FEL vs front bumper weights.

[VroomVroom]

Looking at the geometry of the FEL, its attached near your feet and on the front bumper of the tractor. So from I interpret, when the bucket is full the front bumper is the fulcrum. The bucket of weight wants to go down, while the connection point back by your feet would want to go up should the bolts let go. Being that the FEL which is rated for 11 or 1200 lbs. on the small tractor I have............that would be quite a bit of down force on the front bumper. But if you didn't have the FEL attachment, they would only recommend much less weight to be hung on the front bumper.

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

Looking at the geometry of the FEL, its attached near your feet and on the front bumper of the tractor. So from I interpret, when the bucket is full the front bumper is the fulcrum. The bucket of weight wants to go down, while the connection point back by your feet would want to go up should the bolts let go. Being that the FEL which is rated for 11 or 1200 lbs. on the small tractor I have............that would be quite a bit of down force on the front bumper. But if you didn't have the FEL attachment, they would only recommend much less weight to be hung on the front bumper.

Actually the front axle is the fulcrum. The limit on front weights may have more to do woth the bracket capacity than the front axle capacity. With a full bucket of gravel and no counterweight the front axle has to carry the majority of weight of both load and tractor. A counterweight adds weight behind the fulcrum but front axle loading wouldn't change much

 

[VroomVroom]

I picture it as a teeter totter, the point bolted near my feet wants to go up, with the bucket wanting to go down while the c channel on the bumper being the pivot point. The loaded bucket would put more force on that bumper then hanging say 250 lbs on the front bumper using suit case weights.

 

[VroomVroom]

 

[VroomVroom]

Actually looking at this photo I may think differently and could almost divide the full load of the bucket by half only putting a few hundred pounds on that front bumper, closer to what the manual said about the suitcase weights.

 

[ptsg]

The main point here is that nowadays pretty much all the tractors come standard with power steering. If you experienced using a tractor without power steering, you would definitely notice the difference on the weight between having a loader or the front weights.

The loader will put much more weight on the front versus just the front weights even with an empty bucket.

From factory, I believe they size the counterweights to work with the average weight implements for the size tractor, like mowers, tillers and so on.

 

[PILOON]

The main point here is that nowadays pretty much all the tractors come standard with power steering.

I WISH !

My Mt180D, nice CUT otherwise, but came with 'Armstrong steering'.

 

[ptsg]

As I said, nowadays.. Your tractor is probably from the 90's. Not really a tractor made recently.

I had a Kubota B7000 with an homemade loader, I also understand the "armstrong steering" very well. I'm mean, it really made my arms stronger but also aggravated my tendon problems. Now I have a 2017 Branson, it is just not comparable. I'm glad they fit power steering on pretty much everything now.

 

[skipmarcy]

I'm not sure but I think the lift rams put some of the weight back at the bottom rear framing which would put some of the load in the near center of the tractor, especially the higher you lift the load. Of course the lift arms pivoting at the top of those rear framing members would put some of the load towards the front framing as you say but not all of it.

 

[VroomVroom]

I'm not sure but I think the lift rams put some of the weight back at the bottom rear framing which would put some of the load in the near center of the tractor, especially the higher you lift the load. Of course the lift arms pivoting at the top of those rear framing members would put some of the load towards the front framing as you say but not all of it.

Yeah. There’s something going on like that. Seemed odd to me is all.

 

[ovrszd]

We're still talking apples and spinach. You need to clarify what you are calling the front bumper? The only fulcrum I see from your pic is the front axle.

My FEL takes weight off the rear tires and adds it to the fronts the moment it's installed. This continues as I add load on the FEL.

I have 1400lbs of suitcase weights I install on the front weight rack, which is located where I would consider a bumper, when I use my 3pt brush cutter without the FEL. That much weight doesn't do as much good as leaving the FEL installed. But I hate brush cutting with the bulk of the FEL.

 

[Texasmark]

FEL + a pile of gravel or sand. Set the weight to your liking and when finished with that chore dump the load. When you need to lift/move something, you have a portable lift. On the other post in this forum, no problem getting used to it. Just think about all the jobs it does for you and you will love it, not be annoyed by it.

It can get in the way in corners when mowing along fence rows, but that's what the joystick is for....lift her up pass the corner, let her back down. Wink!

 

[VroomVroom]

I understand the front axle takes the brunt of the load if no rear counter weight. But for theory purposes, I’ve studied strengths and beam loading in college years ago. For theory, find the Center of gravity of the tractor and tie a string at that point lifting the tractor off the ground so no weight touches the ground. If the load is lifted on the front bucket , the loader frame is connected at the fron of the tractor at the front where the suitcase weights can be installed. So the loader forces down on this point which later transfers to the front axle.

If the weight of the loader plus 1100 lbs load is forcing down on the front bumper where the suitcase weight installs, why do they allow 1100 lbs in the extended loader bucket but only a few hundred pounds of suitcase weight.

I understand all the weight regardless if it’s the suitcase weights or front loader will be transferred to the axle should the rear end lift. Hard for me to explain really. Make a jig welded to the floor shaped like the tractor and mount a loader on it. Then lift the loaded bucket. At the point of your jig where the front bumper would be if it was a tractor will be forced down, while bolts back by your feet will want to go up. Where the down force is directed , to me takes much more force with the front loader then the recommended amount of suitcase weights recommended by the manufacturer. Or it seems that way. I don’t know.

 

[Texasmark]

Actually the front axle is the fulcrum. The limit on front weights may have more to do woth the bracket capacity than the front axle capacity. With a full bucket of gravel and no counterweight the front axle has to carry the majority of weight of both load and tractor. A counterweight adds weight behind the fulcrum but front axle loading wouldn't change much

I partially agree with this. Where we diverge is adding counter weights to the rear and the effect on the front axle load. Let's take a corollary for an easy assessment.

I have ZT mowers. The deck is heavy and protrudes out from the rear axle....aka ft-lbs. On rough terrain, the little dolly wheels up front make for a very rough ride. Placing a 50# weight on the rear bumper forces more of the weight on the actual fulcrum (rear axle) where the large tires are located and smoothes out the ride.

When I bought my 2400 it had no counterweights. When I got a full bucket of rocks or sand, it was obvious that the rear was light and the front axle was taking the brunt of the weight. I couldn't back up a slight incline in 2wd without tire spin. By adding rear wheel weights and weights on the 3 pt, I was able to easily back up the steepest hill on my place.

I transferred some of the load to the rear axle. If taken to the limit on foot-lbs applied to the rear axle, I could make it the fulcrum and lift the whole front end off the ground with a full bucket.

The things I like about 4wd tractors, common today is the fact that 4wd front ends are a lot stouter than 2wd tractors of the same size. Usually they come with larger tires and having traction, make for "pulling" you around turns rather than the rears "pushing" you around turns making it hard on the outside tire/wheel assy.....and it too has an "axle" but it's called a "spindle"...so you still have something taking the load on the front end regardless of 2 or 4wd.

 

[Oaktree]

When I bought my 2400 it had no counterweights. When I got a full bucket of rocks or sand, it was obvious that the rear was light and the front axle was taking the brunt of the weight. I couldn't back up a slight incline in 2wd without tire spin. By adding rear wheel weights and weights on the 3 pt, I was able to easily back up the steepest hill on my place.

Why would you back UP a hill with a load in the FEL? Seems to me like just asking for trouble. Backing DOWN a hill, yes. Up, not so much.

 

[ovrszd]

Many, many, many times I back up an incline because I have no choice. I rarely need ballast on flat ground. Inclines change all that.