Loader Build Questions

[WNY Tony]

OK, so I want to build a loader for my 18HP Mitsubishi Diesel Tractor. I will be shopping for deals on materials to help keep costs down, and I may have an opportunity at buying some scrap 2" x 2" x 1/4" wall thickness square tubing, and wanted to know if this would work for the loader framework. I have searched for details on what others have used in the past, and I see a lot of folks using 3"x3"x3/16" wall thickness.

What do you think, will the 2x2 be too small? I am not looking for the worlds heaviest loader, just something that I can put a 4' bucket on.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Coldwater]

OK, so I want to build a loader for my 18HP Mitsubishi Diesel Tractor. I will be shopping for deals on materials to help keep costs down, and I may have an opportunity at buying some scrap 2" x 2" x 1/4" wall thickness square tubing, and wanted to know if this would work for the loader framework. I have searched for details on what others have used in the past, and I see a lot of folks using 3"x3"x3/16" wall thickness.

What do you think, will the 2x2 be too small? I am not looking for the worlds heaviest loader, just something that I can put a 4' bucket on.

Thanks in advance.

you can make it work.2x4 tubing is best. can you put 2x2 to make 2x4

 

[blackd]

"What do you think, will the 2x2 be too small? I am not looking for the worlds heaviest loader, just something that I can put a 4' bucket on."

Too light? Yes. Use it for bracing the tractor mount to the front. Use it to reinforce the bucket. Use it to build a frame mount. But, the tractor upright mounts must be heavy and probably much widet to match up with any existing frame bolt holes. The arms should be heavier.

You'll be surprised how much pressure you can generate by driving into and simultaneously lifting using a FEL.

Also, make the arms as short as possible to keep them close to the front of the tractor to keep the weight of a loaded bucket as close to the center of gravity as possible.

 

[bal0123]

2 X 2 square tubing is fine for what you are doing, especially if it is 1/4 side wall thickness. I used 2 x 2 and only 1/8 inch sidewall thickness or also called 11 gauge on my yanmar homemade loader. works GREAT and have not broke any welds or bent anything yet. I will try to download a pic of it in action. hope you like. My yanmar is a 2210,,, roughly 30 hp.

 

[john m]

one of the most important parts are the lateral braces that run from the up rights down to the nose of your tractor. they displace the weight of the bucket to the tractor.they take the strain when you plow into your material and when you are back dragging & lifting. i am building one myself, PF engineering has plans and a material list. i didn`t use them but they would be good to have if you never had a loader before this. they cost about $55.00. you can look at all the other people`s loaders they built from those plans on their site.

 

[LD1]

If it were me, for your sized tractor, I would perfer to use 2x4 tubing. Even 1/8" wall stuff will be stronger and every bit as light if not lighter than the 2x2 heavywall stuff.

And as others have mentioned, make the mounts pretty heafty. They take a lot of strain.

It would probabally be well worth your time to take a trip to you closest tractor dealer adn take a tape measure with you. Look at a tractor loader about the same size as yours. Take some measurments of the sizes of the arms, cylinders, pins, etc. Make some mental notes and jot some things down on paper.

BAL0123: That is a pretty nice looking loader. I have to ask though, why did you choose to mount the lift cylinder "upsidedown". With the base on the loader arm instead of the support??

I see no benifit to doing so. But the other way around would cause your hydraulic hoses to move MUCH less than the way you currently have it.

 

[monk62553]

BAL0123: That is a pretty nice looking loader. I have to ask though, why did you choose to mount the lift cylinder "upsidedown". With the base on the loader arm instead of the support??

I see no benifit to doing so. But the other way around would cause your hydraulic hoses to move MUCH less than the way you currently have it.

I know on my Kubota L4330 the cylinders are mounted "upside down" to keep the hoses closer to the loader arms for the quick-connect hydraulics. The cylinders are plumbed to the loader arms, then from the tee there go to the tractor.

 

[john m]

most factory loaders come with the cylinders upside down so they can run the lines down the arms and not under the tractor. i`m going to run mine the other way with the lines under the tractor so i don`t have all those lines going around my loader arms. the lines on the loader arms make it more self contained if it is a loader that is removable.

 

[PILOON]

I also own a MITSU and the posts are more like 2 x 4, and the under frame supports really beefy.
My posts are attached to heavy, like 3 8ths flat with gussets and 'ears' that bolt to the tractor frame.
Since the loader arms are rather high up, there is a lot of twisting force at that lower area as well as on the posts.
My loader is a Schwartz 1100, well made and tough unit.
One of the posts also serve as reservoir for hydraulic oil for when using separate pump as I do.
My aux pump is driven from the crank shaft face as did Mitsu for front PTO applications.

 

[LD1]

most factory loaders come with the cylinders upside down so they can run the lines down the arms and not under the tractor. i`m going to run mine the other way with the lines under the tractor so i don`t have all those lines going around my loader arms. the lines on the loader arms make it more self contained if it is a loader that is removable.

:confused2::confused2:

Most of the ones I have seen have the cylinder right side up. (rod end hooked to loader arm and base hooked to loader mount).

Most all of the CUT's, older utilities, Our JD2040, My L3400, The ford 4500 TLB, all have them right side up. It is actually a very rare occurence that I have seen them upside down:confused2: