I just bought a Kioti DK45 with a self-levelling 1590 loader and Skid Steer coupler. This is my first tractor/loader so I am unfamiliar with what is normal. The previous owner added the coupler and welded an adapter plate directly to the back of the bucket. The bottom of the bucket curls back only to about 10 degrees above level, which seems too low for keeping a load in the bucket, but the total curl angle is 110* so when dumping the bucket bottom is 10* negative (past vertical). I am contemplating having the adapter cut off the bucket and re-welded at a higher angle, probably 30* to the ground at max. curl, meaning that the max. dump angle would be 10* positive. Given the restriction on the total angular movement, what would be the best compromise between dumping and curling back?
loader dump/curl angles
- Thread starter KJVT
- Start date
- Views: 6585
Billrog
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2014
- Messages
- 2,058
- Location
- Armstrong, British Columbia
- Tractor
- Kioti 2610, 580 SuperM Case Backhoe
You may want to use it just as it is for a while ,one reason they don't tip back very far is so that you don't dump the load on your hood.
Eagle1
Epic Contributor
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2003
- Messages
- 27,000
- Location
- Viburnum, MO
- Tractor
- Kubota BX2200, LS XG3135H, Grasshopper and Yazoo Zturns
That and allow full dump at max height to load into something.
Xfaxman
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2013
- Messages
- 13,298
- Location
- Guthrie, OK
- Tractor
- Toolcat 5610 G - Bobcat V417 - TORO+Loader
That does not happen with a self-leveling loader like his.
As Xfaxman points out, this loader maintains the bucket angle relative to level regardless of the height above ground. I already dumped the bolt-on forks out of the fully curled bucket while moving around on uneven ground, so I am pretty sure that the bucket needs to tilt back more. The question I have is how much given that more than a 10* change means that the bucket bottom will not reach vertical when dumping. It appears that many loaders have a greater total rotation angle than this one.
Xfaxman
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2013
- Messages
- 13,298
- Location
- Guthrie, OK
- Tractor
- Toolcat 5610 G - Bobcat V417 - TORO+Loader
I was hoping someone in with knowledge of dump angles would answer your question.
Here are some threads with info:
www.tractorbynet.com
www.tractorbynet.com
www.tractorbynet.com
Here are some threads with info:
FEL Rollback and Dump Angles
If I had any experience with FELs I could easily answer this on my own, but I would like to factor the relevant information into my buying decision. On the bigger FELs, total bucket movement seems to be in the 85 to 88 degree range. How they're split between roll back and dump functions...
www.tractorbynet.com
FEL Geometry
I am looking for some advice on dump and rollback angles for my home made loader. After searching around a bit it seems that an average dump angle id 45deg and rollback about 27 deg Firstly does this sound correct? Also is it correct that the rollback angle is measured with the bucket flat on...
www.tractorbynet.com
Minimum Angle to Dump Dirt
Looking for cheep dump trailer for my pond project. CMI six foot one ton with factory hand pump dump kit, less wood delivered is $682. With a dump angle of 40 degrees I have no idea what to expect.
www.tractorbynet.com
jimglassford
Silver Member
Is the loader the KL1590?
Jim, it is a 1590.
Xfaxman, thank you for the links. I didn't do my homework with this loader and it seems to have real limitations but it's mine and I have to figure out how to make it work as best as possible. As configured, when fully rolled back the bottom of the bucket is 10-11* above level no matter what the height above ground. The dump angle varies however, from 100* below level (10* beyond vertical) at the ground to only 45* at full height. At about 78" from ground to tip of bucket the dump angle is about 60* below level. I am currently considering having the attachment plate cut and rewelded with a 15-20* wedge plate between it and the bucket to allow for better carrying loads without spillage. I will lose dumping ability at full height and presumably lose bit of weight capacity as the load will be slightly farther away from the loader arms.
The quick attach adapter is made for the 1590 loader, judging by the model on the id plate. I believe the bucket originally had wedge shaped plates which engaged with the loader arm pins, whereas the previoius owner cut them off and welded the quick hitch plate directly to the back of the bucket. I did check that the adapter was not limiting the curl cylinder travel as the piston arms do not completely retract into the cylinder.
I would be interested to hear from anyone with this loader as to the standard working angles and what would be my best approach. It's interesting that there is such a wide variability among various loader designs.
Xfaxman, thank you for the links. I didn't do my homework with this loader and it seems to have real limitations but it's mine and I have to figure out how to make it work as best as possible. As configured, when fully rolled back the bottom of the bucket is 10-11* above level no matter what the height above ground. The dump angle varies however, from 100* below level (10* beyond vertical) at the ground to only 45* at full height. At about 78" from ground to tip of bucket the dump angle is about 60* below level. I am currently considering having the attachment plate cut and rewelded with a 15-20* wedge plate between it and the bucket to allow for better carrying loads without spillage. I will lose dumping ability at full height and presumably lose bit of weight capacity as the load will be slightly farther away from the loader arms.
The quick attach adapter is made for the 1590 loader, judging by the model on the id plate. I believe the bucket originally had wedge shaped plates which engaged with the loader arm pins, whereas the previoius owner cut them off and welded the quick hitch plate directly to the back of the bucket. I did check that the adapter was not limiting the curl cylinder travel as the piston arms do not completely retract into the cylinder.
I would be interested to hear from anyone with this loader as to the standard working angles and what would be my best approach. It's interesting that there is such a wide variability among various loader designs.
