Yet another 3000 series wheel spacer thread

[toddler]

This seems to be the most recent thread on wheel spacers, so I'm asking here.

I have a 3520 I picked up this weekend. It had 9.9 hours on it when we drove it onto the trailer, and 10.5 now, so it was basically new. Still has 0 PTO hours.
I bought it privately from a guy who unfortunately needed to sell it. The dealer he bought from had loaded the read tires (43x16-20 4P R4s) with glycol, but mounted them valves out. I'm planning to add wheel spacers, and am wondering if I should add 2" spacers and move the wheels to their wide setting, or add 4" and leave the valve stems out. Is there any functional/safety/performance benefit to one option over the other?
Thanks,
Todd

 

[CobyRupert]

Functionally: At first I was going to say that with spacers the extra leverage/torque experienced because of the increased width is placed on the axle (imagine if the spacers where 10' wide and your tires had max. traction at full horsepower). But this is also true with a "deeper" rim setting (again imagine if the rim's dish offset was 10' deep; just now the rims hub plate AND axle is also experiencing this additional torque. Technically the rim hub plate is in a "weaker configuration", but the tractor is engineered for this configuration, so I wouldn't (and don't) worry about it.

 

[toddler]

Technically the rim hub plate is in a "weaker configuration", but the tractor is engineered for this configuration, so I wouldn't (and don't) worry about it.

You mean the wheel's hub plate is slightly weaker in the wide setting? It does appear that a flat spacer would fit better on the wheel with the valves out. Otherwise it sits against the "bump outs" from the shaping of the hub plate. However,I agree, it should be plenty strong either way. The centering bump on the spacer my sit deeper in the valve out position though. Doubt that matters much either.

 

[CobyRupert]

You mean the wheel's hub plate is slightly weaker in the wide setting? It does appear that a flat spacer would fit better on the wheel with the valves out. Otherwise it sits against the "bump outs" from the shaping of the hub plate. However,I agree, it should be plenty strong either way. The centering bump on the spacer my sit deeper in the valve out position though. Doubt that matters much either.

Not sure how the 'botas do it, but if you are changing the way the inner rim (disk/hub) connects to the outer rim (assuming this isn't fixed/welded) so that the "offset" is increasing (i.e. the horizontal offset distance from the end of the center hub to the center of the outer rim) then yes, the inner rim disk is experiencing some increased leverage/torque.

 

[toddler]

Got it. Thanks.
3520 is Deere. You thought I meant 3540 I think, which is just discontinued Grand L. Bota is now on the 3560, and Deere is going to 3033R and 3039R to repace the 3320/3520/3720 models. Tier 4 ... I avoided that.

 

[greg_g]

am wondering if I should add 2" spacers and move the wheels to their wide setting, or add 4" and leave the valve stems out.

If you measure from both sides, you'll quickly realize that there's very little width gained when reversing the rear R4 rims. Plus, the valve stems are a PITA to get to on the inside rear. And I strongly recommend 4" spacers. That takes you out to within an inch or so of the max width that's spec'd available with the widest R1 setting. But by all means, reverse the fronts. With them reversed, I got by with 2.5" spacers.

//greg//

 

[CinderSchnauzer]

If you measure from both sides, you'll quickly realize that there's very little width gained when reversing the rear R4 rims. Plus, the valve stems are a PITA to get to on the inside rear. And I strongly recommend 4" spacers. That takes you out to within an inch or so of the max width that's spec'd available with the widest R1 setting. But by all means, reverse the fronts. With them reversed, I got by with 2.5" spacers.

//greg//

I didn't major in physics, however, I don't think there is anything to be gained by reversing the front wheels, since the front axle pivots in the middle.

 

[toddler]

I didn't major in physics, however, I don't think there is anything to be gained by reversing the front wheels, since the front axle pivots in the middle.

I think widening the front is more to keep the front and rear wheel tracks close to being the same. More important if you have crop rows you're driving over.

I ordered 3 1/2 inch spacers for the back and will swap the fronts to wide when I put them on.

 

[greg_g]

I didn't major in physics, however, I don't think there is anything to be gained by reversing the front wheels, since the front axle pivots in the middle.

Pivot, yes. But distance to the pivot stop is short. Increasing the front track width benefits stability the instant the pivot stop is reached. Plus, widening the front to (closely) match the rears also leaves behind only two tire tracks - rather than four.

//greg//

 

[CinderSchnauzer]

Pivot, yes. But distance to the pivot stop is short. Increasing the front track width benefits stability the instant the pivot stop is reached. Plus, widening the front to (closely) match the rears also leaves behind only two tire tracks - rather than four.

//greg//

OK Agree on the tracking portion, however, by the time the front hits the pivot stop, one of the rear wheels is going to be seriously in the air, perhaps to the point of no return.