A little disappointed with Kubota

[SPYDERLK]

Flaws are relative.

 

[The Fred]

Come on Al what's next?

 

[SPYDERLK]

Agree 100%. After 156 posts no one is yet quite sure what the problem was (and no one knows whether it will return.) It seems likely to me that

1) someone other than the factory mounted the wheels on the tractor. Whoever that was MIGHT have been better advised to use large flat washers. Maybe. 2) that the buyer may not have checked the nuts/bolts for tightness after several hours of use as he should have. I've committed that mistake myself a few times.

No matter which of the many possibilities is true, I have seen no evidence here that should cause one to be "dissapointed with Kubota."

I would like to bring up that washers of large or any oversized diameter do not extend the intense clamping force of the nut very far outward beyond the nut - unless the washer is specially made. To do this the washer must be fairly thick high strength steel and somewhat cupped to extend high clamp forces to their periphery. EVERYTHING MOVES in some way in response to force. The washer flexes. Due to this a standard, even a high strength, flatwasher eases off pressure a bunch as you move out from under the nut, but its still better than any washer ending at the nut.​

A thick belleville is an expensive, but in some cases priceless way of extending clamp outward. They are flattened under the huge forces under the nut, but are still applying pretty good force out at their periphery.

 

[goeduck]

rScotty....the problem is that SEVERAL times in this thread, SEVERAL people have tried to say that either kubota, the dealer, or the assembler messed up and used the WRONG parts. So ONE LAST TIME.....KUBOTA USES LOCK WASHERS.
.

:reading: :reading: WHEW! I am glad I never said it was assembled wrong :no: :no:

 

[ovrszd]

:reading: :reading: WHEW! I am glad I never said it was assembled wrong :no: :no:

Well, actually it was assembled wrong. :stirthepot::stirthepot:

 

[Coyote machine]

Well, actually it was assembled wrong. :stirthepot::stirthepot:

How did you determine that? I'm curious, it seems like that is still a point of contention as to what went wrong, specifically, and how? NOT being snarky, just trying to understand how we can conclude anything as fact...:confused3:

 

[TheMadOne]

How did you determine that? I'm curious, it seems like that is still a point of contention as to what went wrong, specifically, and how? NOT being snarky, just trying to understand how we can conclude anything as fact...:confused3:

If it failed it was assembled/designed wrong. No exceptions. Never mind that OP could have had a wheel center thant had micro-cracks in it or whatever. It's never wear, fluke circumstance, or impossible to find QC issues, there must always be fault laid at someone's feet. Otherwise how can someone on the internet be right?
/s

 

[SPYDERLK]

Well, actually it was assembled wrong. :stirthepot::stirthepot:

How did you determine that? I'm curious, it seems like that is still a point of contention as to what went wrong, specifically, and how? NOT being snarky, just trying to understand how we can conclude anything as fact...:confused3:

Odds are -

Too loose
. . . For precaution the assembly spec 1st torque should be established at around 230 done in 2 stages to relieve the necessity of retightening caused by paint and metal creep.​

 

[The Fred]

Odds are -

Too loose
. . . For precaution the assembly spec 1st torque should be established at around 230 done in 2 stages to relieve the necessity of retightening caused by paint and metal creep.​

2:30 like before the beer comes out?:drink:

 

[SPYDERLK]

2:30 like before the beer comes out?:drink:

Could do it later. But only if the wrench is set to the right value beforehand.