B2601: Removing Front End Loader without the Bucket attached?

[Rdrcr]

^^^^
I’ll have to give that a try. Will the cement blocks be tall enough to mimic the dimensions of the loader and do you believe the loader will be stable enough on the cement blocks for storage purposes?

Mike

 

[workinonit]

I remove mine all the time with forks attached instead of the bucket. But removing with nothing would be a nightmare. For mine, it's not so much the ballast as it is having something on the front to get leverage to get the attaching brackets in the correct position.

 

[RickB]

Adding

^^^^
I’ll have to give that a try. Will the cement blocks be tall enough to mimic the dimensions of the loader and do you believe the loader will be stable enough on the cement blocks for storage purposes?

Mike

a little weight to keep the loader balanced is the reason for the block. The face of the coupler sits flat on the ground. The guys in the shop dismount LA525's without attachments all the time. I'm just not certain the loaders fitted to the B's are balanced similarly.
This might not work if you are among those that have to chase their loaders around to get them reattached. That really shouldn't be necessary.

 

[robertm]

Please post your findings on the B-Series and the cement block. I would bet dollars to donuts that a cinder block won’t be enough weight. I’ve had several B’s, and with my B2620, a cinder block wound not have mattered. As mentioned, a blank SSQA plate would be best, and weight could be added to the SSQA plate until the right counterbalance is found.