Lift Capacity @ 24" for SubCompacts

[rjkobbeman]

arrabil,

Are you trying to say that changing leverage does not change the force on something?

 

[LD1]

1) WELD a 550lb object to the lower hitch arms. Put it's CoG 24" behind the ball eyes.

2) WELD an 1191lb object to the lower hitch arms. Put it's CoG even with the ball eyes.

Do NOT attach the toplink for either.

Tell me, will the MF GC2400 lift these loads to its maximum rockshaft height?

Answer to question two is yes.

Answer to question one depends on the geomety of the hitch. You are completely eleminating the top link. Which will cause the implement to raise in the EXACT same way that I suggested in my last post about making the toplink in the same plane as the lower links @ the tractor. This makes the lower link a TRUE lever, with a fixed load, a fixed pivot, and a fixed lift point. The amout it can lift @ 24" is a ratio of how much the lift arm can lift and how far back the lift arm is. So without knowing the dimensions, I cant say for sure if it will lift it.

If ANYONE has a GC2400, could you please measure the length of your lower arm from pin center to pin center, and then measure how far back from the tractor the lift arm is connected. If I had these measurments, I could figure for sure.

But to clear things up a little here,

1. You do/did agree that in a TRUE //ogram, it can lift the same MAX capacity at ANY point behind the ball ends correct???

2. If we welded something on the lower arms as you suggest, you agree that there is a diminishing capacity the farther back the load is placed correct???

If you agree with these two, then how is it you cant seem to agree with everyting in between these two extremes.

 

[arrabil]

1. You do/did agree that in a TRUE //ogram, it can lift the same MAX capacity at ANY point behind the ball ends correct???

Are you saying in a true //ogram I could place 550lbs a mile behind the tractor and lift it to max capacity?

2. If we welded something on the lower arms as you suggest, you agree that there is a diminishing capacity the farther back the load is placed correct???

Yes. Obviously so.

This makes the lower link a TRUE lever, with a fixed load, a fixed pivot, and a fixed lift point. The amout it can lift @ 24" is a ratio of how much the lift arm can lift and how far back the lift arm is.

We're almost there together this time........... the above is only true in a closed system. On paper or the blackboard. In theory. But if the tractor does not weigh enough up front, the GC2400 cannot follow this formula IN REAL LIFE.

Are you trying to say that changing leverage does not change the force on something?

Of course not. I'm trying to say MF isn't talking about physics books; they're talking about real life. So when the OP asks why does the amount at 24" go down so much, its because something else in the tractor prevents it. Otherwise MF wouldn't have made it so. If they could JUST change the geometry of the hitch or toplink you can bet your *** they would have!

 

[rjkobbeman]

Of course not.

OK. Now are you saying that changing the length and/or position of the toplink does not change the leverage?

 

[rjkobbeman]

So when the OP asks why does the amount at 24" go down so much, its because something else in the tractor prevents it.

Are you saying the tractor knows when the weight is 24" out vs on the lift arm attachment points?

 

[tsteahr]

1) WELD a 550lb object to the lower hitch arms. Put it's CoG 24" behind the ball eyes.

2) WELD an 1191lb object to the lower hitch arms. Put it's CoG even with the ball eyes.

Do NOT attach the toplink for either.

Tell me, will the MF GC2400 lift these loads to its maximum rockshaft height?

If we believe the ball end rating then I would expect the machine will lift 1191lbs at the ball ends.

As to the 550lbs welded 24" behind the ball eyes, we don't have sufficient information about the performance of the system to know if 550lbs can be lifted or not when welded to the lift arms 24" behind the eyes. A 550lb number 24" behind the ball ends is a meaningless rating without a associated lift height. Manufacturers provide this number to give the buyer a reasonable number for how big a implement you can attach. It is fallacy to think this is a exact number for loading mass into a carry all at 24" behind the pins.

As has already been said you could design a loader to lift say 800lbs 60". You could take the same hydraulic cylinders and pump, reconfigure the loader arms and attachment points and be able to lift 2400lbs, but only 20". A shorter range of motion with greater lift capacity vs a longer range of motion and a lesser lift capacity. How is this mechanical advantage tradeoff difficult to understand?

 

[tsteahr]

Of course not. I'm trying to say MF isn't talking about physics books; they're talking about real life. So when the OP asks why does the amount at 24" go down so much, its because something else in the tractor prevents it. Otherwise MF wouldn't have made it so. If they could JUST change the geometry of the hitch or toplink you can bet your *** they would have!

Or more likly the MF lawyers want more margin of safety against people doing stupid things and the MF lawyers have more clout at AGCO than the marketing people who want to have number in a brochure as big as possible, regardless of what the machine can or can't do, "safely". There is more in what determins a "safe" rating than a machine's absolute limits.

The lawyers want a "safe" rating against every possible idiot operator and the marketing people want the biggest number they can print on the brochure. Every company has to balance these. Is it not possible that every manufacturer is a little different in this balance?

 

[jlsmith]

Or more likly the MF lawyers want more margin of safety against people doing stupid things and the MF lawyers have more clout at AGCO than the marketing people who want to have number in a brochure as big as possible, regardless of what the machine can or can't do, "safely". There is more in what determins a "safe" rating than a machine's absolute limits.

The lawyers want a "safe" rating against every possible idiot operator and the marketing people want the biggest number they can print on the brochure. Every company has to balance these. Is it not possible that every manufacturer is a little different in this balance?

Nicely said. Its just like the pto rating. If someone hooked a dyno up to it it would read more than the pamplet. They do that for safty reason. Yes the tractor will pick up what it says it will and prob alittle more. I lifted a 980lbs weight box the other day with a 2410 just to move it out of the way and did not have any problems doing it.:thumbsup:

 

[arrabil]

Now are you saying that changing the length and/or position of the toplink does not change the leverage?

Tell me, what kind of mechanical leverage does the toplink provide when it is hanging down (before horizontal)?

And what kind of mechanical leverage does it provide when its furthest point from the tractor is higher than the toplink hole (past horizontal)?

 

[tsteahr]

Tell me, what kind of mechanical leverage does the toplink provide when it is hanging down (before horizontal)?

See Post 42, 7th paragraph

And what kind of mechanical leverage does it provide when its furthest point from the tractor is higher than the toplink hole (past horizontal)?

See Post 42, 6th paragraph