Rim Guard --> Beet Juice

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> Fluid in Tires: Most of the fluid's weight would be below the center of the wheel </font>
In filling a tire with fluid, how do you get more than 50% of the total weight added below the center line of the wheel? I realize that the tire might deflect a bit and allow slightly more volume below the center line of the wheel than above it, but how can you say 'most of the weight would be below the center of the wheel? Just trying to understand.

I agree that wheel weights would be 50/50 and they would not lower the CG as much as fluid since the fluid would be lower.

<font color="blue"> (2) Using fluid is cheaper than purchasing wheel weights. </font>
Depends. Fluid would be cheaper than factory wheel weights, but something like EZWeights, which allows the use of standard exercise weights at 30 cents per pound (used) is pretty cheap additional weight.

<font color="blue"> (3) Assuming 200 to 300 lbs of weight, the fluid would be much easier to work with than the weights. </font>
How do you mean 'work with'? With wheel weights, you can take them off when you need to work on the tire/wheel. Fluid, unless you drain it, is always there. Working with a tire filled with fluid is quite a chore.

 

[PineRidge]

<font color="blue"> Fluid in Tires: Most of the fluid's weight would be below the center of the wheel (and below the tractor's center of gravity as well). </font>
If I understand correctly most guys fill their tires 75%, that relates to 25% above the axle.

<font color="blue"> Wheels Weights: The weight of the wheel weights would be distributed such that there would be an equal amount of weight above and below the center of the wheel. </font>
I buy this statement 100% However I also add 300 pounds to a 3 point hanger, below the center line of the rear axle. Once again easy on and easy off.

<font color="blue"> Conclusion: Using fluid in tires for additional weight will be more beneficial in lowering the tractor's center-of-gravity thus making the tractor more stable and safer. </font>
</font>
My gut instinct is telling me go cast iron.

OVERALL WEIGHT ISSUES:

<font color="blue">I believe the following statements to be true, but don't have any data readily available to back up the statements:</font> </font>


<font color="blue"> (1) I believe that you can increase the weight of a tractor wheel more when using fluid than you can using wheel weights. </font> </font>

10 pounds of beet juice vs 10 pounds of cast iron still equals 10 pounds.
<font color="blue"> (2) Using fluid is cheaper than purchasing wheel weights.</font> </font>

I had 300 pounds of cast iron rear wheel weights added at a buck a pound.
<font color="blue"> (3) Assuming 200 to 300 lbs of weight, the fluid would be much easier to work with than the weights..</font> </font>

I can very easily remove the weights before removing the tire itself. Each weight weighs 100 pounds and my floor jack will get them off without lifting. Your filled tire is a hernia maker waiting to happen, it will always be heavy unless you drain it, Most folks aren't equipped to do that themselves.

 

[Kelvin]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( In filling a tire with fluid, how do you get more than 50% of the total weight added below the center line of the wheel? )</font>

How can it be any other way? I'm not sure what you're missing. If you fill a tire with fluid to 100% capacity, then you could say that 50% would be above the center of the wheel and 50% would be below the center of the wheel. If you only fill a tire to 75% capacity, then the missing 25% has to come from the top (assuming that (1) the law of gravity is still in effect and (2) the fluid is heavier than air, which it usually is).

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( (2) Using fluid is cheaper than purchasing wheel weights.
Depends. Fluid would be cheaper than factory wheel weights, but something like EZWeights, which allows the use of standard exercise weights at 30 cents per pound (used) is pretty cheap additional weight. )</font>

I did assume factory wheel weights with my statement.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( How do you mean 'work with'? With wheel weights, you can take them off when you need to work on the tire/wheel. )</font>

I will say up front that I have never personally installed wheel weights nor have I personally installed fluid in a tire. I am about to pay the local Farmer's Co-Op to load fluid in my tires, and even then I still won't be able to say that I have persoally installed fluid in my tires. With regard to the weights that you mention, how heavy are the weights that you say you can take off? In my mind, if they are heavy enough to be effective (200-300 lbs was my guess) then they'd be a real pain to install. If you are using multiple weights, then that may not be as great of a pain.

BOTTOM LINE: For me, having a lower center of gravity for enhanced safety is my main reason for wanting fluid in my tires. For my 12.4-16 rear Ag tires, I think that I might could handle the tire loaded with fluid if I had to. My negative opinions about wheel weights may have been too strong given my lack of personal experience.

 

[Kelvin]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I can very easily remove the weights before removing the tire itself. Each weight weighs 100 pounds and my floor jack will get them off without lifting. )</font>

Based upon your personal experience, I will retract my statement about the fluid being easier to work with. My "opinion" about weights being more difficult to work with was based upon some other tractor guy's conversations several years ago when I was very new to the tractor world. That is obviously one of the "it depends on several things" (type weights, tire & wheel size, etc).

I still plan to stick with the fluid in my tires because my main desire is to lower the tractor's center of gravity. But since I don't necessarily need a lot of additional weight, I had originally planned to load fluid to only 50%. One of the threads that I've responded to had a post stating that if you don't cover the wheel entirely in fluid, it is more likely to rust. Therefore, I may be forced to use 60-75% fluid in my tires, even though I don't need that much weight.

Kelvin

 

[art]

Let me throw something else in here! Fluid filled tires don't absorb the ground conditions as fast as when just with air. To the point that you might be better off to be several hundrd pounds lighter but yet still better off! The testing that I saw done was with radial tires on larger farm tractors but you might be better off to be a little light for overall performance.

 

[Junkman]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( </font><font color="blueclass=small">( In filling a tire with fluid, how do you get more than 50% of the total weight added below the center line of the wheel? )</font>

How can it be any other way? I'm not sure what you're missing. If you fill a tire with fluid to 100% capacity, then you could say that 50% would be above the center of the wheel and 50% would be below the center of the wheel. If you only fill a tire to 75% capacity, then the missing 25% has to come from the top (assuming that (1) the law of gravity is still in effect and (2) the fluid is heavier than air, which it usually is).

</font> </font> )</font>

In this particular instance if the tire is filled with 75% fluid, then 2/3 would be below the center line of the wheel/tire and 1/3 above since air for all practical purposed doesn't weigh anything.

I have used wheel weights in the past and I also have used filled wheels and tires. I definitely like the convenience of the filled tires better. My tractor has provisions for adding wheel weight to the rim, but Kubota advises against them in the owner manual. I have never been able to get a reason for this. I know that Kubota doesn't offer wheel weights for the BX nor do they sell filled tires..... so their reasoning can't be financial...

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue"> Fluid filled tires don't absorb the ground conditions as fast as when just with air. To the point that you might be better off to be several hundrd pounds lighter but yet still better off! </font>
Thats right. A loaded tire doesn't conform to the ground to the extent a unloaded tire does. The fluid prevents it. Pound for pound you are better off with fewer pounds of wheel weights than with more fluid weight. Wheel weights also offer an amazing about of lateral stability, perhaps more than you would think. I have 400 lbs. of cast weights on my tractor and it made a tremendous difference.
My Weights

 

[19th_VA]

Maybe I have missed something but I don't see how you can get as much weight via wheel weights as you can with fluid.

And by the way, I spoke with Glen Daly several months ago and he's pretty much a one man band (at least was then). He had no website and his distribution seemed to be limited to the Northeast.

Maybe there is new information, but that is what I found back in June I think.

 

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> I'm not sure what you're missing. </font>
I equated your use of the word 'most' with more than half.

 

[temp]

Hi,

One thing to keep in mind is that if you get into trouble, the fluid in the tires can slosh to the top and add to momentum to a bad situation.

On the other hand, wheel weights just stay where they are...

Still...I have loaded tires...was the easiest way for me... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

 

[PineRidge]

Let me throw another mix into the brew:
At certain wet times of the season those with filled tires may not always be able to get on the turf without badly marking it. It is very easy however to unbolt the wheel weights and leave the weight behind to get on with the chores at hand.

Plus I have seen all kinds of pictures posted here at the tractorbynet site with corrosion damage done to rims that have used fluids in the tires. Cast iron adds no corrosive value to the rim itself.

Still some mighty good reasons for choosing wheel weights over fluids if you ask me. This is just my two cents worth mind you.

 

[Kelvin]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( A loaded tire doesn't conform to the ground to the extent a unloaded tire does. )</font>

I don't really understand how there can be much of a difference, but I am in no position to argue with anyone as I don't have the experience to draw from.

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I have 400 lbs. of cast weights on my tractor and it made a tremendous difference. )</font>

That looks like a neat setup, where the "weight holder" (for lack of a better term) is bolted onto the wheel and the weights are easily removable. With a setup such as yours, I wonder how practicable it would be to have weights that are heavier on one side that the other such that you would gain some of the advantages of fluid where the majority of the weight is below the center of the wheel. The weight would most likely require a bearing in the center.

Kelvin

 

[Kelvin]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I equated your use of the word 'most' with more than half. )</font>

I still don't understand where the conflict is, if there is any.

When a tire has fluid added, and is not filled to 100% capacity (by volume)with the fluid, then 'most', or 'more than half' of the fluid will be below the center of the wheel.

There must be something simple that I am missing...

Kelvin

 

[Kelvin]

PineRidge,
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( Plus I have seen all kinds of pictures posted here at the tractorbynet site with corrosion damage done to rims that have used fluids in the tires. )</font>

I agree that there a potential corrosion problems. There are also techniques to prevent the corrosion. One of the reasons I wanted to bring this post back to life was to open discussion of these techniques.

