which model lifts 2500+

[design]

I have a M5400 and I just moved 1700#'s of shingles on a pallet using the loader with a bradco fork attachment. With a well balasted tractor, that much weight 24" in front of the loader pins makes the tractor very light in the rear end. Going backward up my driveway was enough that I needed to engage 4WD to avoid slipping the rear tires.
1 degree driveway, Loaded 16.9x28 rears and a 600# counter weight. (Tractor weight about 7500#(tractor, loader frame, Counter weight, and loaded tires)
At 2500# for bucket capacity, look to the larger M series Ag tractors or the M59.

Design

 

[texasjohn]

If you are looking at FEL lift capacity, it gets real complicated to come up with a number...I'll give you my experience:

See my signature for tractor, FEL. I can lift 2800 lbs with the FEL... however, that's its absolute limit and the following is also true:

I visited my dealer and they set the hydraulic bypass just OVER the specifications.. before this, pressure bypassed just UNDER specifications and would not lift the weight.
I must remove FEL bucket to increase the payload.
I chain my load directly to hang under the fully retracted quick attach using the crossbar pipe.
I can only lift it about 1.5 foot off the ground.

Study the geometry of the FEL.. it's complex as a load is lifted and bucket/forks are employed...

My net is that you MUST be at least have the same tractor/loader capacity that I have.... and if you REALLY mean that you want to lift this amount regularly in a bucket or with a fork, then you will have to move up to equipment that is rated, IMHO, at 3500lbs or better.

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

If your looking at 2500lbs AT THE PINS (why you would look at this, I don't know) You can get by with an LA854 loader (L4240-L5740). Those do about 1900lbs at bucket center, and about 2500 at the pins. There is typicaly about a 30% change from moving that 20" or so. To really do 2500lbs in the bucket takes an M-Series machine.

 

[texasjohn]

I think Messick and I are in full agreement. I've proven to myself that 2500 is right at the max an L series machine can handle. He's adding his extensive experience that you need to move to an M series. You are onthe right track with QA and HST specifications.

 

[dfkrug]

RCR:

Since you have the CK30, and I assume the KL130 FEL (as do I), I ran
some #s......

The lift cyls are 1.75" ID, so they generate 6010 lb of force ea with the relief
set at 2500psi. On the ground, the moment arm of the cyls are 12",
giving a moment of 6010 ft-lb. The perpedicular distance to the bkt pivot
is 56" on the ground, which yields an upward force at that point of 1286 lb.
This means that both boom cyls generate an upward force at the bkt pivots
of 2574 lb. That's a lot of lift force. When you raise the boom to the top,
the cyl moment arm goes down to 7.5", and the perpendicular distance to
the bkt pivot goes down to 54". This yields an upward force of 1670lb at
the top.

So why does the Kl130 spec sheet say 1155 lb at the top? Well for one,
the spec pressure is only 2000psi. That means the cyl push force is only
4811, instead of 6010. This yields 1336 total force at the top, which is
181lb over. That is the weight of the std bkt, within a lb of what I measured.

Have you measured your hyd pressure?

 

[wallace]

I would be looking at a Kioti DK40SE(41hp) with specs like these and a 4 year warranty on the tractor

A - Maximum Lift Height 107.8"
B - Clearance with Attachment Level 105.5"
C - Clearance with Attachment Dumped 79.9"
D - Reach at Maximum Height 16.1"
E - Maximum Dump Angle 73ｰ
F - Reach with Attachment on Ground 73.6"
G - Attachment Rollback Angle 30ｰ
H - Digging Depth Below Grade 6.7"
J - Overall Height in Carry Position 52.7"
L - Depth of Attachment (to back of inner shell) 20.7"
M - Height of Attachment 22.6"
N - Depth of Attachment (to pivot pin) 25.9"
Lift Capacity to Full Height at Pivot Pins 2,761 lbs
Breakout Force at Pivot Pins 3,727 lbs
Relief Valve Setting (Loader Control Valve) 2,556 psi
Rollback Force at 500mm forward on the ground 4,633 lbs
Rated Flow (Tractor System) 10 GPM
Lift Cylinder Bore 60 x Rod 35 x S.t 485
Bucket Cylinder

 

[SPYDERLK]

To calculate the new weight rating with your attachment, compute the torque generated from the attachment as a function of the weight of the attachment (COG) and the distance the COG is from the Lift Pins.
Derate lift capacity by the torque.

: )

Wrong. The torque is on the tractor frame. The hydraulics apply lift to a parallelogram linkage. The implement does not pivot wrt the tractor like the liftarms do and thus lift diminishes only a small amount with distance behind the lift eyes. This amount is attributable to the imperfect geometry of the linkage.
larry

 

[madslick]

Wrong. The torque is on the tractor frame. The hydraulics apply lift to a parallelogram linkage. The implement does not pivot wrt the tractor like the liftarms do and thus lift diminishes only a small amount with distance behind the lift eyes. This amount is attributable to the imperfect geometry of the linkage.
larry

Ha ha, ok,
Please see the attached pic.
If joint A is fixed (Analysis by reduction), the Force (weight) applied at Joint C, reduces the lift capacity by the Lift force as a function of the length and position of cog at Joint C.
M= F x d ( in perpendicular cases)
The Lift arm linkage can be reduced to a perfect perpendicular case by disecting the vector into it's vertical and Horizontal components (x) and analyzing the vertical component.
SOH CAH TOA


Again, my original statement stands...
If you don't agree please try to prove your point.

: )

 

[SPYDERLK]

Ha ha, ok,
Please see the attached pic.
If joint A is fixed (Analysis by reduction), the Force (weight) applied at Joint C, reduces the lift capacity by the Lift force as a function of the length and position of cog at Joint C.
M= F x d ( in perpendicular cases)
The Lift arm linkage can be reduced to a perfect perpendicular case by disecting the vector into it's vertical and Horizontal components (x) and analyzing the vertical component.
SOH CAH TOA


Again, my original statement stands...
If you don't agree please try to prove your point.

: )

I dont follow your prose - you seem to have left out point B of the diagram. The diagram will suffice however to suggest that your two posts are not coherently joined. Werent we talking about a 3PH? Since, once we add the 3rd point, it is a parallelogram linkage, the force at points C [the lift eyes] will be applicable to the implement, lifting it straight up without pivoting it wrt tractor. Note that there is no torque at points C since they are pivots. Consequently, regardless of where the weight of the implement is concentrated, if that weight is less than the force at points C the tractor will lift it. If that weight happens to be too far back you will have to add front ballast to the tractor or the wheels will come up.
If all you were saying is that the force applied at point B is reduced as you move out on the arm to point C, I agree. My point is that the force reduction [almost completely] stops at C with a 3PH. Thus implement COG location affects only handling, not lift capacity.
larry

 

[madslick]

If all you were saying is that the force applied at point B is reduced as you move out on the arm to point C, I agree. My point is that the force reduction [almost completely] stops at C with a 3PH. Thus implement COG location affects only handling, not lift capacity.
larry

Crapiola!
I forgot the Top-link...
That explains our Differences.
Ha ha ha
At least my picture was able to identify the fault in my analysis...

NO TOPO LINKO!

Thanks Spyderlk

Later...