Safety question - forward tipping limits

davesisk · Jul 6, 2005

Hey folks:

I came from a Power-trac, which is a very odd machine. It had a very low center-of-gravity, so it was difficult to get into big trouble. As long as you carried loads low, even if you tipped forward, the bucket would stop you from tipping very far. You could sit there with the rear up in the air all day, and it didn't feel dangerous...it would barely activate the pucker factor.

I was digging roots out with my new MF 1220 over the weekend beside my house, sideway on a very slight slope (like maybe 1' every 10-15' or so). I see that this machine also has enough hydraulic power to pick it's rear end up, but it felt very unstable when it was just an inch off the ground (like it really wanted to roll sideways to the low side). Needless to say, I proceeded very carefully since I'm new to this machine with it's higher center-of-gravity and heavier weight.

My question is this: what is the PONR (point of no return) when this thing is feeling side-tippy to me? Is the real PONR much higher that what it feels like, or does my pucker factor pretty much match the real limits? The last thing I want to do is get this guy greasy-side-up, so I favor being very conservative, but I figure it's good to ask these types of questions from folks who have more experience with this class of machine.

I'd assume the best answer here is add something heavy on the back to keep the rear down, whether it's bar weights, tire weights, an implement, whatever.

Btw, this is the first diesel I've ever owned (the PT was a B&S 2 cylinder air-cooled gasoline engine)...I have to say I'm really liking this diesel. Even with the revs low (like 1500 rpm), it still seems to have plenty of power, and very quiet. Starts easily with the glow plugs. I'm quite pleased with this engine and the machine in general!

Dave

Glenn9643 · Jul 6, 2005

sideway on a very slight slope (like maybe 1' every 10-15' or so).

I don't know yet about the "point of no return", and hope not to find it.
Any time you're lifting or moving a load with the FEL on a slope sideways to the slope is the most dangerous for losing it. Seems like any turn of the front wheels magnifies your chance of an overturn too. Be careful on slopes, and if you feel it going you can generally drop your bucket quickly and recover with the load carried low.

LBrown59 · Jul 9, 2005

( Hey folks:

I came from a Power-trac, which is a very odd machine. It had a very low center-of-gravity, so it was difficult to get into big trouble. As long as you carried loads low, even if you tipped forward, the bucket would stop you from tipping very far. You could sit there with the rear up in the air all day, and it didn't feel dangerous...it would barely activate the pucker factor.

I was digging roots out with my new MF 1220 over the weekend beside my house, sideway on a very slight slope (like maybe 1' every 10-15' or so). I see that this machine also has enough hydraulic power to pick it's rear end up, but it felt very unstable when it was just an inch off the ground (like it really wanted to roll sideways to the low side).

Needless to say, I proceeded very carefully since I'm new to this machine with it's higher center-of-gravity and heavier weight.

My question is this: what is the PONR (point of no return) when this thing is feeling side-tippy to me? Is the real PONR much higher that what it feels like, or does my pucker factor pretty much match the real limits? The last thing I want to do is get this guy greasy-side-up, so I favor being very conservative, but I figure it's good to ask these types of questions from folks who have more experience with this class of machine.

I'd assume the best answer here is add something heavy on the back to keep the rear down, whether it's bar weights, tire weights, an implement, whatever.

Btw, this is the first diesel I've ever owned (the PT was a B&S 2 cylinder air-cooled gasoline engine)...I have to say I'm really liking this diesel. Even with the revs low (like 1500 rpm), it still seems to have plenty of power, and very quiet. Starts easily with the glow plugs. I'm quite pleased with this engine and the machine in general!

Dave
)
Never operate a FEL with out a corresponding counter weight on the rear of the tractor .
Don't operate side ways or cross ways on a slope.
Once A wheel lifts off the ground that's more than enough for me.

davesisk · Jul 11, 2005

So, weight on the rear (either tires or weight bar) would make this safer. How do I know how much weight I need?

Thx!
Dave

Bob_Skurka · Jul 11, 2005

So, weight on the rear (either tires or weight bar) would make this safer. How do I know how much weight I need? 

Dave, I'm a huge PT fan but own regular tractors (in addition to a Ventrac which is similar to a PT180 or PT422). The differences between the two types of machines are monumental. But the correct answer to your question very likely lies in your FEL owner's manual. Most CUT style tractors will require fluid filled rear tires or wheel weights IN ADDITION to a weight box on the 3pt to get the maximum lift capacity & stability while using a FEL. MOST operators don't have enough weight on the rear of their tractor in the form of ballast (usually I can be included in that group). Depending on the tractor size and the loader capacity, you will have to refer to your manual for the proper weight.

