How much ballast is typically needed for a MX5800?

[rbtjr]

We have a L3800 with which we use a Titan ballast box. We have this ballast box up to about 750# including its weight, sand and 5 suitcase weights we put on top of the sand. We have a MX5800 on order. The MX will have a LA1065 FEL. The heaviest attachment we will have on the FEL is a 4n1 bucket at 640#. The rear tires will be loaded, which will add about 1050#. We can get the Titan box up to about 900# with some scrap iron and concrete. Or, we could consider something like the Kubota ballast box that when filled would weigh 1500#. I have read some posts that indicate that significant ballast is frequently needed for the MX tractors. I know that the ballast needed depends on what you are doing with the tractor, but do you MX owners have any advice about whether a 900# box would usually work well or if we would usually need more like the 1500# box? Thanks in advance for your advice.

 

[LD1]

The 900# box along with loaded tires should keep the rears on the ground...But you ain't doing your front axle any favors. Because you are relying on that tire ballast.

900# by itself on the 3ph is not enough. So therefore, the tire ballast allows you to load the from axle that much more.

I am considering your 900# ballast box, being in close, about as effective as my 700# rear blade which is a bit further back. I would not want to use that combo, for extended periods of hard and heavy FEL lifting. And moving bucket loads of dirt isn't what I'd consider heavy lifting either....Just to be clear.

Heavy lifting is maxing out...Or close to. Like digging at stumps, lifting heavy logs, moving heavy pallets with forks, etc.

I find the 1600# bushhog....Which has its weight center pretty far back....Is a great counterweight

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

900# with rears loaded with actually heavy fluid (not windshield wiper fluid) will cover you.

That's essentially what I have (same loader/capacity/frame/etc) and I frequently use the loader to max capacity.

 

[s219]

Do the math!

If:

L1 is the distance from center of front bucket (or forks, etc) to front axle

L2 is the distance from the front axle to the center of the ballast box

B is the amount of ballast

Then the ballast B will offset this amount of weight W in the front bucket (or forks, etc):

W = B * L2 / L1

Units don't matter as long as you're consistent. This will tell you how much weight a given amount of ballast will counteract -or- you can use the formula to decide how much ballast is needed for an expected typical weight W. You can run the same calculations for the rear tire ballast, but I personally consider that to be there to offset the basic loader weight and don't count it as "cargo" ballast. Just depends on how you want to book-keep things.

 

[Turbys_1700]

I have a Workmaster 50 with loaded rears. Similar in size to your tractor. With loaded rears I am over 6K. With an implement on the back like my Brown 472 at 1200# I am fine. I think that loaded rears with your ballast choice of 750# you should be fine. Now is the time to go ahead a get you a nice med duty brush hog to use as a counterweight. That is a good way to sell it to the lady of the house.

 

[LD1]

With my 700# 7' rear blade and loaded R1 tires with WW fluid, I can lift the back tires if I am picking something that is too heavy....or trying to pry out a log/root/stump or other immovable object.

That means I am getting the full force of whatever force the loader can exert before the back tires come up + the full weight of the tractor + the full weight of the ballast in the tires + the 700# blade on the back......ALL on the front axle.

While Not having any weight box on the back actually loads the front axle LESS than having weight back there, but not having enough of it.

R1 vs R4 as well as liquid of choice make a different in weights. R4's hold more, Beet juice is heavier than WW fluid. I think I got something like 48 gallons of WW fluid in my R1's. So I've only got ~750-800# in the tires. But thats for traction when plowing, and stability. SHOULDNT be relied on for countering the front loader.

Again, I am talking about doing heavy work though. Hard digging, logging, prying on stumps, etc. If you are just moving loose dirt, a bucket load of that is ~50% of what the loader can actually lift. Or if you are lifting ~800# implements off a trailer, moving around a bucket load of firewood, pushing brush piles, etc......all I would consider lighter work that dont involve lifting near max capacity. In which case, 750# should be fine.

