Ballast To load or not to load. That is the question.

[kas2960]

Well, finally pulled the pin and bought a new CK4010H. Should be getting it next week. Had a couple of the farmers stop by for a pop and both gave me a tongue lashing for not loading the tires In their own words. You'll be sorry. What is everyone else experience with this? I will be doing firewood and pushing snow around in the winter and what ever else presents itself for loader work. Thanks.

 

[jeff9366]

Perhaps the most controversial of TBN topics.

I have sandy-loam in Florida. I never have mud, nor clay, nor snow, to deal with.

I have had three tractors, each larger, each with 4-WD. My last tractor and current tractor have carried FELs. All three have been shod with R4/Industrial Tires filled only with air.

I try not to compact my soil. The only time I intentionally compact my soil is when I roll in very small seeds with my Cultipacker, in a limited area.

When I need counterbalance, perhaps 25% of engine operating hours, I mount a heavy implement on the Three Point Hitch.


Filling rear tires is good if you have sloped ground to deal with. Filling rear tires lowers the center-of-gravity for the tractor. (But first move rear tires further apart, if possible.)

Filling rear tires may be necessary for adequate traction on tractors with 2-WD, but NEW tractors with 2-WD are a very small category.

A'hm for air.


TBN ARCHIVE: FILLED VS AIR IN TIRES SITE:TRACTORBYNET.COM - Google Search

 

[George2615]

Without loaded tires I notice the rear end gets light doing loader work or plowing snow. Moving snow consists of 50% of my tractor use so I loaded mine with WW fluid and use chains. I do have several 3 pt attachments for rear ballast but did not need rear ballast last season. I prefer not having something sticking out 6-8' behind me as I plow in some tight areas. For real heavy loader work in summer I do use a 1100 lb rear ballast weight.
If you use chains to plow snow try it without filling the tires. You can always fill them later.

 

[ritcheyvs]

In case you don't know, you NEVER want to lift your rear wheels off the ground. The front axle provides no lateral stability because it pivots. If you lift the rear wheels and the tractor starts to roll, it can flop right over unless you get the back down, and fast.

 

[/pine]

CUTs and SCUTs are so much lighter than full size tractors...loading the rears is the most logical to make for some weight/traction...

If older full size tractors (7K#'s +/-)...had 4 wheel drive...they would not have needed to load the rears with calcium etc.....

 

[holeycow]

There should be no controversy. More weight is almost always better and the best place to put that weight is in the rear tires.

There's probably not a loader tractor built that doesn't benefit from filled rears.

 

[kas2960]

Seems like the consensus is to load. Thanks jeff9366 for the link. I sort of like the idea of the ballast box. How much weight does the beet juice add to the tractor? I have the industrial tire installed. I was hoping to buy a rear snow blower for this winter. Would that compensate?

 

[George2615]

Seems like the consensus is to load. Thanks jeff9366 for the link. I sort of like the idea of the ballast box. How much weight does the beet juice add to the tractor? I have the industrial tire installed. I was hoping to buy a rear snow blower for this winter. Would that compensate?

Beet Juice (Rimguard) weighs about 10.7-11 lbs.per gallon compared to water or washer fluid which weighs about 8.3 lbs per gallon.
Using a rear snow blower for ballast is only good when the 3 pt has it lifted off the ground. Once it's on the ground it's no longer ballast.

 

[VictorW]

Just another thought. When loading, if the valve is at the top of the tire and the fluid is all the way to the valve, then you're at 85% full. If you think you don't need that much weight or are worried about compacting your soil to much, go @50%. If that is works, great. If not, you can always fill more. As mentioned, you want some weight in your rear tires or something on your 3pt when your loader is full of heavy material or the back will feel light and it's definitely not fun to drive that way. Winter traction with the R4 tires is greatly improved too.

 

[k0ua]

You need both loaded tires and rear weight. You won't always have the rear weight on the back to give you additional traction. When you are pulling a blade or some other ground engaging implement, you sure are not going to have a rear weight on, and you will really appreciate being able to move your tractor. Pushing or blading snow strains your traction limits considerably.

 

[MichiganIron]

The tractor needs to be ballasted to use the Front Loader to it's capacity. You will find the ballst listed in the Front Loader Owners Manual. Filling the rear tires is a convenient way to add ballast to the tractor, but not necessarily the best way. With the ballast in the rear tires, or at the rear axle, the front axle is a folcrum from the front loader picked and dead weight. If you pick a load with the bucket, and the ballast is at the rear axle, the front axle is the folcrum.

If you add the weight to the 3-point hitch, you distribute the front loader reaction over both axles of the tractor. We did a computer model several years ago for a KIOTI CK30 with a 1000lb picked load and 500lb ballast. We first put the 500lb ballst at the rear axle. The reaction at the front axle is 1750lbs. We then moved the same ballast to the 3-point hitch. The reaction at the front axle with the ballast at the 3-point hitch was 1200 pounds. This is a 34% reduction in front axle load just by moving the ballst to the 3-Point, and distributing the load more evenly accross both axles of the tractor. Not only will this extend the life of the front axle, it improves the handling of the tractor while carrying a load significantly.

We always explain the difference to potential customers and let them decide. Some applications require tight operating conditions where a ballast on the 3-point would be a problem. Most often, the 3-point is the best way to ballst a tractor. Nothing wrong with doing both.

The original reason for ballasting rear tires was for traction in the field. When Front Loaders came on the scene, it seemed natural to use it as loader ballast.

Hope this helps

 

[holeycow]

Nothing wrong with doing both.

This.

There is a significant improvement in handling when something is on the 3pt (but not swinging wildly around). There is a significant improvement in traction (and somewhat less so handling) when the tires are loaded. I tend to carry one round bale on the back and one bale on the front for a stable, smooth tractor. Many carry two on the front (I used to) and that is very heavy even for very stout tractors. Just because the loader can lift it, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is a good idea, especially over rough ground and in sharp turns at speed.

It is almost always best to load the rears. It changes the tractor. Less bounce and more stability. If you need to carry something around on the 3pt, then do that too.

And there's nothing wrong with calcium in these parts. I have a Minny that has had calcium for almost 60 years, and a Deutz for almost 30 years. Each has a little rust on the rims, but nothing significant.It is the only option here as extended cold periods will freeze beet juice. Even calcium can get pretty slushy here. Tires are "square" for quite a while every morning in the winter...

 

[jeff9366]

Seems like the consensus is to load.

Forget consensus.

Consider your tasks and your conditions. You have not revealed if your tractor is primarily for residential use, ag use, or something else. Nor do we need to know. But it is important that you evaluate your tasks and your conditions.

I thought this information, new calculations to me, was very interesting:

If you add the weight to the 3-point hitch, you distribute the front loader reaction over both axles of the tractor. We did a computer model several years ago for a KIOTI CK30 with a 1000lb picked load and 500lb ballast. We first put the 500lb ballst at the rear axle. The reaction at the front axle is 1750lbs. We then moved the same ballast to the 3-point hitch. The reaction at the front axle with the ballast at the 3-point hitch was 1200 pounds. This is a 34% reduction in front axle load just by moving the ballst to the 3-Point, and distributing the load more evenly accross both axles of the tractor. Not only will this extend the life of the front axle, it improves the handling of the tractor while carrying a load significantly.

Some applications require tight operating conditions where a ballast on the 3-point would be a problem. Most often, the 3-point is the best way to ballast a tractor. Nothing wrong with doing both.

 

[kas2960]

Forget consensus.

Consider your tasks and your conditions. You have not revealed if your tractor is primarily for residential use, ag use, or something else. Nor do we need to know. But it is important that you evaluate your tasks and your conditions.

I thought this information, new calculations to me, was very interesting:

Agreed. Very interesting.
I see my primary use for the loader being pushing snow and lifting logs. In most cases I believe I will have a blower on the back. Not any real ag work. Need to bush hog some fields that are getting very overgrown. Want to get a roto tiller and a blade too. There will be times I will be driving across the lawn.

 

[jeff9366]

There will be times I will be driving across the lawn.

An important reason "A'hm for air."

 

[Deere Dude]

If your lawn is continuously soft maybe a heavy tractor isn't for you.

If you do any loader work where pushing and lifting and grunting is involved fill the tires and put a ballast box on, or a heavy implement. Not just for counterbalance and to take 34% off the front end, as the previous posted found in tests, but it makes it easier on the front drive unit. The goal is to have the rear tires with the juice and Ballast Box do the pushing. They are built a whole lot tougher than the spindly front drive on these tractors.

I found at times I was pushing and lifting to get the most dirt in the bucket I can get, that by itself puts a lot of torque on the front end. I want the rear tires to do most of the grunting.

I have R4s laoded to max allowable with Rimgard and there is absolutely no problem with the lawn. Your lawn may be softer, I don't know.

Also look in the owners manual, if you want to believe them. My JD manual says to load tires plus have a rear weight (Ballast Box) plus put cast iron weights on the wheels. I ran out of money before I could put cast iron weights on so I do without.

 

[jeff9366]

Also look in the owners manual, if you want to believe them. My JD manual says to load tires plus have a rear weight (Ballast Box) plus put cast iron weights on the wheels. I ran out of money before I could put cast iron weights on so I do without.

The problem with Deere/Kubota/Massey, et al, manuals is they are pushing for dealer revenue. You put max weight on the wheels and compact the soil, then you have to buy heavier implements to break up the airless, compacted soil. An endless circle.

Certainly, you need enough ballast and/or counterbalance to accomplish your tasks but, in my OPINION, not a pound more.

I see my primary use for the loader being pushing snow and lifting logs.

If lifting large logs with the loader will be a primary task and if you will be working on uneven ground, spreading the wheels and filling the tires to lower the center of gravity is important. Tractors have small front wheels, large rear wheels and high ground clearance; this sums to inherent instability. Safety first.

If you will be lifting logs on level ground, Three Point Hitch counterbalance will suffice. Soggy Water Oak in picture weighed about 1,400 pounds. Air in tires. Bush Hog (brand) 60" Rollover Box Blade, weight 625 pounds, as Three Point Hitch counterbalance. Smooth, level dirt. Rear a "little" light.

(Normally, I would cut a log of this weight and make two trips, or (easily) drag it from the center drawbar. But the trunk was full of dirt and I did not want to dull my chainsaw "chain" and the tractor was new, and I felt like a new tractor test. When I need a bit more counterbalance I tip my 88 pound Ratchet Rake on top of the 625 pound ROBB = 713 pounds together.)

I cannot address snow issue. I only know snow as theory.

 

[VictorW]

From what you've mentioned, you might be good with just a heavy implement on the 3pt as ballast like jeff9366. Save the money from loading the tires and put it towards the implement. Just get the implement bought and attached before you try a full weight load in the loader and then go easy until you know how it does. I have a CK30hst, much smaller than yours, but never use the loader without my 6ft back blade on unless just for light stuff like wood chips.

 

[buickanddeere]

Dry Tubeless tire's and external cast weights give great peace of mind and faster/cheaper repairs .
Just because Bubba JR is blindly following in Bubba's , Grandpa Bubba's and great grand Pappy Bubba's traditions doesn't mean you should. Way back when there wasn't anything else to ballast down a too small tractor to pull a too large of a load except calcium Chloride .

 

[oldpilgrim]

I see my primary use for the loader being pushing snow and lifting logs.

you need to load them. Try it without and you will soon agree.