Відео

Here's the latest - ua-cam.com/users/shortsmjCMFe0ZYd8?si=l9toxq9XmMnAdnY1

Here's the latest - ua-cam.com/users/shortsmjCMFe0ZYd8?si=l9toxq9XmMnAdnY1

Yes, it can be done from the bottom. With a lift, it might be easier than removing the floor, but on flat ground, it will be tougher because you'll probably have to be on your back to see.

Nothing for that backhoe at this time.

Yes, but the hydraulic pump will likely be first.

260B is the same as the one on the 1025r. Unless you have an older 2025r

​@@MJF40 ok thanks

This is stage 3, and my recommendation is always stage 3, even if you don't have the backhoe. Almost everyone who upgrades to stage 1 or 2 ends up coming back to get stage 3, and they always say they should have started with stage 3. The reason is not because of max flow, rather it's the ability to get fast hydraulics at lower RPMs. The stage 3 does everything the stage 2 can do, but it does it at 500 RPMs less. That's less fuel, less noise, and less wear on your machine.

Thank you for this. My tractor will barely lift at idle. Have to idle up a few hundred RPM to lift. Think I could actually have some pump issues.

check out my comment to adam4218 in this thread. I always recommend stage 3 for the best performance.

This is still in the works, but it's still a ways out at this point. There are some nuances to it that I need to better understand.

This is flow divider only, aka the stage 1 kit. I don't recommend this kit, not because it's not great, but once you get it, you'll want more. Almost everyone ends up with the stage 3 in the end. The reason is mostly that the stage 1 at WOT is enough for what most people need and want, but with stage 3, you can get the same flow at around 2000 RPMs as you have at WOT with stage 1. Stage 3 has the same flow at idle as the stock tractor has at WOT.

I’m curious to know this myself 🧐

@@wraith3951no. The Turbo kit will Increased flow speeds up implement speed. Drive hydraulics are separate and you're still at 23.9hp stock

@MJF40 is correct. To help on the hills, I would recommend the HydrosPlus Turbo+. It makes a huge difference in what you can do in high range. You'll still be limited to the same speeds, and hydraulic temps may be a factor depending on what you're doing with the extra power. Hills typically wouldn't be a problem, but pulling a full box blade in high range down a mile long drive could build some heat and you would have to give it a break from time to time.

The quick answer yes becuase your engine RPM won't decrease as much as stock engine. But the extra HP from the turbo kit will greatly increase the heat going into the oil when the hydrostatic drive is pumping the oil over the high pressure relief valves.

Yep - we ship to Canada. I cover the broker fees and depending on what you order, you will have some additional duty. Give me a ring if you want more details on what that cost will be.

I'm still working on this solution. There is some nuance to it that I have to work through so that it's a solid solution.

Yes - very soon.

@@HydrosPlus awesome! Will it come with an available upgraded hydraulic cooler?

When transferring from mechanical to hydraulic, you have to account for inefficiencies in the pump. Generally, hydraulic pumps are ~80% efficient, so that's the number I'm using for this calculation (1371). While I could test the pump I have to obtain the actual efficiency, the industry norm is good enough for what I'm trying to do. That's also why I've named this machine the "Power Comparison Apparatus" vs. a dyno or other name suggesting it can determine HP. I think it's pretty close based on the numbers I'm getting for the stock power and what is published, but it's only truly reliable at determining the difference between 2 or more runs...assuming other variables at the time of each run are the same, such as ambient temp, the current moon phase, etc. ;)

I'm more of a "low range" kind of guy, but making a short with only 60 seconds allowed kicks me into "high range"

@@HydrosPlus kick it up a notch :-)

I"m not actually looking to address the "wobble" or "flex" in the loader. It's just something that has been mentioned to me by those interested in the future upgrades to the cylinders and pump. My goal, which maybe I should have stated explicitly, was just to explain the differences between this style loader and what is more commonly used when the loaders are redesigned (1, 2, & 4 series) So far, I find no fault in this design, and if I were guessing, it seems to be a stronger approach given it has 2 points of contact to apply pressure...but that's a guess with no engineering data to prove it. Are the redesigns to make the loader stronger and more reliable, and therefore better, or are they to save money, and the older, heavier designs are the better option? I don't know that answer.

@@HydrosPlus I guess I read too much into including the discussion in your video 😅. Maybe it's just because you can flip the locks on the open station tractors with your feet so you don't have to get off.

😢

Hey Tim do an edit...300X, H160 and "300R" you put 320R

@@glenmorris6775 done. Thanks!

Great info, thanks for sharing. I think you nailed the spelling :)

I bet money it's a fix for the sloppy loader valve.

shoulda watched further before i posted that! haha

Ya. I saw that but is it a new valve? I’m assuming a EOH solution since he said cab room and needing to be mounted inside.

​@@tylerstanley7775 If true I wonder how much different the 4 series are from the 3 series. I think I may have had a particularly acceptable 3320 (compared to others at least) because I didn't think there was really any change going from my 3320 to my 4720 (or maybe my 4720 is just as bad as the 3 series...).

Next shipment arrives in August.

Same machine from a loader standpoint.

@@TractorTimewithTim thanks Tim

Turbocharging alone will not damage your engine, but of course, with great power... Assuming you do the recommended maintenance at the same intervals suggested today, your engine may wear out a few hundred hours sooner than it would have if you stay stock. So rather than 10,000 hours, you may only count on about 9,500 hours. That said, this system is created for safe reliable horsepower that is intended to be used intermittently for tough situations that come up in the course of normal use. While my testing suggests you can run it for long periods of time under full turbo load, that's not something that you're likely to do because it's not going to "feel" right. In other words, this turbo would be something to get if you want to pull a 5' vs a 4' bush hog and still ensure it can cut anything your willing to run over, but if you're wanting to pull an 8' bush hog, you really do need a bigger tractor.