Tractor Sizing How Much Can A Sub Compact Tractor lift?

[paulfun9]

There's a good case to be made that if you're constantly taxing the limits of your equipment, moving up to larger equipment will be better in the long run vs continuing to overwork an undersized machine.

Always figured a SCUT was meant to lift a bucketful of material (soil, rock, gravel, etc.), with the FEL; heavier loads were inherently an invitation to a tip-over with such a narrow tractor.

Considering this thread will likely be read by many first-time SCUT buyers, just wanted to add that perspective. My opinion only.

Great observation!

My theory is simple If the manufacture says 600LBS with proper recommended ballast then to operate safely you should be staying within the limits. If your needs are for 900LBS than you should be considering a machine rated for more than 900LBS so that you can stay within the recommended safety ratings of the machine. I hear people all the time talking about seat belts, safety switches and such as being high on their priority list but then they go off and knowingly overload their machine and come back and tell us that its a good argument to go small when in fact its not. This is especially true for first time owners operators who will almost inevitably make mistakes.

 

[CDennyRun]

Great observation!

My theory is simple If the manufacture says 600LBS with proper recommended ballast then to operate safely you should be staying within the limits. If your needs are for 900LBS than you should be considering a machine rated for more than 900LBS so that you can stay within the recommended safety ratings of the machine. I hear people all the time talking about seat belts, safety switches and such as being high on their priority list but then they go off and knowingly overload their machine and come back and tell us that its a good argument to go small when in fact its not. This is especially true for first time owners operators who will almost inevitably make mistakes.

I couldn't agree more. Lifting 900lbs with the short wheelbase, and narrow width of a scut just sounds scary to me, unless it's only a few inches off the ground. When I had a 24hp scut, 500lbs felt pretty significant. If your load is 4ft up, and your balance is thrown off with 600lbs, bad things will happen real quick, if you're not fast with the controls! Especially if you're not the type to back down hills with heavy loads..

 

[gladehound]

Glade, I'm not aware of any machine that makes maximum power at low idle/rpm. Certainly any mulch effort on lawn mowers wants high throttle . . not for movement but faster/stronger blade speed to mulch. Same for snowblowers, outboard motors, skidsteers I've used, motorcycles/cars/trucks . . and tractors.

I don't refer to travel speed . . I refer to torque range. If you raise a motor's rpm . . You raise its hp output ability. You can over rev any engine but you can under rev them too.

On a bx because it has a single pump . . the fel will move very slowly at low rpm. At high rpm the pump allows the fel to move normally but also with more force.

On my Massey I have 2 pumps so my fel speed isn't effected much at low rpm but under higher rpm I have more force/power.

As an example in my lifting test . . . At 2000 rpm I can lift 1 weight and at 2600 rpm its more and at recommended rpm level even further. When I posted my test results I used recommended rpm to not skew results above standards.

If your engine is designed for 2000 rpm as an example and you run it at 1000 rpm . . Its hard on equipment.

As others have mentioned, I wrote that my tractor could do a max lift at idle. This is because I have very little system leakage so my pump does not have to spin fast to build enough pressure under resistance to open the relief valve. I made no suggestion that max engine torque or power was at idle. But will note now that torque at 1000 RPM is very similar to the published max at 1700 RPM. There is no perceptible difference in actual operation.

My operators manual states to run the engine between 1000 and 2800 RPM. So I doubt anything in that range is abusive.

Idle at 1000 RPM is set artificially high to meet emissions and that is the lowest setting on the throttle. There is no reason a 4 cylinder 2.2L engine couldn't idle at 600 RPM other than clean emissions. 1000 RPM is a long way from lugging the engine, is well above a true idle RPM that is not dictated by emissions standards and the engine will smoothly handle full load at that RPM.

I'm curious about your two pump set up, is one pump for steering and the other for other hydraulic functions, or do you have some sort of dual pump system that feeds your loader?

 

[gladehound]

I couldn't agree more. Lifting 900lbs with the short wheelbase, and narrow width of a scut just sounds scary to me, unless it's only a few inches off the ground. When I had a 24hp scut, 500lbs felt pretty significant. If your load is 4ft up, and your balance is thrown off with 600lbs, bad things will happen real quick, if you're not fast with the controls! Especially if you're not the type to back down hills with heavy loads..

And refuse to listen to the wisdom of long time operators... :confused3:

 

[CDennyRun]

And refuse to listen to the wisdom of long time operators... :confused3:

Yes, it's the first thing you learn when driving fork. I guess if you don't understand the triangle, or care if you lose your load, it's going to have to be a learning experience:shocked:

 

[gladehound]

I couldn't agree more. Lifting 900lbs with the short wheelbase, and narrow width of a scut just sounds scary to me, unless it's only a few inches off the ground. When I had a 24hp scut, 500lbs felt pretty significant. If your load is 4ft up, and your balance is thrown off with 600lbs, bad things will happen real quick, if you're not fast with the controls! Especially if you're not the type to back down hills with heavy loads..

Today I retrieved 3 logs out of a low area with my forks. The three logs probably only totaled 600 - 800 pounds. So SCUT territory. But to retrieve them, I went nose first down a 25 degree packed road base bank at an angle such that both front wheels were on the bank and one rear wheel was on the bank. The other was on a paved driveway at the top of the bank.

There are 2 safety considerations here:

1. The heavy end should always point uphill. I had 2000 pounds of ballast on the back. So if you are going to go down hill frontwards, make sure you have more weight on the rear than the front. If you have more weight on the front - the front should point up hill. heavy end always goes uphill.

2. The situation can dictate a much lower safe "max" lift than the actual max lift. Even though the weight I was lifting was in SCUT territory, the steepness of the bank and the angle of approach made this a lift that nobody in their right mind would attempt with a SCUT because it is too great a proportion of the machines weight to lift at that angle. However, with the bigger tractor and heavy rear ballast, it was rock solid. So rock solid that I had no need for 4 wheel drive.

Sometimes a little margin is nice.

 

[94BULLITT]

Here is a test that BCP did with his BX2360.


http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-owning-operating/311309-bx-weight-lifting-test.html

 

[TomSeller]

Oil thread = Gas/Diesel Tread = How much can a SCUT lift Tread.

Carry on.... Good dialog.

 

[CDennyRun]

Today I retrieved 3 logs out of a low area with my forks. The three logs probably only totaled 600 - 800 pounds. So SCUT territory. But to retrieve them, I went nose first down a 25 degree packed road base bank at an angle such that both front wheels were on the bank and one rear wheel was on the bank. The other was on a paved driveway at the top of the bank.

There are 2 safety considerations here:

1. The heavy end should always point uphill. I had 2000 pounds of ballast on the back. So if you are going to go down hill frontwards, make sure you have more weight on the rear than the front. If you have more weight on the front - the front should point up hill. heavy end always goes uphill.

2. The situation can dictate a much lower safe "max" lift than the actual max lift. Even though the weight I was lifting was in SCUT territory, the steepness of the bank and the angle of approach made this a lift that nobody in their right mind would attempt with a SCUT because it is too great a proportion of the machines weight to lift at that angle. However, with the bigger tractor and heavy rear ballast, it was rock solid. So rock solid that I had no need for 4 wheel drive.

Sometimes a little margin is nice.

Correct! Key words being that the heavy end always points uphill. That's a great point with the ballast factor, as well as max load variations depending on grade. Terrain can play a huge factor as well.

 

[check]

Greetings Check,

Spot on. Investing in a scut is investing into a growth pattern for many that have outgrown expensive lawn tractors and wheelbarrows and renting equipment frequently. I can use it on multiple properties also, both in city and urban. And trailering is realistic.

I agree. And fortunately, my second property is only about 700 yards down the road, so I can just drive there, even in the winter. (Important, since I use the snowblower on both properties.)