Tractor Sizing HP and loader sizing question

[LD1]

A true 36" diameter hardwood log thats green....figure about 350-400 pounds per foot of length.

Get over 5000# pretty quick. A 16' log of that would be 6000ish pounds.

 

[Farmer495]

As far as transmission, aside from bidirectional NH's and 1970's era IH's you will not find a hydrostatic transmission in a farm tractor. That should say something right there on the durability in heavy work.

Dry clutch and full manual transmission is more than capable of precise work. They have gears, use them.

Power shuttle is very nice, but sometimes does not have the same precise feel as a dry clutch.

Driven all three types in loader work. They all do the job fine if you understand the best method of use.

 

[LD1]

My TLB has a torque converter trans. Seems pretty common in industrial backhoes. Wonder why it was never adapted to farm use? Basically instead of a clutch, it has a big torque converter. So no clutching. So when doing precise work, like inching forward or backwards (like when we set my trusses with it) there is no riding and slipping the clutch.

My kubota is gear, and I have no issues doing the precise work with it. But have to admit, if I was doing it day in and day out....I'd look for something different. As a clutch isnt designed to do that for an extended period of time.

 

[Deere Dude]

Currently have a green 3720. Really like it, but i need more power, just not sure how much.

I purchased a nice tract of some pasture, more mature hard wood. Need enough power to skid large 24-36" logs and run a FEL with grapple to load them onto a portable saw mill. Also, need to keep center of gravity as low as possible as I will be doing work ona pretty good slope. Finally, if I can find the right for and it will accept a hoe it would help with the initial work I need to do for the septic field, but this isn't a must have.

Looking for size recommendations for HP/hydro flow rates from anyone who has done similar tasks. Would rather get right size and go used than get a bright new one that is undersized. I like the way the attachments fit on the green ones, but orange, red, and blue are OK if they fit the bill.

Lost the bid at auction on a green 5083 which was probably a good thing. Thinking that one was a bit large, but if could have gotten it for 20K I would have made it work.....

I need help.....

Carl

A week ago someone posted a thread. I forgot the name of it,but the crux was, he bought a tractor that was bigger that what he really wanted. Maybe a trade of some sort would work out.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

My TLB has a torque converter trans. Seems pretty common in industrial backhoes. Wonder why it was never adapted to farm use? Basically instead of a clutch, it has a big torque converter. So no clutching. So when doing precise work, like inching forward or backwards (like when we set my trusses with it) there is no riding and slipping the clutch.

My kubota is gear, and I have no issues doing the precise work with it. But have to admit, if I was doing it day in and day out....I'd look for something different. As a clutch isnt designed to do that for an extended period of time.

Torque converters are power robbers, and make a lot of heat. Not something you want in a tractor used to pull tools efficiently...

I use my "dry clutch" loader tractor for hours and hours of loader work all day long, it hasn't given me even one second of trouble and still works as new. DON'T SLIP IT, that's the secret of long long dry clutch life...

When "I" buy a loader tractor, dry or wet clutch is a non issue for me!

SR

 

[jenkinsph]

Torque converters are power robbers, and make a lot of heat. Not something you want in a tractor used to pull tools efficiently...

I use my "dry clutch" loader tractor for hours and hours of loader work all day long, it hasn't given me even one second of trouble and still works as new. DON'T SLIP IT, that's the secret of long long dry clutch life...

When "I" buy a loader tractor, dry or wet clutch is a non issue for me!

SR

Before 2005 all the smaller tractors I have had were dry clutch gear tractors and I seemed to get everything done with them. You work with what you have. The larger tractors had power shift and partial power shifts. All of them did the job as I recall.

In 2005 and 2009 I bought the ehydro tlb and tractors and imo they are easier to operate and have some particular advantages over gear and power shuttle tractors. While these hydro tractors are less efficient in all day use for farm and field work they do have their place. For close quarters work they are much easier to use than either a dry clutch gear tractor or a refined power shuttle or reverser transmission with a wet clutch.

Torque converters are a practical and proven way to apply power. While they may generate some heat they have coolers to solve this problem. Most vehicles use them for their automatic transmissions the last 50 years or so and with good results. Lots of heavy equipment using torque converters too, they work and make the equipment easier to operate. Most people find the trade off of a little power or fuel is worth the benefits.

Gear drive with dry clutches, wet clutches, power reversers, power shuttles, power shifts, and partial power shifts all have the advantage of full lock up of the gear train. That is a real advantage when pulling a plow in an open field all day. Definitely a higher percentage of power to the wheels than a hydro or non locking torque converter.

In summary their are a lot of transmission types available today and each one has it merits. I recommend everyone pick the one that best fits their needs. Some of us will consider several of the transmissions depending on the tractors uses.

You can kid yourself but you are not going to convince me that any of the choices above will work the best in every scenario.

 

[ovrszd]

Before 2005 all the smaller tractors I have had were dry clutch gear tractors and I seemed to get everything done with them. You work with what you have. The larger tractors had power shift and partial power shifts. All of them did the job as I recall.

In 2005 and 2009 I bought the ehydro tlb and tractors and imo they are easier to operate and have some particular advantages over gear and power shuttle tractors. While these hydro tractors are less efficient in all day use for farm and field work they do have their place. For close quarters work they are much easier to use than either a dry clutch gear tractor or a refined power shuttle or reverser transmission with a wet clutch.

Torque converters are a practical and proven way to apply power. While they may generate some heat they have coolers to solve this problem. Most vehicles use them for their automatic transmissions the last 50 years or so and with good results. Lots of heavy equipment using torque converters too, they work and make the equipment easier to operate. Most people find the trade off of a little power or fuel is worth the benefits.

Gear drive with dry clutches, wet clutches, power reversers, power shuttles, power shifts, and partial power shifts all have the advantage of full lock up of the gear train. That is a real advantage when pulling a plow in an open field all day. Definitely a higher percentage of power to the wheels than a hydro or non locking torque converter.

In summary their are a lot of transmission types available today and each one has it merits. I recommend everyone pick the one that best fits their needs. Some of us will consider several of the transmissions depending on the tractors uses.

You can kid yourself but you are not going to convince me that any of the choices above will work the best in every scenario.

Well stated

 

[jacain]

Good thread. I particularly like the discussion about transmission options and doing long steady state field work. I have always liked the concept of the Ford skip loaders with the torque converter setup. You can also lock the converter, so in theory this should reduce heat generated and power lost. The 545d seems to have a lot of lift capacity which I think would make it perfect for this kind of work. Just not sure about the smaller front tires compared to a traditional utility tractor. They are heavy built and simple compared to the newer tractors. They are also still compact enough that you should be able to use them in the woods. Anyone ever considered one for this kind of work?

 

[Sawyer Rob]

Torque converters are a practical and proven way to apply power. While they may generate some heat they have coolers to solve this problem.

So you agree with me, when I said: "Torque converters are power robbers, and make a lot of heat".

That's NOT something you want in a tractor used to pull tools efficiently..."

Sure you can cool the Torq C oil off, but heat = wasted energy...

Anyway, FARM tractors, need to be as fuel efficient and put at much power to the PTO and ground as possible, a Torq C doesn't do that, and THAT is what I was trying to get across, to answer LD1 question...

SR

 

[LD1]

I guess by my question I wasnt clear. I understand that it is in-efficient and not a good match to a tractor that is pulling a plow, disc, planter, etc.

When I said "Wonder why it was never adapted for farm use" was more meaning like the utility tractor kept on the farm.

Most the farmers I know, have a few big pulling tractors, then a utility with a loader for moving bales, unloading seed, blading in washouts, picking up/moving rocks, or any other odd job that dont necessitate the 150HP machines. Would be a good place for a torque converter trans...

Wonder how the efficiency stacks up vs a HST trans? And wonder just how much power they do rob? I know the hoe is sluggish in road gear, and any hills require a downshift. But alot of that is simply an 18000# machine with a 67HP motor. Dont matter what kind of trans it has, it aint gonna pull much of a grade in 18.5MPH road gear.

 

[ovrszd]

Wonder how the efficiency stacks up vs a HST trans? And wonder just how much power they do rob? I know the hoe is sluggish in road gear, and any hills require a downshift. But alot of that is simply an 18000# machine with a 67HP motor. Dont matter what kind of trans it has, it aint gonna pull much of a grade in 18.5MPH road gear.

Good questions.

A clutch trans in a hoe would be a huge step backwards. Even it would climb that hill in high gear.

 

[jenkinsph]

So you agree with me, when I said: "Torque converters are power robbers, and make a lot of heat".

That's NOT something you want in a tractor used to pull tools efficiently..."

Sure you can cool the Torq C oil off, but heat = wasted energy...

Anyway, FARM tractors, need to be as fuel efficient and put at much power to the PTO and ground as possible, a Torq C doesn't do that, and THAT is what I was trying to get across, to answer LD1 question...

SR

I clearly stated my opinion and thoughts in my post. I agree that a full lock up transmission is more efficient for field use with open work areas. I would much prefer a hydro or torque converter set up working in tight quarters.

 

[jacain]

Like I stated before, the skip loaders use a locking converter where the the turbine and impeller are locked together thus reducing heat. I would think that coupled with a properly designed/sized cooler should allow it to perform field work. I could be wrong though. It would be awesome if I could dig up an account or two of someone using one of these tractors in this capacity. That being said, nothing beats a crash box for durability. That's why most of the real big trucks use them.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

"Fendts" IVT is the best of those worlds...

IMO it's MUCH better than a torq C and much much better than a straight hydro...

SR

 

[jacain]

"Fendts" IVT is the best of those worlds...

IMO it's MUCH better than a torq C and much much better than a straight hydro...

SR

I'll have to look into the IVT. Thanks for posting.

 

[jacain]

"Fendts" IVT is the best of those worlds...

IMO it's MUCH better than a torq C and much much better than a straight hydro...

SR

From the IVT wiki. Though no citation was provided.

"however one weakness to the Vario is its power consumption, in comparison to a mechanical transmission, most IVT/CVT gearboxes can lose 10–20 hp in the transmission due to the hydraulic swing pump element of the transmission"

 

[Sawyer Rob]

From the IVT wiki. Though no citation was provided.

"however one weakness to the Vario is its power consumption, in comparison to a mechanical transmission, most IVT/CVT gearboxes can lose 10–20 hp in the transmission due to the hydraulic swing pump element of the transmission"

Depends on what you are doing with the tractor, it also can move power from the IVT, putting power through gears, for full power to the ground just like a gear drive tractor.

SR

 

[Ricks284]

I'm a bit late to the party, but I'll throw a wrench in the works anyway...

Since you already have a tractor, have you considered a skidsteer instead of a new tractor? The big ones will lift 5,000 lbs and you can't get a center of gravity much lower than one of those machines. It would be very maneuverable around the sawmill, and you could put tracks on it for use out in the woods. Is your 3720 big enough to handle most of the skidding work with a 3-point winch on the back?

As an added bonus, the skidsteer would be useful for earthwork when you break ground, and you could use a trenching attachment to run power and water lines.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

I bought a skid steer and it tore up the ground every place you turned with it, worse than my dozer does! I hated that thing around my mill! Tracks made it even worse, so I SOON sent it down the road...

I couldn't pull loads of logs with it either, so I was glad to see it gone!

SR

 

[carlhwv]

Drove down to TN and did a survey of the property and met our guy who is going to knock in our road. The first pic is broinlaw in front of the ave sized timber we will be handling. Second, with big belly, is me in front of the biggest one we found running the boarder fence....it made it this far and isn't going anywhere.