3038e Ballast Block/Lights/Tool Box

[blueridger]

Hey, Fellers,

Couple things about the 3038e I just bought.

First, the photo shows the concrete ballast block I fabbed up. It turned out nice, but it's too heavy. I got the AF11 hydraulic-angled front blade for pushing snow. I believe the blade's 780# and it projects a ways beyond the loader frame, so I wanted to unload the front axle some and have more rear weight than just filled tires. (If I'm reading it right, the manual says that with a loader, the minimum rear weight is filled tires plus 380# hitch weight.) Anyway, the block measures 6 cu. ft., so figuring 144# per cu. ft. it's almost 900#. The rear hitch is rated at 1300# @ 24" behind the lift points so I thought it'd be OK. Turns out the rear hitch will barely lift the block at rated rpm. Plus it just feels too heavy. Ya know, when I was building the form, I thought about reducing the size to 4.5 cu. ft., but noooo. And, with the cost of a shop welding up the 2" receiver assembly and reinforcing steel that runs through the block, I didn't really save much over the cost of the JD BW15073 ballast box, which is what I'm going to do now. Hope this info helps someone avoid the same mistake.

Also got the forward work light kit which the dealer mounted halfway up the ROPS uprights. I thought about moving the lights to the forward edge of the canopy which looks like a much better position for them. Anyone done something like that?

Finally, I can't find a tool box add-on for the 3038e. Am I missing something there?

TIA....

 

[beenthere]

:welcome: to TBN

When first looking at the pic, I came to the same conclusion upon reading of your experience.
I have the ballast box and like it real well.

You should be able to sell your heavy concrete block to someone with a larger tractor.

But on first look, I wouldn't want the large array of basket and block sticking out that far behind my tractor. Hits too many things and digs into any slight raise in the ground unless you put on a hydraulic top arm to tilt it up.

Wish you well on downsizing that ballast. And enjoy the tractor.. should be a good ride.

 

[BuilderML]

My father in law has the 3032e he has 500lbs at the pins and its not enough. His tires are not loaded. For the heck of it can you take the plow off of the front and see if your 3pt has an issue lifting it. Your hyd system also has a max total weight it is capable of lifting just wondering once you take weight off the front if your 3pt has no problem lifting the 900# in the back. I also think you have the weight set way to far behind you. But like others said i think if you entered into the woods with your set up i think you would find it really cuts down on where you could go. Just to let you know i have the next size down from your tractor twin to the 2720 and i have a 750lb block on the back and its perfect for the tractor. Again i also do NOT have loaded tires. Here is a picture of the weight i made and how it tucks into the tractor.

 

[jgayman]

(If I'm reading it right, the manual says that with a loader, the minimum rear weight is filled tires plus 380# hitch weight.)

I assume you have a 305 loader. If so, I think you may have mis-read the manual.



With fluid filled rear tires the minimum 3PH weight is 551 lbs.

 

[Deere Dude]

That is a nice looking block. I bet it would work if you hooked it up to the arms instead of to the quick hitch. That would bring it quite a bit closer to the tractor. But I can't tell if it has pins like a drawbar would have to be able to do that.
My neighbor got a free ballast box I made for mine because it was to heavy.

 

[blueridger]

I assume you have a 305 loader. If so, I think you may have mis-read the manual. With fluid filled rear tires the minimum 3PH weight is 551 lbs.

Jgayman is correct. I have the D160 loader but the ballast table is same as what he posted for the 305 - I misread the table.

The other comments are also right on, about the whole rear rig projecting too far back. The cleanest design would have been to cast side lift pins and a top link in the block so it could be connected directly to the iMatch. I couldn't figure out how to fab up the side pins with standard hardware, so I decided to go with the 2" receiver concept which I wanted anyway to move trailers around with.

Anyway, the JD ballast box will tuck right in on the iMatch, and I'll probably bolt a 2" receiver tube to the top of the box, so the cargo carrier will also be closer in and higher. Still, even though the rig doesn't leave the driveway and parking areas, it's probably just a matter of time until I snag that carrier on something. Sure is handy, though, to load that basket up with a chain saw, line trimmer, gas cans, etc.

 

[kcflhrc]

Never felt the need for a ballast box on my 3032E. My rear tires are loaded so maybe that is why. I have the 305 loader.

 

[jgayman]

Never felt the need for a ballast box on my 3032E. My rear tires are loaded so maybe that is why. I have the 305 loader.

The important thing is that JD feels it is needed. It's not just for stability but also to off-load the front axle. The front axle is not designed to take the weight exerted by the loader without sufficient 3PH weight to act as a cantilever.

 

[beenthere]

The front axle is not designed to take the weight exerted by the loader without sufficient 3PH weight to act as a cantilever.

And which loaded rear tires do not do (provide the cantilevered weight).

 

[Deere Dude]

I'm not sure much is gained by the cantilever effect.

I think the ballast box is for more weight on the really beefy trans-axle, which is where you want the power for pushing loads.

 

[kcflhrc]

I guess it's all what you use the tractor for. The loaded tires seem to work for everything I do. I cant imagine not having them loaded but they have been that way from the day I took delivery. I have loaded the FEL with gravel and dirt and never an issue. The only time the loader didn't do what I wanted is when I was trying to pick up a section of sidewalk. The loader just wouldn't lift it, the rear never came off the ground though. The fluid in the tires seems to add quite a bit of weight. I also think of JD thought the extra weight was needed it would be required to be sold with the tractor with the FEL. Dealer never mentioned needing a ballast box.

 

[bigtiller]

If i have a heaping bucket of soil in my 2720, my front tires get pretty flat looking. But if i use my 900 pound ballast box, the front tires look pretty good, and it is easier to steer.

 

[beenthere]

Deere Dude

Think on it some more... you will figure it out..

 

[Deere Dude]

Deere Dude

Think on it some more... you will figure it out..

Just did and I came up with the same answer. Can't teach an old dog anything I guess.

 

[beenthere]

Think Teeter-totter, and the big guy on one end...

 

[Deere Dude]

Think Teeter-totter, and the big guy on one end...

Yes I understand the concept. but I forget the formula. If there was 1000# 4 feet from the back of the tractor and the front wheels are 8' from the back tires, then the cantilever effect would be like taking 250# off the front end tires, if I remember correctly. If the bucket is able to lift 1000# 4' in front of the axles, and the axles are more than capable for that load, I just can't see how 250# less will help much.
I do know without the FEL and with a weight box, the front seems definitely lighter from that effect. Time to hit the scale or find a formula book just to see.