Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?: John Deere Review  -- John Deere Tractors Discussion Forum and Review Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?: John Deere Review -- John Deere Tractors Discussion Forum

  parts   |   manuals   |   discussion   |   photos   |   podcast   |   reviews   |   specs   |   dealers   |   classifieds   |   contact   |   faq   |   myProfile   |   home          Login Now | Sign Up


FAQ:   What is a tractor?

Forum Index
New As Posted | Active Subjects



www.emerichsales.com - New & Used Equipment
          View Tractors For Sale!


www.partsbynet.com - Lawn and Garden Equipment Parts


Bernardsville Landscape Lighting
Click to Post a New Message!

Discussion Boards > Active Subjects > Messages as Posted > John Deere Review Forum

Page [ 1 ] | 2 | 3 | | Next >>
Reply | Pop Up Window Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo
 11-10-2003, 22:46 Post: 68445
kwschumm



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NW Oregon
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5764

9
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Since I'll be getting new tires I wanted to check into ballasting requirements to possibly avoid loading the rear tires. Looking at the 430 loader manual, it says that IN ADDITION to having calcium loaded rear tires and six wheel weights a 43x0 series tractor requires an additional 1210 lbs of ballast on the 3ph. Can this be right? Yowsa - how on earth can you get enough ballast WITHOUT loading the rear tires?






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-10-2003, 23:40 Post: 68446
DRankin



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5105

5
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Your three point will pick up more than you think. I snatched 1500# off the ground with the BX, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else.

Double check the verbiage though, my 4115/410 manuals specify EITHER wheel weights OR loaded tires (not both) plus 725 to 900 pounds rear ballast.

The 420 loader for your tractor needs liquid ballast plus 550# on the three point or wheel weights plus 770#.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-10-2003, 23:52 Post: 68448
kwschumm



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NW Oregon
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5764

9
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

The 4310 3 point is rated at more than 2000 lbs, so picking it up isn't an issue.

Mark, I see in the loader manual where you got those numbers. The columns for the 430 loader are different - one column is for unloaded tires with no weights and the other is for loaded tires with weights. It may be a typo. As printed it calls for 1320 lbs for unloaded tires with no weights and 1210 lbs with weights and loaded tires.

Thus my confusion. The loaded tires with weights would weigh, what, 1400 lbs already - why would you need another 1210 lbs on the 3-point?






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-11-2003, 06:39 Post: 68458
Art White



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Waterville New York
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 6839

2
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

To really make your tractor feel like a dog, burn a lot of fuel so you can get upset and come to your favorite Kubota guy me, and swap! Sounds like you could be very secure and stable but beyond that, I wouldn't do it. Ag tractors go for 110-120lbs per horsepower and they are made to tear up ground. Normally to not tear up ground you need to be around 90 lbs per horsepower max.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-11-2003, 19:26 Post: 68513
DRankin



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5105

5
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Ken, I am thinking the 430 loader might weigh 150 pounds more than the 420 model. The ballast numbers might be a bit more based on that, but not 1200 pounds more.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-11-2003, 19:39 Post: 68514
Art White



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Waterville New York
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 6839

2
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Something is wrong for that to be needed. I don't want to get into it but that is way to much!






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-11-2003, 19:50 Post: 68516
kwschumm



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NW Oregon
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5764

9
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

I'm sure it's another case of JD not double checking their documents before publishing them. These numbers can't be right.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-12-2003, 06:28 Post: 68529
TomG

TP Contributor

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Upper Ottawa Valley
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5406

2
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Or maybe another case of corporate liability lawyers getting into the act.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-12-2003, 08:49 Post: 68545
Murf

TP Contributor

View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Toronto Area, Ontario, Canada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 7020

4
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Using 'thumb-nail' mathematics, your FEL probably already has about 600 pounds of counterbalance being the back of the tractor and you (no commentary on your waistline intended).

You then would only need to 'top up' the level of counter balance to a little over the maximum lift capacity, probably 1500 pounds, so the figure of 1200 pounds sounds about right.

Bear in mind however, ballast on a tractor is like loading a 'see-saw', the front wheels being the fulcrum or balance point. You have to options to achieve the same results, you can add less wieght, but put it farther back, on the 3pth for example, or you can put a little more weight closer to the fulcrum, say on the rerar wheels, either as loaded tires or wheel weights.

If you are concerned about the tractor chewing up ground (as we are on golf courses) you might want to opt for a 3pth ballast which you can easily and quickly take off when you're not using the loader for anything heavy.

Best of luck.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

 11-12-2003, 12:09 Post: 68566
kwschumm



View my Photos

View my Photos  Pics
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NW Oregon
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 5764

9
Filter by User
 Ballasting 4310 - can this be right?

Murf, that's what I was thinking when I asked the question. The JD loader manual says that I'd need approx. 2600 lbs of ballast for a loader that can lift a maximum of 1200 lbs. It made no sense, thus the question. I thought maybe there was something I was missing, but it seems not.






Reply to PostReply | Quote Post Reply to PostQuote Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo




Bookmarks: Digg It | Del.icio.us | Stumble This

Reply | Pop Up Window Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo


Page [ 1 ] | 2 | 3 | | Next >>

Discussion Boards > Active Subjects > Messages as Posted > John Deere Review Forum

Thread 68445 Filter by Poster:
Art White 2 | Billy 1 | Chief 3 | diesel 1 | DRankin 5 | kadorken 1 | kwschumm 9 | Murf 4 | plots1 1 | TomG 2 |




Most Viewed

+ John Deere 2210 Backhoe Review
+ John Deere vs Kubota Compact Tractors
+ John Deere 790 fuel shut-off solenoid failing???
+ John Deere low viscosity HY GARD
+ John Deere JD 4100 Wiring diagram
+ JD 790 or Kubota L3000DT
+ Should I buy a John Deere 4105???
+ John Deere 4300 turns over but won't start
+ John Deere 455 garden tractor
+ Oil Change for Diesel Tractor

Most Discussion

+ John Deere 4300 scuffing......
+ Possible Solution To The 4000
+ Dealer out to lunch
+ Just got my new JD 4410 - Prob
+ Hello Green, Goodbye Orange
+ Receiver hitch for iMatch
+ 4300 wheel bolt problems
+ 4000 Ten Series 50 hour break
+ Don't buy JD compact tractors.
+ Oil Change for Diesel Tractor

Newest Topics

+ Oil overflow from tube and Smoke
+ John Deere 4100 gear 3 point not workin
+ 2000 John Deer Gator 4 X2
+ Mini Excavator SY20C - Small Body with Big Power
+ John Deer 1070 starting problem
+ John Deere 990
+ Tractors R Us
+ john deere 4100 with 410 loader hydraulic problem
+ John Deere 2032R Buying advice
+ John Deere 2010 loss of hydraulics













Turbochargers for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Cab Glass for Tractors and Industrial Machines

Alternators for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Radiators for Tractors and Industrial Machines

Driveline Components for Tractors and Industrial Machines
Starter Motors for Tractors and Industrial Machines