L3400 Ties. More plys and possible Upsizing. R1 Tires??

Fallon · May 26, 2014

skyhook said:
Here's my "opinion" on this....
I personally don't like R4's, unless there on a backhoe, at least 24' rim's.
Anything smaller, the threads are too close together and they clog up.
My L4200 calls for 16" front and 24" rear,
I have 16" front and 28" rear's, R1's...(loaded), no traction issues.
The bigger the tire, the better the traction, put whatever your machine
can turn, on gravel, grass, snow, mud etc, 4X4 is not a problem that I've had
regarding "circumference" issues.
On dry Asphalt, throw it in 2X4.
If you want traction, "big" R1's, and loaded is the way to go. IMHO
Your machine calls for 15" front,
if you can somehow put 16's on, without clearance issue's, Then "I"
personally would do it.
The engine size (horsepower) is what has to move these larger tires,
that would be my main concern, your L3400 is on the edge, when it comes to HP,
so that's something to think about.
I always wondered, why a small CUT with a hoe, (example B26) would have
14" front's and 16" rear's, and advised NOT to load tires....
just look under the hood, larger, loaded tires along with the weight of the hoe
could simply not handle the extra horsepower needed to pull these.
Most likely why they don't come cabbed, as well, the weight and no power.
Don't get me wrong, the smaller CUT's do have their purpose, as is...
just keep them, as is and you'll be fine.

I'm happy with my R4s, but do a lot of loader work & want to save my fields a little. Now that I'm loaded in the rears, i only have traction issues when its really muddy. The R4s don't self clean in the mud that well, not that i have R1s to compare to. Your L3400 has 2 more HP than my L3200, but should otherwise be the same tractor. Do you have traction limitations or HP limitations with the R1s & extra 2hp? As Skyhook said, whats the point of bigger tires unless they are already loaded & you are still traction limited?

LD1 · May 26, 2014

Larger tires give better flotation and ride smoother. As well as more traction.

And yes I am traction limited. No matter what I am doing, I can spin the tires. Larger ones would be harder to spin/slip Gauss they have more area in contact with the surface.

TomSeller · May 26, 2014

JerryG said:
Just have a boot or plug patch put in the tire you have. If tube type use the boot. If tubeless use the plug patch. Either will out last the tire.

If you are going to plug patch a tire that has a tube that is filled with calcium, you could be inviting a problem. If the penetration went all the way through the tube and you plug patch the tire, you have just exposed the rim to the calcium. If the tires are not filled or are filled with a non corrosive fluid, you can get by with a plug.

LD1 · May 29, 2014

Update: I stuck with the 11.2's. The plug didn't hold. It held for several days. But onceni started using the tractor, it worked loose. I needed the tractor.no time to shop for and swar all 4. So I bought the used ones for $50 and paid them $45,to mount the one.

skyhook · May 29, 2014

Fallon said:
I'm happy with my R4s, but do a lot of loader work & want to save my fields a little. Now that I'm loaded in the rears, i only have traction issues when its really muddy. The R4s don't self clean in the mud that well, not that i have R1s to compare to. Your L3400 has 2 more HP than my L3200, but should otherwise be the same tractor. Do you have traction limitations or HP limitations with the R1s & extra 2hp? As Skyhook said, whats the point of bigger tires unless they are already loaded & you are still traction limited?

Not sure if this was directed at me, but,,
I have the L4200, rated at 45 horse, no traction or HP limitations so far and my rears need replacement, badly. Will try to get another year out of them.

Fallon · May 29, 2014

skyhook said:
Not sure if this was directed at me, but,,
I have the L4200, rated at 45 horse, no traction or HP limitations so far and my rears need replacement, badly. Will try to get another year out of them.

More of a general comment. Why hassle with the change unless you are unloaded & having traction limitations? Not sure why a L3400 with loaded R1s would have traction issues when I have the same tractor minus 2hp running R4s with power limitations.

skyhook · May 29, 2014

Fallon said:
More of a general comment. Why hassle with the change unless you are unloaded & having traction limitations? Not sure why a L3400 with loaded R1s would have traction issues when I have the same tractor minus 2hp running R4s with power limitations.

I agree.

forthemostpart · May 30, 2014

I went through the same exercise a while back for my 2007 L3400. My dealer informed me that the gear ratio for my machine was 1.55. The rolling circumference of the tires is the most accurate figure to use in the calculation...ie: tire pressure combined with actual machine weight. This is easily measured when the tires are on the machine, otherwise you have to take the manufacturers word for it...that's if they have those specst. When you've done the calculation, you ideally look for a result that has the fronts running positive a few %...ie: the fronts turning a touch faster or looking to pull as opposed to being pushed by the rear tires. I hope this helps.

LD1 said:
That one of the points of this thread. Finding the ratio of stock tire sizes is easy. But rolling circumference, rolling radius, and diameter all give slightly different ratios. As do different brands of tires that are the "same size".

My stock tires are 11.2-24 rear and 7-16 front. And it is possible just by changing brands or tread design (still r1 though) to get as much as 4-5% difference in ratios.