The fact that you did a follow up video in response to a multitude of comments, speaks volumes about your commitment to educating the tractoring community. Another outstanding job, Neill!👍👍👍
Agree!! I was stoked to see this video. Physics says ballast makes a difference, and it’s great to see in reality. Some extensions on the ballast box to get the weight farther from the fulcrum would be a really cheap way to increase the effect of your ballast weight. I.e., it would bring the offset closer to one to one.
Thanks for the videos! In aviation, we calculate the effect of a weight placed in an aircraft by a simple formula: weight x arm = moment. Multiply the weight (ballast, person, gravel in the bucket etc.) by the arm (or distance) from a standard reference point (called a datum point) and that will give you a moment number. I would suggest using the front axle as your datum point. For example if you put 100 lbs 10" from the datum (100# x 10" = 1000) it would cause the same effect as 10 pounds 100 inches from the datum point. (10# x 100" = 1000) Any weight forward of that point would have a negative distance and anything behind that point would be a positive distance. You can also calculate the center of gravity by adding up all the moment numbers and dividing it by the total weights. (Using the last examples: total moments = 2000, divide by the total weight of 110# gives you a center of gravity of 18.2 inches behind from the datum point. Hard to explain here, but there are lots of videos. Look up "weight and balance aviation" and any place they say "airplane" replace it with "tractor"!
This some very good "lingo". Been saying rear leverage counter-weighted rear axle is "where it's AT". Were as tire blast just "AMPLIFY's" the problem of "Leveraging" MORE weight on those puney front axle spindles. Way to go,for the suggestion Sir.
The aviation procedure is for finding CG location, which is what is needed for an aircraft. CG location does not show the weight split between the front and rear axles. The weight on the front axle will be the total weight multiplied by the distance the CG is ahead of the REAR axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle.
Yes but. :-) For calculating the impact of the ballast, you calculate using the rear axle as the fulcrum for the moment. For calculating the impact of the weight in the FEL, you calculate using the front axle as the fulcrum for the moment. Then do some funky maths to combine the two.
For calculating the impact of ballast, FEL or anything else on the FRONT axle use the REAR axle as the fulcrum. The impact of the object on the front axle weight will be the weight of the object multiplied by the distance the object's CG is ahead of the rear axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle. For calculating the impact of FEL, ballast or anything else on the REAR axle use the FRONT axle as the fulcrum. The impact of the object on the rear axle weight will be the weight of the object multiplied by the distance the object's CG is behind of the front axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle. Rear tire ballast always has zero effect on front axle weight.
I would agree that tire ballast does nothing to take weight off front axle, but adding weight behind rear tires will take weight off front axle. Hook a big trailer behind your truck and what does it do to front end? That is even considering that the rear springs are helping to cushion the rear end. Ever hook a camper to your truck and drive after dark? You could go raccoon hunting, lights shining in the trees. So yup, I do believe it takes weight off front axle with counterweight behind rear tires on tractor.
I should have ordered one with my BX2680....even the roto-tiller doesn't weigh enough for doing loader work, I think its only about 300 pounds...I think the spec sheet says 298 or something like that, but it definitely is not enough ballast for doing actual loader work.
Good news is that a ballast box is a place where you can go cheap. So long as the 3 point is in spec, send it. I spent a couple hundred on mine and then filled it with the washout concrete from a build site. Easy 7-800lbs for the rear, and the results are night and day in loader performance/stability.
As a mechanical engineer myself, and a look before I leap compact tractor shopper, this video brings amazing value! Thank you for the great content in your videos Neil!
Lots of good info, and numbers to back it up. I personally think the Mfr. Underated the axel to be on the safe side. I say that because we both know that we owners push these small tractors way past design limits and yet they still hold up. Outstanding!
Thanks for doing this followup! It would be neat if you also show the effect of leverage, say with a 500lb brush hog where it pushes the center of gravity of the ballast out farther from the rear axle. It will reduce the weight on the front even more. But obviously would be hard to drive around with.
I have a land pride box blade that I use as ballast. Spec sheet says it’s 315 lbs. I think it’s good for most of the loader work I do. But there have been times I don’t feel like it’s enough. I wish box blade manufacturers would put a bracket on the back that would fit suitcase weights.
HAHA, the box blade I have does have cross bars on it that I can hang my suitcase weights from...it works quite well, but still isn't really enough ballast for doing heavier loader work.
I purchased my tractor from our local dealer in MN and upon delivery I immediately pushed some snow around... the only thing going through my head? "Messick's... A helping hand with your land" For about 2 hours straight. Excellent video
Very helpful, BX2380 here, I just changed to a QH ballast box with close to 500#, I can grab and drop it quickly. Since it relieves the front axil, I’m inclined to stay at that weight for front implements. Thanks.
I am an engineer. The weight of the wheels, tires, wheel weights and fluid ballast should be subtracted when measuring the working load of the axle. A simple way to look at it is the ground holds the weight of the wheels and tires, the wheels and tires hold the axle plus its working load.
Yes!!! the weight in the back definitely takes weight off the front wheels because I have no steering when I plow with the backhoe on the back of my B2650. I would love to leave it on because it's handy to pull myself out of stuff if I get really stuck but I have no steering if I leave it on with the front plow attached.
Very informative. So this shows the difference between commercial - AKA a skidsteer; and a tractor. The skidsteer will have a huge margin of error and the tractor will be deadset on the limit. This also doesn't take into account those of us on hills where the tractor twists, the shock loads when you hit a bump or wet vs dry material (clay I'm looking at you....). I have assembled and made my own seal replacement grab bag of tools for the front axle seals and expect to keep using it.
Tractors honestly weren't built with a loader in mind, just happens that many people like a tractor with a loader so they're offered as an attachment/accessory to the machine....they were really built for pulling type duties, such as plows, discs, etc., as well as PTO implement uses rather than lifting things and moving things with a loader....where a skid steer was built with those types of tasks as its main duty, so it has quite the margin of error when it comes to capacities.
Great job with these videos! I Have a 2012 bx25 with loader and backhoe (summer), loader and rear 54" snowblower (winter), essentially acting as my ballast box , with the rear equipment attached the loader does a magnificent job .I have never understood why you would attach a ballast box if you have attachments that weigh as much or sometimes more. You/one could easily work the loader and front axle past recommended capacities ( if you are a worker or employee who doesnt care about the equipment) but as an owner/operator , i would like the equipment to last a long long time. Dont get me wrong, i by no means baby it either. there have been situations where the rear is in the air and the bucket is mid lift. the front axle holds (thank goodness) but the axle was not meant for that kind of abuse. what i am trying to say is , after 10 yrs of mid to heavy construction style use, luckily only regular maintenance has been required and wear on leading implement edges have been observed. Tools used for their intended purposes perform well. when they are expected to operate beyond manufacturer specs. then expect failure.I absolutely love this equipment. True not a skid steer nor mini ex. but definitely a happy medium.sorry kinda got into a long winded rant
The 1025 (120r??) loader manual talks about ballast and weight limits extensively. You need to hang a LOT of weight off the back to keep everything in spec. Too bad nobody reads it, but for the most part the tractors still tolerate it. Thanks for the follow up!!! :)
I have been thinking of building some sort of bracket that mounts on the 3 point so I can hang weights on....or find a ballast box that isn't ridiculously priced LOL.
