How are loaders rated?: Loaders  -- Tractor Attachments Implements 3ph Discussion Forum and Review How are loaders rated?: Loaders -- Tractor Attachments Implements 3ph 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 > Loaders Forum

Page [ 1 ] |
Reply | Pop Up Window Reply | Add PhotoAdd Photo
 02-03-2000, 00:00 Post: 12476
Roger L.



Join Date: Jun 1999
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 0

2
Filter by User
 How are loaders rated?

I have always figured that loaders were rated for lift with the weight centered in the bucket. In a different thread, Art mentioned that some loaders are rated at the bucket pins.....which would give a much higher - but useless - number. Some years ago there was a similar controversy on rating three point hitches. Some manufacturers rating them at the hitch pins and others using the standard method, which is with the load centered two feet behind the hitch pins. Does anyone know if there is a standard for rating loader lift capacity and which manufacturers are using it?






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




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

 02-03-2000, 00:00 Post: 12489
Larry in MI.



Join Date:
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1
 How-are-loaders-rated?

Hello Roger,
I don't know what the standard is but the JD 410 loader manual shows two liftability curves. One measured at the pivot pin and the other measured at 500mm forward of the pivot pin (the front edge of the bucket). Neither of these ratings are at the center of the bucket. I don't know why JD rated the loader this way unless they wanted to state the maximum and minimum liftability depending on where your load is centered.






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




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

 02-04-2000, 00:00 Post: 12508
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
 How-are-loaders-rated?

Unfortunately (fortunately?) with a fleet of 9 machines in total I spend quite a bit of time at dealers. I noticed this useless (IMHO) rating of loaders using the wrist pins, the dealer said it's because of the number of diferent buckets, attachments, quik-attach brackets, etc. we have these days. By knowing the lift capacity at a known point on the frame, it can be calculated at the required point of any given implement or attachment. It actually proved very usefull recently when I had an attachment fabricated for picking up and placing the root balls of trees for large plantings, it's kind of like a hydraulic hand, I got the idea from a round hay bale grapple.






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




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

 02-04-2000, 00:00 Post: 12510
JeffM



Join Date:
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1

2
Filter by User
 How-are-loaders-rated?

Although specifying lift capacity at the pivot pins does not give a "honest" bucket lift capacity in real use, I believe that it is a more objective means of measuring to compare different loaders. As Murf implies, different bucket weights and depths alone would skew the numbers. A small depth lightweight bucket would yield extra "centered lift capacity" over a deeper, heavier duty bucket because the load is closer to the pins. When I'm shopping or comparing I'm interested in what the loader can do, then I will choose the appropriate bucket for my situation. It seems to me that the pivot pins are a fairly consistent place to measure. How about the difference between measuring lift capacity at the maximum height vs. at ground level? I would bet that the geometry of loader design favors lift capacity at maximum height significantly. Only problem is that you usually have to start by picking that load up at ground level.






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




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

 02-04-2000, 00:00 Post: 12511
JeffM



Join Date:
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1

2
Filter by User
 How-are-loaders-rated?

Now that I'm thinking over my last post I'm not so sure that the "geometry of loader design" favors lift capacity at maximum height vs. at ground level. Guess i need another cup of coffee before my brain starts firing on all cyclinders. (BTW, related to another post: my brain only has 2 cylinders - runs efficiently but not very smooth. And when one is misfiring it gets real choppy.)






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




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

 02-04-2000, 00:00 Post: 12516
MichaelSnyder

TP Contributor

Join Date: Jun 1999
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 0
 How-are-loaders-rated?

I keep reading mentions of "useless" when talking about rating the loader at the pivot point. Yet Murf's dealer brings a good point to the table. Different buckets or attachement would alter the lift capability if it was rated at the edge of the provided bucket. Whereas rating it at the pivot point allows this figure to remain constant regardless of attachment. I completely agree that it is bogus to compare loader rating between Manu'f when listed ratings are derived from different points. Seems loaders should also follow a guideline similar to 3pt hookups. X" from a pivot point, regardless of the attached implement. Thats my 2 centsSmile






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




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

 02-04-2000, 00:00 Post: 12527
Roger L.



Join Date: Jun 1999
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 0

2
Filter by User
 How-are-loaders-rated?

Yes, it looks to me like I was too quick on the trigger when I said that the rating at the pivot point was "useless". As you all point out, it is actually a useful geometric point to use for a lift number. I think what was - and still is - troubling to me about this is that the three point hitch is measured 2 feet from the pivot point and the front loader is measured...where? In thinking about it, I'd guess that the 3pt lift is measured this way because it was the approximate center of gravity of most implements of the time. No arithmetic was required: just weigh the implement and you knew if the tractor could handle it. 50 years ago machines were overbuilt, under rated, and approximations were good enough. I think implements vary more today. But the basic idea would work even better with a loader. Most seem to carry the load about the same distance from the pivots. Might need to stamp the bucket weight on the bucket itself; they do vary a lot in weight.






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




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

 02-05-2000, 00:00 Post: 12532
MChalkley



Join Date:
Location:
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 1
 How-are-loaders-rated?

I guess what's really 'useless' is comparing the numbers on loaders using these different rating methodologies without realizing the difference and compensating for it. It has been said (whether correctly or not, I don't know) that Kubota has changed the rating for the new loader on the L4610 to the 'at the pins' figure because JD's use of this method made their loaders appear stronger. Some would, of course, insinuate that this was deliberate, but it appears JD had a very intelligent reason (not related to 'out-specing' Kubota) for doing so, and maybe that's the best way for them to be rated. It would be nice for all of them to do it the same way. Maybe Kubota is coming around to JD's way of thinking...






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 ] |

Discussion Boards > Active Subjects > Messages as Posted > Loaders Forum

Thread 12476 Filter by Poster:
JeffM 2 | Larry in MI. 1 | MChalkley 1 | MichaelSnyder 1 | Murf 1 | Roger L. 2 |




Most Viewed

+ Front End Loader for Honda 5518 Multi-Purpose Trac
+ Problem Connecting Hydraulic Hoses
+ 7108 Loader
+ Great Bend Loader
+ Best way to free a seized pivot bolt / joint ??
+ LA302 Kubota Loader
+ Standard or self-leveling 541 loader for JD5320?
+ FEL Leak Down
+ Loader Buddy
+ Cylinder seal replacement

Most Discussion

+ Best way to free a seized pivo
+ I am frustrated with my loader
+ Loader Buddy
+ Loaders..... What would you ch
+ FEL Leak Down
+ Kubota loader installation
+ Woods vs. Kubota Loaders
+ my hydraulics quit working
+ NH 7308 Loader
+ 410 material bucket to big?

Newest Topics

+ Best o-rings for hydraulic quick connects
+ Kubota B6200HST Compatible Loader
+ Hydraulic Gremlins
+ 14 LA Loader
+ 14 LA Loader
+ 7308 Loader
+ Tips for First time FEL or Front End Loader users
+ FEL level Indicators Ideas
+ New Holland 1925 Loader 7308 or Third Party Option
+ JD 420 loader toothbar













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