires will out pull it. We use the Case for bush hogging exclusively and until we cleared all the Locust trees out we had to plug them about every day, so filled tires wouldn't work.

We have 2 Ford 600's and a NAA, fluid really makes a difference in traction as we have run them with and without.

 

[JasG]

My own experience and everything I have read is not to fill the tires, or at least not fill them like they used to. Now this is with farm tractors with AG tires, I don't know how compacts with R-4 tires are affected. I also have 2 tractors at a friends farm that are very close in set-up and weight that I run on a regular basis(2 of many I have run filled and unfilled over the years). The only major difference is one has filled tires the other has cast weight. The cast weight tractor pulls better, and rides much nicer. Most tire MFG and at least Deere don't recommend filling tires anymore. I know in draft applications the tires work much better unfilled. Unfilled tires will flex more and grip the ground better. I don't know if it would make a difference in loader work. As the loader fills the rear in most cases will get lighter. Where in draft (plowing) the rear gets pulled down.

You also don't have to fill the tires fully, you could only fill say 30%-40% and this would lower the weight and still allow some flex.

In cooler weather filled tires seem to ride really rough and take longer to "warm up" and start flexing.

If I could avoid it I would never again fill tires on any of my own equipment. The problem with compact tractors is it seems hard to add as much weight as needed.

 

[TripleR]

My own experience and everything I have read is not to fill the tires, or at least not fill them like they used to. Now this is with farm tractors with AG tires, I don't know how compacts with R-4 tires are affected. I also have 2 tractors at a friends farm that are very close in set-up and weight that I run on a regular basis(2 of many I have run filled and unfilled over the years). The only major difference is one has filled tires the other has cast weight. The cast weight tractor pulls better, and rides much nicer. Most tire MFG and at least Deere don't recommend filling tires anymore. I know in draft applications the tires work much better unfilled. Unfilled tires will flex more and grip the ground better. I don't know if it would make a difference in loader work. As the loader fills the rear in most cases will get lighter. Where in draft (plowing) the rear gets pulled down.

You also don't have to fill the tires fully, you could only fill say 30%-40% and this would lower the weight and still allow some flex.

In cooler weather filled tires seem to ride really rough and take longer to "warm up" and start flexing.

If I could avoid it I would never again fill tires on any of my own equipment. The problem with compact tractors is it seems hard to add as much weight as needed.

Interesting, I put wheel weights on my BX and have considered doing so on a couple of our newer tractors. In my area, farmers often go with filled tires and weights. I need to check with the family that farms our land as they use 7000&8000 Series John Deeres.

Some of us are victims of "we have always done it this way".

 

[k3nn3y]

The model # is LM8244. But remember that it is Canadan made. My dealer had to contact a dealer in Canada. With you living that close you shouldn't have a problem finding one. Me being in Kansas made it a little tuffer. What I liked about this box is the way you put the rod in your 3pt lower links then you can just leave it there. When you want to us your ballast box you back up to it let the rod go under the hooks and lift. No getting off the tractor to hookup top link or anything and the same with unhooking just back it where you want it,drop it and drive away. I don't know the closest Canadan dealer to you but you might find a box around you sense you live that close.

P/S I you go to kubota on this site and search Ballast LM8244 Ballast box
you can see where I first seen it.

 

[Diavolicchio]

Philip8N:

That really is an awesome job with the ballast box.

You now need to paint (even with temporary paint) a black jack-o-lantern face on that thing and put it out in front of your house for Halloween.

That's what I'd be doing.


John

 

[Verticaltrx]

My own experience and everything I have read is not to fill the tires, or at least not fill them like they used to. Now this is with farm tractors with AG tires, I don't know how compacts with R-4 tires are affected. I also have 2 tractors at a friends farm that are very close in set-up and weight that I run on a regular basis(2 of many I have run filled and unfilled over the years). The only major difference is one has filled tires the other has cast weight. The cast weight tractor pulls better, and rides much nicer. Most tire MFG and at least Deere don't recommend filling tires anymore. I know in draft applications the tires work much better unfilled. Unfilled tires will flex more and grip the ground better. I don't know if it would make a difference in loader work. As the loader fills the rear in most cases will get lighter. Where in draft (plowing) the rear gets pulled down.

You also don't have to fill the tires fully, you could only fill say 30%-40% and this would lower the weight and still allow some flex.

In cooler weather filled tires seem to ride really rough and take longer to "warm up" and start flexing.

If I could avoid it I would never again fill tires on any of my own equipment. The problem with compact tractors is it seems hard to add as much weight as needed.

I don't know that I would agree with all this. Tires should be filled to about 75% of their volume, at that level the tire still has plenty of room to flex and conform to the terrain. Air pressure is more of a factor in this than fluid vs non-fluid filled tires. We have a 2550 JD that is used almost entirely for field work, rear tires filled, cast rear wheels (rack and pinion), and wheel weights. This is all in recommendation of the manual, and the desired amount of slip is achieved by adjusting tire pressure. The traction is so great that when moldboard plowing you can actually lift the front tires off the ground when you hit a tough spot (with 1100lbs of weight on the front also). I personally don't know how much better traction you could need or want, and this is with just 2wd. So loading tires does work, I know my little NAA and Kubota would be worthless without loaded tires.

 

[Reg]

Sample arithmetic on ballast box.
Cat 1 tractor, ~6ft wheelbase, loader bucket center 4ft ahead of front axle, 3pt lift arms ~27 inches.
Quick "back o' the pay envelope" arithmetic shows that every pound of ballast box weight relieves the front axle load 3/8 of a pound (27/72).

So, HOW MUCH are you going to put in there to get anything significant off the (fragile) front axle ?

The 4ft dimension is only useful for figuring the front axle load wrt the loader's load and of course the front end of the tractor that it carries.

 

[rjkobbeman]

Sample arithmetic on ballast box.
Cat 1 tractor, ~6ft wheelbase, loader bucket center 4ft ahead of front axle, 3pt lift arms ~27 inches.
Quick "back o' the pay envelope" arithmetic shows that every pound of ballast box weight relieves the front axle load 3/8 of a pound (27/72).

So, HOW MUCH are you going to put in there to get anything significant off the (fragile) front axle ?

The 4ft dimension is only useful for figuring the front axle load wrt the loader's load and of course the front end of the tractor that it carries.

Well, I'm sure your numbers are different for my tractor... buy my ballast box weighs 1800 pounds. Using your numbers, that would remove 675 pounds off of my front end. But more importantly, it prevents my rear end from coming off of the ground when I am picking up a big load or ripping trees out of the ground. Keeping the rear end on the ground is the biggest benefit in my eyes.

 

[Reg]

On a sample CUT the R1 tires have about 70% of the ballast capacity of the R4,
35 vs 50 gallons at the 75% fill level.

280 vs 400 lbs of water, 410 vs 585 of RimGuard at 11.7 lb per gallon, same ratio for ww fluid, though I understand that to be slightly lower density than water.

Arguably with filled R4s you have more weight to the ground on a bigger footprint, e.g. more traction with less compaction (lower pressure) - as I said, arguably.