@William Sevier my neighbor got some pins and made a concrete block with the pins sticking out to mount on his 3 point hitch. He grades the road with this on while pulling a huge metal 8'x8' square made from 6" angle iron. He never spins out and his tractor is only 2 wheel drive. He said it is 30hp.
Hi Neil, Thanks for the great follow up video. The only thing I was hoping for at the end where you shared the overloaded numbers, was to show it again with you in the seat to see how much that changed the weight balance if anything. Dan
This has been an awesome set of videos! It’s another testament to the importance of ballast, but more importantly, they definitely don’t make them like they used to. Although incredible machines, I can’t imagine an L3560 lasting longer than an L3130 or even a L3010. Serviceability is what made the 8n and similar tractors stand the test of time. As long as you can justify the cost of repairs and be somewhat productive, it’s worth keeping.
I have no idea how many people read the manual that comes with their tractor but virtually all the information regarding load/lift specs is very well detailed in the manual. It pretty much tells you the limits of everything. Of course you can choose to ignore the limits, but still a good idea to understand what the factory recommended limits are.
When I ordered my B2601 I specified that it had a ballast box. I bought it primarily for moving snow and some earth moving. I took delivery a year ago this past Feb. so it didn't get used that winter, nor did I use it in good weather because I hadn't filled the ballast box with concrete yet. I cleared my drive once this past winter once , and only once without needing the ballast box, but spring is upon us and I've got plans, so bring on the concrete.
Neil, We expect a lot from you, and you delivered. Thank you! As far as the engineering, the designers take into account various factors, principally stability and the properties/strengths of the material utilized in the manufacturing. They would start with a conceptual design load for the class of machine. From there, the strengths of the various components would be evaluated within the CADD framework to identify the critical load components - the component that would fail first. If the conceptual design load is not achieved, that critical component is upgraded until the conceptual design load is achieved and the next most critical component is identified. This highly iterative process goes on and on until the conceptual design load is achieved and the stability parameters are met. Along the way, component wear and safety factors are considered. It is a very complex process for a machine like these and is aided significantly by computerization. At least, that is what I was taught in Engineering school, way back at the dawn of time....THANK YOU again for all that you do for us tractor nuts.
Watching a 80 yo 100 horsepower backhoe unit as it works shows that you are correct! I have seen some of them while back filling with the loader can easily lift the front tires when changing direction from reverse to forward. Shows the weight of said backhoe does fulcrum weight. Thanks fo the information & vids!
Excellent video. I have a 2016 BX2670 with 750 hours on it. At least half the hours are loader work- snow, mulch, topsoil, crushed stone. Hydraulics are shimmed and it makes a noticeable difference in lift capacity. I’m always rear ballasted with land pride box blade or 3 point snow blower. I’m not intentionally trying to break the tractor but I work it hard. At 650 hours the front tires (bar tread) were almost bald and the left front axel seal leaks. Replaced front tires and switched from kubota hydro fluid to amsoil heavy gear oil which stopped the leak. All I can say is this is a tough machine. Far exceeded my expectations.
Very good to know that the ballast counteracts the loader weight. I read some of the comments last video about this and wondered after reading many of the arguments. It’s good to see that ballast does matter in that respect and it will definitely make me sure to take it into account. Videos like this really help me learn and make better decisions when it comes to certain things and I really appreciate it!
I own two Deeres, 425 and 455. Great little tractors. Designed and built a front end loader that attaches to the front frame with just 4 bolts. Bucket is 32 inches wide, perfect for a tractor of this size and holds 6 cubic feet, again, perfect for these tractors. The back of the bucket is 14 inches from the frame. I could never understand why some manufacturers have the bucket extended so far out in front. Puts more stress on the axle and the hydraulics, with no advantage that I can see. Hi from Canada, to all my tractor loving brothers.
Nice video, Couple thoughts that came to me.... Rear tire fill as ballast, It does plant your wheels which should reduce rollover on hills and reduce rear wheels coming up when lifting a very heavy load, may not be the best to relieve weight on the front axle since it is on the wheels and not the tractor frame itself this would be interesting to test with those fancy scales . 😀 The other thought is you should back out the weight of the front wheels and tires from your total front weight since that weight is being transfered to the ground and not carried on the frame and front axle.
The fulcrum effect is pretty obvious that it would exist, although the actual difference is impressive and more than expected. One thing to be aware of is that having more ballast might allow you to more easily overload your front axle because the extra stability gives a false confidence. One thing I do is run a moderate wheel weight, and a lighter implement on the back especially for gravel work. Just enough to maintain stability under regular loads. Not so much that I'm at limits. That way I still feel it if I'm stuck or overloaded.
Way to go, Neil! Thanks for following up on that. Not only does it put a little more favorable numbers on those axles, but it really shows the importance of ballast weight. You still have a point about the axles being built a little light. When will you be doing a video on the new lx3520 and lx4020? I'm normally a Deere guy but those tractors look nice if only they had the twin touch pedals. Keep up the good work!
I upgraded to that same ballast from the loaders standard, glad to see I made the right decision. Thanks for all your videos, I know my machine will last longer and you've really helped me learn alot in the 3 years owning a BX. My only wish is more maintenance and repair videos for the BX and accessories with Neil or a tech. Still lots of new to me stuff I would love some pro videos from oil changes and the best way to get to that one BX fuel filter, to best practice loosening the seized clutch on my LP tiller.
Since most new tractors have quick attach plates and one attachment I use that may get my point across is a tree puller. It is a scissor like clamp with teeth that you grasp brush/small trees and work them out of the ground. During this procedure, the rear of the tractor can lift off the ground. Can you see my point that the front axle takes the weight of the load and tractor? And by adding ballast, you will add weight to the front axle (under these conditions).
I just wanted to make a point about wheel weights or liquid tire ballast. Which obviously these videos are not about but people say rear tire weight does not help your front axle survive. I say it does because it gives your rear axle more traction which makes life easier for your front axle….
Good job. It would've been interesting to have you compare the rear axle load to its specification with the max ballast box and max load in the loader bucker. I would expect it to be close to it's maximum on one side or the other.
I think one question we don't have the answer to would be...what exactly does "maximum axle load rating" mean? Does that include the weight of the axle itself, or is that in addition to the weight of the axle? Or is it in addition to the weight of the unladen tractor? As you mentioned, it would seem that the weight of the wheels and tires would not be included, since they are supporting the axle and not being supported by the axle. It would be interesting to have a clarification of the meaning of this rating, which would have to come from the manufacturer I would assume. Sometimes these figures are pure marketing.
Thank you for the information. As always, it is very much appreciated and valued. Things we often take for granted but make a real difference in the longevity of your equipment. I think your the only one I've seen spending the time showing this stuff. Thank you!
This is a Great education for me. I subscribed a long time ago and learn a lot, despite growing up on a farm. Thank you for my continuing education on tractors and associated equipment and dealership functions. Again thank you!!
My loader is more effective at lifting when I use adequate ballast, because energy isn't wasted in lifting weight off the rear axle. Instead the weight in the rear, helps lift in front.
Front AND back axle load capacity depends on speed the machine is intended to run at. Moving slower usually increases max load. Usually or at least for my New Holland T4.75 there is table in owners manual that specifies how fast you can go with certian load on the front axle.
Great video - next step, How about the back hoe? When doing really heavy loader work (stone or gravel) I always put the BH on. For lighter work I use the box blade as ballast
IDK how difficult it'd be to show but some people might need to be shown the difference in digging in 4x4 vs 2wd-diff-locked, the traction difference in diff-lock-2wd vs 4x4-not-locked-diff. In 4x4 some people dig with the front-axle's additional traction instead of arching the machine to put the full weight down on the bucket. Sometimes I move so dirt fast I wonder if I should be checking hydraulic temps, & I'm only at about 2200k-2600k RPMs on the 70-series. I'm on turf tires so I don't have the higher traction to abuse my front axle.
Great video! Heck, while we're opening a can of worms, can you talk about using Differential Braking with the Diff-Lock engaged? My Uncle managed to tear his differential into many small pieces when he forgot he had it engaged while doing tight turns in a field with differential braking and the diff-lock engaged. It was an expensive repair for his new tractor with less than 100 hours on it! 😏
The BX doesn't have steering brakes, it does have a diff lock, and many people say its pretty easy to break, and I'm not surprised, many people have no clue how to operate anything with a diff lock, which is why most vehicles do not have them, people would be breaking stuff all the time. A diff lock connects both left and right axle shafts together so they turn at the same speed regardless of direction of travel, and includes when turning. A conventional open differential allows both rear wheels to turn at different speeds while turning left or right. Attempting to slow or stop one of the wheels on the axle with the diff lock engaged will definitely break something, or several things, and yep it'll be expensive. Operator error caused that failure LOL.
I think that what is more important is how misleading or non existent specs affect ones warranty ? If the actual loader without a load is close to the front axle load specs then the tractor should not be allowed to be sold legally. Imagine putting 300 pounds in your bucket and your axle breaks in two and the dealer tells you sorry ,you over loaded it .?
Front axle longevity is one of the reasons I’m considering a DK over a CK. I don’t need the extra loader capacity but I figure if I’m running at 50 to 70 percent capacity vs 100 to 120 percent capacity that’s gotta be good for the axles.
I use the right pice of equipment for the job my go to equipment is most of the time is my track skid steer on my farm , I have a case 270 and it the 300,000 th made back in 2017 it says it right on it too
I would be curious to see the same test with the backhoe and a loaded heavy hitch. Just wondering how the mass in different configurations affect the front axle load.
To make things very clear I feel that you should’ve added some thing like the following: wheel weights, or fluid ballast in the rear tires do not make any difference to the loading on the front axle, as they are not part of the fulcrum affect. Now I understood what you meant by fulcrum, but there are a few folks that might need the additional clarity.
Great video. I can tell you for sure, by mowing without a loader on, that putting too heavy of a bush hog on the rear will definitely decrease your front axle weight. Even sometimes to ZERO! 😁 Still love to see how the back axle rating is affected, especially with different length mowers that put the weight farther away from the fulcrum of the 3pt lift. For instance, does a flail mower put less stress on the rear axle than a rotary cutter since it’s held closer to the tractor?
Better to shift weight to have rear axle as fulcrum instead the front axle as fulcrum. A well balanced machine is key...not too much in back either, like those plowing accidents.
My take is that, if you assume the two front wheels and tires (aka weight below the axle) are probably around 150 lbs, and therefore the tractor when ballasted as recommended, and lifting the recommended load, is exactly at the limit of the front axle. As it should be, it shows the engineers are doing their job right.
@Messick's Equipment they wouldn't have the fulcrum effect you spoke of in the video, but also don't effect the rear axle as well. Just helps to keep the rear end down, and provide more traction.
I dont imagine wheel weights would have much effect on how much weight sits on the front axle, if any at all. What they will do, is help counteract the effect of putting a bunch of weight way out in front on the REAR axle. And also improve traction, by weighing the rear tires down. That weight is carried on the wheels, not the axle.
This was on my mind also. I'm pretty positive its going to have little effect on the front. I need two tractors each setup differently to test it correctly.
Pyroman is correct that weighted rear wheels have no affect on the front axle. This is why I chose not to fill my tires and use 3 point balast (I do have wheel weights). Another part of the equation not mentioned is the further behind the rear axle you go, the more fulcrum effect you get. 500 lbs moved towards or away from the rear axle, even a few inches, will show a significant difference on the scales.
@@MessicksEquip I'd love to see a scale reading on this as well. Loaded tires definately keep the machine planted, but I wonder if there is even the slightest change on front axle weight. Love these videos!
With all of these tests one of the things that comes through is that the machines are engineered as a complete system and as long as we stay within the appropriately sized attachments they will last. Of course we are always going to get into situations where we push them to the limits and when we have the correct attachments we are less likely to get in trouble or damage the tractor. I was tempted to get a 54" bucket instead of 48" and after seeing these videos I'm glad that I stayed with the 48. Question on the front axle. With loader work we need to have it in 4x4 to get into the pile and if we are hauling the load a few hundred feet or more would it be easier on the front axle if we disengage 4x4 for the travel or does it not make a difference to keep it in 4x4? Thanks again for your great content!
So what is the back axle limit and what is it with the rear ballast added? Maybe you can get an engineer from Kubota or New Holland that can explain that from their side.
Thanks for the follow-up, Neil. I will definitely make sure I have ballast going forward. It never occurred to me that I was overloading the front axle. Is it possible to overload the rear axle with too much ballast? Thanks
Good video - I am wondering if you can do the same kind of calculations for us bigger tractor guys? It seems as though everything is sub compact everywhere you look. Take like an common MX5400 and toss it on the scales and see? But I notice that in the heavier tractors there are no specs like axle load capacities etc... published that I can find.
Great video - since you had the BX23S with the backhoe (I have that same unit), how does the backhoe fit in to the equation? I keep the backhoe on --anything wrong with that approach?
Hey Neil, Paul here. I purchased a Kubota Grand L 3560 with LA805 Loader IN JANUARY. I The loader 3rd function was on backorder then and now they are saying it could be June before it comes in. Any suggestions? I purchased it from CFI Calvert City, KY now First Choice. Thanks and I enjoy your channel and Outdoors with the Morgans too.
This is very informative and has made up my mind to start using more rear ballast, do you think the bx model was designed thinking the backhoe would always be on and that’s your real ballast?
Interesting seeing you adding the weight box to a BX23S, can you run the same test with the backhoe installed? I have never removed my backhoe, but I am wondering if the position and weight of the 3 point weight box is comparable to the position and weight of the BX23S backhoe? I really appreciate your video's, you have taught me a lot over the years!
@@Sventy11 Night and Day meaning easier to carry loads without the BH? I am fortunate to own 2 tractors in helping us maintain our property. The BX23S is solely used with the BH (diverting water on our walking paths, conduit trenching or removing 12" and smaller tree stumps), our primary utility tractor is a Grand L6060, it does everything else and then some!!
@@5077chip nice inventory! I meant that the tractor just feels so much better with the BH on when you're moving material with the FEL. You can almost feel the tractor teeter on the front axle and nothing on the back. And with anything in the bucket, you better not even try going across any hills.
Hmmm. Okay, the rear axle acts as a fulcrum. With weights behind the rear axle it decreases the weight on the front axle. For me it gets more complicated. If you have fluid filled rear tires, that "also" adds weight = better traction, but also would help prevent lifting the rear end if you have a heavy load in the loader. So, if you have the recommended amount of weight on the back end, would you still need fluid filled rear tires?? I hope you are able to expand on this series. Very educational!
Depends on what you are doing with your tractor. If, you are like many and have a sub-compact or compact tractor you use around your yard, I wouldn't ballast the tires with fluid, you'd leave terrible ruts in your yard LOL....now, if you use it in fields all the time, fluid filling the tires is a great way to get yourself more traction and weight for pull type implements like planters, plows, discs, etc....but for loader work fluid filling the tires would only help keep the back of the tractor on the ground, and wouldn't lesson the amount of weight on the front axle, only weights on the 3 point will do that.
On the topic of front axles....i have a question? i widen my rear tires and everyone said that's ok. i also flipped and widened my front tires. some say this adds stress to the axel and you should never widen the front. the wider stance also i have found handles loads in the bucket better and over all looks way better, any input on this? L2501dt.
What this tells me is that Kubota (and frankly any small tractor) is not designing their equipment to function as a loader. If they were they would beef up that front axle. We have a John Deere 640 loader at my work and the front axle is massive. I like Kubota, I have an L2501 but some of the things they do in their designs frustrates me (really, short control levers on the BH77 - you can do better Kubota).
You're adding in the weight of the axle itself when running these calculations. The axle, along with the tires and rims since the axle is hung from them. This should be omitted.
this. i mentioned the same thing last video. Very interesting to see the difference with the ballast installed. I have a Rake on the back but I'd like to get more weight on it seeing this
You are right, but he still has some valid points: 1) it's easy to put too much stress on the front axle and 2) we need balast when using the front loader. Like Neil said, we can all learn from this simple test.
Yes. Some manufacturers have a recommended rear ballast weight minimum. Adding more weight will reduce the front axle load. All the laws of physics still apply. But do not overload the 3 point either. As always, read that owners manual!
With loader full and full amount of ballast what does it do to the overall load on the tractor? Is it above the overall weight capacity of the tractor? I still want a sub compact but I’d use grapples more than loader bucket. Are grapples available or does that require a tractor upgrade?
Hey Neil, I run a BH77 on the back of my L2501. Would it be a good idea to build a ballast block to put in the bucket of the BH77 to bring the center of gravity back? Is that going to be ok with the BH77 subframe? I wouldn’t use it long-term, but when moving heavy rocks/logs with my grapple. Thanks for all the great knowledge!
I’ve always mentally used the weight of the BH77 as my counterbalance, but would a couple hundred pounds of steel plate in that bucket improve things, when hauling heavy loads?
Hey Neil, what is the weight of the ballast box in addition to the 500 pounds you put into it? Also, did you do the 2nd and 3rd tests with you on the tractor like the 1st test? It is good to see that while the 3 point hitch ballast does offset some front axle weight of the loader at carrying height it is nowhere near what the internet tries to claim time and again.
The fact that you did a follow up video in response to a multitude of comments, speaks volumes about your commitment to educating the tractoring community.
Another outstanding job, Neill!👍👍👍
Agree!! I was stoked to see this video. Physics says ballast makes a difference, and it’s great to see in reality. Some extensions on the ballast box to get the weight farther from the fulcrum would be a really cheap way to increase the effect of your ballast weight. I.e., it would bring the offset closer to one to one.
Thanks for the videos! In aviation, we calculate the effect of a weight placed in an aircraft by a simple formula: weight x arm = moment. Multiply the weight (ballast, person, gravel in the bucket etc.) by the arm (or distance) from a standard reference point (called a datum point) and that will give you a moment number. I would suggest using the front axle as your datum point. For example if you put 100 lbs 10" from the datum (100# x 10" = 1000) it would cause the same effect as 10 pounds 100 inches from the datum point. (10# x 100" = 1000) Any weight forward of that point would have a negative distance and anything behind that point would be a positive distance. You can also calculate the center of gravity by adding up all the moment numbers and dividing it by the total weights. (Using the last examples: total moments = 2000, divide by the total weight of 110# gives you a center of gravity of 18.2 inches behind from the datum point. Hard to explain here, but there are lots of videos. Look up "weight and balance aviation" and any place they say "airplane" replace it with "tractor"!
This some very good "lingo". Been saying rear leverage counter-weighted rear axle is "where it's AT". Were as tire blast just "AMPLIFY's" the problem of "Leveraging" MORE weight on those puney front axle spindles. Way to go,for the suggestion Sir.
The aviation procedure is for finding CG location, which is what is needed for an aircraft. CG location does not show the weight split between the front and rear axles. The weight on the front axle will be the total weight multiplied by the distance the CG is ahead of the REAR axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle.
Yes but. :-) For calculating the impact of the ballast, you calculate using the rear axle as the fulcrum for the moment. For calculating the impact of the weight in the FEL, you calculate using the front axle as the fulcrum for the moment. Then do some funky maths to combine the two.
For calculating the impact of ballast, FEL or anything else on the FRONT axle use the REAR axle as the fulcrum. The impact of the object on the front axle weight will be the weight of the object multiplied by the distance the object's CG is ahead of the rear axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle.
For calculating the impact of FEL, ballast or anything else on the REAR axle use the FRONT axle as the fulcrum. The impact of the object on the rear axle weight will be the weight of the object multiplied by the distance the object's CG is behind of the front axle, divided by the distance from the rear axle to the front axle.
Rear tire ballast always has zero effect on front axle weight.
I would agree that tire ballast does nothing to take weight off front axle, but adding weight behind rear tires will take weight off front axle. Hook a big trailer behind your truck and what does it do to front end? That is even considering that the rear springs are helping to cushion the rear end. Ever hook a camper to your truck and drive after dark? You could go raccoon hunting, lights shining in the trees. So yup, I do believe it takes weight off front axle with counterweight behind rear tires on tractor.
My dealership give’s each purchaser of a BX a Kubota ballast box and it makes perfect sense.
It would be interesting to see what the front axle weight is with a backhoe attached vs the 500 pounds of ballest.
Excellent follow up. I always have the ballast box on my machine unless there is another implement back there. Those 3-point arms are never empty.
I should have ordered one with my BX2680....even the roto-tiller doesn't weigh enough for doing loader work, I think its only about 300 pounds...I think the spec sheet says 298 or something like that, but it definitely is not enough ballast for doing actual loader work.
Good news is that a ballast box is a place where you can go cheap. So long as the 3 point is in spec, send it. I spent a couple hundred on mine and then filled it with the washout concrete from a build site. Easy 7-800lbs for the rear, and the results are night and day in loader performance/stability.
As a mechanical engineer myself, and a look before I leap compact tractor shopper, this video brings amazing value! Thank you for the great content in your videos Neil!
Lots of good info, and numbers to back it up. I personally think the Mfr. Underated the axel to be on the safe side. I say that because we both know that we owners push these small tractors way past design limits and yet they still hold up. Outstanding!
Not really, they hardly get used! Maybe 50-75hours per year on average in 90% of cases.
I bet it's close, i bet they dont include the tires or wheels.
Very good to know. It’s clear to me that a ballast box is better than just loaded rear tires.
Thanks for doing this followup! It would be neat if you also show the effect of leverage, say with a 500lb brush hog where it pushes the center of gravity of the ballast out farther from the rear axle. It will reduce the weight on the front even more. But obviously would be hard to drive around with.
Great followup Neil on the importance of ballast. Numbers don’t lie. Thanks 👍
You run a top notch business and channel Neil. Great presentation as always. These videos are like Veritasium but with tractors.
I have a land pride box blade that I use as ballast. Spec sheet says it’s 315 lbs. I think it’s good for most of the loader work I do. But there have been times I don’t feel like it’s enough. I wish box blade manufacturers would put a bracket on the back that would fit suitcase weights.
HAHA, the box blade I have does have cross bars on it that I can hang my suitcase weights from...it works quite well, but still isn't really enough ballast for doing heavier loader work.
I purchased my tractor from our local dealer in MN and upon delivery I immediately pushed some snow around... the only thing going through my head? "Messick's... A helping hand with your land" For about 2 hours straight. Excellent video
Very helpful, BX2380 here, I just changed to a QH ballast box with close to 500#, I can grab and drop it quickly. Since it relieves the front axil, I’m inclined to stay at that weight for front implements. Thanks.
I am an engineer. The weight of the wheels, tires, wheel weights and fluid ballast should be subtracted when measuring the working load of the axle. A simple way to look at it is the ground holds the weight of the wheels and tires, the wheels and tires hold the axle plus its working load.
This makes sense.
Yes!!! the weight in the back definitely takes weight off the front wheels because I have no steering when I plow with the backhoe on the back of my B2650. I would love to leave it on because it's handy to pull myself out of stuff if I get really stuck but I have no steering if I leave it on with the front plow attached.
Well Neil, I think you’ve engaged the community! 🤣. Cheers bud 🍻
I have a ballast box on the back constantly unless an implement is there. Seeing how much weight that takes off the front axle makes me glad I do.
Very informative.
So this shows the difference between commercial - AKA a skidsteer; and a tractor. The skidsteer will have a huge margin of error and the tractor will be deadset on the limit.
This also doesn't take into account those of us on hills where the tractor twists, the shock loads when you hit a bump or wet vs dry material (clay I'm looking at you....).
I have assembled and made my own seal replacement grab bag of tools for the front axle seals and expect to keep using it.
Tractors honestly weren't built with a loader in mind, just happens that many people like a tractor with a loader so they're offered as an attachment/accessory to the machine....they were really built for pulling type duties, such as plows, discs, etc., as well as PTO implement uses rather than lifting things and moving things with a loader....where a skid steer was built with those types of tasks as its main duty, so it has quite the margin of error when it comes to capacities.
Great job with these videos! I Have a 2012 bx25 with loader and backhoe (summer), loader and rear 54" snowblower (winter), essentially acting as my ballast box , with the rear equipment attached the loader does a magnificent job .I have never understood why you would attach a ballast box if you have attachments that weigh as much or sometimes more. You/one could easily work the loader and front axle past recommended capacities ( if you are a worker or employee who doesnt care about the equipment) but as an owner/operator , i would like the equipment to last a long long time. Dont get me wrong, i by no means baby it either. there have been situations where the rear is in the air and the bucket is mid lift. the front axle holds (thank goodness) but the axle was not meant for that kind of abuse. what i am trying to say is , after 10 yrs of mid to heavy construction style use, luckily only regular maintenance has been required and wear on leading implement edges have been observed. Tools used for their intended purposes perform well. when they are expected to operate beyond manufacturer specs. then expect failure.I absolutely love this equipment. True not a skid steer nor mini ex. but definitely a happy medium.sorry kinda got into a long winded rant
The 1025 (120r??) loader manual talks about ballast and weight limits extensively. You need to hang a LOT of weight off the back to keep everything in spec. Too bad nobody reads it, but for the most part the tractors still tolerate it. Thanks for the follow up!!! :)
I have been thinking of building some sort of bracket that mounts on the 3 point so I can hang weights on....or find a ballast box that isn't ridiculously priced LOL.
@William Sevier my neighbor got some pins and made a concrete block with the pins sticking out to mount on his 3 point hitch. He grades the road with this on while pulling a huge metal 8'x8' square made from 6" angle iron. He never spins out and his tractor is only 2 wheel drive. He said it is 30hp.
iirc, my manual recommended almost 800 lbs of 3pt ballast, plus wheel weights/filled tires.
JD recommends approximately 1000lbs total on my 2025R. All 3 ballast box, wheel weights, and loaded tires.
OUTSTANDING!!! Thanks Neil!
Great follow up video that demonstrates why the manual provides ballast recommendations. I appreciate the comment based content on this one.
