Tires filled with Beet Juice too heavy for landscaping and field work?

[3 Horse Ranch]

They increase the stability of the tractor but they do not transfer the weight off of the front axle.

I've heard of this mentioned before, but for the life of me I can't see how adding weight to the three point transfers weight off of the front when the bucket is fully loaded. It seems that it would keep the back axle on the ground and allow the bucket and front axle to carry more weight without getting tippy on the front axle pivot. Weight on the 3 point is so close to the other fulcrum point (the center of the back axle) that any weight transferred back from the loader would be marginal.

 

[ROUSTABOUT]

We have a 5610 Ford 4x4 that weighs 13,600 pounds. It is heavy enough to do something. All four tires filled. Belly Pan, cage, loader, grapple, all add weight.

 

[LD1]

I've heard of this mentioned before, but for the life of me I can't see how adding weight to the three point transfers weight off of the front when the bucket is fully loaded. It seems that it would keep the back axle on the ground and allow the bucket and front axle to carry more weight without getting tippy on the front axle pivot. Weight on the 3 point is so close to the other fulcrum point (the center of the back axle) that any weight transferred back from the loader would be marginal.

It has to be a significant amount of weight to do any good.

Wheel weighs, fluid, and an implement on the 3ph all increase what the loader can lift.....and all also increase the load that is gonna be placed on the front axle. Up to the point in which significant weight on the 3ph is added to transfer enough weight.

On an average 40hp sized tractor....no weighs or fluid and a light 350# rear blade is gonna put less weight on the front axle when doing loader work than the same tractor with filled tires and an 800# blade

 

[Massey convert]

Wheel weights or fluid in the tires will not transfer weight from the front axle, BUT they will aid in not letting the rear wheels lift when using the FEL.
Weight on the three-point does aid in transferring weight from the front axle, think of the rear axle acting as a fulcrum of a lever consisting of the space between the front axle and the load on the 3-point.

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

It has to be a significant amount of weight to do any good.

Wheel weighs, fluid, and an implement on the 3ph all increase what the loader can lift.....and all also increase the load that is gonna be placed on the front axle. Up to the point in which significant weight on the 3ph is added to transfer enough weight.

On an average 40hp sized tractor....no weighs or fluid and a light 350# rear blade is gonna put less weight on the front axle when doing loader work than the same tractor with filled tires and an 800# blade

I totally understand the concept of counterweight for lifting a load, it's the claim that counterweight on a tractor 3 point takes stress off the front axle I can't understand.

 

[LD1]

I totally understand the concept of counterweight for lifting a load, it's the claim that counterweight on a tractor 3 point takes stress off the front axle I can't understand.

Well I just did an experiment with dad's 630 Deere to see if it would lift a full icb tote.

With the tote empty....the tractor weighs about 6000# with the forks, empty tote, and wheel weights and I'd guess at least 2000# over the front. Certainly enough weight that I couldn't lift it with my bare hands.

Put 260 gallons in the tote...tractor lifts it....but barley.

I can walk to the front of the tractor and pick the front end up with my bare hands.

What part of the concept still eludes you? Weight BEHIND the rear axle will take weight OFF the front axle. Simple leverage.

How much is a simple calculation. Distance behind rear axle the weight it....how far forward the front axle is, and how much weight.

1000# at 3' behind the rear axle will remove 509# off the front axle if the wheelbase is 6'.

Same simple concept with a loader. Lifting weight forward of the front axle takes weight off the rear axle

 

[Gee Ray]

Did you ever play on a teeter-totter? You push down on one end and the other end goes up. If the rear axle is the fulcrum, the rear weight is pushing down and thus makes the front end lighter.

For an easy demo lay 2 pencils on a table. They represent the axles. Now lay a ruler across both of the pencils. One pencil at 4 and the other at 8. 1 is the rear ballast and 12 is the bucket. Press down on #1 and #12 goes up. This will shift some, not all of the weight to the rear axle at #4. If you press down on #4, the rear axle, the front axle acts as the fulcrum and must carry the bucket weight.

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

Well I just did an experiment with dad's 630 Deere to see if it would lift a full icb tote.

With the tote empty....the tractor weighs about 6000# with the forks, empty tote, and wheel weights and I'd guess at least 2000# over the front. Certainly enough weight that I couldn't lift it with my bare hands.

Put 260 gallons in the tote...tractor lifts it....but barley.

I can walk to the front of the tractor and pick the front end up with my bare hands.

What part of the concept still eludes you? Weight BEHIND the rear axle will take weight OFF the front axle. Simple leverage.

How much is a simple calculation. Distance behind rear axle the weight it....how far forward the front axle is, and how much weight.

1000# at 3' behind the rear axle will remove 509# off the front axle if the wheelbase is 6'.