By reading the posts on this site and also gathering opinions from local Kubota dealers and Farmer's Co-Ops, this is a summary of the various statements I've read & heard and are trying to sort through. Note that I am not necessarily arguing FOR or AGAINST any of these techniques:

(1) Use less corrosive fluid. This makes sense. There are several discussions as to which fluid is least corrosive. This subject is expanded into which fluids are safer for the environment in the unlikely event of a fluid leak.
(2) Fill the tire to over 50% such that the entire wheel is covered; not doing this will allow the wheel to be exposed to air while wet thus creating an situation where corrosion could easily form. Fill the tire to over 50% even if you don't need that much weight.
(3a) USE TUBES; this keeps the fluid off of the metal wheel. Also, tubes help keep tires from breaking the bead under extreme side-loads.
(3b) DON"T use TUBES; This allows moisture to form between the tube and the wheel which allows corrision to form. Tubes can develop a small leak that will expose the wheel to moisture and subsequent corrosion.

Kelvin

 

[MikePA]

<font color="blue"> I still don't understand where the conflict is, if there is any.</font>
There isn't.

 

[PineRidge]

Kelvin I have seen a lot of discussion regarding damage done to tractors with acid splashing on various tractor parts. In these cases most opt for a sealed battery such as the Optima to eliminate further damage to their expensive investments. If there are known problems most folks find a solution that will reduce or eliminate the likely event of further damage.

So back to the damage at hand caused by fluid filled tires, will I be putting this stuff in my rims with the investment that I currently have? NOT very likely in this lifetime. While I am sure that there are some very good arguments for fluid filled tires vs. wheel weights I can't justify carrying the load 100% of the time not to mention damage that could result to the tractor itself.

I wish you the best of luck and hope that you never encounter any of these problems yourself.

 

[jdrotert]

I will give my experience with loaded tires:

I bought a Kubota B2150DT three years ago from the prior owner of my home. The tires were ag and were loaded with a CaCl2 mixture. I use the tractor mainly for mowing, so I wanted turf tires, but wanted to keep the ag's for loader work. Anyway, I usually switch tires twice a year. I noticed that around the stem hole, the wheel was severely corroded. After further inspection, the stem came out of the tube throught the stem hole! The CaCl2 corroded the brass stem in the tube to the point that it would pop out. I drained both rears in a plastic drum. I found one wheel to be completely unsalvageable and one that I spent a whole day rebuilding the stem hole in the wheel. I now have about 35-40 gallons of a CaCl2 mixture that I don't want to throw out, but I don't want to use for fear that it will corrode my new rims. I did like the weight that CaCl2 added, so I'm torn. One thing to remember: just because you use a tube with CaCl2 doesn't mean that something won't corrode.

I believe that beet juice is the way to go.

John

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue"> Maybe I have missed something but I don't see how you can get as much weight via wheel weights as you can with fluid.
</font>
You may not get as much, but pound for pound it more effective for traction. Fluid doesn't let the tire conform to the dirt as well as cast weight. I think that Art explained it the best a while back, I don't remember if it was here or someplace else. Firestone has a lot of stuff about fluid fill on their site, just about anything that anyone would like to know. They did have some information about how the cast was recommended over fluid, I looked briefly for it and will look again. I was told by someone that Michelin also had something like it, but I haven't looked there. I do know that with weights like I have, you have the advantages of the weights and can remove them easily without the headaches of fluid.

 

[timb]

How does a part liquid part air-filled tire have any different tire contact patch than a pure air-fill? The tire has not "gone solid" - it is still compressible - the air pressure in the (still considerable volume of) non-liquid zone is still set to the same pressure setting as the pure-air tire. That comment leaves me stumped. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

I have driven tractors with fluid-filled and pure air-filled tires (but never the same tractor both ways) and never noticed any difference in ride consistent with one style of fill or the other - it seemed all due to tire ply count and the dozen other more significant differences between the tractors.

Our '53 Ford has calcium chloride filled rears (have no idea if there are tubes or not) - for close to or better than 20 years on the current set - no real corrosion problems. Storey is that there were a few corrosion issues around the stem holes when the current set of tires were mounted in the still-used original rims - since the last set had also been fluid-filled. Required some repair work - but those rims are still rolling today.

Here's a question - Would wheel weights (like any other weight anywhere on the tractor) end up as part of the tire loading (reducing the amount available to carry the rest of the tractor/load) where liquid would not?

 

[JerryG]

<font color="blue"> Here's a question - Would wheel weights (like any other weight anywhere on the tractor) end up as part of the tire loading (reducing the amount available to carry the rest of the tractor/load) where liquid would not?</font>
I would say that as far as tire load goes, you are probably right. but how many compact owners exceed the tire load?
As far as the conforming, from what I have seen, the weight of the water on the bottom of the tire vs the cast load through the sidewall is the difference. Tires are designed to carry their loads through sidewall not the type of load that the water supplies to the contact patch only or should I say in large part.