Tractor Sizing Kubota M7040 HDC UltraGrand Cab

[Gary Fowler]

I added 800 lbs. of suitcase weights and 400 lbs. of liquid ballast to the front tires flleminj2pa

a great tractor & wise choice! i too went through several until i found the right model to suit my needs. you mentioned you added liquid ballast to the ft tires. my dealership mentioned to me it is not recommended to add liquid ballast to ft. tires...strange, when ft. suitcase weights can be added (to the frame bumper) was told it can put extra stress on the ft axle, power steering, etc. whether this actually holds any merit, not sure. i would recommend you post a thread on the subject, would hate to see you have problems down the line...been a great season for plots this year! best regards.

The old argument about front wheel liquid ballast putting extra stress on the front end doesn't hold water. If you can add front weights which most all mfg. allow that are equal to or greater than the water weight, then the ballasted tires are going to be much less stress on the front end that steel weights. I think this is just another ploy by the mfg'er and dealers to sell you steel weights. For the smaller CUT and SCUT tractors, adding 40 or so pounds of weight via the front tires is insignificant to induced wear. This would be no more weight to the front end than say the difference between a 150# operator and a 250# operator.
For the big Ag tractors on our farm when I was young, we always had water in the front tires along with front weights so we could carry the heavy 3 PH implements and still keep the front wheels on the ground. I don't recall every having to replace any components on the steering or axles of any farm tractors we had for Ford 8N to 9000 models and Allis Chalmers WD45 to One Ninety XT. Granted these were all AG tractors, none of which had FEL but all carried the max front end weights available.
Remember that all liquid ballast whether front wheels or rear put no weight on the front end, it is all carried on the tire. Only minimal extra effort is needed to turn the front wheels even at high speed, if you can call 14MPH high speed (14 mph is about the max most CUT will travel. I know someone is going to say "mine will go 16MPH", big deal, not enough to make any difference)

 

[fleminj2pa]

I added 800 lbs. of suitcase weights and 400 lbs. of liquid ballast to the front tires flleminj2pa

a great tractor & wise choice! i too went through several until i found the right model to suit my needs. you mentioned you added liquid ballast to the ft tires. my dealership mentioned to me it is not recommended to add liquid ballast to ft. tires...strange, when ft. suitcase weights can be added (to the frame bumper) was told it can put extra stress on the ft axle, power steering, etc. whether this actually holds any merit, not sure. i would recommend you post a thread on the subject, would hate to see you have problems down the line...been a great season for plots this year! best regards.

The grain drill was popping the front tires up considerably on level ground until we added weight. My dealer actually suggested adding rim guard to the fronts but not the rears in this instance. Unfortunately, my take is that they are not terribly experienced with ag series tractors. By and large, they are a BX series dealer. This was the highest HP tractor my salesman ever sold. I will take your suggestion and start a new thread on this topic to get some feedback but frankly, I am comfortable with what we've done. I am a tire dealer and we have been ballasting tires for decades on all sorts of equipment. I don't really anticipate any problems but it never hurts to get input from others with first hand experience.

 

[RollingsFarms]

In my experience with ballast loaded front tires, your tractor will "power hop" during a hard pull sometimes and that bouncing can't be good for the axle, not to mention going down the road in high gear it'll want to bounce too. That's why I never mess with front loaded tires but am a big advocate of front weights and rear loaded tires.

 

[bushhog28]

Sweet tractor! I hope she gives you years of reliable service!

 

[fleminj2pa]

In my experience with ballast loaded front tires, your tractor will "power hop" during a hard pull sometimes and that bouncing can't be good for the axle, not to mention going down the road in high gear it'll want to bounce too. That's why I never mess with front loaded tires but am a big advocate of front weights and rear loaded tires.

I pulled a drill for almost 7 hours the day after we filled the tires and it was smooth as silk. Uphill, downhill or level ground, I had no indication of hop at all. The hop that comes with highway operation is usually attributable to the tire not being filled to the proper level, which is done intentionally in some cases due to weight constraints.

In my situation, I chose not to fill the rears for exactly that reason. Since I'm almost exclusively using 3 pt attachments of 2000 lbs or less, it's not a big deal. If I were pulling a haywagon or silagewagon down hills then I'd have to fill the rears too, which would put me overweight for trailering purposes, as it would probably take 100 gal. each to fill those 16.9-30's to the proper level.

 

[Tx Jim]

I'd have to fill the rears too, which would put me overweight for trailering purposes, as it would probably take 100 gal. each to fill those 16.9-30's to the proper level.

Properly filled 16.9x30 tires hold 73 gallons.of liquid

 

[fleminj2pa]

Properly filled 16.9x30 tires hold 73 gallons.of liquid

Thanks for mentioning that, sir. I didn't have my chart with me when I estimated the amount. However, 730 lbs per side would also put me over my weight limit.

 

[big bubba]

be interesting to see if there were any warranty issues if the power steering or ft axle had problems & kubota knew the ft tires were loaded. not really sure if damage would result or not....but sorry gary folwler i don't buy your ft suitcase weight purchase conspiracy theory. just my opinion

 

[hawkeye08]

Very nice tractor.. keeps me dreaming about having a bigger tractor..

 

[fleminj2pa]

The old argument about front wheel liquid ballast putting extra stress on the front end doesn't hold water. If you can add front weights which most all mfg. allow that are equal to or greater than the water weight, then the ballasted tires are going to be much less stress on the front end that steel weights. I think this is just another ploy by the mfg'er and dealers to sell you steel weights. For the smaller CUT and SCUT tractors, adding 40 or so pounds of weight via the front tires is insignificant to induced wear. This would be no more weight to the front end than say the difference between a 150# operator and a 250# operator.
For the big Ag tractors on our farm when I was young, we always had water in the front tires along with front weights so we could carry the heavy 3 PH implements and still keep the front wheels on the ground. I don't recall every having to replace any components on the steering or axles of any farm tractors we had for Ford 8N to 9000 models and Allis Chalmers WD45 to One Ninety XT. Granted these were all AG tractors, none of which had FEL but all carried the max front end weights available.
Remember that all liquid ballast whether front wheels or rear put no weight on the front end, it is all carried on the tire. Only minimal extra effort is needed to turn the front wheels even at high speed, if you can call 14MPH high speed (14 mph is about the max most CUT will travel. I know someone is going to say "mine will go 16MPH", big deal, not enough to make any difference)

Gary, I'm with you on the issue of damage or potential damage to steering or axle parts as a result of ballasting the front tires. It just isn't plausible to think that parts which are designed for the workloads that these parts will encounter would fail as a result of liquid ballast...in this case we're talking about 400 lbs. What is 400 lbs. to this piece of equipment?

However, I don't think it's about Kubota trying to sell more wheel or suitcase weights nearly as much as I think it is about some attorney in their legal department trying to cover their butts in the event that someone would have an accident that some OTHER lawyer would try to attribute to loss of control due to ballasting front steering tires. So much of what we have to put up with in today's world is the result of garbage litigation and knee jerk reactions by corporate legal counsel. Like you, I've been around ballasted tires since I was a kid and I've NEVER heard anyone even mention a problem along the lines of what is being discussed here. I've asked several farmers today if they had ever had any issues of this nature and they all looked at me like I was smoking something. I guess that was my answer.