Whats with you guys and ballast boxes and rear weight implements.

[arsenix2001]

Yes, i figured you grew mulch, raked it, baled it, sold it... Anyone know the best time of year to plant mulch?

PS, it was a joke.:confused2:

 

[stangkid14]

congrats on putting undue stress on your front end and criticizing others for not doing so

 

[Mounted Madness]

congrats on putting undue stress on your front end and criticizing others for not doing so

Right on! :thumbsup:

Without the ballast and 4x4, as soon as there's a real load in the bucket or on the forks, all the FEL wants to do is pickup the back end, let alone move the mud, brick, stone, gravel, wet sand, clay, wet clay...

Plus, when the back end is up in the air, and you're balanced on the front axle, it kind of looks stupid, or worse, like you've been hijacked by an elephant in heat ... :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

[mjncad]

If you ever have the arse end of your tractor get slightly airborne and you feel your bung-hole pucker, you'll quickly appreciate having ballast behind the rear axle when using the loader.

 

[glc24]

congrats on putting undue stress on your front end and criticizing others for not doing so

With the loader,that model tractor has a 6,210lb front axle loading.
I doubt if there is any stress at all.

Guys,we're talking apples and oranges here. The larger tractors do not need ballast to take weight off their front axle like the our smaller ones do. The only reason for ballasting the bigger tractors is for tractive purposes.

Greg

 

[RoyJackson]

With the loader,that model tractor has a 6,210lb front axle loading.
I doubt if there is any stress at all.

Guys,we're talking apples and oranges here. The larger tractors do not need ballast to take weight off their front axle like the our smaller ones do. The only reason for ballasting the bigger tractors is for tractive purposes.

Greg

Yes...and No...
Although the front axle has a higher load rating, the UT loader has a higher lifting capacity then most CUTs.
So, proportionally, it's pretty much the same for any tractor. That's a blanket statement, and like any blanket statement, doesn't fit all circumstances.
In Edward's case, he may not be using his loader near the limit of it's lifting capacity (even with a full bucket of sand or dirt).

My guess is...and only a guess....he'll be replacing his front wheel bearings sooner then he would if he had been using rear ballast...might even see a front axle failure before it's time.

 

[glc24]

Good point Roy,never thought of it in that sense.
He stated he has over 3,900 hours on 'er,but didn't mention if anything had been replaced.

Greg

 

[PCABE5]

With the loader,that model tractor has a 6,210lb front axle loading.
I doubt if there is any stress at all.

Guys,we're talking apples and oranges here. The larger tractors do not need ballast to take weight off their front axle like the our smaller ones do. The only reason for ballasting the bigger tractors is for tractive purposes.

Greg

Right on Greg, Section 70 is only for traction and not for loader work and I would have no concern about front axle load. All the responders so far have tractors with total weights that are less than or equal to the 5420's rear axle weight only (The Kubota L3540 is a CUT with a total weight that is close to the weight of the 5420's rear axle weight so that is not a close comparison). Everyone is comparing their CUT to the utility tractor and it is not the same.

We would hoist 1500-2000 lb bales around all day with a tractor this size with no ballast and have zero concerns. Same tractor was used with a 7 ft rock fork bucket and when that was loaded it was darn heavy and there was zero concerns. When is the last time you saw a farmer with a ballast box?

 

[jinman]

congrats on putting undue stress on your front end and criticizing others for not doing so

C'mon! The OP didn't criticize anybody. He just said he didn't use ballast and didn't understand those who said it was necessary. The only person I see criticized in this thread is the OP. I think he may find at some time that ballast or loaded tires are handy, but if he doesn't think he needs them, so be it. JD doesn't "demand" ballast to buy a tractor with a loader or there would be lawsuits galore over them selling a dangerous tractor. They don't sell tractors designed to overload the front axle either. Surely we can explain our usage and experiences without being criticized or accused of criticizing someone else. If the OP is happy without ballast, then my response to him is excellent! You obviously have lots of tractors and experience.:thumbsup: I have ballast and think I need it because my tractor is much more stable since I added fluid ballast to the tires. I also keep an implement on the 3PH when doing loader work.

 

[JB4310]

If you ever have the arse end of your tractor get slightly airborne and you feel your bung-hole pucker, you'll quickly appreciate having ballast behind the rear axle when using the loader.

If the rears come off the ground equally, for me that's no so bad, (provided the loader is not fully raised ) and for op's heavy machine probably would not happen. But catch a corner of the bucket on an unmovable object or get a very uneven load in the bucket, and you get that feeling that the machine wants to lay over on it's side cause one rear is coming off the ground.
That is a very unstable situation and I'm sure that could happen to OPs machine as well, considering it's lift capabilities.

I am always ready to push the stick forward and drop the bucket in float, in anticipation of a dangerous situation when handling capacity loads with loader. It would be an ugly bumpy ride but would put all 4's back on the ground.

JB