XR3135, the T-rex of tractors??

[1stDeuce]

I've been looking at LS tractors as a very likely option for my next major purchase. I like the features, size and capability of the XR3135 tractor, but I find myself wondering about the tiny 25" R4 front tires. Every time I see a picture of one, it makes me think of a t-rex, with it's tiny front legs, and huge back legs. :confused2:
It seems that historically, all the 3000 series LS tractors used smaller front tires.
Other brands seem to have 27's in R4, and 7-16's in R1 on similar size tractors, excluding of course NH Boomer's...

Strangely, the opposite is true of the 4000/4100 tractors, which have oversize front tires compared to other brands.

I have noticed that the 7-14 ag tires used on this series are a little taller (~27") than the 25-14 R4's (~25.5"), so it might be possible to bump the R4's to 27-15's if an appropriate set of wheels could be found.

If anyone has a 3000/3100 series tractor with R1 tires, can you toss up a picture for me?

Just seems odd that LS put comparatively undersize tires on this series, while the next series up has slightly oversize tires. ??

 

[PJSprog]

Purely from an aesthetics point of view, I actually like that smaller front wheel look. I don't think it's an issue at all on these smaller tractors.
I'm also looking at buying an XR3135HC (with the industrial tires, though).

 

[PJSprog]

The T-rex reference is funny, though. :laughing:

 

[George2615]

I have the XR3037HC which also has the smaller R4 tires. I would have preferred the larger front tires but would have to go with the 4000 series to get them. When I needed a tractor the dealer had the 3037 in stock but not a 4040 so I bought the 3037. I've now had it over 2 years and never a problem with the front tires. As long as they are aired up properly they do the job but like you say, it looks odd with smaller tires. The 3135 is basically the same as the 3037 but with the LS engine. If you want the larger tires go with the 4000/4100 series. You get the bigger tires and much greater loader and 3 pt. lift capacities.
I like my LS a lot. It does all I need it to do. Its very rare I need to lift more than a ton with the loader so it suits my needs well. I've never seen a 3037 or 3135 with R1's as the majority get R4's. The stock R4's are rated for 2130 lbs. max load each (4260 for the pair) and are more than capable for the tractor. If I remember there is a member that has R1's on his 3037. Hopefully he'll read this and post a couple pics.
Here's a couple pics of mine wire the R4's.

 

[1stDeuce]

Thanks for the thoughts and pics fellas.

To clarify, I'm not worried about the rated capacity of the tires, as it's likely more than sufficient. My concern is that the tiny footprint will make travel over soft ground difficult, particularly with the loader full of dirt or lifting logs...

The first use for my tractor will be developing a property and putting up a log home... No doubt the ground will be soft in places, and I'll be lifting quite a bit...

For the small relative price difference, I'll probably bump to a 41xx series... You rarely hear anyone complain that they bought too big a CUT.

 

[BradTx]

I have the 4140 with R1's and your topic is one of the reasons I didn't go with the 3100 series. I have several places on my property that is wet and I wanted larger tires to give better capabilities in those areas. I too liked the look of the larger tires in the front.

 

[roadhunter]

I wish more manufacturers would change this. In the old days when tractors were just to pull things the large rear wheels and small fronts worked great. Now much of the work these smaller tractors do is with the FEL. When you think about the weight being carried by each axle when the FEL is being used it's obvious that the front axle is carrying much of the load on those tiny tires and axles.

When you are picking up a load and feel the rear of the tractor get light you not only have the majority of the tractor's weight but also the object you are picking up as well all on the front axle. You notice construction equipment with loaders often have similar sized tires on the front axle. There is a reason for that.

 

[sikmusicfreak8]

Man, those do look kind of ridiculous, haha. My tractor needed new front tires, so I just went ahead and installed the larger set of tires that Branson had as options, much happier now.

 

[Hinomotoman]

I have 2 26hp tractors with bigger front tires than my R3039.
Eugene

I have the 4140 with R1's and your topic is one of the reasons I didn't go with the 3100 series. I have several places on my property that is wet and I wanted larger tires to give better capabilities in those areas. I too liked the look of the larger tires in the front.

 

[1stDeuce]

I have the 4140 with R1's and your topic is one of the reasons I didn't go with the 3100 series. I have several places on my property that is wet and I wanted larger tires to give better capabilities in those areas. I too liked the look of the larger tires in the front.

Can we get a pic? I'm leaning toward R1's too because R4's can't be run at lower pressures for better flotation... or I should say it doesn't seem to make much difference, since the tire is so stiff. Plus 16.5" rims don't have any bead retention as far as I know...