Tires Filled front tires...

[mrcaptainbob]

Heard it's not a good idea to fill the fronts. Why might that be? I would think it would help the tires...

 

[woodchuckie]

Most fronts are so small (not much weight added) compared to the rear that it's not worth the trouble to me.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Heard it's not a good idea to fill the fronts. Why might that be? I would think it would help the tires...

You'll hear from some sources that it's not good to fill REAR tires, but that's only true in some isolated instances. Same applies to fronts.

First the advantages. Weight is weight. But location is location like the old real estate addage. Weight down low is better as far as center of gravity. Hanging cast weights on a front rack gets the job done, maybe even with some advantages of it's own. (Farther forward than front axle. leverage advantage) But placing that weight in the tires keeps the weight low, helping stabilize the tractor without significantly altering center of gravity. Smaller tires don't hold all that much, but you can add 30lbs, 40lbs, 50lbs, even more to each wheel. In many cases, that's enough to do the trick. Fluid filled fronts add that weight without adding any "dimentional" changes to the tractor. (no cast weights sticking out from the tractor) Many older tractors were even available with cast weights that fit inside the dish of the front wheels for this very reason. Price cast weights and associated mounting hardware. Price fluid in tires. Advantage fluid.

DISadvantages. Well, there's the age-old issue of what to put in them. (ca/cl/rim gaurd/windshield washer fluid/anti-freeze/ect) Then there's the corrosion issue. (see previous sentence) It's NEVER fun to deal with a flat tire when there's fluid inside. Fronts flatten easier than rears from my experience. There is some extra loading on wheel bearings/steering components from having a heavier wheel assembly bouncing around at the end of the axle. (MORE of an issue with cast weights hanging as "sprung weight")

All in all, in that "perfect world" we wouldn't need extra weight on the front of our tractors. But this ol' world isn't nearly perfect. Any way you go about adding weight has its liabilities. Fluid included. If you need weight and can live with the disadvantages as compared to the disadvantages of cast weights, it's not all that bad of a solution to the problem.

But, as eluded to at the beginning of my reply, it's a case by case situation.

 

[BTDT]

You didn't say filled with what, so I'll add that if they are foam filled, you won't have flats.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

You didn't say filled with what, so I'll add that if they are foam filled, you won't have flats.

I didn't think of THAT "filled".

Positive; No more flats.

Negative; Ride of the proverbial "log wagon", Loads of fun when it's time to change a worn out tire.

 

[N80]

The manual for my Kubota L4400 4wd says specifically not to fill the fronts with fluid. They don't give an explanation. To me, it seems like fluid in the fronts would be a good thing. Maybe they are worried about the bearings, etc.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

The manual for my Kubota L4400 4wd says specifically not to fill the fronts with fluid. They don't give an explanation. To me, it seems like fluid in the fronts would be a good thing. Maybe they are worried about the bearings, etc.

You'll get an explaination from some that fluid in front wheels (or rear for that matter) is "unsprung weight" and doesn't stress bearings, axles, steering components, ect. But look at it from a simple logic standpoint. Which would put more strain on a bearing? A 75lb wheel/tire assembly bouncing around? OR, a 125lb wheel assembly?

I'm sure with the use of common platforms on a lot of todays tractors, there's a model at the bottom end of the size chart that is more than adaquate in component strenght and the heaviest/biggest models that could very well be marginal in stregnth. That added weight translates to more traction. With a loader carrying a full load AND that fluid weight, I'd bet there are instances where there's just TOO MUCH traction available on the front end. That might just make the engineers in the warranty dept. a little nervous.

 

[SFish]

If you use your tractor once a week only to mow it will take a long time to wear out. If you use it every day for 8 hours dragging heavy implements and the loader full, it will wear out quicker. Within these extremes fluid in the tires is a very small wear factor.

I load the front tires. It gives a little traction increase and helps keep the front down with something heavy on the back, but the main reason is to keep the front tires from rolling sideways. Here is how I learned this-- On one smaller CUT I own I have R1 tires and a loader. One time with the front tire pressure fairly high, a heavy bucket full of dirt (low to the ground), and a sharp turn on a side hill (not real steep), I had the downhill side front tire role sideways on the rim and break the bead so the air whoshed out and it collapsed. It was a little scary for the downhill side to drop, especially when I was not doing anything unusual or abusing the rig. Because water is not very compressible, filling some proportion of the tire (never all) with water reduces how much the tire will distort under load. This practice reduced squishy movement under load and extended tire life for me and I now do this on my larger tractor with R4s as well.

Steve

 

[SPYDERLK]

Quote Farmwithjunk: You'll get an explaination from some that fluid in front wheels (or rear for that matter) is "unsprung weight" and doesn't stress bearings, axles, steering components, ect. But look at it from a simple logic standpoint. Which would put more strain on a bearing? A 75lb wheel/tire assembly bouncing around? OR, a 125lb wheel assembly?

