4tillingdirt
Silver Member
I have noticed on several forums that people are complaining about the LS tractors don't lift as high as some competitors. Has anyone heard if this is something that LS will address?
Loader lift height
- Thread starter 4tillingdirt
- Start date
- Views: 16142
oosik
Epic Contributor
Not a peep. Lift height is a rather relative situation anyhow. Generally speaking - the higher the lift, the lighter the recommended load. And to that extent - heavy loads should be transported as low as possible. Lift height should be shown in the FEL operators manual for any tractor/FEL combination. If you are needing a tractor to lift a specified load to a certain height - best check the specs prior to purchase.
George2615
Super Member
I mentioned this to the LS rep at the local farm show 4 years ago. He said pretty much what oosik said. LS may have higher lift capacity than others but it comes at a price of lower lift height. Its a geometry thing I think and it doesn't look like they are going to change the way they have loaders built. I don't need the higher height lift for my tractor uses and LS had the best bang for the buck back then. I haven't kept up on how pricing compares with other brands.
oosik
Epic Contributor
I have the model LA1153 FEL on my Kubota M6040. It has two positions that the lifting boom cylinder can be attached to on the main frame. One position is the HEIGHT position the other is the POWER position. The FEL will lift - 123.3" in the height position and 107.8" in the power position.
Changing position is simply - bucket flat on the ground - remove fulcrum retaining pin - pull fulcrum pin - move boom cylinder to alternate position( position A is height, B is power) - instal fulcrum pin and retaining pin. Repeat this operation on the other side. Word of caution - DO NOT forget to make the SAME CHANGE to both sides of the FEL.
Changing position is simply - bucket flat on the ground - remove fulcrum retaining pin - pull fulcrum pin - move boom cylinder to alternate position( position A is height, B is power) - instal fulcrum pin and retaining pin. Repeat this operation on the other side. Word of caution - DO NOT forget to make the SAME CHANGE to both sides of the FEL.
CMV
Platinum Member
That's why when replacement shopping I quickly crossed LS off the list even though that's what I had and liked the machine very much. I need to get close to 8' dump clearance without a lot of fuss. The larger LS had good bucket sizes and lift strength, just not the height. In fact, would have had to go a LOT bigger in LS just to get about the same height I had with their almost smallest tractor.
Unless you have a specific need to get the loader that high, it's a non-issue. But if you need the height, you need it and it's a cumbersome limitation to work around. Even though you transport heavy loads real low from A to B, sometimes once at B, you need to get that load to X height - or get it down from X height at A so you can take it to B.
Unless you have a specific need to get the loader that high, it's a non-issue. But if you need the height, you need it and it's a cumbersome limitation to work around. Even though you transport heavy loads real low from A to B, sometimes once at B, you need to get that load to X height - or get it down from X height at A so you can take it to B.
ThirdMan
Gold Member
When shopping for my SCUT lift height was something I looked at. The MT125 is as good as the BX80 series for lift height and capacity. Height and reach in the sub compact rage seem to be not that far apart (1-4 inches for many of the measurements). The lift capacity and breakout force do have more variation (200 lbs. difference is significant when the capacity is under 1000 lbs.) To reach anywhere near the stated numbers you need some good counterweight and as everyone above states; keep loads low when moving.
LS does list all the basic loader specs on one page. They have new loader models on the MT3 and MT5 series.
LS does list all the basic loader specs on one page. They have new loader models on the MT3 and MT5 series.
GSVette
Gold Member
Lift height was a small concern for me when I finally pulled the trigger on my XR4155HC. It does have a lower lift height than either the Yanmar or the TYM that I was considering. This is s small issue for me as the LS cannot clear my dump truck so I have to either switch to my Case 580 or park the truck where I can clear the side boards with the LS-I work around the limitation.
rgr33
Platinum Member
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2012
- Messages
- 814
- Location
- Hillsboro or
- Tractor
- John Deere 950. LS g3033. Kubota RTV 900. Exmark Lazer Z
The lift height on my LS g3033 isn’t great, but I have only one storage shelf in the barn that it can’t reach.
I don’t like operating in the fields with the bucket high anyway, as I an on a hillside, 99% of my work is at 5 feet or lower, transporting totes out of the vineyard and loading onto a trailer, etc. If I was loading dirt into a truck, I would probably look at another brand.
I don’t like operating in the fields with the bucket high anyway, as I an on a hillside, 99% of my work is at 5 feet or lower, transporting totes out of the vineyard and loading onto a trailer, etc. If I was loading dirt into a truck, I would probably look at another brand.
Snowman87
Bronze Member
Lift height wasn't on the top of my list either. About the only thing I can't do to date that I'd "like" to is double stack bales on my father-in-laws goose neck trailer. That said, it's a 36' trailer and he probably doesn't need more than 12 bales on there with what he uses to pull it....
OverandOut
Member
Loader height was of little concern to me as I would only use FEL to move material around the yard. My decision came down to Kubota 7060 or LSXU6168, with the 7060 on power position theres only 3 inches difference, but not on power positon theres a 19" difference. With more options and $9500 cheaper price I went with the LS