LittleBittyBigJohn
Veteran Member
I found this one. I did not read through the whole thing but it looks like the highlights are that the less than ideal roll back is a known issue that Kioti fixed with this kit. It also says you should have 33 degrees of roll back.
www.tractorbynet.com
NEWS ON THE KL1595, 1590 LOADER ROLL-BACK FIX KIT!
Great News- I talked with the president of KMW this am and he told me that the first "kit" with my name on it had been sent to Kioti to be forwarded to my dealer for an install next week. He said that (with Kioti's approval) they were changing a number of loaders this summer. The Kit will...
www.tractorbynet.com
jimglassford
Silver Member
This is why I asked if it was the KL1590. There is no loader that is just called the 1590. As for the kit to repair the issue, it was $2,000. I say was because it is no longer available. Some of the dealers still list it but they were discontinued a long time ago. The kit included a lot of parts and required welding new components on the bucket or tool carrier. In general, KMW did a poor job of designing the loaders for Kioti and that is why Kioti dumped them, leaving the customer holding the bag. If you need a loader, plan on buying a new loader, preferably other than Kioti.
Jim, it is in fact a KL1590. It's not clear to me whether the repair kit changed the rollback angle or just improved the rollback strength with improved geometry. It's academic in any case.
Short of getting a new loader, given the existing angles I have can you suggest an optimal bucket attachment angle change? Do you have personal experience with the KL 1590 and if so do you know what the original curlback angle was? If it was in fact 31* that would mean the dump angle at full height was only about 15*, which seems ineffective. I am not planning on moving mountains so I am most interested in carrying materials low safely and being able to dump effectively at a moderate height.
Short of getting a new loader, given the existing angles I have can you suggest an optimal bucket attachment angle change? Do you have personal experience with the KL 1590 and if so do you know what the original curlback angle was? If it was in fact 31* that would mean the dump angle at full height was only about 15*, which seems ineffective. I am not planning on moving mountains so I am most interested in carrying materials low safely and being able to dump effectively at a moderate height.
jimglassford
Silver Member
I have the slightly larger KL1595 sitting in the field. I do not know what you mean by the original angle since what you have is the original angle. Are asking for an optimal angle for a loader in general? Each manufacturer has their own opinion. The kit that was sold moved the spacing of the four pivot pins on the bucket or tool carrier to increase the roll back angle and force. This was accomplished by cutting the old brackets off of the tool carrier and welding on the new ones. These have to align exactly or the loader will bind as you rotate the bucket. The kit then included new cylinders and linkages to address the new mounting hole locations.
I spent a lot of time investigating how to alter my loader and there is no clear cut formula. There is no low cost way to fix the poor design.
I spent a lot of time investigating how to alter my loader and there is no clear cut formula. There is no low cost way to fix the poor design.
Yes, I am asking for an optimal angle given the constraints of this loader. I find it hard to believe that the original curl angle was only 10 degrees between level and the bucket bottom but perhaps that was the case. I am guessing that the guy who put the skid steer QA plate on the bucket did not take the resulting curl angle into account. I am not interested in re-engineering the loader, only in possibly changing the angle between the QA plate and the bucket. Thanks for your help.
jimglassford
Silver Member
Another problem you will run into is if you decide to use other attachments. I tried putting a set of forks on the tool carrier and that was a disaster. The forks would not even roll back enough so they were parallel to the ground. That and the lack of force would only support about 100 pounds on the forks. I think KME designed the loader on bring your child to work day.
I have decided to modify the SSQA adapter so that the front attachment plates curl back 24* from vertical. Combined with the bucket shape that will put the bucket bottom at 32* from level and when I get pallet forks they will curl back to 24* from level. The bucket dump angle at full height will be about 60* from level and at minimum height about 80*. It turned out that the bottom rear edge of the adapter frame was hitting the loader arm when dumping at or near full height and the angle change will allow for the full dump angle shown in the loader manual.
I made a plywood mockup of the adapter and bucket and mounted it to the loader arm pins to check for interference, and talked to my metal fabricator about doing the job. It will probably lower the effective lifting force slightly as the bucket bottom will be about 3" further forward, but it should be worth the effort. The adapter is from HLA and labelled for the specific loader, but it definitely was not well designed for the application. Their site offers one universal adapter for tractor loaders and I would not be surprised if similar problems crop up with other tractor models. Loader designs vary a lot.
As far as the loader strength goes, I haven't tested it thoroughly but I did bolt on bucket forks and lifted and curled back some moderate loads. The 1590 may be a dog and the mods are an unexpected pia but I think it will serve well enough for my purposes. We had no problem lifting a 6' brush hog off a flatbed truck.
I made a plywood mockup of the adapter and bucket and mounted it to the loader arm pins to check for interference, and talked to my metal fabricator about doing the job. It will probably lower the effective lifting force slightly as the bucket bottom will be about 3" further forward, but it should be worth the effort. The adapter is from HLA and labelled for the specific loader, but it definitely was not well designed for the application. Their site offers one universal adapter for tractor loaders and I would not be surprised if similar problems crop up with other tractor models. Loader designs vary a lot.
As far as the loader strength goes, I haven't tested it thoroughly but I did bolt on bucket forks and lifted and curled back some moderate loads. The 1590 may be a dog and the mods are an unexpected pia but I think it will serve well enough for my purposes. We had no problem lifting a 6' brush hog off a flatbed truck.
