Publishing Loader Capacity Numbers That Far Exceed The Capacity Of The Axles

[Sid Post]

OP asks "Why manufacturers would...." because they can. Competent, prudent design and manufacture builds and rates an assembly for X pounds of load. That does not mean it fails/collapses when loaded at X+1 pounds. That means there is some undisclosed design margin - for safety/stupidity/litigation avoidance - you pick the reason.

So with the loader on, and the bucket loaded to rated capacity for the loader, and no ballast on the rear, the load on the front axle is beyond the engineer/designer intent, but still within what the static load of what axle will support without failing. Put some dynamics on that situation, such as turning, hitting a bump, stopping a quickly dropping load, etc and the failure of a spindle or kingpin is more likely.

When the failure happens, whose problem (responsibility to pay) it is becomes arguable, both at the dealership service/parts counter and further into the courts.

We like to think that purchasing a reputable brand would get a more robust design margin. The more robust design might be the utilization of drop-forged castings in the high stress points, and an extra eighth of an inch of high strength steel in the spindle or kingpin. As every brand has moved to "outsource" larger portions of a finished product to the low bidder, the concept of "quality" being built into a brand is long gone.

For us end-market customers, that means our multi-tens-of-thousands of dollar purchase is like stepping up to a craps-table and throwing the dice. Gone are the days of buying a product from a reputable brand and having a high level of assurance that it will last long enough to leave with the farm and continue to serve well for your grand children.

Because they can.

Got a good chuckle of this as I'm looking for a Deering McCormick 10-20 inter-war year tractor and a W-4!

 

[WinterDeere]

Got a good chuckle of this as I'm looking for a Deering McCormick 10-20 inter-war year tractor and a W-4!

Yeah, but I'd argue jiggs was wrong. The implication that quality has gone out the window due to American manufacturers outsourcing component designs is ludicrous to anyone actually working as an engineer or quality professional in a manufacturing environment. Put simply "quality" is a concept that did not even exist, in the modern sense, in those inter-war years.

Also, over-built has nothing to do with quality, and often does little to ensure reliability. We all remember the old cars of our youth, massively heavy and overbuilt by today's standards, but infinitely less reliable.

 

[finn1]

Yeah, but I'd argue jiggs was wrong. The implication that quality has gone out the window due to American manufacturers outsourcing component designs is ludicrous to anyone actually working as an engineer or quality professional in a manufacturing environment. Put simply "quality" is a concept that did not even exist, in the modern sense, in those inter-war years.

Also, over-built has nothing to do with quality, and often does little to ensure reliability. We all remember the old cars of our youth, massively heavy and overbuilt by today's standards, but infinitely less reliable.

I get a chuckle every time I hear the term “over built”

That term really means poorly engineered, or a we used to say, “woods engineered”. Make it, break it, then put on a few gussets or add a hundred pounds to the casting. That’s not engineering at all, it’s trial and error which leads to an overweight, over expensive product.

In the old days, before modern design analysis tools, that’s how we did it. Fortunately those days are long gone for most manufacturers.

 

[BnRidge]

That’s not engineering at all, it’s trial and error which leads to an overweight, over expensive product.

In the old days, before modern design analysis tools, that’s how we did it. Fortunately those days are long gone for most manufacturers.

Until cost cutting cuts the margin on those castings (and everything else) razor thin. Failure then is only one slight misstep away.

 

[beenthere]

Regardless, the FEL is a handy wheelbarrow substitute. Be a rare occasion to get too much weight in the bucket, IMO.

 

[rvds]

This popped up in my YT feed today and I found it quite interesting. The obvious question: Why would a manufacturer build a front axel that is already at capacity before the bucket is even loaded?

you missed a great opportunity to measure weight at various heights all the way to the top. you did not put weight on the 3pt either!