For those of you who think the L3400 has a weak loader!!

[Bluegill2]

I would dearly love to see your theory of relieving weight off front axle by adding weight behind rear axle confirmed by use of platform scales to weight frt axle load. I understand Fulcrum effect but doubt seriously that will lessen stress on frt axle.

You really are having trouble seeing this? Really?

I had to rebuild the front axle on our old L3750 from years of using FEL with no weight on the 3 pt. Take a look in your manual.

 

[Tx Jim]

kOua
I reread the post I replied to and I previously was thinking LD1 was stating that the frt axle on a tractor with a FEL got lighter when adding a counterbalance to the rear of tractor, after all the title to this thread is " Re: For those of you who think the L3400 has a weak loader!!". SORRY

 

[Tx Jim]

You really are having trouble seeing this? Really?

I had to rebuild the front axle on our old L3750 from years of using FEL with no weight on the 3 pt. Take a look in your manual.

Yes I have a problem seeing less weight exerted on a tractor with a FEL by adding counterbalance. Which manual would you like for me to read? Yes I see better stability from counterbalance but not less strain/wear on ft axle. A lot of things influence wear including "grease worms"

PS: I read my M7040 operators manual under the section titled "ballasting" and fail to see any reference to what you stated.

 

[k0ua]

Yes I have a problem seeing less weight exerted on a tractor with a FEL by adding counterbalance. Which manual would you like for me to read? Yes I see better stability from counterbalance but not less strain/wear on ft axle.

Ok lets try again...lets put 1000 lbs in the loader bucket. Now lets put 5000 lbs on the 3pt Hitch.. Ok.. what happens to the L3400? The tractor rotates around the rear axle. the 5000lb load goes to the ground and the front wheels come UP off of the ground and the 1000 lbs in the bucket goes up in the air from the tractor doing a wheelie... There front axle is carrying no wieght as it is dangling from the axle pivot bolt. The front tires have no weight on them as they are just hanging from the axle. OK so far.. Now lets remove 1000 lbs from the 3pt. and then another 1000.. at some point the front tires start to contact the ground, and lets remove another 1000.. now we are down to 2000 lbs on the 3pt. and the front tires are starting to carry some weight.. the axle components are carrying some weight too.. now lets remove another 1000 off of the 3pt... down to 1000 on the rear now.. The front tires and axle are carrying a lot of weight now.... now lets add 4000 lbs to the 3pt... total 5000 lbs back on the 3pt... whoops. the front of the tractor is way the he!! in the air again. No weight on the front axle, no weight on the front tires.... do you see how it is a dynamic process?

James K0UA

 

[Bluegill2]

Yes I have a problem seeing less weight exerted on a tractor with a FEL by adding counterbalance. Which manual would you like for me to read? Yes I see better stability from counterbalance but not less strain/wear on ft axle. A lot of things influence wear including "grease worms"

PS: I read my M7040 operators manual under the section titled "ballasting" and fail to see any reference to what you stated.

My rig came with a separate manual for the FEL, that's were I saw reference to this.

That would be Less weigh exerted on the Front axle...

KOua explained it well, but I'll see if I can add to his. With a mower on back lifted in the air, start adding weight to it, as the weight starts pushing the mower down, it starts lifting the front up. Enough weight added and the front tires are off the ground.

This is the reason you see weight on the front of ag tractors that have no FEL. Other wise with a heavy implement they can not steer the thing.

Same can happen with too much weight in the loader and no rear ballast on the 3 pt. It can left the rear tires off the ground. Too much of this and you will kill the front axle components!

It's like a see-saw, you'll either pivot on the front, or rear axle. Best to pivot on the rear (that is one reason it is built much stronger than the front). But better yet to have balance or near equal weight front and rear, with just a bit more rear than front.

 

[murphy1244]

I think he's talking about total weight.

 

[Bluegill2]

I think he's talking about total weight.

Maybe... Except for this;

Quote Originally Posted by Tx Jim
I would dearly love to see your theory of relieving weight off front axle by adding weight behind rear axle confirmed by use of platform scales to weight frt axle load. I understand Fulcrum effect but doubt seriously that will lessen stress on frt axle.

 

[repete]

I have got to log off for a while. My brain is seriously overheating here...

 

[Tx Jim]

k0ua
I see this: how are you planning on picking up 5000# on a tractor(L3400) that will only supposedly pick up 1985#s even with end of the 3 pt draft links? No one is going to have counterbalance weights to "your extremes". Here's what I'll do Tuesday, I'll take my M7040 with FEL to a certified scale. I'll weight frt axle with a rd bale on FEL no counterbalance weight then weight frt axle with bale of hay on frt & rear and report back. Well see how much difference in the ACTUAL WEIGHTS

.I believe in correct information on a discussion forum

 

[Tx Jim]

I think he's talking about total weight.

Actually I'm referring to whether or not counterbalance on the rear of the tractor will """"significantly relieve the weight and wear from the frt axle"""" on a tractor equipped with a frt end loader with say 1000"s on the loader.