Kioti CK30 loader repair and reinforcement

[Bob_Skurka]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( This is a six inch block of wood under one corner of the loader and down pressure until the front end starts to get light. My CK20 loader will twist this much. Is this too much or is it engineered to flex? ... Are other brands of loaders or tractors similar to this or are they rigid enough not to flex at all? I'm curious, are you?? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Steve )</font>

Steve, I just walked in from dinner and saw your post and was very curious about my New Holland loader. While this thread has been about a 130 loader, it is a curved arm loader similar to my NH loader, only larger than mine. My curiousity was heightened when I saw you have a Kioti 120 loader since your 120 is almost equal in all specs to my 12LA loader.

So attached find a photo of my loader sitting on 2 pieces of 4" concrete landscape block. I put enough down pressure on my loader to lift the front wheels completely off the ground. (you can see the airspace under the wheel is at least 1") So while your loader is deflecting what appears to be about 3"??? with your front end "light" my front end is completely lifted off the ground and I have about 1/2" of deflection. (you can see the top of the loader is nearly parallel with my headlights) I suspect that the curved arm loaders have a bit more flex than the dogleg loader arms. However it strikes me that your loader is flexing way too much? BTW, the loader on this tractor has just about 200 hours on it.

 

[Steve_Miller]

Dargo,
Thanks for the demo. It's info, I take a lot in from that picture. I notice that the cross member passes through both sides of the loader arm, which to me is going to be much more solid than what my little tractor has. Does it matter, no, but its little things like a picture that shows how some loaders are designed different than others. Was the loader designed on my Kioti to conserve weight as it is a little tractor with a relatively light loader capacity or did they want to keep the loader tubes free to route hoses through? Do Kubota opt for strength over looks? Who knows? A million questions with so few answers. I thought it would be a good comparison for people to ponder and I appreciate any one who is willing to answer honestly as you always do. I don't think I have ever read one of your posts and did not like what you had to say. I sort of get a kick out of people that get offended so easily. (this is not meant at you, its just a general statement). Thanks again for the picture.

Good night
Steve

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( That in particular (weight on the front end) as well as designed flex, and lots of other issues is why I don't honestly think this "test" proves anything. )</font>
I'm not sure any of this is important either, but it has rather robbed Joe of his thread.

As far as the flex goes, I like some give in most of this type of implement. I don't tighten my sway chains for most implements for the same reason. If I hit something in the ground, and there is a little flex, I'm less apt to do damage.

But I'm wondering if this "test" is supposed to hint toward a cause for Joe's and Steve's problem, but I doubt that it does as it is not clear where the flex is actually occuring, in the linkage, or in the cross member where the damage was done.

John

 

[Steve_Miller]

<font color="orange"> Steve, I just walked in from dinner and saw your post and was very curious about my New Holland loader. </font>

Bob,
Thanks as well, If you guys keep posting pictures of these none flexing loaders I'm going to get condemned as a Kioti member.

This time its really good night
Steve

 

[JerryG]

It appears that there is a large amount of flex. I don't know if some are designed that way or not. I had always felt that the less flex the better. I don't know really know for sure. Does any of our dealers or our resident engineers know for an absolute fact if some or all or if any loaders are designed to have a certain amount of flex for a reason.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

Jerry I'm neither a dealer nor an engineer, but I suspect that the less flex the better.

Simply put, if you have excessive flex then your loader is actually fighting the power of the tractor. If your loader is going to flex when you push into a pile, then the power of the tractor is not being utilized. The flex is actually working against the tractor make it far less efficient and robbing it of power.

Think of it like a spring, the cushioning effect of the spring does prevent shock (as John suggests) however it also prevents loader from doing its job. So the loader, if it has excessive flex, simply is wasting what power it has. Now this is not the lifting power, because that is related to the hydraulic cylinders. The flex is causing power loss when you drive into a pile or do some back dragging because that is when you'd experience it. Certainly if you tried to use the corner of your bucket to pry up a stump, you'd also experience flex in the arms then, and that would also be a time when you'd experience the loss of efficiency in power.

 

[MikePA]

Since the flex isn't infinite, once you've reached the limit, the loader performs as if there was no flex. I don't see where hp is lost. Some hp is initially used to take up the flex, then it's all used to perform the task at hand.

 

[Glen_Ippolito]

Guy's we are for getting one factor hear! Steves loader has cracks, which I would think would cause more flex??? I have a ck30 and I'll do the same tomorrow.
thanks

 

[Bob_Skurka]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Since the flex isn't infinite, once you've reached the limit, the loader performs as if there was no flex. I don't see where hp is lost. Some hp is initially used to take up the flex, then it's all used to perform the task at hand. )</font>

Mike, a couple things I will partially agree with you to a point, but if you've now flexed your loader so it is no longer square, and you keep pushing, are you now in danger of putting a permenant bend in it? Afterall, you've flexed it several inches out of square (taking Steve's 120 loader as an example) pushing harder would likely eventually have bad results?

Further, if you have excessive flex (and I'm not really sure what is excessive) and you push into a pile until the flex has reached its limit (as you suggest) then you've essentailly wasted all the effort up until that point and I wonder if you wouldn't risk losing traction during that process?

Just some thoughts.

 

[TBDonnelly]

<font color="purple"> Certainly if you tried to use the corner of your bucket to pry up a stump, you'd also experience flex in the arms then, and that would also be a time when you'd experience the loss of efficiency in power.</font>

Can't say I would recommend anyone use the corner of a loader bucket to pry up stumps. You're just asking for a tweaked loader frame.

If I may, use an excerpt from a post by Brent Pepper from earlier today:

<font color="blue"> The front end loader is a remarkable scooping device. ...... A tooth bar will make it dig better but that does not change the fact that it is a front end loader and not a front end digger. </font>

Don