Same simple concept with a loader. Lifting weight forward of the front axle takes weight off the rear axle

Works until the load on the loader exceeds the ballast and the the tractor is balanced on the front axle at which point 100% of the weight, tractor, load and ballast is on the front axle. A tractor without ballast won't pick up much at all, front axle never carries more than the weight of the tractor and load. Add ballast and the front axle is carrying the full load on the loader, plus much of the weight of the tractor and ballast. (Ever spin a back wheel with a full load on the loader?) The front axle becomes the primary fulcrum and the load on the loader is further from the fulcrum than the ballast is from the rear axle. If ballast didn't increase the ability of the tractor to lift, then I could accept the concept.

 

[LD1]

Works until the load on the loader exceeds the ballast and the the tractor is balanced on the front axle at which point 100% of the weight, tractor, load and ballast is on the front axle. A tractor without ballast won't pick up much at all, front axle never carries more than the weight of the tractor and load. Add ballast and the front axle is carrying the full load on the loader, plus much of the weight of the tractor and ballast. (Ever spin a back wheel with a full load on the loader?) The front axle becomes the primary fulcrum and the load on the loader is further from the fulcrum than the ballast is from the rear axle. If ballast didn't increase the ability of the tractor to lift, then I could accept the concept.

Re-read my post #43

 

[Gee Ray]

Works until the load on the loader exceeds the ballast and the the tractor is balanced on the front axle at which point 100% of the weight, tractor, load and ballast is on the front axle. A tractor without ballast won't pick up much at all, front axle never carries more than the weight of the tractor and load. Add ballast and the front axle is carrying the full load on the loader, plus much of the weight of the tractor and ballast. (Ever spin a back wheel with a full load on the loader?) The front axle becomes the primary fulcrum and the load on the loader is further from the fulcrum than the ballast is from the rear axle. If ballast didn't increase the ability of the tractor to lift, then I could accept the concept.

The 3 point ballast does nothing to the capacity. The rear ballast just makes the tractor safer when using the FEL. If you are picking up the rear tires with a ballast on the 3 point then your ballast is not heavy enough. The rear ballast is to keep the rear axle on the ground so it is the fulcrum, and the front axle does not act as the fulcrum.

Remember on most tractors the front axle can tip from side to side. The rear axle does not tip side to side so you need the load on the rear axle for stability.

 

[Massey convert]

"Wheel weighs, fluid, and an implement on the 3ph all increase what the loader can lift.....and all also increase the load that is gonna be placed on the front axle."
I re-read your post, NONE of the things you mentioned will increase the weight on the front axle, they will ALL increase the weight on the rear axle. The implement on the 3-pt will DECREASE the weight on the front axle, FEL or not.

 

[LD1]

The 3 point ballast does nothing to the capacity. The rear ballast just makes the tractor safer when using the FEL. If you are picking up the rear tires with a ballast on the 3 point then your ballast is not heavy enough. The rear ballast is to keep the rear axle on the ground so it is the fulcrum, and the front axle does not act as the fulcrum.

Remember on most tractors the front axle can tip from side to side. The rear axle does not tip side to side so you need the load on the rear axle for stability.

The 3-point ballast DOES increase the capacity that the front loader can lift.....unless you live in the world of paper specs and theoretical capacities.

IF you have a tractor with ZERO ballast and ZERO 3PH implement...its capacity is only a fraction of what it "can" lift. If the loader in "theory" can lift 1000 pounds...in reality without ballast it may only be able to lift 400#.....because any more it WONT lift it....rather it will lift the rear of the tractor.

So adding ballast WILL increase what it CAN lift

 

[LD1]

"Wheel weighs, fluid, and an implement on the 3ph all increase what the loader can lift.....and all also increase the load that is gonna be placed on the front axle."
I re-read your post, NONE of the things you mentioned will increase the weight on the front axle, they will ALL increase the weight on the rear axle. The implement on the 3-pt will DECREASE the weight on the front axle, FEL or not.

I wasnt suggesting YOU re-read my post. That was directed at someone else.

BUT.....you are quoting only PART of what I said....and quoting it out of context.

Because YES, wheel weights, fluid, and ballast WILL increase the load on the front axle because you have made the tractor capable of lifting more.

If you have a 2500# tractor that will lift 500# before the rear wheels lift, you now have all 3000# on the front axle.
If you fill tires with 500# of fluid....now the tractor weighs 3000# and can now lift 700# before the rears go airborn. Now thats 3700# on the front axle.
If you add wheel weights of 300#, now the tractor is 3300#, and the loader can lift 900# before the rears get in the air....thats 4100# all on the front.

If you add a 500# implement....now the tractor is 3800# and the loader can lift 1200 before the rear becomes airborn. You now have 5000# all on the front axle.

You have to have ENOUGH ballast to keep the rear end down.....and furthermore, enough to transfer significant weight off the front axle to see a difference.

My ACTUAL quote from post 43 that you only choose to quote part of....

Wheel weighs, fluid, and an implement on the 3ph all increase what the loader can lift.....and all also increase the load that is gonna be placed on the front axle. Up to the point in which significant weight on the 3ph is added to transfer enough weight.

Note the part you conveniently overlooked.

 

[Gee Ray]

Please take a video of a tractor working off of the front axle only while holding the rear axle and the bucket aloft. It sure would be entertaining to watch.

It has become obvious you do not want to understand the laws of physics. The wheel weights and the load tires apply a down force on the rear axle while the ballast on the rear of the tractor applies a force downward behind the axle thus lessening the downward force on the front axle.

If you are trying to lift enough weight that the rear wheels come off the ground you are only putting yourself in danger.

Watch and learn how important correct ballast is:

What is "Rear Ballast"? And why do you need it?

www.greentractortalk.com

 

[LD1]

Please take a video of a tractor working off of the front axle only while holding the rear axle and the bucket aloft. It sure would be entertaining to watch.

It has become obvious you do not want to understand the laws of physics. The wheel weights and the load tires apply a down force on the rear axle while the ballast on the rear of the tractor applies a force downward behind the axle thus lessening the downward force on the front axle.

If you are trying to lift enough weight that the rear wheels come off the ground you are only putting yourself in danger.

Watch and learn how important correct ballast is:

What is "Rear Ballast"? And why do you need it?

www.greentractortalk.com

Who said anything about lifting and working off only the front axle?

I have stressed several times the importance of correct / sufficient ballast.

The fact that you dont think I understand physics or the importance of ballast is quite comical.

Please try and find anything I said that was incorrect in my previous statements? That way I can educate you as to why it is not incorrect.

 

[Massey convert]

LD1, Ok, I see what you are saying, weight back there increases the potential for increasing the load on the front axle when you lift enough with the FEL. That potential load on the front axle will always be limited by the FEL's capacity to lift.

 

[LD1]

LD1, Ok, I see what you are saying, weight back there increases the potential for increasing the load on the front axle when you lift enough with the FEL. That potential load on the front axle will always be limited by the FEL's capacity to lift.

YES.

Like some of my examples in post #53. While those numbers are just a reference for example....they are probably pretty close to real world examples. I dont know any modern tractor that can operate at rated capacity with nothing on the back. Even with only liquid in the tires.....loaders are still strong enough to lift the rear in the air.

Sure, if you are shuttling pallets of a given material and nothing more.....as long as the tractor CAN lift it.....adding weight on the back will never add more weight to the front unless you add more weight to the loader.

But most of us use our tractors digging into piles of dirt and gravel for example. And in doing so.....usually one of two things happens......you hit the loader relief (max capacity of the hydraulics)....or the rear wheels lift. IF the rear wheels are lifting.....you dont have enough ballast. And any ballast that is added will ALSO be transferred to the front axle when this happens. UP UNTIL you have ENOUGH weight back there that they no longer become airborn. Then beyond that, you still need significantly more ballast to start taking a noticeable weight off the front axle.

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

With the tote empty....the tractor weighs about 6000# with the forks, empty tote, and wheel weights and I'd guess at least 2000# over the front. Certainly enough weight that I couldn't lift it with my bare hands.

Put 260 gallons in the tote...tractor lifts it....but barley.

I can walk to the front of the tractor and pick the front end up with my bare hands.

So how much stress do you figure you could take off the back axle by hanging a few hundred pounds of suitcase weights off the front?

 

[3 Horse Ranch]

Then beyond that, you still need significantly more ballast to start taking a noticeable weight off the front axle.

And that was my point in posing the questing to begin with. The key word is significant. A 5' box blade is not enough significant weight to take any meaningful stress off the front axle with a fully loaded bucket of gravel. It would require significantly more than that, but a box blade is all I need to keep the back axle firmly planted for stability.

 

[Bill Guenthner]

I recently just purchased a new 48hp HST TYM. About to have it delivered to get started. They did a nice job of getting me talked into beet juice in back tires as it helps with loader work, and i'll be doing a lot of that. Also, I'll be doing a lot of field work (planting, cultivating) AND landscaping around my house. The guys told me last week the extra weight will leave very deep grooves everywhere. Now I'm thinking I should have NOT had the beet juice add instead of a removable ballast or leave box blade on back when loader work. Thoughts or suggestions? I could in theory ask them to pump out the juice, lol.

My tractor is smaller, 33hp, I have never, in over 10 years, felt the need for fluid in the tires. If I'm using the loader I will generally have the rotary cutter on which weighs more than anything I would lift with the loader. I'm pretty good with situational awareness and maybe some people aren't, but I've never had a problem.