Bladehauler
Gold Member
Be home tomorrow and I'll check mine
R4041 Loader Issue LB4101
- Thread starter boomer632
- Start date
- Views: 14327
Gary Fowler
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 11,917
- Location
- Bismarck Arkansas
- Tractor
- 2009 Kubota RTV 900, 2009 Kubota B26 TLB & 2010 model LS P7010
Drop the front of the blade till bucket is in vertical position and see if you can move the bucket back and forth any. Mine doesn't have any slack in the cylinders, it is all in those pin and bracket connections.
Bladehauler
Gold Member
I checked mine tonight and all the slop is in the pins,the cylinders dont move, but theres slop on both ends and the pins in the linkage and bucket.Does anyone know if the pin locknuts can be tightened to take out some slop ?
I'll take most of the blame, I dont grease it as often as I should.
Gary Fowler
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 11,917
- Location
- Bismarck Arkansas
- Tractor
- 2009 Kubota RTV 900, 2009 Kubota B26 TLB & 2010 model LS P7010
That's the way mine is and I grease the heck out of it. Maybe it is cheap pins or the grease is not staying in the pin area. I know everytime I grease mine, I am wiping grease off the hood for a few hours as it squirts out of the pin area. My tractor has less than 80 hours on it so pin wear should be minimal and the self leveling brackets seem to have a lot of slop also.
TSO
Elite Member
I have not looked at the pins yet (to check for slop) ... but I was moving snow the other day with mine, and noticed that when I went to "full-dump" and tried to "shake" out the leftovers in the bucket, mine would go limp for a short time also. Sounds like this is another design flaw with these loaders. I know, I know... it's designed to be like that, it isn't meant to be smooth, it's only supposed to do THIS or THAT... again, it seems like an LS problem, because the other tractor brands (new CUT's) don't have these issues with the loader.
Gary Fowler
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2008
- Messages
- 11,917
- Location
- Bismarck Arkansas
- Tractor
- 2009 Kubota RTV 900, 2009 Kubota B26 TLB & 2010 model LS P7010
Anyone have a LS dealer close by that they could discuss this obvious problem with. Mine is 70 miles away. It sounds like and issue with all loaders on all of these tractors.
GManBart
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,976
- Location
- Detroit, Michigan
- Tractor
- Massey Ferguson 241, Kubota SVL90-2
Mine hasn't done this at all. I'm only at 55hrs, but I've spent most of that using the loader.
rwork
Platinum Member
I really haven't noticed this on mine, either. I'll check it out this weekend, though.
Short Game
Veteran Member
My loader gripes probably became legendary here when I found I couldn't roll the bucket back with the strength I was used to with my old CubCadet. That, and it wouldn't even reach my deck with a keg of beer in the bucket, as I had grown accustomed to doing with my little old Cub. LS and my LS dealer upgraded me to the 2011 and up larger bucket cylinders, though improved, it still wasn't the power I was used to. I just bought an aftermarket quick attach for the used Cub I just got. I got it on there and thought that with the sun shining here for a change, I'll get some pictures of the two tractors with their loaders set up for comparison. The LS 4100 loader is set well forward, as well as higher from the ground. It is just plain smaller.
It is a bit hard in the photo to see the why the roll-back strength is different, but it is mostly in the spacing of the pins on the quick attach (I should have gotten a closeup). As for height and reach, it is easy to see the difference in the length of the booms. The Cub is reaching 13 inches higher than the LS, and the LS is on higher ground than the Cub.
Of the two tractors, the LS kicks serious butt for comfort and PTO power. But now I have a loader that will do more. The weakness of having the Cub's bigger loader is in the Cub itself. So, with the Cub 7***s, Case IH 1140s, and Mahindra 28, 30, & 3215s (all the same Mitsubishi built machines), the front axle is not strong enough to carry the loads its loader can lift. I repeatedly blew the front wheel bearings out of my old one. I will be very careful about how much I weight I try lifting with it now.
BTW, the cub never has that issue of the bucket having that gap in power that this thread started with.
It is a bit hard in the photo to see the why the roll-back strength is different, but it is mostly in the spacing of the pins on the quick attach (I should have gotten a closeup). As for height and reach, it is easy to see the difference in the length of the booms. The Cub is reaching 13 inches higher than the LS, and the LS is on higher ground than the Cub.
Of the two tractors, the LS kicks serious butt for comfort and PTO power. But now I have a loader that will do more. The weakness of having the Cub's bigger loader is in the Cub itself. So, with the Cub 7***s, Case IH 1140s, and Mahindra 28, 30, & 3215s (all the same Mitsubishi built machines), the front axle is not strong enough to carry the loads its loader can lift. I repeatedly blew the front wheel bearings out of my old one. I will be very careful about how much I weight I try lifting with it now.
BTW, the cub never has that issue of the bucket having that gap in power that this thread started with.
Attachments
That's interesting. Just some clarification. The Mahindra 2615, 2816 are the same as the Cub 723* series tractors. Is the Cub loader made by KMW out of Kansas? Looks like the Cub 727* series matches the Mahindra 3015. The 3015 has a larger turbo engine and a different loader. It's rated to lift more but has a slightly lower reach. The Mahindra 2815/3215 and 3316 have some differences, somewhat upgrades if you like since they are newer designs. More spacious operator platform, fuel tank under hood, different front and rear axles, different HST trans and loader is again different with even higher lift capacity and even slightly lower reach than the 3015. I know the loader buckets on the 2615/2816 though the same width as the 2815/3015/3215 have less depth and thus less volume capacity, maybe in an effort to reduce the weight on the front axle, that's why I was curious as to who manufactured the Cub loader.
Last edited:
