Ballast Ballast box or Filled tires?

[YanmarFever]

I cant believe this has gone this far !

Rolling weight -verses -carrying weight do the math, better yet use your heads. It makes such a little difference that the tractor doesnt even know the tires are filled with liquid.

The crayons are out now. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

I can roll a 200 lb. tire 10 times farther & faster than you can carry it .

Ernie

 

[dknarnd]

With either wheel weights, box or loaded tires the secret to maintaining constant speed is to turn up the flux capicator on the ignition then add one bottle of go go juice with each 5 gallon of fuel added. Then hang on

 

[Partsman2]

But seriously folks, I had a 1973 Ford 2000 that I ran for 16 years with loaded tires. I did not have a FEL on that tractor so the loaded tires were strictly for traction. Other than the extra cost of having flats repaired at the tire shop I never had a problem with the loaded tires.

I bought a new JD a couple of years ago (4710 w/460 FEL and 48 BH which is heaviest in this class for JD) which obviously came with unloaded tires. I asked around with the local farmers as to what was the best way to ballast the tractor, loaded tires or wheel weights. Everyone said to stay away from loaded tires due to environmental and maintenance issues.

I went with the JD wheel weights and put 220# on each side for a total of 440#. This works very well with any FEL work I do even with just a 6' grader blade on the back.

But, I recently added a grapple on the front that weighs in excess of 600#. With the BH on the back I obviously have all the ballast I could want but there are times when working in rough terrain that the BH doesn't have enough ground clearance. My preference is to run a grader blade on the back but this doesn't provide enough ballast for heavy loads when using the grapple. I can use my bush hog for ballast just fine but this is too much hanging off the back for maneuvering in tight places not to mention it is really handy to have a blade on the back while doing this type of work. I am considering going ahead and loading my tires also to give me the extra ballast.

Why do the farmers in my area dislike loaded tires so much? Indy, you're a farmer and don't seem to have an issue with it. Around here everybody uses calcium in the tires. Is this the enviro issue the farmers are worried about?

Other than the fuel economy issue, which to me is a moot point, and the other points already raised here, are there any other good arguments for not loading the tires?

Pmoon, to answer your question, I would go with wheel weights or loaded tires 1st. This leaves your 3PH available to put a useful attachment on the tractor to give you more versatility. A ballast box would be my last choice.

 

[dbelisle]

HERE ! HERE ! those flux capacitors will do it every time.

I ended up loading my tires last year, I wanted to keep the back tires on the ground and get my best traction.

There is one good side effect I did notice between loaded and unloaded tire though. When driving on the highway I don't get that little bounce with the loaded tires, and at 10 or 15 MPH you feel you have more control if the road is a little rough.

Don't get me wrong, You hit a pot hole with a tractor and you will know it , but the fluid in the tires seems to settle it down quicker. It seems that some of that energy from the road is absorbed in the fluid and you get a better ride , if there is such a thing on a tractor.

Dave in NH

 

[pmoon]

Well folks - have to say I'm glad I asked what I thought would be a simple/straightforward question! Thanks!

 

[stevenf]

Partsman2, I also run a rather large tractor for this site Kubota M9000 and also have a BTR grapple that weighs in around a 1000lbs and even after urethane filling all 4 tires which added around 3000lbs and carrying my 1000+lb woods BB on the back the grapple is still capable of lifting the rear wheels off the ground, point is I've got only a couple of hundred hours but listen to the clinch factor carefully and if its to big take smaller bites luckily the grapple is always low picking up when I discover I've got to big a bite but when the rears come up its a little dicey especially in my case where I was trying to move and lift it just cranks you right up till the grapple hits the ground now I grab, pickup then move.
Steve

 

[DeutzOwner]

If you are going to ballast your tires check out this new product. It is nice and clean and won't ever rust your rims
www.tractorballast.com

 

[froggy]

I use wheel weights and a box blade.

 

[woodlot]

What weights more a ton of feathers or a ton or bricks?........um,er.....I mean....what weights more a ton of liquid tire balast or a ton of balast box?

ALL the weight is rolling. There is no frictional energy adding to the balast box whatsoever. Assuming they weigh the same, tire balast and balast boxes require the same hp to move. Both transfer their weight to the ground equally (its the ground that supports the whole thing). I'm not even going to touch on which one is "better" (like center of gravity) but the physics are straight forward.

***caution theory ahead*** One might be able to argue that fluid filled tires take MORE energy to move than a ballast box. There is friction created by the fluid-tire interaction. Although the heat generated by these forces would be minuscule they are existant. The ballast box however has no friction associated with its movement.

 

[timb]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( The ballast box however has no friction associated with its movement. )</font>

Only if you're operating in outer space. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif