Resolving self leveling dislike

[Xfaxman]

If I were in this situation I would modify the bale spear for more roll back.

 

[IndyJay]

If I were in this situation I would modify the bale spear for more roll back.

Killjoy!

 

[npalen]

This pic appears to show that the bucket has more than adequate dump angle so wondering why the rear leveling links couldn't be shortened to give more rollback when bucket is down. Better yet would be rear links with threaded adjustment (turnbuckles?) to find the sweet spot.

I'm sure there are considerations with how far the bucket and linkage can rotate on the mounting pins and also realize that a scaled layout of the entire linkage would be needed to assure clearances at each end of the bucket and lift cylinders strokes.

As a retired farm machinery designer, I would enjoy doing an Autocad layout but would need a lot of measurements to work with.

 

[LouNY]

I don't know what type of bale spear you have.
My Self Leveling loader curls the bottom bucket back about 45 degrees,
a bale spiked at zero and curled back to 45 isn't going to fall off.
Unless that is one of the slide on bale spears that drops down considerable below the base of the bucket.
Even if it only curled back 30 degrees a bale shouldn't slide off.

 

[ptsg]

This pic appears to show that the bucket has more than adequate dump angle so wondering why the rear leveling links couldn't be shortened to give more rollback when bucket is down. Better yet would be rear links with threaded adjustment (turnbuckles?) to find the sweet spot.

I'm sure there are considerations with how far the bucket and linkage can rotate on the mounting pins and also realize that a scaled layout of the entire linkage would be needed to assure clearances at each end of the bucket and lift cylinders strokes.

As a retired farm machinery designer, I would enjoy doing an Autocad layout but would need a lot of measurements to work with.

Mechanical self leveling loaders usually won't curl as much as the non self leveling. This is one of the reasons why some manufacturers are now using two extra cylinders mounted above the lift cylinders to make for hydraulic self leveling.

However, I think in this case, it may have been a slight flaw in the design of this particular loader. I've suggested to the OP on another thread regarding the same issue, that he could also shorten the curl cylinders at the base, basically cut a little bit of the extension they weld on the back of the cylinder.

 

[Xfaxman]

This pic appears to show that the bucket has more than adequate dump angle so wondering why the rear leveling links couldn't be shortened to give more rollback when bucket is down. Better yet would be rear links with threaded adjustment (turnbuckles?) to find the sweet spot.

Yep, I agree, shortening those links should work:

 

[npalen]

Mechanical self leveling loaders usually won't curl as much as the non self leveling. This is one of the reasons why some manufacturers are now using two extra cylinders mounted above the lift cylinders to make for hydraulic self leveling.

However, I think in this case, it may have been a slight flaw in the design of this particular loader. I've suggested to the OP on another thread regarding the same issue, that he could also shorten the curl cylinders at the base, basically cut a little bit of the extension they weld on the back of the cylinder.

Mechanical self leveling loaders usually won't curl as much as the non self leveling.

I've heard that said in the past and that's why I would like to do a layout to see where the limitations lie.

Edit: It appears that the "bolt-on" triangular links at the base of the bucket cylinders could be redesigned to position where the min and max positions of the bucket curl occur as well as the total amount of curl "throw". That mod, if feasible, could be done without changing cylinders or any other components.

 

[ptsg]

Mechanical self leveling loaders usually won't curl as much as the non self leveling.

I've heard that said in the past and that's why I would like to do a layout to see where the limitations lie.

Edit: It appears that the "bolt-on" triangular links at the base of the bucket cylinders could be redesigned to position where the min and max positions of the bucket curl occur as well as the total amount of curl "throw". That mod, if feasible, could be done without changing cylinders or any other components.

I've seen loaders that offered two pivot locations on those triangular plates. One position would give more curl and less dump, while the other position would be the opposite. Actually, there was a tractor with a loader like this for sale last week but I didn't think about saving a picture of that before the tractor was sold.

Cutting the links that Xfaxman pointed out in post #16 may or may not work, because of the way the linkage sits when the loader is lowered all the way.

 

[CADplans]

If you simply remove the upper bar that connects to the bucket cylinder rotating mount bracket,,
then lock the bracket so that it no longer moves,,
you will have eliminated the self leveling,, no purchase are necessary.

The "lock" choice can be as easy as a couple welding rods,, or,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

[ovrszd]

I've seen loaders that offered two pivot locations on those triangular plates. One position would give more curl and less dump, while the other position would be the opposite. Actually, there was a tractor with a loader like this for sale last week but I didn't think about saving a picture of that before the tractor was sold.

Cutting the links that Xfaxman pointed out in post #16 may or may not work, because of the way the linkage sits when the loader is lowered all the way.

View attachment 727352

Always thinking, that's what I like about you Pedro. And you are right!!!