How much ballast is typically needed for a MX5800?

[rbtjr]

We have a L3800 with which we use a Titan ballast box. We have this ballast box up to about 750# including its weight, sand and 5 suitcase weights we put on top of the sand. We have a MX5800 on order. The MX will have a LA1065 FEL. The heaviest attachment we will have on the FEL is a 4n1 bucket at 640#. The rear tires will be loaded, which will add about 1050#. We can get the Titan box up to about 900# with some scrap iron and concrete. Or, we could consider something like the Kubota ballast box that when filled would weigh 1500#. I have read some posts that indicate that significant ballast is frequently needed for the MX tractors. I know that the ballast needed depends on what you are doing with the tractor, but do you MX owners have any advice about whether a 900# box would usually work well or if we would usually need more like the 1500# box? Thanks in advance for your advice.

 

[LD1]

The 900# box along with loaded tires should keep the rears on the ground...But you ain't doing your front axle any favors. Because you are relying on that tire ballast.

900# by itself on the 3ph is not enough. So therefore, the tire ballast allows you to load the from axle that much more.

I am considering your 900# ballast box, being in close, about as effective as my 700# rear blade which is a bit further back. I would not want to use that combo, for extended periods of hard and heavy FEL lifting. And moving bucket loads of dirt isn't what I'd consider heavy lifting either....Just to be clear.

Heavy lifting is maxing out...Or close to. Like digging at stumps, lifting heavy logs, moving heavy pallets with forks, etc.

I find the 1600# bushhog....Which has its weight center pretty far back....Is a great counterweight

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

900# with rears loaded with actually heavy fluid (not windshield wiper fluid) will cover you.

That's essentially what I have (same loader/capacity/frame/etc) and I frequently use the loader to max capacity.

 

[s219]

Do the math!

If:

L1 is the distance from center of front bucket (or forks, etc) to front axle

L2 is the distance from the front axle to the center of the ballast box

B is the amount of ballast

Then the ballast B will offset this amount of weight W in the front bucket (or forks, etc):

W = B * L2 / L1

Units don't matter as long as you're consistent. This will tell you how much weight a given amount of ballast will counteract -or- you can use the formula to decide how much ballast is needed for an expected typical weight W. You can run the same calculations for the rear tire ballast, but I personally consider that to be there to offset the basic loader weight and don't count it as "cargo" ballast. Just depends on how you want to book-keep things.

 

[Turbys_1700]

I have a Workmaster 50 with loaded rears. Similar in size to your tractor. With loaded rears I am over 6K. With an implement on the back like my Brown 472 at 1200# I am fine. I think that loaded rears with your ballast choice of 750# you should be fine. Now is the time to go ahead a get you a nice med duty brush hog to use as a counterweight. That is a good way to sell it to the lady of the house.

 

[LD1]

With my 700# 7' rear blade and loaded R1 tires with WW fluid, I can lift the back tires if I am picking something that is too heavy....or trying to pry out a log/root/stump or other immovable object.

That means I am getting the full force of whatever force the loader can exert before the back tires come up + the full weight of the tractor + the full weight of the ballast in the tires + the 700# blade on the back......ALL on the front axle.

While Not having any weight box on the back actually loads the front axle LESS than having weight back there, but not having enough of it.

R1 vs R4 as well as liquid of choice make a different in weights. R4's hold more, Beet juice is heavier than WW fluid. I think I got something like 48 gallons of WW fluid in my R1's. So I've only got ~750-800# in the tires. But thats for traction when plowing, and stability. SHOULDNT be relied on for countering the front loader.

Again, I am talking about doing heavy work though. Hard digging, logging, prying on stumps, etc. If you are just moving loose dirt, a bucket load of that is ~50% of what the loader can actually lift. Or if you are lifting ~800# implements off a trailer, moving around a bucket load of firewood, pushing brush piles, etc......all I would consider lighter work that dont involve lifting near max capacity. In which case, 750# should be fine.

 

[rbtjr]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I think I will get my existing box up to 900# and see how it works.

And yes, s219, I am aware of the approach you suggest. I was looking for feedback based on experience, but I appreciate your approach and I use it frequently.

Thanks again to all.

 

[aarolar]

I have about 1500lbs on the back of my MX4800 and I've not once wished for less thus far. I've hit the pressure relief several times and never seen the rear tires lift but I did have one instance where I had very little traction because of the lack of weight on the rear tires. This is with loaded rears as well, my advice is to go heavier than 900lbs that would be marginal.

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

Also, tangentially, if max capacity is important to you, be sure your pressure relief is at spec. Mine is a little above.

You or the dealer can do this.

 

[TripleR]

Pretty much what everyone else said, I use a similar size tractor except it has a cab and use 1100 pound implement on the 3 PH and have loaded tires in addition to steel wheel weights. The tractor did OK without the wheel weights, but help in my hills and I needed the traction when the implement is being pulled. I seldom max my FEL out, so I don't need the added ballast on my 3PH, but if I did, I'd go heavier. You'll know more once you use your tractor a while.

I don't disagree with those whose caution added wear on the front components, but we have a couple with over thirty years of hard FEL use and no failures, so I don't get too excited when someone tells me I need more/less of anything, but that's just me.