Actually, more strain on the bearings from that 50# added to the tractor front than to the wheels. The tractor suspension is ridgid so there really is no sprung/unsprung distinction. In reality the tires are all the suspension you have. When you fill them you lose some of this -a negative- but offset somewhat by the + of not carrying all your traction weight on the bearing. Filled tires would be great for loader work since the tires will be less compressible, but it will be necessary to take it easier on bumps with a buckload to reduce the higher impulse loads on the bearings.
larry

 

[Harvey7]

You didn't say filled with what, so I'll add that if they are foam filled, you won't have flats.

How much weight do foam filled tires add ? I would think little or nothing.

 

[BTDT]

Harvey7, here is an old post talking about the same thing,

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/owning-operating/77578-exactly-what-foam-foam-filled.html

Happy reading.

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Quote Farmwithjunk: You'll get an explaination from some that fluid in front wheels (or rear for that matter) is "unsprung weight" and doesn't stress bearings, axles, steering components, ect. But look at it from a simple logic standpoint. Which would put more strain on a bearing? A 75lb wheel/tire assembly bouncing around? OR, a 125lb wheel assembly?

Actually, more strain on the bearings from that 50# added to the tractor front than to the wheels. The tractor suspension is ridgid so there really is no sprung/unsprung distinction. In reality the tires are all the suspension you have. When you fill them you lose some of this -a negative- but offset somewhat by the + of not carrying all your traction weight on the bearing. Filled tires would be great for loader work since the tires will be less compressible, but it will be necessary to take it easier on bumps with a buckload to reduce the higher impulse loads on the bearings.
larry

I agree, but my point was, some people will tell you that fluid filled tires add NO stress to wheel bearings and such. That simply is not true.

 

[SPYDERLK]

I agree, but my point was, some people will tell you that fluid filled tires add NO stress to wheel bearings and such. That simply is not true.

Yes, I would quibble with the NO stress statement too.
larry

 

[MtnViewRanch]

Good, bad or otherwise I do not know. What I do know is that I tried the cast iron route 1st and yes it did help (installed 4 sets of rear wheel weights for a total of about 600lbs) but it was not enough. Then added about 1500lbs in fluid to the front & rear tires. Now this made a huge difference and I can now take full advantage of the power that is available to me. The tractor is much more stable and to me it even rides better.

These are just my experiences, yours may vary.

 

[daTeacha]

I've been around the site for a little while. I haven't even visited some of the forums, much less read all the posts. Still, I think I've read quite a few.

I've never encountered any reference to sprung or unsprung weight here prior to this. The term arises from the automotive world where reducing the amount of unsprung weight (actually mass would the concern, I think) is a much sought after ideal to improve the handling characteristics of the vehicle. I never thought of it with regard to tractors since the axles are rigidly attached to the vehicle and any suspension action comes from the tires flexing.

 

[Taiser]

I'm getting my fronts filled with foam on my B7800. This is not styrofoam here, this stuff is HEAVY. Once cured it's basically a soft rubber. It will flex and does not appreciately make the ride rougher. My cost is going to be $110.00 per tire and it adds 55 lbs to each tire, like I said it's not styrofoam .

You'll lose the tractor for 48 hours (that's how long this stuff takes to cure). The front end loader is suppose to support 1000+ lbs, so I doubt 50 lbs or so to the tires are going to hurt anything. When it's time to remove and replace the tire (probably not in my lifetime for my machine anyways, minimal useage and indoor storage) then the tire is simply cut off the rim. The foam comes right out by cutting on one side and just pulling it off.

I've already had two front flat tires so enough is enough for me. The back tires would be $$$$$ to do as this stuff is sold by the pound, so I'm not going to bother to do them anytime soon and as an earlier poster stated, front tires go flat more often.

 

[3RRL]

I too have my fronts filled. I do a fair amount of fel work and having the fronts filled has come in handy not squishing down like they used to. I have also noticed significant gain in overall traction and stability. I'm not nearly as concerned about the small amount of added stress or wear to the bearings as I am with getting as much stability and traction. In my case, every little bit helps.

 

[firemanpat2910]

I filled my fronts soon after I got the tractor, makes it stay closer to the trailer when I load it. I am going to find some more weight to put up front and maybe keep the tires on the trailer ( my old, now spare, trailer is 6'6" wide the tractor is 6' not much room for error.)

 

[GaryS]

A timely thread for me. I took my loader off for the first time to cut this weekend. Using the RFM was fine but I popped a few wheelies with brush hog. I called the dealer and he said "just fill your front tires".

Is this something I can do on my own or should I take it somewhere to have them filled?

The dealer said I should have around 200# on the front of the tractor - does that seem about right?

 

[MikeD74T]

IMHO I find it hard to believe that 50 - 75 pounds of fluid in the front tires of a tractor designed to carry a loaded FEL would cause the bearings much harm, in part because the bearings aren't carrying that weight. With a heavily loader FEL without enough rear ballast the front spindles carry the entire tractor weight & the FEL load, and adding rear ballast brings the rear down to earth but removes very little weight from the front spindles / bearings. Weighted front tires may increase lateral loading on the front wheel & spindle bearings but again much less than turning with a loaded FEL. MikeD74T