Publishing Loader Capacity Numbers That Far Exceed The Capacity Of The Axles

[LD1]

Finally some people are seeming to understand ballast and counterweight. And how it certainly "can" increase the load on the front axle.

I have been trying to explain it on various threads here for years.

 

[Torvy]

The video, imho, was a backhanded attack on the LS, TYM and Kioti tractors that don't publish that info and lift significantly more than the Kubota. In that regard, JD is not a competitor for Kubota. Both lift less than the others. Most likely, sales people are getting an earful of how the lower priced competition also lifts more weight.

Well, Neil, I am not an engineer, but I have eyes. If you compare a TYM/Branson, LS or Kioti axle to the same sized frame Kubota, it is abundantly clear that Kubota has less robust axles. Don't need the number published. Kubota has advantages in dealer network and name recognition.

As the economy worsens, people will move more and more toward substitute goods. In other words, they become more price sensitive and tend to buy the less expensive brands. Also why you are seeing some prices drop on Kubota. The price gap got too big and it is affecting sales.

 

[daman1]

My question is why someone would buy a 1,500 lb lawnmower and expect to operate it like a 10,000 lb skidsteer?

Imo because it's all they can afford then they think they can use it like an industrial unit, I see it on forums all the time people are stupid

 

[LD1]

The video, imho, was a backhanded attack on the LS, TYM and Kioti tractors that don't publish that info and lift significantly more than the Kubota. In that regard, JD is not a competitor for Kubota. Both lift less than the others. Most likely, sales people are getting an earful of how the lower priced competition also lifts more weight.

Well, Neil, I am not an engineer, but I have eyes. If you compare a TYM/Branson, LS or Kioti axle to the same sized frame Kubota, it is abundantly clear that Kubota has less robust axles. Don't need the number published. Kubota has advantages in dealer network and name recognition.

As the economy worsens, people will move more and more toward substitute goods. In other words, they become more price sensitive and tend to buy the less expensive brands. Also why you are seeing some prices drop on Kubota. The price gap got too big and it is affecting sales.

If any small tractor manufacture published the front axle info....I'd be willing to be it can easily be exceeded. Don't care if it's a kubota, Deere, la, Mahindra, etc.

I have a bota MX. Loader + fluid + wheel weights but nothing on the 3ph and the machine weighs about 7000#. If I put 500# on the 3ph I can lift right at a ton but the back has zero weight.

Now that's 9500# on the front. Pretty sure that would exceed the spec if it existed.

A heavier tractor of a different brand that can lift more could put even more on the front.

I you want a heavier front axle and stronger loader...whatever your manufacture of choice....I'm sure they make a bigger model.

 

[Sid Post]

The video, imho, was a backhanded attack on the LS, TYM and Kioti tractors that don't publish that info and lift significantly more than the Kubota. In that regard, JD is not a competitor for Kubota. Both lift less than the others. Most likely, sales people are getting an earful of how the lower priced competition also lifts more weight.

Well, Neil, I am not an engineer, but I have eyes. If you compare a TYM/Branson, LS or Kioti axle to the same sized frame Kubota, it is abundantly clear that Kubota has less robust axles. Don't need the number published. Kubota has advantages in dealer network and name recognition.

As the economy worsens, people will move more and more toward substitute goods. In other words, they become more price sensitive and tend to buy the less expensive brands. Also why you are seeing some prices drop on Kubota. The price gap got too big and it is affecting sales.

The rear axle on my L4600 belongs on a much smaller tractor. The front axle isn't anything to brag about but, compared to the rear axle it looks good.

Compared to something else, today I would not own an L4600. It's not that it is a bad tractor but, that is marketed to be something it is not! Users are every bit as bad as dealers with extolling the greatness of the L4600 too! This creates unrealistic expectations for users that will really work them pretty hard.

 

[BnRidge]

axles aren't snapping as a result of these static loads

It's a manufactures goal to reduce cost, but it would be a huge PR issue if axle failures were to start showing up on the public perception radar. It's one thing to state limitations (axle specs), and create other limitations (hydraulic relief), but word gets around quickly if failures become an issue. If the specified limitations are so off, which manufactures at the moment have front transaxles failing at an alarming rate?

 

[TimberFarm]

I didn't read this thread, but the title reminded me of a Kubota that a church I attended had.
They broke the front axle 3 times from overloading the bucket according to the dealer who kept fixing it.

 

[dodge man]

With my tractor I can lift the same amount of weight if I have my ballast box hooked up or not. It limited by the hydraulic pressure in the loader. Having the ballast box hooked up has nothing to do with how much I can lift. The ballast box just takes the load off the front axle.

 

[Jstpssng]

The video, imho, was a backhanded attack on the LS, TYM and Kioti tractors that don't publish that info and lift significantly more than the Kubota. In that regard, JD is not a competitor for Kubota. Both lift less than the others. Most likely, sales people are getting an earful of how the lower priced competition also lifts more weight.

Well, Neil, I am not an engineer, but I have eyes. If you compare a TYM/Branson, LS or Kioti axle to the same sized frame Kubota, it is abundantly clear that Kubota has less robust axles. Don't need the number published. Kubota has advantages in dealer network and name recognition.

As the economy worsens, people will move more and more toward substitute goods. In other words, they become more price sensitive and tend to buy the less expensive brands. Also why you are seeing some prices drop on Kubota. The price gap got too big and it is affecting sales.

Neil IS a Kubota dealer!

 

[Sid Post]

My biggest take from this is that he is a Kubota dealer.

If you are referring to Messick's, they are a multi-brand dealer.

 

[oldtimer 66]

When I look at an axle I count the lug nuts. 5,6,8,10 etc. That gives me an indication of the load rating.

 

[MossRoad]

Finally some people are seeming to understand ballast and counterweight. And how it certainly "can" increase the load on the front axle.

I have been trying to explain it on various threads here for years.

Yes.

If you have a 5000# tractor and pick up 1000# in the loader the total weight of the tractor is now 6000#.

The tractor tips forward with the rears coming off the ground, and we have 6000# on the front axle.

So we add 1000# of ballast to the rear of the tractor and the total weight of the tractor with 1000# in the loader is now 7000#.

Less weight will be concentrated on the front axle at that point because the ballast behind the rear axle will pull down, lightening the front end. It now won't tip forward off of the rear wheels as easily and not much stress is added to the front axle. That's great.

But now the operator is tempted to pick up more in the loader. So they pick up 2000# in the loader and now you have a total weight of 8000#....

The rears come off the ground. Now you have 8000# on the front axle.

 

[Muhammad]

Is nobody going to bring up the 18x8.50-10NHS R14T front tires and the 880lb load rating on those? That gives you 1,760lbs so you'd be over the rating on the tires too...

I also noted the mid-mount mower on the JD that ads a little weight, maybe 120lbs to the front.

 

[ptsg]

I'll just show the tag on my tractor. It would be nice if manufacturers could expand on more details about these axle ratings to clear things up. Is the rating meant for static use? While moving? If moving, at what speed? Does it include the front weights already? Without the front weights?, Etc. Lots of variables.

The reality is, most tractors will be near max capacity with just the loader on it. Here is my case, I have 870 kg (1900 lbs) weight rating on the front axle as seen on the picture. I know for a fact it does not include a loader since the tractors are sold without a loader and there is no OEM loader option.

If I put my loader on, that's about 1000-ish lbs (loader mounts + arms + bucket) that will take from the front axle capacity. So this means I now can only lift 900-ish lbs with a loader that I built and design to match the aftermarket loaders we have here, which have a max capacity of around 1650 lbs at max height at the pins. Or even the Branson loader in the US with 2200 lbs capacity. Plus, I still have my hydraulic winch (160 lbs) and my front weights ( 240 lbs).

I'll also add that Branson tractors have really heavy duty axles for the size of tractor compared to about everyone else. It's like they put the axles from the next frame size tractor on the smaller frame one. Specially when compared to other brands side by side, you'll really notice the size differences.

 

[mikester]

Imo because it's all they can afford then they think they can use it like an industrial unit, I see it on forums all the time people are stupid

I guess they spend $100K on 4x4 SUV pickup trucks with 4 foot boxes and discover they can't afford the payments for a tractor and get a SCUT?

 

[Torvy]

Is nobody going to bring up the 18x8.50-10NHS R14T front tires and the 880lb load rating on those? That gives you 1,760lbs so you'd be over the rating on the tires too...

I also noted the mid-mount mower on the JD that ads a little weight, maybe 120lbs to the front.

Sorry about that. The default front tires on my new tractor each have a load rating of 4180. Trac Chief 12-16.5 NHS TL 6PR

 

[71bronco]

The tires that came with my L3240 were 4 ply. They lasted about 3 years before they got a bubble on the sidewall. I upgraded to 6 ply and haven't had a problem since. I have the bigger loader and use the heck out it with no problems except a small leak in 1 seal. Always have about 1000 lbs hanging off the 3 point.

Jeff

 

[Hay Dude]

The tires that came with my L3240 were 4 ply. They lasted about 3 years before they got a bubble on the sidewall. I upgraded to 6 ply and haven't had a problem since. I have the bigger loader and use the heck out it with no problems except a small leak in 1 seal. Always have about 1000 lbs hanging off the 3 point.

Jeff

What brand were they? Titan?

 

[WinterDeere]

I have a bota MX. Loader + fluid + wheel weights but nothing on the 3ph and the machine weighs about 7000#. If I put 500# on the 3ph I can lift right at a ton but the back has zero weight.

Now that's 9500# on the front. Pretty sure that would exceed the spec if it existed.

Sure you realized this, but neither wheel weights or fluid in the tires add to axle load calculation. It may put a little extra dynamic stress on all of the parts, but its static load is zero.

With my tractor I can lift the same amount of weight if I have my ballast box hooked up or not. It limited by the hydraulic pressure in the loader. Having the ballast box hooked up has nothing to do with how much I can lift. The ballast box just takes the load off the front axle.

Yeah, but that's not common to all tractors. The 320R loader on my 3033R has sufficient lift capacity to pick the back of the tractor up off the ground with no hesitation under a heavy load, if I don't have sufficient ballast on the back. I don't think the original H165/300R loader could do this, but the 320R loader seriously increased lift capacity beyond what the tractor can do without ballast.

Even if you don't have sufficient hydraulics to limit your lift, your breakout force is definitely high enough to cause a tip while operating without ballast, which you would not experience with ballast. This alone can lead to the situation described previously.

 

[daman1]

I guess they spend $100K on 4x4 SUV pickup trucks with 4 foot boxes and discover they can't afford the payments for a tractor and get a SCUT?

Maybe