Kioti CK30 loader repair and reinforcement

[LakeLanierBuddy]

How are my old Kioti friends? It has been a few months since I reviewed TBN. I am happy to no longer have loader quality issues but see that they are still an active subject here! I still have a nice DK55Cab service manual, 73inch tiller, 84" box blade, rake and 84" Finish mower to play with but have not decided which color tractor to replace my ex-DK55Cab with. Any ideas? Anybody need a Dk55Cab service manual? I need a new Tractor!!

 

[Bob_Skurka]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Guy's we are for getting one factor hear! Steves loader has cracks, which I would think would cause more flex??? )</font>

Good point but did it crack because it flexed? I suspect that excessive flexing is what caused the cracking. That would be a typical way to crack metal. And now that it is cracked, I suspect it can just flex to a greater extent. Remember his 120 loader and my 12LA loader have virtually identical specs. My loader has more hours than his loader. I neither have flex nor cracks.


Don - I'm not the one who has the reputation of taking threads off topic.

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue"> but I suspect that the less flex the better. </font>
That has always been my assumption. But, from an engineering stand point we may be missing something here. I don't know if we are or not. That is why I ask for input from an engineer or someone that has contact with a company that builds loaders. That is just to make sure that our assumption is correct. I know, I personally have had faulty assumptions before. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[MossRoad]

Moderator's Note:
A few derogatory posts by several different users have been removed from this thread. Since this is being posted here, no PMs were sent, as it is late and I am going nighty night. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif Sounds like good advice for some folks as well.

If your post was a reply to one of the posts that got pulled, it will also have gone away as well, as that is the physical setup of the board and I have no control over that. If it was a comment related to the problems with the loader, please feel free to re-post your thoughts by replying to Highbeam's post. However, if anyone feels like taking another poke at someone, please refrain. Thanks and good night. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

[KiotiJohn]

This is very interesting to consider. The only thing I really wonder about is the way of testing. Putting the tractor on a block and powering it up onto the block on one corner is not really typical of a bucket going into a pile of dirt/rock etc. Yes, I can see that it would show the loader can flex, but I doubt this particular force is going to be exerted while loading.

Maybe using the loader in a way that's not particulary within its normal functional limits would show the same. I don't know.

What I do know is that my loader performs flawlessly in so many applications, some of them some that loaders are not designed for, and so far, I have no cracks, and hope I don't get any either!
John

 

[Steve_Miller]

<font color="orange"> I'm not sure any of this is important either, but it has rather robbed Joe of his thread. </font>

I apologize, it was not my intention, so I will start another post under the heading KL120 loader flexing.

Thanks Steve

 

[Bob_Skurka]

John. . . I agree this is an atypical test. I simply followed the lead of Steve becasue he asked the question and posted the test. And while Dargo did the same, Dargo has a loader that is constructed in a completely different way than Steve's and my loader. Dargo's loader is also substantially heavier built that Steve's and my loader. I duplicated Steve's test simply because the 120 and the 12LA are virutal twins if you look at the spec sheets and are very similar if you look at them physically. In the real world, it is unlikely that I would use the corner of my loader to lift my tractor off the ground.


JerryG. . . I agree, we are making the assumption that less flex is better. We have both been wrong before so we may be wrong this time. Further, I speculated that the flex that Steve has is related to his stress cracks in two ways. I believe that excess flex is what caused his loader to crack. I further believe that he probably has more flexing due to the stress cracks. I'm only a hobby welder/metal worker, but I've seen plenty of stress cracks and it strikes me that they often start due to metal deflection/flex.

I am not a metalurgist, but I do know that some types of metal are stronger than others, some are more subject to flex than others, some are more brittle than others, etc. It is possible that the metal used in the Kioti loader is different than the metal used in the NH or Kubota loaders and that is the reason for the flex?

At this point it is all speculation as to what is causing cracks.

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

I've was at a school where a NH factory guy was talking about the design of the "torque tube". Apparently having a rigid one is important because it helps spread out the forces applied to the loader. I'm no engineer, I just repeat what I hear.

 

[Glen_Ippolito]

Bob,
Dargos loader had flex. It looks to me from your pic yours had little flex. I hope to find out more about this issue.
Glen

 

[Bob_Skurka]

Yes, my loader deflected about 1/2 to 3/4 of an inch. I believe I indicated that in my post that contained the photo. It had very little deflection, but it was there. I can't imagine any loader would not have some. I do know from using some older machines that these things tend to get loose with time. But I also know that some I've used are much tighter feeling than others. I've never run a test like this one before but I woud expect every loader would have some deflection.

Tight loaders would have very little, older loaders that have loosened up may have a lot. That is why I think it is informative to include the number of hours on the machine, it would give some indication of how much use the loader has been put through.

 

[JerryG]

Thanks Neil. That was what I was taught, but that was some time ago and a lot of things change with time. Now we know how one company designs their loaders at this time. It would be nice to know if any companies design in an amount of flex or in this instance which way Kioti designs their loaders.

 

[Glen_Ippolito]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( Guy's we are for getting one factor hear! Steves loader has cracks, which I would think would cause more flex??? )</font>

Good point but did it crack because it flexed? I suspect that excessive flexing is what caused the cracking. That would be a typical way to crack metal. And now that it is cracked, I suspect it can just flex to a greater extent. Remember his 120 loader and my 12LA loader have virtually identical specs. My loader has more hours than his loader. I neither have flex nor cracks.


Don - I'm not the one who has the reputation of taking threads off topic.


)</font>

Bob,
Because in this statement you stated u had no flex? I was just wondering, because it looked like u did have flex. I just wanted to be sure.
Thanks

 

[Bob_Skurka]

Glen in the post with my photo (shown again attached with this post) I posted the following statement:

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.

In another post I said I had no flex, but the implication of what I tried to write was in comparision to the large amount of flex/deflection, the amount that I had was minimal. Hence, no flex. Perhaps "essentially no flex in comparision to Steve's large amount of flex" would have been a better statement.

Now I don't know what is designed into these other than what Neil Messick wrote about New Holland, and he said that he attended a class at a New Holland dealer event and that they led him to believe that they design them to be rigid. My tractor certainly confirms what Neil wrote.

However, not much should be taken from any of that.

We do not know how any of the other manufacturers design their loaders. They may design them with flex. They may make them rigid. Until another person who is knowledgable on the topic can speak up we are just able to compare what we see.

No value judgements here, just observations.

 

[MotorSeven]

Bob,

Now i'm not saying this because i think it was done on purpose.....OK? Now with that out of the way, can you move the blocks all the way over to the very edge of the loader bucket and repeat the "test" because that is where the block is on the Kioti. It's just an observation, but the downforce may have been changed due to the blocks being what appears to be 6" off from the edge of the bucket. I am curious if the twist will be the same 1" or more. I am no engineer, but excessive flex in a loader frame just has to be hard on all the parts. I think the next test should be to lip the corner of the bucket on something imovable and lift, then measure that flex......i guess we could get carried away with this /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Anyway, what all of us tractor junkies need is someone to do "real life" independant tractor testing.......Hmmm, what a great "job" for a retired guy /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif!

BTW- headed to VT tomorrow, picking up a sawmill, then headed to my place in TN=SEAT TIME!

RD

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( i guess we could get carried away with this )</font>
Well, now that you've seen there are two threads with much of the same stuff, I think you're late. We have gotten carried away with this, but it's kind of interesting, and it provides some respite from the same old stuff, stuff.
Have a good trip!
John