Loader Dl95 loader capacity cuft?

[Snobdds]

I read your post the first time so you don't need to point it out again. I just don't care about your point, TBH. I never said anything about speed. Nor did I ever say anything about wanting to lift more than 1,000 pounds so your suggestion to "get a bigger tractor" is the dumbest thing I've heard in awhile. Why the **** would anyone spend another $14k or more on a slightly bigger compact tractor (or even $5k on a 20+ yr old tractor with loader, or tractor plus aftermarket loader) when this free adjustment can get the extra lift capacity needed to do what I want? Your suggestion to trade this tractor for a newer, bigger one, move my lights, redo all the financing and all the other BS, or drop a few thousand dollars instead of making a free adjustment is, quite frankly, stupid.

Then again, by your logic I should probably just go buy a bigger house instead of adding another room onto it for a workshop. Afterall, the current house doesn't meet my needs.



hmmmmm......

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...-ssqa-conversion-post4727302.html#post4727302

So is it the same axle or not?

Ready...Fire...Aim. That's the mentality here. It's your tractor, but understand physics too. You change one thing, it changes other variables too. Simple as that.

You seem confused on the axle part. The GC 1700 series came with the DL100 early in the production cycle and then switched to the DL95, however as long as it's the GC1700 series...it has the bigger axle. If you have the GC 2600 series, it has the smaller front axle regardless of front loader numbering.

 

[piercedtiger]

Ready...Fire...Aim. That's the mentality here. It's your tractor, but understand physics too. You change one thing, it changes other variables too. Simple as that.

You seem confused on the axle part. The GC 1700 series came with the DL100 early in the production cycle and then switched to the DL95, however as long as it's the GC1700 series...it has the bigger axle. If you have the GC 2600 series, it has the smaller front axle regardless of front loader numbering.

Thanks for clarifying the axle part.

Allow me to clarify my pressure issue. My particular tractor was 120PSI below factory. So I needed to perform a routine maintenance procedure just to bring it back to factory specs, regardless of pushing it a bit further. Your comment to "get a bigger tractor" sounds like someone telling me to buy a new truck instead of doing a tuneup to reclaim lost horsepower on one I already own. As such, it sounded completely ridiculous. Perhaps that's not how you intended it? Personally, I'm not one of those people that goes out to buy something new when an existing item can do what I need with minor modification. In my experience on these forums people that do that tend to have more money than brains and I can't say I've ever had the opportunity to experience that.

Again, I'm not concerned with the hydraulic speed as long as it can lift a little more weight. Faster hydraulics will not make the jobs I do any faster than a larger bucket. Repeatedly driving back and forth with smaller amounts takes up far more of my time than lift/curl speed. So no offense, but I don't care if they're a bit slower. And if I can hang a larger weight off the back to unload the front axle and be ok, then this is a moot point.

 

[Snobdds]

The suggestion to get a bigger tractor if your main need for this machine is loader capacity is sound thinking, I don't see how you could argue against it? You're wanting to exceed the loader, hydraulic, and front axle capacity on the tractor...

Are your familiar with duty cycle? It's an engineering methodology that says double the machine capacity and work it 1/2 as hard to get the maximum service life. Your doing the opposite, your taking the extremes and adding 15% to that...at the very minimum the machine will have a service life of 85% of average. It wasn't a dig at you to suggest the GC2600 is maybe a little small for your needs if, by only supercharging it up, fits your needs.

 

[Jonohio]

I think this topic has been sufficiently debated. I vote for dropping the argument and letting each party go on their way regarding this hot button topic.

To each their own and after all our tractors are "OUR" tractors - everyone is free to do what they will and reap whatever benefits or risks you may discover. After all I am the OP :drink: