Front-End Loader FEL's on 2wd tractors

[777777]

FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

Hi all,

Just looking for some clarification.

When you talk to anyone about FEL's, one of the first things said or asked is about 4wd and how you must have 4 wd to use a FEL.

Now when I look around at older tractors, I see that much better than 30% of them have only 2 wd, have an FEL and they have worked fine for many a year.

Has something changed ? I see the need for PS. That only makes sense. But how come FEL's were ok on 2wd tractors before but now days it seems almost taboo.

Are the front axles made less hardy ? FEL's that much heavier? Tractors that much lighter ? Has the geometry changed so much that they are unsafe ?

Were the old 2wd tractors with an FEL that unsafe ?

Sure, maybe a weight issue on the back now days if tractors are that much lighter but you can load tires, use a ballast box, etc.

So, can anyone tell me why it was ok before and it is completely frowned upon now.

Thanks for any input. Just trying to understand.

Tom

 

[RoyJackson]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

Most older tractors were bigger and heavier then the Compacts most users on TBN own and operate.

I also suspect most older tractors with FEL's were used to load and move loose materials such as manure,hay..things such as that.

That said, if your tasks only include loading loose materials, ballast on the 3PH may be more important then front wheel assist.

Now, I think, front wheel assist is, like power steering or, for some folks, hydrostatic transmissions; a "luxury" that has become a necessity...just as automatic transmissions, air conditioning and other "options" have in the cars we drive.
Since most of us (including me) consider MFWD a "necessity"...that's what we promulgate when we offer our opinions.
Could be many professional farmers would consider us nuts...and, from their point of view, they might be right.

However, for my 2200 lb tractor and for my tasks, I find MFWD a very convenient option for those times we really need it. I do use it if I'm moving a load across the field. I don't use it if I'm moving a load on the drive way or on pavement.

I hope Soundguy picks up on this thread...reckon he has more experience with "old iron" then most of us on TBN.

 

[jimmysisson]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

It's good someone asks the obvious questions once in a while so we can think why we think what we think. I had a '56 MH50 (a Massy Harris) gas 40 hp with an industrial loader. It would lift dirt and snow easily, two-handle control of course. The bucket was only about 4' wide, though it was a bit deeper than we're used to now, and was only about 1/4 yard struck. I poured a big block of concrete, probably about 400#, that hung on the backhoe subframe. (Did I mention this thing had an ancient backhoe attachment?) With the counterweight the 50 didn't get stuck in snow (with good chains) and was very stable. The counterweight was a nuisance to move, though, and the narrow bucket was poor at cleaning next to a building or fence or something. So, yes, we're used to more and better now, and it's nothing against the 2wd jobs, they were good in their day and much better than shoveling manure or loam or snow by hand. Still work fine, most likely.
Jim

 

[Soundguy]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Has something changed ? I see the need for PS. That only makes sense )</font>

I agree. On a new tractor, MY pre-req would be PS.. not 4wd.. though 4wd would be on my 'want to have' list... etc.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( But how come FEL's were ok on 2wd tractors before but now days it seems almost taboo.
)</font>

Back when 95%? of the tractors were 2wd, and non PS.. you didn't have much choice.. you made due.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Are the front axles made less hardy )</font>

IMHO.. a fixed 'dead. or even an adjustable 'wing' or 'U-channel' front axle is much stronger than a front wheen drive axle... So I don't chalk it up to an axle weight issue specifically. More ergonomics, and wear / tear. A few on a 2wd, non ps / non 4wd tractor puts lots of wear on some steering components.. like gearbox.. course.. now with PS.. all those components are made differently now too.

Many of the early loaders were for stockpiled materials.. that is.. piled sand.. or as others mentioned.. soft materials.. like snow or maneuer.

My 1955 Ford 660 has a ford 722 hyd 1-arm loader with maneuer bucket and exterder plate on it. .. no ps on my unit.. though in 55 it was an option.

I added a huge concrete ballast weight ont he rear to make it steer much easier.

I have used it to dig some clay in a shallow scooping method.. however, it scoops and tends my maneuer pile much easier.. etc.

Soundguy

 

[unreconstructed]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

I have a JD 5203 which is 2wd. I have been doing some digging with it, scraping caliche, and moving dirt which is not loose. I know I need some more ballast on the 3ph and have gotten bogged down where I am not sure that 4wd would have helped or would have sucked me down even further. Anyhow, this little tractor has had plenty of power to get a bucket full of undisturbed soil. The bucket capacity I believe is .49 cu yard struck.

I was advised by a couple of other JD '03 model owners prior to my buying my '03 that their's too had sufficient power to do what they wanted. Average rainfall in my area is 26 inches on one place and 18 on the other so constant mud is not an issue and my area is relatively flat compared to a lot of TBN posters.

If I had wanted to spend more money, of course I would have liked to had 4WD, but like an earlier poster said--one makes do with what he has.

Hope that helps.

 

[Farwell]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

I have a 1965, 45 hp 2wd JD2010 with a heavy duty FEL that I do a lot of digging, dirt moving and tree removal with. I am happy with it but the work would go much faster if it had 4wd. It would also work a little better if I had teeth on the bucket. It needs a bucket rebuild so I can add a few extras to it like teeth, a grapple, etc.
Another thing that would go better with 4wd is I could go places on my property that I can not go to with out getting stuck.
Farwell

 

[Farmwithjunk]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

My loader tractor is 2WD. (Massey Ferguson 150) I've had no need to change that over the years. It's also HEAVIER than most compacts. Weight is your friend when dealing with a loader.

Weight equates to traction. It also helps with control and stability. Both keys in loader use.

One advantage to having 4WD on a loader tractor is the ability to shove the bucket into material. Another is added steering control when those front wheels are mashed into soft ground. (i.e. mud....)

A bigger tractor can overcome it's disadvantage with shear weight, but even that heavier tractor can benifit from 4WD.

I'm around construction sites quite a bit with my job. Over the past 20 years, I've seen back-hoes gradually make the transition to 4WD. Even with their heavy mass, they are much more manuverable and have far more "pushing power" with the front end driving too.

As I get older, I'm begining to see a need for a new tractor on my little farm. One feature would be a cab. (The MAIN reason I'd buy a new tractor) If I spend the money, it's going to have 4WD, and a loader. (Something in the 75 to 90 HP range) I've done perfectly fine WITHOUT 4WD, but it sure is nice when you do need it.

 

[hudr]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

4wd makes it a lot easier to push, back up and turn with an FEL. We have not a single 4wd tractor on our place and have loaders on most of them. Have not had much problems other than ones mentioned above. I think back to the first FEL we owned. We hadn't had one for years before that but now I don't know how we got things done w/o them. 4wd would be the same I imagine. We just spoil easy, thats all. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[MossRoad]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

<font color="blue">So, can anyone tell me why it was ok before and it is completely frowned upon now. </font>

Folks use to store food in lead containers and not wear seatbelts in cars, too. Times have changed. So have people's attitudes towards small, utility tractors VS. farm type AG tractors.

I think smaller, lighter tractors really benefit from 4WD while larger, heavier 2WD tractors get by fine in most circumstances. The reason is traction and weight, I guess. It just boils down to what your needs are in a machine.

 

[777777]

Re: FEL\'s on 2wd tractors

Gentlemen, thank you for the clarification.

Now, as I understand it, no real issues with an FEL and 2wd as long as you have weight behind it. In other words, a heavier tractor and some ballast on the back. So, I guess most of the newer CUTS are just too light to handle as they certainly weigh less than older tractors. I see many older tractors with full size buckets on them.
So 4wd is nice and a preference but not a necessity.
When you are talking about the back and forths with picking up loads, does a shuttle shift not help out there if you have a gear drive tractor ?

Again, thanks, have made things a little less hazy for me.

Tom