Hill Climbing Primer

[sacmarata]

...and this is why it's best to use all caution and never enter a new situation thinking you "KNOW" how things will go. Seat time pays of in dividends, but only then if it's dynamic.
Case in point; when I was a kid, I pulled the tobacco setter or hay wagon in 1 low while the grown ups planted or loaded behind. I was probably 7yrs old or so the first time and remember it was a few seasons later that I actually figured out the clutch wasn't a brake. With only 1 low experience on flat ground, every time I hit the clutch the tractor would stop. Pretty simple eh? I had this whole tractoring thing figured out. Left pedal = stop. Well the first time dad asked me to take the tractor on the road, down to a neighbors farm, he assumed I had been driving it for a few years now and understood the brakes. Well, in my mind I DID understand them. It wasn't until I got to the neighbors farm and was headed down a long steep hill that I realized I was in deep doo doo. I remembered dad and other farmers sayinng something before about those two weird pedals on the right but I kept mashing on the left pedal clutch with all my might thinking why isn't this thing stopping????

Finally, one of the older kids that was close enough ran up and managed to get on and mash the two mystery pedals on the right and stop the thing, but not before I had rattled off one fender, shook all the tools out of the tool box and popped the muffler out. My 2 or 3 seasons of seat time didn't mean anything when the dynamics changed.

Long story but it does illustrate the difference between application and theory and more importantly demonstrates that All caution should be exercised when approaching a new task; whether it be pulling up hill or for me it was driving unloaded down hill.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Did you note the mis information that is presented in the plan view of the "stability baseline" associated with conventional and tricycle wheel arrangements?
The front axles on all of my tractors pivot on a single pin ;-)

Yeah, but years ago when I really looked at it, rather than this time just making sure it was the one Id seen originally.
... I never commented because it would have been a side subject with nothing to do with whatever the subject was. Also some complexity must be introduced. ie - The 4wheel is more stable as shown, but in the showing they have exaggerated the appearance of it by not noting and discussing the pivot and modifying the depiction with reasoning. A key advantage of the 4wheel setup is that the pivot is hi relative to the tri, and thus causes a little less side shift of the COM as the rear of the tractor starts a tip.
... Then of course theres the 2nd chance the stops will give if its not too far gone
larry

 

[ovrszd]

...and this is why it's best to use all caution and never enter a new situation thinking you "KNOW" how things will go. Seat time pays of in dividends, but only then if it's dynamic.
Case in point; when I was a kid, I pulled the tobacco setter or hay wagon in 1 low while the grown ups planted or loaded behind. I was probably 7yrs old or so the first time and remember it was a few seasons later that I actually figured out the clutch wasn't a brake. With only 1 low experience on flat ground, every time I hit the clutch the tractor would stop. Pretty simple eh? I had this whole tractoring thing figured out. Left pedal = stop. Well the first time dad asked me to take the tractor on the road, down to a neighbors farm, he assumed I had been driving it for a few years now and understood the brakes. Well, in my mind I DID understand them. It wasn't until I got to the neighbors farm and was headed down a long steep hill that I realized I was in deep doo doo. I remembered dad and other farmers sayinng something before about those two weird pedals on the right but I kept mashing on the left pedal clutch with all my might thinking why isn't this thing stopping????

Finally, one of the older kids that was close enough ran up and managed to get on and mash the two mystery pedals on the right and stop the thing, but not before I had rattled off one fender, shook all the tools out of the tool box and popped the muffler out. My 2 or 3 seasons of seat time didn't mean anything when the dynamics changed.

Long story but it does illustrate the difference between application and theory and more importantly demonstrates that All caution should be exercised when approaching a new task; whether it be pulling up hill or for me it was driving unloaded down hill.

Well stated. I totally agree. Mathematically something may not be possible. But practically it is. But I'm sure I'll be proven wrong concerning that statement.

 

[sacmarata]

Well stated. I totally agree. Mathematically something may not be possible. But practically it is. But I'm sure I'll be proven wrong concerning that statement.

how dare you have an opinion!!!

 

[ovrszd]

how dare you have an opinion!!!

No kidding.

 

[SPYDERLK]

how dare you have an opinion!!!

Im not sure what opinion has to do with this. Opinion is based on conjecture. Fact just is.

... Also not sure how "Long story but it does illustrate the difference between application and theory" illustrates a difference between application and theory.

larry

 

[CalG]

Im not sure what opinion has to do with this. Opinion is based on conjecture. Fact just is.

... Also not sure how "Long story but it does illustrate the difference between application and theory" illustrates a difference between application and theory.

larry

I thought about that one too.

The "theory" may be since "the kid" had been operating for a couple of years he MUST know about the brakes or how to use engine braking.

