Loader BX1860 with LA243 loader?

[poldies4]

I bought a BX 1860 last week assuming that it would be delivered with the LA203 loader that I ordered. When the delivery arrived the tractor had the LA243 loader instead. I mentioned this to the delivery man and he said "you got and upgraded loader for the same price". All of my Kubota supplied paperwork not so specifically states that recomended loader be the 203 on the 1860, and the 243 for the 2360 etc.? Should I be concerned, or happy for the little extra capacity? Feeling like getting a straight answer is tough, and have been waiting four years for this tractor. I don't want to ruin the moment with concerns about possible issues......Any advice is appreciated..

 

[bp fick]

I just bought a new LA203, in a crate. Talked about it here:http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-owning-operating/166469-buying-front-end-loader-crate.html

In doing a cursory overview of the difference in specs, the bucket seems to be a slightly larger capacity in the 243. The lifting ability seems to be greater, but pistons seem similar or identical.

I know this much. An 1860 has the shorter frame. Much of it is shorter from the anchor point of the FEL to the front frame "bumper". In other words, that 243 you have mounted by simple deduction is projecting out farther in the front of your 1860 by 2" than it would protrude from the front of the longer framed 2360 or 2660. This means that it is absolutely putting the weight 2" farther out "there" into space. The shorter frame of the 1860 also brings into bear the counter balance issue. There is slightly less tractor mass behind the mounting point to provide counter balance as well.

In short? The leveraging is simply different with the 243 on that frame than it would be with a 203. Unless someone more knowledgeable than I says "no way" or "it's all good, don't worry about it" my gut, my head, and my recent mounting experience of the 203 on my 1860 all paints me into a corner here that I don't like. Nope. Don't like it at all. Maybe I'm all wet and that would be great for you to accept a "better" loader than what is prescribed.

I will follow this thread with some interest.

 

[alchemysa]

Specs for the two loaders....


Not much difference but if its a new tractor and a new loader I'd seriously investigate if it breaches the warranty.

 

[bp fick]

If these two loaders arms and frames are identical (and I certainly don't know if they are) except for the decals and bucket, then you'd be fine. But I find that hard to believe. Kubota puts the same MMMs, front blades, and other attachments on both the shorter framed and longer framed BXs and does not simply use different decals. I gotta believe that those 203 and 243 decals reference more than just the bucket. Tell you what, we could measure them from two reference points and see if the arms are the same length, using a flexible tape and carefully measuring, we should be able to discern a difference quickly enough.

To me this sounds like an assembly error at the dealership that someone just doesn't care/ didn't care to undo?
+1 on the warranty concern.

 

[Ductape]

I'd crack open a beer and sit back and stare at the upgraded loader I got at no extra charge (with a big grin on my face). If the dealer installed it, I'd certainly expect him to honor the warranty if there were any problem.

Congrats on your new tractor ! That was a long wait. :thumbsup:

 

[alchemysa]

The spec to be most concerned about is the extra lifting capacity and the extra weight of the bigger loader (presumably its built heavier than the LA203). More weight puts extra strain on the tractor case, the wheels, tyres, bearings, axles, steering and all those other expensive bits up front. You're not just talking about a potential broken fender here. If your tractor needs a really expensive repair under warranty its a whole different ballgame.

The brochure clearly suggests the LA203 is the standard loader for your tractor. So get it in writing that Kubota (not just your dealer) will stand by the warranty.

 

[poldies4]

Thank you all for the info...I emailed Kubota directly, and really appreciate the response. I'll update when I hear from Kubota. The tractor does seem a little front heavy...the dealer loaded the tires, but said that any additional ballast wasn't necesary? Maybe I just need to get used to it? Weathers been bad and i've only been able to get the hour meter to 1.2 hrs. Thanks again.

 

[bp fick]

Good for you. It isn't your dealer who will ultimately have to stand behind it, but Kubota through a district rep or some such who would make the warranty call. Good for you to go directly to Kubota. That, my friend, is wisdom. It will all turn out for the good. BTW, gonna love that tractor.

 

[TripleR]

Thank you all for the info...I emailed Kubota directly, and really appreciate the response. I'll update when I hear from Kubota. The tractor does seem a little front heavy...the dealer loaded the tires, but said that any additional ballast wasn't necesary? Maybe I just need to get used to it? Weathers been bad and i've only been able to get the hour meter to 1.2 hrs. Thanks again.

You will definitely need additional ballast to safely get the full benefit of your tractor/loader combination. I use a box blade, but you can make one out of a barrel, buy a ballast box or get something else.

 

[CHDinCT]

Two things, first, you need ballast on the rear 3PH. Loaded tires help keep the rear on the ground, but they don't help in getting weight off of the front axle when lifting a large load. With the higher capacity loader, rear ballast is even more important. Second, the increased capacity of the 243 loader will only create more risk when you're using it to max capacity. I don't know what you plan to use your FEL for, but 90% of the time, I'm no where's near max lift on my FEL. So, I don't see it as a major risk to have the better loader, in fact just the opposite warranty issues aside.

What does you're invoice show for the loader model? If it lists the 243, you have proof your dealer sold you the one that's on your tractor, so you should be covered. If on the other hand, it states LA203, but he delivered an LA243, then it's your word against his if push comes to shove.

 

[poldies4]

I got my answer. The Kubota rep called today and confirmed that the loader would be fully warrantied with the tractor. Apparantly the BX series carry the same frame/subframe the only difference is the tires and the HP. He did recommend additional ballast, which I do plan to add. His feeling was that the dealer was upgrading my loader as a convenience to not delay delivery, and him not having to order a 203. He added that the loader arms are the same, the difference is in the cylinders and the bucket. I guess i'll take the upgrade, fully warrantied and enjoy it. Thanks for all your responses and info. It was very helpful for a new tractor owner.

 

[Usta]

Good for you. Relax, Ride and Enjoy.
If you do any heavy lifting, you will want rear ballast. This last summer, I moved a lot of dirt with the loader with a box blade on back. After I thought I was done with the loader work, I removed the box blade. A few days later I desided to move and dump a large rock over a steep bank. WOW, what an eye opener! It was actually scary with a heavy load without the rear ballast.

 

[kevinj]

I had the BX rears loaded plus about 250# on the 3ph and sometimes that was not enough weight. You only get about 100# of weight by filling those small tires.

If the loader will lift 400# you need about that or better on the rear end.

 

[bp fick]

What a wonderful deal!!! Nice gift. Very nice.

 

[Ductape]

Now crack open that beer and sit back looking at your upgraded loader (at no additional charge). In the grand scheme of things, its not much, but since we don't often get something for nothing....... you gotta relish in it ! :licking:

Enjoy your new tractor! :thumbsup: