Traction Another R1 v. R4 tires question

[sdef]

I will be purchasing my first CUT and using it to clear our new home site on 4.4 acres, that is densely wooded and rocky- similar to mountain type property, with some small boulders that will tax the FEL, along with the majority of rocks that are maybe 12" - 24" in diameter. The tractor work will be mostly FEL and box blade to clear and build the 475' drive and 2 acre home/garden site. The property is fairly level in the areas I will be working and the ground is hard due to the rocks; it is difficult to drive a metal stake using a 3# sledge hammer due to hitting more rocks under the surface. After clearing the property, I will need to do a lot of landscaping around the home site before building due to the poor drainage of the top soil/rocks. But I am confident it is doable.

I am planning on selecting a tractor in the LS R3039 HST class (38 gross HP, 5500# working) or the LS R4041 HST class (41 gross HP, 6600# working) with FEL, various types of buckets, 500# BB and loaded rear tires, along with a T-N-T unit. From reading the many posts about the T-N-T type of adjustability, I have become a believer. I want to spend most of my time in the seat and not having to make on-the-ground adjustments. For what I have to do and being a newbie at this, T-N-T is the way I am going.

I plan on using a rock bucket with teeth on the FEL for the first pass through a particular area to pickup as many loose/surface rocks as possible and maybe will also drag the BB rippers at the same time to kick up the next layer of rocks. But this will be an experiment in progress... I will also use a stump bucket or spade attachment to pickup the few small boulders or roll them as required.

My question is in selecting the best tires for my usage. I feel my main obstacle will be traction when dragging the BB with rippers through the soil and do not expect the tractor to sink deeply into the soil due to the rocky makeup.

I am an old race car guy, have some 4wd off-road experience and understand what I have been reading in other tires posts on TBN. But I am having a difficult time deciding which tires would be best in my circumstances.

Which tires do all of you think would be best?

Thanks

 

[MHarryE]

Although the R-1 will give you better traction even in your rocky soil, R-4 may be the best choice due to their being much more rugged. We have R-4s on our CUT because it goes in all the rocky ground plus does the brush cleaning around fields while all of our larger tractors have R-1 radials for traction, life, and all the other good things about radials. They seldom get near anything that could damage them. My brother-in-law, on the other hand, has R-1s on his CUT, spends a lot of time around brush, and finally ad is fronts filled with gel due to all the flats.

 

[94BULLITT]

R-4's are a good all around tire.

 

[arrow]

R-4's are a good all around tire.

There has been much discussion on this topic but essentially, if particulars are not expressed, the topic becomes too generalized. To wit: How much does your tractor weigh, what size are the R4's. Are the tires loaded? Because of the size of the tire, how much fluid does it accept? Most small cuts have the 15.9 R4's. Tread pattern is close because of the smaller tire allowing for easier gumming up in mud and many have stated how worthless these tires are on their tractor. Then you have the guy with 14.9 x24 R4's and he has no problem skidding logs in snow. The tractor I'm considering has 11.2 x 24 ags or the larger (43") R4's. With loading the tires, the tractor will weigh 3700 lbs with the loaded 11.2 but 4200 lbs with the R4's. Unfortunately I do not know where weight equals to traction. There are always chains.

 

[94BULLITT]

There has been much discussion on this topic but essentially, if particulars are not expressed, the topic becomes too generalized. To wit: How much does your tractor weigh, what size are the R4's. Are the tires loaded? Because of the size of the tire, how much fluid does it accept? Most small cuts have the 15.9 R4's. Tread pattern is close because of the smaller tire allowing for easier gumming up in mud and many have stated how worthless these tires are on their tractor. Then you have the guy with 14.9 x24 R4's and he has no problem skidding logs in snow. The tractor I'm considering has 11.2 x 24 ags or the larger (43") R4's. With loading the tires, the tractor will weigh 3700 lbs with the loaded 11.2 but 4200 lbs with the R4's. Unfortunately I do not know where weight equals to traction. There are always chains.

Well the BX has 26-12-12. It does extremely good for its size.

I had a Bobcat CT235 with 15-19.5. For the most part I was pleased with the performance of it.

The L4240 has 17.5-24 it is a beast.

Weight does add traction til you are on ice then it does not matter.

 

[sdef]

I am not expecting to have to deal with much deep mud, if any. So at this point in the discussions, R4 seems to be the best in my circumstances due to the rock hazards I will have in abundance. I can always get chains, if necessary and if there is enough fender clearance.

Thanks to all who have replied so far.

 

[TripleR]

We have tractors with Ag as well as Industrial and based on your conditions my choice would be Industrial.

 

[LD1]

Another vote for R4's.

Traction wont be that much less than with R1's. R1's need soft conditions for the lubs to bite in. And as others mentioned, the R4's will be much more durable.

 

[jeff9366]

I am planning on selecting a tractor in the LS R3039 HST class (38 gross HP, 5500# working) or the LS R4041 HST class (41 gross HP, 6600# working) with FEL, various types of buckets, 500# BB and loaded rear tires, along with a T-N-T unit.

My question is in selecting the best tires for my usage. I feel my main obstacle will be traction when dragging the BB with rippers through the soil. Which tires do all of you think would be best?

LS web site shows weight of LS3039 as 2,780 pounds and 54" tire width. What is the 5500# stat you show? You have to feed T-B-N standard info to get a tailored reply.

At any rate, both the LS tractors you are considering are fairly heavy and you are planning on loading the tires. Neither tractor will have any dificullty pulling a 500 pound box blade, as wheel slippage will be a non-issue with loaded R4 tires. Personally, had I such a brawny tractor, even with TnT, I would look for a 66" box blade in the 650-700 pound range. If you intend to dislodge rocks and boulders with the rippers you want them beefy and the implement heavy.

If you do not have considerable tractor experience be very cautious on hills until you are familiar with the tractor.

Go with industrial tires/R4's.

Do not wait too long to order your tractor. I am kicking myself for not ordering a Kubota L3540/Tier 3 compliant tractor in time; now they are gone. I am facing $6,000 more for L3560/Tier 4 compliant engine. I am pro-environment but $6000 is a LOT of money for slightly lower emissions.

PS: LS does not specify a folding ROPS. If you intend to keep your tractor inside be sure to plan a door at least 96" high.

 

[sdef]

Jeff9366- The weight figures I quote are for a working tractor with FEL (1100#), bucket, box blade and loaded tires. The figures you saw on the LS web site are for a bare tractor. I just added all of the weights together so any posters would have an easier time understanding my situation and not have to extrapolate, which is why I mentioned the "working" weight.

I measured the rear tire width on the 3039 and it is 67.5". With the 4041s larger tires, I imagine it will be right at 70" - 72" wide, but will measure the next time I get over there. So the current plans are for a 72" BB.

Can you suggest a particular box blade in the 650# - 700# range or will I just need to fabricate additional weight? I tested a new Yanmar LX4100 yesterday and the dealer had just gotten in a new shipment of Woods HD box blades with a Yanmar name on them. It was very beefy and built very similar to the Everything Attachments high end BB for a similar price. But the woods only weighed 550# net, while the ETA weighs 630#. I am hooping I do not have to pay $1300 for a BB I would have little use for once I get this project is completed. Well used, old, BBs around here on Craig's List and elsewhere are listed at near new prices, even for things that are obviously damaged. I have not been to any farm auctions yet.

Yes, I am concerned about the 2014 Tier 4 price increases also, but my dealer has assured me I will still be able to get what I want when the 2014s come out. Right now my plans are to order one the end of July, once I get the finances in order.

 

[jeff9366]

This 72" model from ETA is 635 pounds; priced commensurate with weight:

72" Category I&II XTreme Duty Box Blade by Everything Attachments

Here is a Woods weighing 680 pounds:

BSM72 Landscape Equipment

The Woods brand is highly regarded. Woods has numerous dealers because the demand is there.

Do not buy a box blade with the intention of adding weight after arrival. Buy your Box Blade with the weight devoted to strength.

Here are T-B-N threads devoted to Woods BSM72 box blade:

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=BSM72+site:tractorbynet.com&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

 

[sdef]

Thanks again Jeff9366. I will upgrade my BB thoughts to the top end ETA or the Woods BSM72. I would FAR rather have the proper tool the first time around.

 

[jeff9366]

Now you need to determine if you want a box blade with a FIXED back, HINGED back, or HINGED AND LATCHING back.

Here is the universe of T-B-N posts with opinions on whether to buy HINGED or not to buy HINGED.......

Google

Still having fun?

 

[Morning Wood]

I've got r1's and they really beat up a finished lawn if you go over it. You might want to think about a backhoe for that tractor too if you have a lot of large rocks.

 

[jeff9366]

I will be purchasing my first CUT and using it to clear our new home site on 4.4 acres, that is densely wooded and rocky- similar to mountain type property, with some small boulders that will tax the FEL, along with the majority of rocks that are maybe 12" - 24" in diameter. The tractor work will be mostly FEL and box blade to clear and build the 475' drive and 2 acre home/garden site.

This is a substantial job. If you buy a light box blade the job will be hard and the box blade beat up after completion of the job, should you decide to sell it after a year or two. A heavy BB, as you are considering, will make the job easier and probably be easier to sell later. Light box blades turn up on Craigs List because people find they do not do the job and want to get rid of them.

(( After I complete a multi-day task with an implement I can never bear to sell it. ))

Just do not get frustrated in the beginning. Box blades take quite a while to master. The concept is so simple it seems you should be able to operate effectively immediately, but it takes time to learn BB technique, especially working rocky "soil".

You are on the right track.

 

[sdef]

Thanks again jeff9366. This is another point I have been pondering- the hinged rear blade. With having no experience with this type of device and just thinking about the basic operations of each blade, how they can interact/interfere with each other, along with the vertical angling (glad I will have a T-N-T), makes me think I would rather have a hinged back blade that could be secured in a static- locked down position for use in smoothing when moving forward or to help act as a type of stability gauge for the front blade. But I would find it hard to plunk my money down for a hinged rear blade that could not be locked down. I am all about options.

 

[the old grind]

IMO the hinged rear blade doesn't offer much, really. Controlling the depth of cut with 'fixed' is as easy as adjusting a top link, no? With t-n-t, the hinge option would be another 'sunroof' to me.

I've had only a dozen yrs with a BB & three tire types, R-4s only recently ('Rim Guard' fill). I'm very quickly adapting to them and appreciate the good traction on the local gamut of surfaces. Steering is sure & steady on the rocky & uneven, and the ride as smooth there as with turfs, ie: less tiring after a while somehow. Lawn damage is minimal and, with 4wd, stalling the motor is too easy on anything but lawn, sand, or mud, so o'all traction doesn't seem an issue yet. We'll have to see if R-4s push snow as well as the turfs did. (surprising, they were, with air fill ..) btw: I learned here that siping the lugs works wonders in the winter.

I do 'lower the hooks' on the BB when plumbing rocks from the depths of a new garden or food plot, .. multiple sub-soilers if you will. I must say that your 'six' may be tossed around if you hit the 'big one' with an outer tooth, even at a crawl, and your 3-pt gear might be seriously tested. (Ask me how I know .. :laughing I might use 1-3-5 and crossing passes vs the 1-pt SS and its drudgery. 2 & 4 have beat older my weaker (former) sway links the least and caused the least neck-snapping and cringing. A lot can depend on what you can get a 'feel' for in a particular area.

 

[coobie]

IMHO the R-4 tires suck.I had them on my 2008 kioti DK40se and hated them from day one.To fat and they would not just not dig in.I just bought a new 2012 Kioti DK40se cab model and ordered the R1 ag tires.I had a chance to do some loader work this weekend in some rough areas glad I got the ag tires.Both sets of tires were loaded with rimguard.coobie

 

[NHmitch]

The R1 vs R4 has been a widely debated topic. R4's have 70% of the tread depth of an R1 tire. R1's have the best traction and are the widest used tire in Agriculture in the US and Canada, however they are narrower, and do damage lawns. R4's are typically used in construction and light industrial applications. If you have to drive in snow, R1's would probably be better. I switched to R1's because I needed the extra traction, and New England is very rocky, and hilly, and muddy at times. I drive primarily in the woods, over rocky soil, and up a lot of hills. I found that I needed the extra traction when I was working on my trails and driving in the woods. I have not regretted the switch once, and when I buy a new tractor, I will make sure that it has R1's, however I am not allowed to drive on the lawn per my wife after I have left ruts. R4's will last longer on hard roads, and pavement, and both have their own advantages. Traction was my major issue, and we get a lot of snow here in the winter, so that played a big role as well and there was no question about making the switch to R1's.. Hope that you really enjoy your new tractor, and property!

This article has everything that you ever wanted to know about tires and you should really read this if you have the time..https://elibrary.asabe.org/data/pdf/6/crt2004/Lecture28.pdf

 

[sdef]

NHmitch- Thanks for the great tire/wheel article and I have saved this article as a reference piece. Almost all of the other posters have responded that in my circumstances, R4 would be the best. I also have rocky soil like you, but will have no snow to contend with (one reason I moved here from Iowa many years ago) and am expecting the mud situation to be shallow.

I recently had a geo-technical engineer provide a soil analysis that I could provide to my future home builder, primarily to ensure the house will have a proper, long-term foundation in this troubled soil, as DHEC had denied a septic tank permit (as expected) and I will have to build an engineered septic system- basically a mini waste treatment plant. When the geo-tech guy was out there using a hand auger for his tests, in most of the spots of the marked foundation area, he could only get 12" below the surface (I assume due to the rocky soil) and in one spot he was able to get 36" down. And this confirms I do not think mud should be a significant issue for me.

Is your noted experience using the Bolens G154 tractor? Or a larger, heavier unit? My tractor will weigh between 5500 - 6600 pounds.

And thanks for a great post!

Greg