 

[rbtjr]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I think I will get my existing box up to 900# and see how it works.

And yes, s219, I am aware of the approach you suggest. I was looking for feedback based on experience, but I appreciate your approach and I use it frequently.

Thanks again to all.

 

[aarolar]

I have about 1500lbs on the back of my MX4800 and I've not once wished for less thus far. I've hit the pressure relief several times and never seen the rear tires lift but I did have one instance where I had very little traction because of the lack of weight on the rear tires. This is with loaded rears as well, my advice is to go heavier than 900lbs that would be marginal.

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

Also, tangentially, if max capacity is important to you, be sure your pressure relief is at spec. Mine is a little above.

You or the dealer can do this.

 

[TripleR]

Pretty much what everyone else said, I use a similar size tractor except it has a cab and use 1100 pound implement on the 3 PH and have loaded tires in addition to steel wheel weights. The tractor did OK without the wheel weights, but help in my hills and I needed the traction when the implement is being pulled. I seldom max my FEL out, so I don't need the added ballast on my 3PH, but if I did, I'd go heavier. You'll know more once you use your tractor a while.

I don't disagree with those whose caution added wear on the front components, but we have a couple with over thirty years of hard FEL use and no failures, so I don't get too excited when someone tells me I need more/less of anything, but that's just me.

 

[Luke'sScreenName]

Also, tangentially, if max capacity is important to

 

[rbtjr]

Turbys_1700, I plan on replacing our 5' brush hog with a 6' model that will weigh about 850#or so. It will make good ballast with a low center of gravity. aarolar, it looks like you have the Kubota 1500# ballast box I will consider. Correct? You like it? Sand in it or something else? LukesScreenName, I will check the psi before the MX leaves the dealer. I checked our L3800 and it was at the max. I was hoping to increase the psi to increase the FEL capacity but that didn't work, which led in a roundabout way to the decision to get the MX.

Thanks again to everyone for the feedback.

 

[aarolar]

No sir I built it myself, it's full of concrete.

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=373072

I desperately want some wheel weights like tripleR has even though I don't feel under weight with loaded tires and the ballast I certainly wouldn't mind even more weight when I get the chance.

 

[rbtjr]

Wow, great job on the box, aarolar. Obviously, you can weld and work with sheet metal. I have never welded a single thing but I am thinking of buying a beginner's welder and learning how. I had a dedicated 220v outlet installed in our shed just for that purpose. If you have time and are willing, send me a PM and give me some suggestions for a starter welder. Thanks much.

 

[sdef]

lots of 3PH weight ideas on TBN. My 710# ROBB is not enough weight on the back of my 7200# tractor with filled tires and I decided to build a weight box using a 15 cu.' job site tool storage box on a 3PH fork set a friend donated for the project. I am adding a 36" long 2" trailer receiver tube through the box which will tie to the fork lower cross bar. Will also add cross pieces to the 2" tube for added resistance once the concrete is actually poured. I am going to start with adding 750# of dry concrete bags which should provide ~ 1050# of weight. This will allow me to test usage with a heavy FEL and without before mixing the concrete. Will try and strike a balance where I can leave the weight box installed even with light FEL loads without taking too much weight off the front axle causing handling problems. I will still have plenty of room to add large rocks as needed for temporary max FEL capacity.

Starter welder? I am NOT a welder, but can do whatever I need for my usage. Had a 110v unit years ago and would recommend you stay away from that. I purchased a Miller 211 MVP and it makes me look like a better welder than I am when I take my time and do my part. Not inexpensive, but a fine piece of equipment. I use mine in automatic mode and let the machine chose the settings.

I cut the forks with a new Eastwood 60 amp plasma cutter. I almost got a Lincoln on sale for $1500 with rebate from Lincoln and am glad I went with the $650 on sale Eastwood. Not much experience with it but have cut 1" bale spear with it, but it was not pretty and took awhile to do so. On lighter material it does a fine job. But I am still learning how to run it and have more dross (slag) than I like. Will get more experience cutting the 2" receiver tube and support parts. If my uses were not just intermittent I would have purchased the Lincoln instead.

Work in progress and hope to test in a week:

 

[rbtjr]

Thanks for the info, sdef. I will look into your recommendations, and I will check back to see how your project turns out.

 

[s219]

Wow, great job on the box, aarolar. Obviously, you can weld and work with sheet metal. I have never welded a single thing but I am thinking of buying a beginner's welder and learning how. I had a dedicated 220v outlet installed in our shed just for that purpose. If you have time and are willing, send me a PM and give me some suggestions for a starter welder. Thanks much.

What type of stuff do you plan to weld? If no prior experience, I'd probably say stick or wire-feed using flux-core wire. I had only stick-welded and not for 20+ years, and when I got back into it I got a wire-feed machine and used flux-core wire. In no time I was making great welds (although more complex joints or orientations are still a challenge).

I wouldn't be afraid of the 110V units as long as you buy good quality and are OK with welding 1/4" material or thinner. They are great starter machines for under $500 new. Don't waste time/money on welders that are $300 or cheaper. Some people have had luck with them, but they are just not consistent/reliable from what I have seen.

 

[GManBart]

If you want to beat the heck out of the front end, a 900lb ballast box should be just fine. If you want to max the loader and not beat up the front end, something like 1,500lbs is more like it.

I built a 1,400lb ballast box (weighed) for my LS which has a similar loader capacity to the MX line and it was like night and day. Loaded tires keep the rear wheels on the ground, but only allow you to abuse the front axle. You won't know it for a while, but you'll pay for it in the end.

 

[4570Man]

With my 700# 7' rear blade and loaded R1 tires with WW fluid, I can lift the back tires if I am picking something that is too heavy....or trying to pry out a log/root/stump or other immovable object. That means I am getting the full force of whatever force the loader can exert before the back tires come up + the full weight of the tractor + the full weight of the ballast in the tires + the 700# blade on the back......ALL on the front axle. While Not having any weight box on the back actually loads the front axle LESS than having weight back there, but not having enough of it. R1 vs R4 as well as liquid of choice make a different in weights. R4's hold more, Beet juice is heavier than WW fluid. I think I got something like 48 gallons of WW fluid in my R1's. So I've only got ~750-800# in the tires. But thats for traction when plowing, and stability. SHOULDNT be relied on for countering the front loader. Again, I am talking about doing heavy work though. Hard digging, logging, prying on stumps, etc. If you are just moving loose dirt, a bucket load of that is ~50% of what the loader can actually lift. Or if you are lifting ~800# implements off a trailer, moving around a bucket load of firewood, pushing brush piles, etc......all I would consider lighter work that dont involve lifting near max capacity. In which case, 750# should be fine.

How much difference would your bush hog make to the load on the front axel? The bush hog might allow for heavier loading of the front axel because the hydraulics weren't maxed out before. Even if you were lifting the exact same load on the FEL you haven't changed the front axel weight by more than a few hundred pounds. Proportionality that's pretty minor. The absolute best thing you could do for you front axel would be taking it out of 4wd. It's possible to load the front axel far heavier ( assuming there's adequate ballast in place ) by backing up while the loader is unmovable. Not to mention all of the binding that occurs.

 

[LD1]

Loaded tires AND the 700# blade would just barley lift the rears. I could get to 2400 psi on the hydraulics the the rears would lift. My system is only 2500psi. So I'd say 800# would max out the loader, and just barley leave the rears on the ground. At that point....That is the most the front axle can see. All the weight from the tire ballast + tractor weight + blade weight + loader and load.

The bushhog is 1600+, and hangs farther back than the blade. So I'd day the difference the front axle is seeing is significant. Also noted by the non-scientific visual reference of front tire squat