Branson Front Wheel Axle Failures

[Stimw]

After a close look at the pics, the axle did not break. It was twisted off.
There are circular marks on the parts.
I have had my 3510 since 2005 when I had 2 acres, I now have 10 acres.
They are great tractors BUT I would not consider it for 125 acres unless it was for minor use with a larger industrial tractor to do the work!
I have picked up logs with my FEL and forks and had the tractor crab walk from so much weight but I babied it when I did.

 

[CliffNeudorf]

After a close look at the pics, the axle did not break. It was twisted off.
There are circular marks on the parts.
I have had my 3510 since 2005 when I had 2 acres, I now have 10 acres.
They are great tractors BUT I would not consider it for 125 acres unless it was for minor use with a larger industrial tractor to do the work!
I have picked up logs with my FEL and forks and had the tractor crab walk from so much weight but I babied it when I did.

Hello Stimw, thanks for the post. You are quite correct about the acreage, about 50 acres is in bush, about 75 acres is tillable. I bought the Branson for my garlic operation which is under 10 acres total at this point, also use it for bushhog work, cutting and raking operations and fence line and dead tree cleanups. For the garlic planting I use the cruse control with it set pretty much as slow as I can get it. It is slower than the creep functions on any of the other tractors that I have seen. Works great. For other work have two other tractors both with loaders. For my main field work I use a MF265. I also contract in work as needed. Interesting your observation about the axle twisting in its final failure. Lends support to the notion that the axle was pretty much fractured when it finally failed. The picture was taken within an hour of the failure. If you look at the center area of the hub side of the axle spindle I notice that the very center is a darker rustier colour than the outer areas. This indicates to me that that area (the very center) was probably failed much earlier than the rest of the assembly. If that is true I think the fault may have been there from manufacture which makes me suspect that this axle spindle assy is two piece in construction. It would be nice to have Branson Tractor/Kukje Machinery state that this is a two piece construction or a single piece. I have had some other pictures sent to me in confidence which I will not share but I can say the failures are in exactly the same place and look the same except that there is no evidence of a dark rusty area at the very center of the axle failure point. There is however the same bit of pin material protruding from the center of the fracture plane if you can think it as that. i am working on getting the manufacturer to the table. I know that is a long shot but if I do I will share any pertinent details that come to light and which can be shared.

 

[sikmusicfreak8]

Well,*I just read this entire post, and I would like to weigh in on a few things:

1. Expecting the manufacturer to spell out every scenario on how to operate seems a bit ridiculous. Way to many variables, environments, scenarios, uses, etc. If you are buying a tractor, it is your responsibility to learn how to*operate it, and how to do it safely. They provide you the basics,*you take it from there.

2. Its concerning that*a few people*seem confused on why you would need ballast. If*you need a quick lesson,*remove any 3pt implement from your tractor,*place the tractor in 2WD, then*scoop a full load of material. Well, you probably wont be able to, so shift back into 4WD, get your full load, then shift back to 2WD, and then try to back up, go forward, go up a small incline, etc. You will immediately see what role your front axle plays in moving*the tractor. Now pick up a*heavy implement and do all the above again and see the*difference. When I have my backhoe attached, which is*only about #1200 lbs, I typically don't need 4WD for any loader/forklift work at all. *

3.*Saying that people or dealers need to*dismantle tractors to try and see if any impending failures can be seen is also quite absurd. Until failure occurs, I don't see any sort of inspection (if its not blatantly failing) doing any good.*Do car dealers removes all wheel bearings to try and see if they think they could be*failing? Should they?*Of course not.

4. Again, little research will show that most all of these tractor manufacturers*are on*roughly the same playing field, designs are roughly the same, engineering roughly the same, capabilities roughly the same, expected usage is roughly the same.. All will have their share of failures, and as far*as front axles go, nobody is exempt. The early*Branson tractors were more prone than the newer ones, but as*Dave*said, a lot can be attributed to operator error. I would go as far to assume that the VAST majority are operator error.* It*should also be noted that over the years, they have tracked failures to some degree, because some parts have been upgraded that they deemed inadequate, such as tie rods for the early years. So they*are diligent at correcting their mistakes.

