New 424 owner

LD1 · Jun 20, 2016

The weight in the rear tires DO stress the frame and axles on both the front and rear axle if insufficient weight BEHIND the rear is not used and the rears are lifted into the air.

Weight In The tires is great.....as long as they stay on terra-firma

AxleHub · Jun 21, 2016

You posted: "Weight In The tires is great.....as long as they stay on terra-firma."

But when is it ever a good thing for a 4 wheeled tractor to have less than 4 wheels on the ground ? Its not about specific wheels not on the ground . . its any wheels not on the ground.

LD1 · Jun 21, 2016

AxleHub said:
You posted: "Weight In The tires is great.....as long as they stay on terra-firma."

But when is it ever a good thing for a 4 wheeled tractor to have less than 4 wheels on the ground ? Its not about specific wheels not on the ground . . its any wheels not on the ground.

Its never good.

But I have yet to see a modern SCUT or CUT, or UT, that has a loader so weak that it cannot lift filled rear tires.

Fact is, it simply isnt enough. If you run tire ballast, dont get a false sense of security, you STILL need weight on the 3PH.

BUT, it is possible to ballast sufficiently with the 3PH alone. Not so with only fluid/wheel weights.

Tire ballast is great for stability, and great for added traction when running a mounted implement like a blade, disc, plow, etc. Because when those are engaged in the ground, their weight isnt helping with traction as tire ballast would.

But tire ballast is not a proper method of offsetting heavy FEL lifting.

AxleHub · Jun 21, 2016

LD1 said:
Its never good.

But I have yet to see a modern SCUT or CUT, or UT, that has a loader so weak that it cannot lift filled rear tires.

Fact is, it simply isnt enough. If you run tire ballast, dont get a false sense of security, you STILL need weight on the 3PH.

BUT, it is possible to ballast sufficiently with the 3PH alone. Not so with only fluid/wheel weights.

Tire ballast is great for stability, and great for added traction when running a mounted implement like a blade, disc, plow, etc. Because when those are engaged in the ground, their weight isnt helping with traction as tire ballast would.

But tire ballast is not a proper method of offsetting heavy FEL lifting.

My point LD1 is you are posting in "absolutes" in saying tire balanxe isnt a proper ballast method. I think some will read that and believe it is true. Thats the priblem with "absolutes" . . all of life is about compromises and certainly tractors are included in that.

Virtually all tractors start or end up with loaded rear tires because its a good thing and does not add to the gross frame weight requirements. 3ph is also a fine thing when used properly but can be overdone or underdone.

If my scut had no loaded tires but I put 175 or 200 pounds on the 3ph . . Thats not a practical solution for fel counterbalance for max fel loading. But its a start. Same is true for loaded tires and no 3ph weight. But combine the two and you have an answer that doesn't strain the axle or frame but benefits fel loading. But even then there is the side to side issue if that loaded fel is going to be high in the air.

Tire loading is a big plus for another reason too . . there are often situations where 3ph weight is not desired or practical or you don't want it on all the time because you don't intend to do fel work or you don't even have the fel on.

And yes we understand about rear axle loading leverage to help front axle weight. But a yanmar 424 is sized like a small cut not a scut and its tires are substantially karger than a scut rear tire and we'd have to assume the front axle is substantial in that size of tractor.

The goal is all 4 wheels in ground contact all the time.

Thanks.

LD1 · Jun 21, 2016

You are trying to make an argument where there is no need for one.

The only absolute I am saying is that any modern scut-cut-ut, with ONLY loader tires, will lift the back end of the tractor long before it runs out of loader power.

Fine if all you are doing is hauling around mulch, or other light loads. But using the loader digging in the dirt, stumps, heavy pallets, etc. Tire ballast is simply not enough.

DieselMachine · Jul 26, 2016

As an update with some time in the seat moving a considerable amount of dirt: feels very stable with a completely mounded full bucket of dirt. I have always had the rear box blade on and at times added a few sandbags to the BB for additional. I can tell if I didn't have the BB on it would definitely get tippy. I have decided against filling the rear tires because of weight concerns when I get some sod in place throughout the yard. Being able to stay as light as possible then will be nice. Overall stoked with the tractor, very happy I went with the 424! As far as accessories, anyone running a tooth bar or piranha bar on the 52" bucket? It looks like they're made for Kubotas but may still work for this brand?

BXpanded · Jul 26, 2016

DieselMachine said:
As As far as accessories, anyone running a tooth bar or piranha bar on the 52" bucket? It looks like they're made for Kubotas but may still work for this brand?

We build the Piranha to fit almost any bucket up to 9 1/2 feet wide, any brand.
Thanks!
Harry
BXpanded