In application, he didn't.

But, experience is not a theory. It is derived from practice ;-)

 

[sacmarata]

Im not sure what opinion has to do with this. Opinion is based on conjecture. Fact just is.

... Also not sure how "Long story but it does illustrate the difference between application and theory" illustrates a difference between application and theory.

larry

This is a great illustration of the disconnect that has happened between what the OP was getting at and what has happened here...and I don't mind saying a bit that whats happened here, regardless of who is "right" or "wrong" is nothing more than a P!$$!ng match.

Opinion is not based upon conjecture. Opinion CAN be based upon conjecture, but opinion IS based upon conjecture is a straw man you just built so you could smash it to pieces with your infallible logic that "fact just is" which is a quasi ad hominem statement and support no truths you have presented.

I could use examples like this all day and illustrate the sillyness going on here to the Nth degree, but it wouldn't benefit anyone here and only foment bad blood between myself and the "offended." I don't intend to offend anyone and I come here with respect to all; I wanna make that clear.

I used a personal example to help illustrate that ones theories, i.e., the magical mystery pedals on the right aren't required to stop a tractor, *may be open to interpretation and changed by a different dynamic. How that was difficult to understand...I can't grasp.

Y'all might as well have gone ahead and started the argument about punctuated equillibrium or a steady state universe, or who was hotter on Gilligans Island; Ginger or Mary Anne (I vote Mary Anne.)

There is a veil of civility here that is becoming more and more opaque the longer the streams get. :irked:

 

[SPYDERLK]

This is a great illustration of the disconnect that has happened between what the OP was getting at and what has happened here...and I don't mind saying a bit that whats happened here, regardless of who is "right" or "wrong" is nothing more than a P!$$!ng match.

Opinion is not based upon conjecture. Opinion CAN be based upon conjecture, but opinion IS based upon conjecture is a straw man you just built so you could smash it to pieces with your infallible logic that "fact just is" which is a quasi ad hominem statement and support no truths you have presented.

I could use examples like this all day and illustrate the sillyness going on here to the Nth degree, but it wouldn't benefit anyone here and only foment bad blood between myself and the "offended." I don't intend to offend anyone and I come here with respect to all; I wanna make that clear.

I used a personal example to help illustrate that ones theories, i.e., the magical mystery pedals on the right aren't required to stop a tractor, *may be open to interpretation and changed by a different dynamic. How that was difficult to understand...I can't grasp.

Y'all might as well have gone ahead and started the argument about punctuated equillibrium or a steady state universe, or who was hotter on Gilligans Island; Ginger or Mary Anne (I vote Mary Anne.)

There is a veil of civility here that is becoming more and more opaque the longer the streams get. :irked:

A related issue to the OP task developed into a disagreement as to the effect of hitch points. I think youve called the debate between true and mostly true a "pissing match". Perhaps it is instead an unwillingness to gloss over a physical reaction to which important distinctions apply. Incomplete info is sometimes enuf - when youre lucky - but if it becomes viewed as complete sooner or later it will hamper you ... or get you in trouble.

What is it you are attacking with all your "opinion"?
larry

 

[sacmarata]

Incomplete info is sometimes enuf - when youre lucky - but if it becomes viewed as complete sooner or later it will hamper you ... or get you in trouble.

Define complete. Look at the original question then define complete in the context of all the pissing. Pretty sure there is sufficient information for anyone wanting an answer to the original question to consider it "complete enough" to make an informed and safe decision. This isn't about an unwillingness to gloss over a physical reaction to which important distinctions apply....and if it is, look at the previous 35 pages and ask how beneficial that stance has become.

 

[SPYDERLK]

Define complete. Look at the original question then define complete in the context of all the pissing. Pretty sure there is sufficient information for anyone wanting an answer to the original question to consider it "complete enough" to make an informed and safe decision. This isn't about an unwillingness to gloss over a physical reaction to which important distinctions apply....and if it is, look at the previous 35 pages and ask how beneficial that stance has become.

The original question has been dealt with in several ways. It is an evolving job and I dont think OP has settled on a method yet. He has had lots of good advice and will get more when asked for.

In the mean time there has been a dispute about the accuracy of a claim made about pull point. You see that as a problem. So do I. It is a problem to base bold conclusions on incomplete pertinent information. It can make one too cautious or not cautious enuf. All because of a ready acceptance of the quick answer or deduction that seems right. Im surprised you didnt make that connection with your example experience.

 

[ovrszd]

Larry, again I say, it must be extremely frustrating for you to deal with those of us that are obviously inadequate in our abilities to understand your position. You are truly a better person than I to continue to deal with our stupid opinions. I cannot comprehend why you continue to post on this site. I salute you.

