Self leveling loader. Yes or no?

[npalen]

Would it be possible to disable mechanical self leveling if the need arose? Probably would require disconnect or removal of the SL links between the loader mast and the cylinder bell cranks. Then the bell cranks would need to be immobilized by some method. Probably wouldn't be extremely difficult to design this feature into a FEL.

 

[ptsg]

Would it be possible to disable mechanical self leveling if the need arose? Probably would require disconnect or removal of the SL links between the loader mast and the cylinder bell cranks. Then the bell cranks would need to be immobilized by some method. Probably wouldn't be extremely difficult to design this feature into a FEL.

The mechanical linkage also moves the cylinder forward and backward in relation to a non self leveling loader. That's why they also used shorter curl cylinders. If you would deactivate the linkage and lock the rear pivot pin of the curl cylinder, you wouldn't have enough stroke for a proper curl and dump.

 

[npalen]

The mechanical linkage also moves the cylinder forward and backward in relation to a non self leveling loader. That's why they also used shorter curl cylinders. If you would deactivate the linkage and lock the rear pivot pin of the curl cylinder, you wouldn't have enough stroke for a proper curl and dump.

Well that is interesting. I always assumed that the curl cylinder stroke would be the same regardless but I have heard several times in the past that self-leveling loaders don't have enough range in the motion of the curl. I'm wondering if it is an issue of not enough room to swing the self leveling along with full curl function. It would be interesting to do the layout for a self leveling FEL to see what's going on.

 

[ptsg]

Well that is interesting. I always assumed that the curl cylinder stroke would be the same regardless but I have heard several times in the past that self-leveling loaders don't have enough range in the motion of the curl. I'm wondering if it is an issue of not enough room to swing the self leveling along with full curl function. It would be interesting to do the layout for a self leveling FEL to see what's going on.

Well, I should've said that it kinda depends on the design of the loader. Some will have the same stroke, regardless being self leveling or not. Others have shorter cylinders for the curl. For a loader manufacturer, it's better to maintain the same stroke and just change the ends of the cylinders.

Here is a few examples of different styles.

Non self leveling:




Hydraulic self leveling, note the smaller cylinders over the lift cylinders:



Mechanical self leveling:

 

[LouieJunior]

I noticed this on my new deere self-leveling loader -- doesn't curl back as far as my previous loader using the same grapple. For grapple work I'd say NO -- skip it.

 

[jonsstihl]

coming from a kubota b7800 with no self leveling I rented a b26 with self leveling and I hated it for the reasons mentioned above (limited curl at certain heights) I would definitely skip it.

It is something you really need to demo before choosing. free options that you hate are going to cost you money down the road.

 

[4570Man]

My Deere backhoe had one and it sucked to epic proportions. It limited how far back I could roll the bucket and made spilling much worse of a problem than it really was. It had a pin that controlled it and I cut it off. My M59 has a hydraulic one and I’m not a big fan of it either. Reason one I just don’t like it. Reason 2 the loader is weaker with it engaged. Reason 3 if you’ve got your grapple or bucket rolled down and try to lower it on a precise spot you can’t because the bucket is going to flip forward when you lower. Reason 4 and probably the most annoying of all is when I’m loading my dump truck I raise the loader and dump the load then I roll the bucket back up to clear the sideboard and lower the loader arms except the self level tries to continue rolling the bucket up and deadheads the hydraulics. You have to stop lowering and curl the bucket back down and then continue. With all the downsides it doesn’t even work perfect. You still have to make adjustments to keep the bucket or more importantly pallet forks level.

 

[kthompson]

I had tractor with standard loader and ended up replacing with self levFeling. I used my tractor for bucket and dirt and loading and unloading hay. Would recommend the self leveling very much for those applications. That was 90 hp tractor and have recently sold it as retiring from farming and bought Kubota L which does not offer self leveling as I understood. No more bucket work than have done already miss the self level loader. That being said using grapple mostly on the Kubota and agree the standard loader there works fine. My tractor with self leveling was a JD and used mechanical setup, worked very well...but it did reduce visibility some as there were level linkage on the top of the loader. Back to operate the two if possible at dealer. But if I were moving dirt or rocks only kind I would have.

 

[Gem99ultra]

I'd love to have the self-leveling feature on my L3400. I've been hounding my Kubota dealer for 2 years for a kit, but so far he says it's unavailable for my little tractor. I know Branson does have a kit; why not Kubota?

Granted, I use my tractor more for fork work than lifting, so my requirement obviously is biased.

 

[XMS]

A self-leveling loader was standard on my new tractor and I much prefer it over my previous loader. The only adjustment I needed to make was when dumping stone or loose material - on the old tractor I could gauge the drop of the FEL arms to meter out the material without needing to control bucket tilt. Dumping now means I need to explicitly tilt the bucket. It's an extra motion the few times it comes up, and no big deal. Just a different feel.

All said if given the choice I'd prefer the leveling option.