Do not be fooled by the people who say that a heavier tractor requires less ballast on the rear end. The whole concept here is BALANCE. Some tractors have a lot of front overhang in front of the front tires, some have very little, some have things like SuperSteer, some have light ladder frames but long wheelbases, others are cast iron with short wheelbases. . . and each will balance differently and each had different lift capacities, and that is what determines the amount of ballast needed for balance.

Please understand that you are changing from the ideal loader design (PT) to an afterthought type of loader design (CUT).

As for side slopes, my rear end puckers up so much on side slopes I don't like to work on them unless I am in the seat of the Ventrac. The CUTS just feel way too tippy. It's been said they can handle greater than 20 degreees . . . but if you are moving or if you lift the bucket or if uphill tire climbs a rock or if your down hill tire drops in a rut then the center of gravity changes in a heartbeat and you better be wearing your seatbelt and have a clean pair of shorts to change into.

davesisk · Jul 11, 2005

Hey Bob:

Thanks for the reply. I definitely agree that the PT's are the ideal loader design and balanced for loader work "out-of-the-box", so to speak. That was certainly true of mine. It was difficult to get into trouble with that low center of gravity and the majority of the weight already in the rear.

I do like that you are seated up high on a traditional CUT...there's definitely a visibility advantage to that. I was moving some mulch tonight on somewhat uneven ground, and there's definitely more pucker factor on a CUT, even with nothing in the bucket. I'm sure some part of that is actually because of the fact that you are seated up high though. That said, this machine definitely feels more tippy than other machines I've operated. I believe the MF 1220 would qualify in the cast-frame/short wheelbase class.

And now that you mention it, I believe I remember seeing a weight chart in the loader manual for the 1220. I'll have to go get it and check on the proper rear weight. Thanks for jogging my memory.

Dave

davesisk · Jul 12, 2005

OK, I checked the loader manual and the tractor manual, and it's say to use ballast, but doesn't offer any advice on how much. The only thing it says is to test it by stopping quickly with a fully loaded bucket held low. /forums/images/graemlins/ooo.gif I guess I could rig up something to hold weights via the 3PH. I looked at the tires and there are six lugs, but I don't see any additional holes theoretically for wheel weights. I'd rather not liquid-fill the tires, but perhaps foam would be a good choice? Foam adds quite a bit of weight, doesn't it?

So, I guess I just have to add 100 lbs or so at a time until I get it to where it doesn't tip forward with a full bucket on a quick stop then...

Thx,
Dave

loulblades · Jul 12, 2005

I just had my front tires filled with foam and they seemed heavier than the liquid filled. If you are going the foam route, which in my opinion is best since you won't ever have to worry about flat tires, make sure whoever does it uses the lower density foam. The high density foam makes the tires like rocks which makes for a rough ride.

When using the FEL, I always put my rear blade on which helps alot. I am of the opinion that the further back the weight is hanging (within reason) the more stable the system. I do notice some instability though when getting a full bite of dense topsoil. I will be adding more weight but I am trying to decide if I will make weight to put on the 3pt or add weight to the rear blade. In an earlier thread I posted the numbers of the weight gain if using a steel pipe with a rod through the middle filled with concrete, which I believe is a lower cost option than buying the weights.

Since I use the rear blade alot when I am using the FEL, I will probably add the weight to the rear blade.

More than a few times I have got myself in situations where my pucker factor was beyond a greased BB level and my property is pretty flat. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif. I imagine all the weight in the world wouldn't overcome carelessness.

davesisk · Jul 12, 2005

I just talked to the local dealer, and they said wheel weights would have to be ordered and would probably be quite expensive. They suggested just putting a bar between the lift arms and hanging exercise equipment-type weights on them. I asked about foam-filling the tires, but they said that liquid filled would be heavy and foam filled would not. I guess it depends on what kind of foam you're talking about, eh?

Dave

Bob_Skurka · Jul 12, 2005

Dave, depends on the foam, but foam is typcially expensive and typically heavier than fluid fill. As for weight, I would start out at about 500# and work your way up. Both tractors I use (Kubota & New Holland) suggest FLUID FILL or WHEEL WEIGHTS -- AND -- a weight box. My weight box alone weighs about 400#. A box blade is also a nice option if you have one, but being fairly large you have to watch out behind you if working in tight areas. The weight box is much more compact.

On the New Holland I do NOT have fluid fill and just use the weight box. It is NOT heavy enough to fully utilize the capacity of the FEL. That tractor is a moderately heavy short wheelbase, cast iron tractor.

On the Kubota I do have fluid in the rear tires, and with a weight box on the back it is balances very well. It is a light ladder frame, (relatively) long wheelbase tractor.