 

[square1]

The original question has been dealt with in several ways. It is an evolving job and I dont think OP has settled on a method yet.

I jumped on the PA300 welder deal in anticipation of building a log arch for the saw logs if the bids from logging outfits / timber buyers to come in and harvest don't appeal to me. I think the smaller logs will chain to the FEL okay. Experimenting with some good sized firewood logs from another area on a lesser grade has me convinced with 4WD engaged in a low gear the Ford will pull the hill fine IF it ever dries out. As I said, time isn't an issue.

He has had lots of good advice and will get more when asked for.

This is very true and a real attractive feature of TBYN. I can tell I'm going to be hanging around here for quite a while

 

[SPYDERLK]

I jumped on the PA300 welder deal in anticipation of building a log arch for the saw logs if the bids from logging outfits / timber buyers to come in and harvest don't appeal to me. I think the smaller logs will chain to the FEL okay. Experimenting with some good sized firewood logs from another area on a lesser grade has me convinced with 4WD engaged in a low gear the Ford will pull the hill fine IF it ever dries out. As I said, time isn't an issue.

Sounds like a good plan for the saw logs. Bout the only way to keep em whole and DIY w/o a big tractor.

 

[square1]

The entrance into to low area from the top looking down on a 2nd pile of small logs. I'll start with these in small loads and gradually increase the number of logs per load to get a feel for the task.

Brought this pile out this morning chained to the FEL in one trip after making a dry run empty. Low range, 2nd gear, 2000 RPM, 4WD & diff lock engaged the whole way. This was maybe 600 -700 pounds and very close to the limit of what the tractor will haul up the hill using the FEL. Had power to spare, but the back end got pretty light. Definitely going to need that log arch for the big logs.

Bought this today



weighs between 400 & 500 pounds, didn't hook it up today but it might help some with keeping the back end down.

 

[RedNeckGeek]

This thread is a great example of why I keep coming back to TBN: I always learn something. In this case it was also quite timely: I've been pulling downed trees out of wood piles using a chain. Started off hooking up to the top of the box grader, but felt I was abusing the 3 pt. mechanism. So I went to the draw bar. I've been lucky so far with respect to wheel stands, especially as I had some pretty bad misconceptions of how the torques were working. This in spite of taking statics and dynamics almost 40 years ago. Worst one is that I could pull as hard as I wanted as long as the pull point was below the rear axle. Thanks to the explanations here, now I can envision the contact patch walking forward out from under the axle as the tractor tips up, just as long as the draw bar is above ground. So I'll be extending the draw bar and working slowly (no more backing up and ramming it forward to jerk something loose). You guys may have just saved a life!

square1: weight in back is a good thing. I stack a few lengths of steel rail on the box grader when I'm carrying heavy loads in the FEL. Learned that lesson when I had a bucket full of gravel going down a steep hill and a splined coupling let loose on the propeller shaft to the front drive. With no engine braking on the front wheels and no traction out back, I found the brakes didn't do squat. Fortunately dropping the bucket saved the day, but now I understand about weight transfer, too.

 

[RedNeckGeek]

This thread is a great example of why I keep coming back to TBN: I always learn something. In this case it was also quite timely: I've been pulling downed trees out of wood piles using a chain. Started off hooking up to the top of the box grader, but felt I was abusing the 3 pt. mechanism. So I went to the draw bar. I've been lucky so far with respect to wheel stands, especially as I had some pretty bad misconceptions of how the torques were working. This in spite of taking statics and dynamics almost 40 years ago. Worst one is that I could pull as hard as I wanted as long as the pull point was below the rear axle. Thanks to the explanations here, now I can envision the contact patch walking forward out from under the axle as the tractor tips up, just as long as the draw bar is above ground. So I'll be extending the draw bar and working slowly (no more backing up and ramming it forward to jerk something loose). You guys may have just saved a life!

square1: weight in back is a good thing. I stack a few lengths of steel rail on the box grader when I'm carrying heavy loads in the FEL. Learned that lesson when I had a bucket full of gravel going down a steep hill and a splined coupling let loose on the propeller shaft to the front drive. With no engine braking on the front wheels and no traction out back, I found the brakes didn't do squat. Fortunately dropping the bucket saved the day, but now I understand about weight transfer, too.

 

[CalG]

sj

you can "ram forward" against the load if you like, just press the clutch as your momentum carries you!

You must brace against something, brace against the part that does the most benefit! ;-)

Hills, loads and traction are always tricky. I slid the Fordson about 20 feet down the path to the lower level of the barn this afternoon. With the snow blade out front, It needs ballast out back!

Ill be adding that this summer ;-)