Hi Neil, Thanks for the great follow up video. The only thing I was hoping for at the end where you shared the overloaded numbers, was to show it again with you in the seat to see how much that changed the weight balance if anything. Dan
All numbers were recorded while I was sitting in the seat, just got off to shoot the video portion.
@@MessicksEquip Thanks, did you happen to notice what the scale read when you got off ? Curious how much it may have changed 🤔
This has been an awesome set of videos! It’s another testament to the importance of ballast, but more importantly, they definitely don’t make them like they used to. Although incredible machines, I can’t imagine an L3560 lasting longer than an L3130 or even a L3010. Serviceability is what made the 8n and similar tractors stand the test of time. As long as you can justify the cost of repairs and be somewhat productive, it’s worth keeping.
This may be one of the most important videos that you have ever published. Thank you.
I have no idea how many people read the manual that comes with their tractor but virtually all the information regarding load/lift specs is very well detailed in the manual. It pretty much tells you the limits of everything. Of course you can choose to ignore the limits, but still a good idea to understand what the factory recommended limits are.
When I ordered my B2601 I specified that it had a ballast box. I bought it primarily for moving snow and some earth moving. I took delivery a year ago this past Feb. so it didn't get used that winter, nor did I use it in good weather because I hadn't filled the ballast box with concrete yet. I cleared my drive once this past winter once , and only once without needing the ballast box, but spring is upon us and I've got plans, so bring on the concrete.
Loving the audience engagement and follow up! The proving my assertion correct was nice too ;)
Neil, We expect a lot from you, and you delivered. Thank you! As far as the engineering, the designers take into account various factors, principally stability and the properties/strengths of the material utilized in the manufacturing. They would start with a conceptual design load for the class of machine. From there, the strengths of the various components would be evaluated within the CADD framework to identify the critical load components - the component that would fail first. If the conceptual design load is not achieved, that critical component is upgraded until the conceptual design load is achieved and the next most critical component is identified. This highly iterative process goes on and on until the conceptual design load is achieved and the stability parameters are met. Along the way, component wear and safety factors are considered. It is a very complex process for a machine like these and is aided significantly by computerization. At least, that is what I was taught in Engineering school, way back at the dawn of time....THANK YOU again for all that you do for us tractor nuts.
Watching a 80 yo 100 horsepower backhoe unit as it works shows that you are correct! I have seen some of them while back filling with the loader can easily lift the front tires when changing direction from reverse to forward. Shows the weight of said backhoe does fulcrum weight. Thanks fo the information & vids!
Excellent video. I have a 2016 BX2670 with 750 hours on it. At least half the hours are loader work- snow, mulch, topsoil, crushed stone. Hydraulics are shimmed and it makes a noticeable difference in lift capacity. I’m always rear ballasted with land pride box blade or 3 point snow blower. I’m not intentionally trying to break the tractor but I work it hard. At 650 hours the front tires (bar tread) were almost bald and the left front axel seal leaks. Replaced front tires and switched from kubota hydro fluid to amsoil heavy gear oil which stopped the leak. All I can say is this is a tough machine. Far exceeded my expectations.
That was quick. Your channel is the best.
Very good to know that the ballast counteracts the loader weight. I read some of the comments last video about this and wondered after reading many of the arguments. It’s good to see that ballast does matter in that respect and it will definitely make me sure to take it into account. Videos like this really help me learn and make better decisions when it comes to certain things and I really appreciate it!
I own two Deeres, 425 and 455. Great little tractors. Designed and built a front end loader that attaches to the front frame with just 4 bolts. Bucket is 32 inches wide, perfect for a tractor of this size and holds 6 cubic feet, again, perfect for these tractors. The back of the bucket is 14 inches from the frame. I could never understand why some manufacturers have the bucket extended so far out in front. Puts more stress on the axle and the hydraulics, with no advantage that I can see. Hi from Canada, to all my tractor loving brothers.
Lift height, clearing the side of a truck bed or trailer, and visibility are all solid reasons to put a bucket further out front
More people need to complain about this. These companies should advertise their tipping weight like skid steers. An actual comparable number.
Nice video, Couple thoughts that came to me.... Rear tire fill as ballast, It does plant your wheels which should reduce rollover on hills and reduce rear wheels coming up when lifting a very heavy load, may not be the best to relieve weight on the front axle since it is on the wheels and not the tractor frame itself this would be interesting to test with those fancy scales . 😀 The other thought is you should back out the weight of the front wheels and tires from your total front weight since that weight is being transfered to the ground and not carried on the frame and front axle.
The fulcrum effect is pretty obvious that it would exist, although the actual difference is impressive and more than expected. One thing to be aware of is that having more ballast might allow you to more easily overload your front axle because the extra stability gives a false confidence. One thing I do is run a moderate wheel weight, and a lighter implement on the back especially for gravel work. Just enough to maintain stability under regular loads. Not so much that I'm at limits. That way I still feel it if I'm stuck or overloaded.
Thanks for the follow up. Great to know you are actually reading the comments. Great information. These videos really
Help the ordinary tractor guy.
Way to go, Neil! Thanks for following up on that. Not only does it put a little more favorable numbers on those axles, but it really shows the importance of ballast weight. You still have a point about the axles being built a little light. When will you be doing a video on the new lx3520 and lx4020? I'm normally a Deere guy but those tractors look nice if only they had the twin touch pedals. Keep up the good work!
Awesome follow-up video, Neil. Great explanation. Tractor Hard! 🚜💪!
I upgraded to that same ballast from the loaders standard, glad to see I made the right decision. Thanks for all your videos, I know my machine will last longer and you've really helped me learn alot in the 3 years owning a BX. My only wish is more maintenance and repair videos for the BX and accessories with Neil or a tech. Still lots of new to me stuff I would love some pro videos from oil changes and the best way to get to that one BX fuel filter, to best practice loosening the seized clutch on my LP tiller.
Thanks for closing the loop on that one!
I would love to see this test done with skid steer, both wheeled and with tracks. Nice followup.
Since most new tractors have quick attach plates and one attachment I use that may get my point across is a tree puller. It is a scissor like clamp with teeth that you grasp brush/small trees and work them out of the ground. During this procedure, the rear of the tractor can lift off the ground. Can you see my point that the front axle takes the weight of the load and tractor? And by adding ballast, you will add weight to the front axle (under these conditions).
its time for me to rethink what i am doing with my BX.
great info.
What a great follow up video!
I just wanted to make a point about wheel weights or liquid tire ballast. Which obviously these videos are not about but people say rear tire weight does not help your front axle survive. I say it does because it gives your rear axle more traction which makes life easier for your front axle….
Good job. It would've been interesting to have you compare the rear axle load to its specification with the max ballast box and max load in the loader bucker. I would expect it to be close to it's maximum on one side or the other.
Love the videos always educational...but why are some stickers missing on loader? Shouldn't be A34...lol just noticed keep it up.
I think one question we don't have the answer to would be...what exactly does "maximum axle load rating" mean? Does that include the weight of the axle itself, or is that in addition to the weight of the axle? Or is it in addition to the weight of the unladen tractor? As you mentioned, it would seem that the weight of the wheels and tires would not be included, since they are supporting the axle and not being supported by the axle. It would be interesting to have a clarification of the meaning of this rating, which would have to come from the manufacturer I would assume. Sometimes these figures are pure marketing.
You have the best videos...Thanks
Great follow up video. It would be cool to see the same scenario but with different implements on the back.
Thank you for the information. As always, it is very much appreciated and valued. Things we often take for granted but make a real difference in the longevity of your equipment. I think your the only one I've seen spending the time showing this stuff. Thank you!
Thanks Neil for doing this test
This is a Great education for me. I subscribed a long time ago and learn a lot, despite growing up on a farm. Thank you for my continuing education on tractors and associated equipment and dealership functions. Again thank you!!
My loader is more effective at lifting when I use adequate ballast, because energy isn't wasted in lifting weight off the rear axle. Instead the weight in the rear, helps lift in front.
Thanks Neil for this follow up. Very helpful. And Interesting!
Front AND back axle load capacity depends on speed the machine is intended to run at. Moving slower usually increases max load. Usually or at least for my New Holland T4.75 there is table in owners manual that specifies how fast you can go with certian load on the front axle.
Great video - next step, How about the back hoe? When doing really heavy loader work (stone or gravel) I always put the BH on. For lighter work I use the box blade as ballast
IDK how difficult it'd be to show but some people might need to be shown the difference in digging in 4x4 vs 2wd-diff-locked, the traction difference in diff-lock-2wd vs 4x4-not-locked-diff. In 4x4 some people dig with the front-axle's additional traction instead of arching the machine to put the full weight down on the bucket. Sometimes I move so dirt fast I wonder if I should be checking hydraulic temps, & I'm only at about 2200k-2600k RPMs on the 70-series. I'm on turf tires so I don't have the higher traction to abuse my front axle.
Great video! Heck, while we're opening a can of worms, can you talk about using Differential Braking with the Diff-Lock engaged? My Uncle managed to tear his differential into many small pieces when he forgot he had it engaged while doing tight turns in a field with differential braking and the diff-lock engaged. It was an expensive repair for his new tractor with less than 100 hours on it! 😏
The BX doesn't have steering brakes, it does have a diff lock, and many people say its pretty easy to break, and I'm not surprised, many people have no clue how to operate anything with a diff lock, which is why most vehicles do not have them, people would be breaking stuff all the time.
A diff lock connects both left and right axle shafts together so they turn at the same speed regardless of direction of travel, and includes when turning. A conventional open differential allows both rear wheels to turn at different speeds while turning left or right. Attempting to slow or stop one of the wheels on the axle with the diff lock engaged will definitely break something, or several things, and yep it'll be expensive. Operator error caused that failure LOL.
I think that what is more important is how misleading or non existent specs affect ones warranty ? If the actual loader without a load is close to the front axle load specs then the tractor should not be allowed to be sold legally. Imagine putting 300 pounds in your bucket and your axle breaks in two and the dealer tells you sorry ,you over loaded it .?
Front axle longevity is one of the reasons I’m considering a DK over a CK. I don’t need the extra loader capacity but I figure if I’m running at 50 to 70 percent capacity vs 100 to 120 percent capacity that’s gotta be good for the axles.
Watch the DK flex when it lifts a full load. You'll cringe.
@@MessicksEquip Yikes! I’m not sure what to do with this information.
I use the right pice of equipment for the job my go to equipment is most of the time is my track skid steer on my farm , I have a case 270 and it the 300,000 th made back in 2017 it says it right on it too
I would be curious to see the same test with the backhoe and a loaded heavy hitch. Just wondering how the mass in different configurations affect the front axle load.
Nice One Neil Thanks again
To make things very clear I feel that you should’ve added some thing like the following: wheel weights, or fluid ballast in the rear tires do not make any difference to the loading on the front axle, as they are not part of the fulcrum affect. Now I understood what you meant by fulcrum, but there are a few folks that might need the additional clarity.
We are all here to learn and grow, hopefully in a way that isn't "the hard way".😂
Great video. I can tell you for sure, by mowing without a loader on, that putting too heavy of a bush hog on the rear will definitely decrease your front axle weight. Even sometimes to ZERO! 😁 Still love to see how the back axle rating is affected, especially with different length mowers that put the weight farther away from the fulcrum of the 3pt lift. For instance, does a flail mower put less stress on the rear axle than a rotary cutter since it’s held closer to the tractor?
Better to shift weight to have rear axle as fulcrum instead the front axle as fulcrum. A well balanced machine is key...not too much in back either, like those plowing accidents.
My take is that, if you assume the two front wheels and tires (aka weight below the axle) are probably around 150 lbs, and therefore the tractor when ballasted as recommended, and lifting the recommended load, is exactly at the limit of the front axle. As it should be, it shows the engineers are doing their job right.
"sprung" vs unsprung weight ratings, good question!!
Good info. Thanks.
If you could only choose one would you rather have rear ballast or liquid ballast in tires?
I'd be curious to see if it's possible to overload the rear axle. Especially if it's fluid filled and then used as a fulcrum to lift the front end.
I would assume it's possible to overload both the front and rear axles at the same time.... if you really try.
i wouldn't think weight in the tires would put "load" on the rear axle
@@ryancrazy1 they shouldn't, at least not nearly as much. That is part of the appeal of liquid ballast and wheel weights.
liquid or wheel weights likely don't do anything to relieve the front though. I need to think though a good way to test this.
@Messick's Equipment they wouldn't have the fulcrum effect you spoke of in the video, but also don't effect the rear axle as well. Just helps to keep the rear end down, and provide more traction.
The next question or test point might be the effect of liquid ballast in rear tires.
Great info
Great follow up video. Curious what the readings would be with a tractor with loaded tires and no ballast on the 3 pt.
I dont imagine wheel weights would have much effect on how much weight sits on the front axle, if any at all. What they will do, is help counteract the effect of putting a bunch of weight way out in front on the REAR axle. And also improve traction, by weighing the rear tires down. That weight is carried on the wheels, not the axle.
This was on my mind also. I'm pretty positive its going to have little effect on the front. I need two tractors each setup differently to test it correctly.
Pyroman is correct that weighted rear wheels have no affect on the front axle. This is why I chose not to fill my tires and use 3 point balast (I do have wheel weights). Another part of the equation not mentioned is the further behind the rear axle you go, the more fulcrum effect you get. 500 lbs moved towards or away from the rear axle, even a few inches, will show a significant difference on the scales.
@@MessicksEquip I'd love to see a scale reading on this as well. Loaded tires definately keep the machine planted, but I wonder if there is even the slightest change on front axle weight. Love these videos!
With all of these tests one of the things that comes through is that the machines are engineered as a complete system and as long as we stay within the appropriately sized attachments they will last.
Of course we are always going to get into situations where we push them to the limits and when we have the correct attachments we are less likely to get in trouble or damage the tractor. I was tempted to get a 54" bucket instead of 48" and after seeing these videos I'm glad that I stayed with the 48.
Question on the front axle. With loader work we need to have it in 4x4 to get into the pile and if we are hauling the load a few hundred feet or more would it be easier on the front axle if we disengage 4x4 for the travel or does it not make a difference to keep it in 4x4?
Thanks again for your great content!
So what is the back axle limit and what is it with the rear ballast added? Maybe you can get an engineer from Kubota or New Holland that can explain that from their side.
Thanks for the follow-up, Neil. I will definitely make sure I have ballast going forward. It never occurred to me that I was overloading the front axle. Is it possible to overload the rear axle with too much ballast? Thanks
Good video - I am wondering if you can do the same kind of calculations for us bigger tractor guys? It seems as though everything is sub compact everywhere you look. Take like an common MX5400 and toss it on the scales and see? But I notice that in the heavier tractors there are no specs like axle load capacities etc... published that I can find.
Great video - since you had the BX23S with the backhoe (I have that same unit), how does the backhoe fit in to the equation? I keep the backhoe on --anything wrong with that approach?
Hey Neil, Paul here. I purchased a Kubota Grand L 3560 with LA805 Loader IN JANUARY. I The loader 3rd function was on backorder then and now they are saying it could be June before it comes in. Any suggestions? I purchased it from CFI Calvert City, KY now First Choice. Thanks and I enjoy your channel and Outdoors with the Morgans too.
I have them.
messicks.com/part/L2265
This is very informative and has made up my mind to start using more rear ballast, do you think the bx model was designed thinking the backhoe would always be on and that’s your real ballast?
Interesting seeing you adding the weight box to a BX23S, can you run the same test with the backhoe installed? I have never removed my backhoe, but I am wondering if the position and weight of the 3 point weight box is comparable to the position and weight of the BX23S backhoe?
I really appreciate your video's, you have taught me a lot over the years!
I remove my BH from my BX23S a lot and it's night and day when you carrying anything in the front with or without the BH.
@@Sventy11 Night and Day meaning easier to carry loads without the BH?
I am fortunate to own 2 tractors in helping us maintain our property. The BX23S is solely used with the BH (diverting water on our walking paths, conduit trenching or removing 12" and smaller tree stumps), our primary utility tractor is a Grand L6060, it does everything else and then some!!
@@5077chip nice inventory! I meant that the tractor just feels so much better with the BH on when you're moving material with the FEL. You can almost feel the tractor teeter on the front axle and nothing on the back. And with anything in the bucket, you better not even try going across any hills.
Hmmm. Okay, the rear axle acts as a fulcrum. With weights behind the rear axle it decreases the weight on the front axle. For me it gets more complicated. If you have fluid filled rear tires, that "also" adds weight = better traction, but also would help prevent lifting the rear end if you have a heavy load in the loader. So, if you have the recommended amount of weight on the back end, would you still need fluid filled rear tires?? I hope you are able to expand on this series. Very educational!
Depends on what you are doing with your tractor. If, you are like many and have a sub-compact or compact tractor you use around your yard, I wouldn't ballast the tires with fluid, you'd leave terrible ruts in your yard LOL....now, if you use it in fields all the time, fluid filling the tires is a great way to get yourself more traction and weight for pull type implements like planters, plows, discs, etc....but for loader work fluid filling the tires would only help keep the back of the tractor on the ground, and wouldn't lesson the amount of weight on the front axle, only weights on the 3 point will do that.
On the topic of front axles....i have a question? i widen my rear tires and everyone said that's ok. i also flipped and widened my front tires. some say this adds stress to the axel and you should never widen the front. the wider stance also i have found handles loads in the bucket better and over all looks way better, any input on this? L2501dt.
how does a backhoe compare to a ballast box ?
What this tells me is that Kubota (and frankly any small tractor) is not designing their equipment to function as a loader. If they were they would beef up that front axle. We have a John Deere 640 loader at my work and the front axle is massive. I like Kubota, I have an L2501 but some of the things they do in their designs frustrates me (really, short control levers on the BH77 - you can do better Kubota).
How much ballast would you recommend on a B2601. I have a 60"bucket.
You're adding in the weight of the axle itself when running these calculations. The axle, along with the tires and rims since the axle is hung from them. This should be omitted.
this. i mentioned the same thing last video. Very interesting to see the difference with the ballast installed. I have a Rake on the back but I'd like to get more weight on it seeing this
You are right, but he still has some valid points: 1) it's easy to put too much stress on the front axle and 2) we need balast when using the front loader. Like Neil said, we can all learn from this simple test.
@Messick’s Equipment Neil why does my LX2610 cab model tell me to take the liquid ballast out when I have the FEL attached? This must be a mistake.
Very informative follow up.
If more ballast was added do you get more reduction in weight off the front? 👍🏻
Yes. Some manufacturers have a recommended rear ballast weight minimum. Adding more weight will reduce the front axle load.
All the laws of physics still apply. But do not overload the 3 point either. As always, read that owners manual!
@@lcee6592 thanks.
With loader full and full amount of ballast what does it do to the overall load on the tractor? Is it above the overall weight capacity of the tractor?
I still want a sub compact but I’d use grapples more than loader bucket. Are grapples available or does that require a tractor upgrade?
Hey Neil, I run a BH77 on the back of my L2501. Would it be a good idea to build a ballast block to put in the bucket of the BH77 to bring the center of gravity back? Is that going to be ok with the BH77 subframe? I wouldn’t use it long-term, but when moving heavy rocks/logs with my grapple. Thanks for all the great knowledge!
I’ve always mentally used the weight of the BH77 as my counterbalance, but would a couple hundred pounds of steel plate in that bucket improve things, when hauling heavy loads?
How can I send you a picture of my tractor Neil ?
That is only true if you have a ballast box if you have loaded tires you will not get the fulcrum affect
Hey Neil, what is the weight of the ballast box in addition to the 500 pounds you put into it? Also, did you do the 2nd and 3rd tests with you on the tractor like the 1st test? It is good to see that while the 3 point hitch ballast does offset some front axle weight of the loader at carrying height it is nowhere near what the internet tries to claim time and again.