What should my rear ballast weigh ?

[CharlieS]

I would be curious why some are opposed to filling tires? I respect that you don't want to do it, just curious about the reasoning.

Personal preference as much as anything i suspect. Loading tires presents several potential problems. Using water only is only good in areas where freezing isnt an issue, Anti-freeze mixes mostly are toxic, and can get expensive. CaCl2 (calcium) is expensive, toxic and corrosive. Tubeless tires need tubes installed to prevent wheel damage. Rim-Guard is costly also. Tire repair/replacemnt is also more expensive. Weight adjustment is also time consuming, having to pump the fluid in or out of a tire should one need to adjust ballast.

 

[RoyJackson]

Weight adjustment is also time consuming, having to pump the fluid in or out of a tire should one need to adjust ballast.

I doubt you'd ever find anyone removing liquid ballast from the rear tires...

 

[CharlieS]

I doubt you'd ever find anyone removing liquid ballast from the rear tires...

Actually i have seen it done once or twice, but my point was, that it would be quite a chore and not something one would want to undertake under normal circumstances.

 

[Duffster]

I have often thought about doing this as well but it would be anything but accurate. It would be a rough approximation at best.

The amount of pressure the load will exert back on the cylinders would directly be related to where it is located in relationship to the pins, and at what height it is lifted to.

500lbs of dirt/gravel in the bucket will give a different reading than say... a chained load off the edge or a hook. And 500lbs lifted at max height is going to give a higher psi reading than 500lbs at ground level as well. Its the whole levers and angles thing.

And regardless of how much is in your bucket, it would still make it hard to guage the weight in the front axle. 500lbs in the bucket with no weight out back vs 500lbs on the back will give two totally different amounts of weight over the front while still reading the same on the guage.

Wouldn't this be fairly accurate for figuring the load on say the front axle?

If you figure some constants like the loader at max reach (that is where the highest load on the front tires would be) and a fixed amount of counterweight, wouldn't the gauge be fairly accurate?

 

[Ford tractor]

Just for kicks, I went out and took some measurments off my tractor. The distance from the center of the front axle to the bucket edge is 67". The distance from front axle to 3PH pins is 91". 67/91=.74.

What that means is to maintain the same F/R weight % you would need 74% of whatever your loader can lift hanging off the 3PH pins. Assuming your tractors measurments equal about the same ratio. Your loader can lift~ 545lbs at the edge. 545*.74=~400lbs of ballast needed to maintain the same weight distribution.

But 500-600 would be a little better IMO because even with no load in the bucket, if you rais it all the way, it can become a little unstable. 2 reasons is that it raises the center of gravity, and also because it moves the load farther from the front axle which is what the tractor tries to pivot around. Thus giving it more leverage on the ballast.

I also wanted to point out that my wheel base is 64". The loader pins are 67" in front of the front axle. Almos a 1:1 ratio. That means that for every pound of fluid in the tire will only ballast 1 pound in the bucket. I have loaded tires @ 200lbs each on a loader that will lift 853lbs @ the edge. Loaded rears will only account for about half the load in the bucket.

Just some food for though for those who care to ponder.

I didn't wade into the whole thread, so I hope this isn't duplicate info.

Your calculation is incorrect. The distances to compare torque arms are from the center of the bucket to the FRONT axle and from the center of the rear counter weight to the REAR axle. There are 2 objectives with rear weight. The one most people think about is to increase traction by maintaining weight on the rear tires. The one that is sometimes forgotten is to take weight off the front end so steering is easier and the front end components are not so over stressed. Just look at the weight ratings of the front tires vs the rear tires. If you don't add ballast and pick the rear wheels off the ground the entire weight of the machine plus load is on the front tires, axle and steering components. VERY damaging over time.

When the FEL is full and it tries to lift the rear wheels, the pivot point is the front axle, but that's not the only thing to care about! When you add rear weight, add enough to actually lighten the front axle when the bucket is full. That will keep you from wearing out the front end. So, the pivot point that will do that is from the weight to the rear axle.

Typically, the distance from the bucket center to the front axle is 1x to 1.5x the distance from the rear weight to the rear axle. So, the amount of weight should be equal to the loader max lift or 1.5X that amount.

Hope that made sense...

Ford Tractor

 

[LD1]

But my measurments ARE correct.

But I understand your point as well. I was comparing the Front to rear percentage. You were just calculating weight.

Say a tractor with an empty bucket and no counter weight has 2000lbs on the front and the tractor weigs 4000lbs. You figured enought counter weight to still stay @ only 2000lbs front when loader is loaded. (obviously it would be lighter without the load).

I figured just keeping it 50%F/50%R. Just maintaining the same balance takes less weight.

 

[Marveltone]

Typically, the distance from the bucket center to the front axle is 1x to 1.5x the distance from the rear weight to the rear axle. So, the amount of weight should be equal to the loader max lift or 1.5X that amount.

Hope that made sense...

Ford Tractor

That was both the simplest and most concise explanation I've seen yet. I actually understood that! :shocked:

 

[Don87]

My MF GC2400 manual calls for 25% of gross vehicle weight with loader loaded to max capacity.
I can find the tractor weight, and the bucket weight and capacity, but no weight is listed for the loader arms and so forth.
So I just guesstimated and added roughly 400 pounds to rear tires and rear ballast combined.


Don


P.S. and I agree..........Ford Tractor's post is the easiest to understand.

 

[RoyJackson]

That was both the simplest and most concise explanation I've seen yet. I actually understood that! :shocked:

Looks like a good rule of thumb if you don't have the loader manual. If you do have the manual, I suggest that takes precedent.