Buying Advice Update on Purchase: Kubota M7060

[mopardude318]

Yes, a 12' Batwing works well behind an M7060. The Bush hog 1812 weighs about 3200#.

View attachment 530975

HP

Is that the 84" light materials bucket? I sure want one, the standard bucket is too small. I think the loader will handle that bucket full of dirt no problem.

 

[KenBike]

I just picked up a new M7060 with the 84" bucket. Have 600 lbs of wheel weights, no cab, and tires are not filled. The 12 sp hyd has no problem lifting the bucket loaded with light or heavy materials.
But I was moving gravel with a mostly full bucket and had the left front tire about 8" lower then the others.
Hit the brake to dump the bucket that was about 60" above the ground and my fence gate and the tractor started to tip.
Quickly dumped the stone and saved the fence gate but it did remind me be careful if you are not on a flat surface when moving heavy loads.
I do think the tractor needs the 84" but maybe more weight in the rear. Going to one more 150 lb weight on each side.

 

[ovrszd]

If you are going to use the FEL a lot I suggest non corrosive fluid in the rears.

 

[mopardude318]

I just picked up a new M7060 with the 84" bucket. Have 600 lbs of wheel weights, no cab, and tires are not filled. The 12 sp hyd has no problem lifting the bucket loaded with light or heavy materials.
But I was moving gravel with a mostly full bucket and had the left front tire about 8" lower then the others.
Hit the brake to dump the bucket that was about 60" above the ground and my fence gate and the tractor started to tip.
Quickly dumped the stone and saved the fence gate but it did remind me be careful if you are not on a flat surface when moving heavy loads.
I do think the tractor needs the 84" but maybe more weight in the rear. Going to one more 150 lb weight on each side.

what implement did you have on the rear?

 

[KenBike]

I just had a 75 pound quick hitch.
Should have. The ft blade to keep it planted!

 

[ovrszd]

Weight on the rear tires determine a tractor's stability, not the front tires. When doing FEL work we dramatically change the Center of Gravity on our tractors. Developing a mental way to judge that change is critical to our tractors and ourselves survival.

 

[Fallon]

Weight in the tires helps with traction & to some degree stability. Weight on or far behind the 3pt adds stability, traction AND unloads the front axle. Think of a teter toter. Put the fat kid on one side of the rear axle & the other end goes up in the air. The rear axle is beefy & fixed to take that load on the rear. The front axle is complex, weaker, more expensive & less stable. You want 50 to 100% of the weight you are lifting on the 3pt. Weighted rears add traction & prevent tipping a bit, but do nothing to unload your front axle.

 

[ovrszd]

Weight in the tires helps with traction & to some degree stability. Weight on or far behind the 3pt adds stability, traction AND unloads the front axle. Think of a teter toter. Put the fat kid on one side of the rear axle & the other end goes up in the air. The rear axle is beefy & fixed to take that load on the rear. The front axle is complex, weaker, more expensive & less stable. You want 50 to 100% of the weight you are lifting on the 3pt. Weighted rears add traction & prevent tipping a bit, but do nothing to unload your front axle.

Weight in the tires adds a LOT of stability. Actually better than weight on the 3pt, which can become unstable in the wrong off camber situation.

The unloading the front axle discussion gets extremely complex. I never consider weight added to the rear of the tractor as unloading the front axle. On the contrary. It actually allows the operator to put larger loads on the front axle.

Here's an example:

1. I'm trying to pick up a load with the FEL. Rather than pick up the load the tractor simply raises the rear wheels off the ground. This action applies XXXlbs of weight on the front axle.

2. So,,,,, I go back to the shed and attach a Ballast Box, rear blade, brush cutter, whatever, on the 3pt. Now I go back and try to pick up the load again using the FEL. This time the load is actually lifted off the ground and the rear tires remain on the ground. This action applies XXXlbs of weight on the front axle.

Which example above applies the most weight on the front axle?

 

[Turbys_1700]

We've never had a tractor on the farm without loaded rears...
Don't understand why anyone would have a tractor without loading rears...
I mow the yard with a 6,000# tractor...
Add an additional 1200# for the FEL and I am at over 7200# and still have minimal yard damage...
I do run R4's...

Great write up...
Thanks...

 

[Fallon]

Weight in the tires adds a LOT of stability. Actually better than weight on the 3pt, which can become unstable in the wrong off camber situation.

The unloading the front axle discussion gets extremely complex. I never consider weight added to the rear of the tractor as unloading the front axle. On the contrary. It actually allows the operator to put larger loads on the front axle.

Here's an example:

1. I'm trying to pick up a load with the FEL. Rather than pick up the load the tractor simply raises the rear wheels off the ground. This action applies XXXlbs of weight on the front axle.

2. So,,,,, I go back to the shed and attach a Ballast Box, rear blade, brush cutter, whatever, on the 3pt. Now I go back and try to pick up the load again using the FEL. This time the load is actually lifted off the ground and the rear tires remain on the ground. This action applies XXXlbs of weight on the front axle.

Which example above applies the most weight on the front axle?

Again go back to the fat kid on a teter toter. The more weight on one end, the less weight on the other. In this case the rear axle is the pivot.

If you lift a heavy load & the rears come off the ground 100% of the weight of the tractor & whatever load is sitting on that front axle. And that pivot on the front axle is almost assuredly starting to tip setting you up to roll over in microseconds.

If you have a load on the 3pt (even better, way behind for more leverage) weight is transfered from the front to the rears, regardless of anything on the loader. That leaves 3pt weight + transfered weight on the rear axle.

Proper ballast on the 3pt isn't high. It's usually as high as the axle or lower. Box blade, tiller, even a rotary cutter are all lower profile than most CUT axles. In that case it's actually got a lower center of gravity than wheel weights or any liquid ballast over the axle centerline.

Somebody on TBN actually weighed axles attempting to disprove this (I think, maybe he was trying to prove it). He found the numbers showed a very noticable unloading of the front axle in all situations.