Just my thoughts.

 

[mopardude318]

In my opinion,, there is only one answer,,, the right machine, with a lot of axle.
If you are gonna do a lot of work,,, get a lot of machine.

I purchased this, with a loader,, it was 15 years old at the time,,, I have used it an additional 20 years.

It is only 60HP,, and has never been used with ballast, on purpose,

The loader gets LOTS of use.

Zero axle failures,, (it seldom needs 4WD),, It cost me $5,000, I paid the asking price.

Now THAT is one fine tractor...I would LOVE to find one of those....very rare id imagine..?

 

[CADplans]

Now THAT is one fine tractor...I would LOVE to find one of those....very rare id imagine..?

I do not know if it is rare,,, it came from Canada.
The P.O. moved it from Canada to Virginia.
He told me that by 1980, that almost no one was buying 2WD loader tractors in Canada.

So,, it might be common up north??

 

[mopardude318]

you have a point...the only 4 wheel drive I can find for sale is this one...from canada..lol

TractorHouse.com | 1988 INTERNATIONAL 584 For Sale

 

[Aaron L]

I've seen a number of 2wd 584's in California, but no 4wd's. Yes it is on my 'list' too. If one shows up on CL I imagine you and I will be competing for it...

 

[Zork]

From what I have seen, most loaders lift the front end somewhat while digging down into the dirt. This movement actually takes pressure off the front axle. For level surface loaders working on concrete and asphalt, there is no need to dig below the surface, just scoop from the finished surface so there is a chance for more pressure and traction on the front end in this case. Barring abuse, the tire should be expendable, not the axle.

If someone feels a product is unsafe or a corporation is selling defective products they should first try and rectify it with the manufacturer and if not successful, report it to a government authority and let the government investigate it. Sometimes companies will not rectify a defect, if applicable, unless they are forced to correct it. Not to mention that when you report something that is unsafe or doesn't wear properly, other informed consumers may perform research prior to their purchase and use this information in making their decision.

CPSC SaferProducts.gov | Report an Unsafe Product

EDIT: I don't need 4wd on hard pavement. I am also not sure if the drive train has any internal clutch to alleviate torque when the wheels are not freely slipping on soil. I have seen this drive train torque cause transfer case failures in several older 4x4's- my rule of thumb is to use 4wd on slippery pavement or off road- when you need it. The rear transaxles on these tractors are probably more robust that the weak link is some other component.

 

[DavesTractor]

From what I have seen, most loaders lift the front end somewhat while digging down into the dirt. This movement actually takes pressure off the front axle. For level surface loaders working on concrete and asphalt, there is no need to dig below the surface, just scoop from the finished surface so there is a chance for more pressure and traction on the front end in this case. Barring abuse, the tire should be expendable, not the axle.

If used as a normal loader, I agree that you should get tire spin before axle breakage. But you can force the tractor in some situations to have tremendous traction for the front tires, at the same time having almost no traction to the rear tires (as they are in the air or nearly so). If you then proceed to push and the tires can't spin and the item you are pushing does not move and the clutch does not slip and the motor does not stall....then what? Snap. It is under difficult circumstances that these operator induced breakages occur. MFWA is to be used for traction, but not as the sole motivating force when the front axle is under extreme load. Using it to push into a pile for loading is proper. Just considering the physics of what all is happening can keep a guy out of trouble.

And I agree with you on the rear axles being more robust. A rear axle shaft on a (any brand) compact 4x4 tractor are several times larger than the front axle shafts. Some front axles shafts are only an inch or so, and on that same tractor the rear axle might be 2". Cross sectional area of a 1" shaft is 0.785 sq in. A 2" shaft is 3.14 sq in. 4 times stronger, given that everything else is equal.

 

[LindenBruce]

Ssoooo............. Don't use 4 wheel drive unless you are stuck. And, load the rear tires? B.