Go Bottom Go Bottom

Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-21          38871

Subtitle: How to get a 1500 pound tractor to pull a 2300 pound trailer up a sand dune.

As discussed in an earlier post, I have assembled a dual axle trailer to haul a 225 gallon water tank to the far corners of my land to water trees and to keep as a standby water supply in case of a lightning strike fire (a very high probability in my neck of the woods…or rather, sage brush). The water tank is only 38 by 44 inches so the trailer is pretty short coupled. There is no tongue weight to speak of, because the whole thing sits level when fully loaded with the hitch about a foot off the ground. I figure the loaded trailer weighs about 2300 lbs, and nearly 1900 lbs. of that figure is water.

I knew before I started that it would be too big a load for my 4100, but the 110-gallon tank was too small and I planned to compensate by filling the tank somewhere between 110 and 225 gallons. I was surprised on fully loaded test runs down the steep paved driveway, that I had plenty of braking power, as long as I kept the tractor in 4wd so all four wheels were braking. But I ran into trouble on the back lot where it is steep and sandy. The tractor lost traction and dug in about 50 feet from the top fence line and when I turned to go downhill the weight of the loaded trailer pushed the rear end of the tractor sideways on 90-degree turns. Ok, time to regroup.

So how much can I safely haul? Maybe I should figure out what I have first. It looks like this:

Tractor………………............................……………………….1565
Loader (a guess, Deere does not publish the weight)…... 500
Combo 3 pt. carryall forks/platform/hitch.....…...………....…150
Fluid filled tires (sort of turf types).….......…………………...240
Operator (somewhere between the loader and the tires).. xxx
Total………………………………………………......................………2700 Lbs.

Hmmmm……… remember last month when we got into a history of John Deere tractors? I found some specs on a tractor I drove when I was a kid, the Model 80. It is a 2wd diesel that produced 57 HP and tipped the scales at around 8,200 lbs. That critter could pull anything short of a loaded freight train. Maybe it isn’t about the load on the trailer. Maybe I needed more mass on the tractor.

The quickest and easiest way was to put a 55-gallon drum on the combo hitch and fill it with water, which fits into the fire suppression scheme anyway. That put 500 extra pounds on the rear tires (total gross 3200). I adjusted the tire pressure from 12 to 20 pounds. I still had plenty of braking power. The extra weight got me 30 feet closer to the back fence before the tires started digging holes. Now the rear end was more stable going down hill but the front end was sloshing around a bit.

Again, it wasn’t about tongue weight but rather leverage. With the rear end more firmly planted, it became a pivot point and the front tires were moving. So, maybe a bit more weight, this time on the front end. I filled the FEL bucket with cinderblocks, 12 to be exact. At a bit more than 27 pounds each that added 325 lbs. (total gross tractor weight 3525). Brakes still checked out fine going full speed down the paved driveway. This, by the way, is the same driveway that stalled a fire truck a couple of months ago. They had to restart the engine and find their lowest gear to get to the house.

With a total of eight forward speeds and 20 gross horsepower, the 4100 carried the entire load (5800 lbs.) up the drive in 7th gear. More importantly it easily climbed the soft sand all the way to the back fence and remained quite stable turning downhill in the dirt.

So what does all this mean? It seems that when getting work out of a tractor, especially for pulling type jobs, that weight is more important than horsepower. This was true in 1956 when 8200+ pound machines operated with 57 horse engines, and it is still true today. So if you are running a ground-engaging implement and it isn’t working well, try adding weight, maybe a whole lot of weight, to the tractor. It might surprise you. It surprised me.


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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-21          38872

More Math:

The 1956 John Deere Model 80 weighed 8250 pounds (field ready) and produced 57 PTO horsepower. That is one horsepower for each 144 pounds of weight. (8250/57= 144.73).

My 2001, 4100 Gear weighs 2450 (Tractor, FEL, loaded tires and rear combo hitch) and makes 17 PTO horsepower. It works out to the same power to weight ratio. (2450/17=144.12). Pretty weird. Or maybe not.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Art White
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 6898 Waterville New York
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-21          38875

We actually try to get close to 110lbs today useing that formula. It is hard on some tractors as they have to much weight built in to be able to do it. When getting into the higher pounds per horsepower we find it takes to much to get everything moving and really can make a good engine feel doggy and will burn a lot of fuel. On our hills we will go to 120 or 130 but anything more than that and our conversion charts give us a big red lite to let us know that we are to heavy for maximum performance and longevity. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
sgr
Join Date:
Posts: 1
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-05-21          38878

I think you are comparing Drawbar hp on the 8o to pto hp on the 4100, not the same thing ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-21          38880

My manual has two listings: 20 gross HP- presumably a free standing engine, and 17 PTO HP. The listing I found for the Model 80 says 57 hp at the belt pulley and 47 at the drawbar. I am comparing the HP in both models where the implements are run. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-22          38892

Interesting ideas. I'm also glad the brakes worked and the tank eventually got where it was going.

A neighbour up the highway tells a story about brakes. His neighbour helped him move a large mobile home with a 2wd utility tractor. They started out down his driveway. The mobile pushed the tractor, brakes set and all, down the drive and across the highway where the tractor started down the ditch and broke the hitch. I don't know if that was the tractor or the mobile hitch. The mobile was blocking both lanes of the highway and it took them about an hour to get it off the road. The highway has much more traffic today than when my neighbour blocked it, but there still were quite a few unhappy people. Anyway, tractors are better at pulling than stopping.

The idea I have is that most people want to know could be called 'pulling power.' Pulling power would be affected by the engine and transmission and also by tires, soil conditions, ground speed, gear etc. I don't know if pulling power and drawbar HP are the same things. I also don't know if either pulling power or drawbar HP are the same things as performance.

The Nebraska Farm Test site at: http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/FarmPower/g579.htm
gets into their tests a bit. I imagine that more detail of the tests is available. Maybe exact definitions for these sorts of terms are provided, but I couldn't find any at the site.

The sense I get from this is that it takes HP to move tractor weight, and that HP is subtracted from pulling power. Adding weight decreases pulling power. However, additional weight on the axles increases traction, which increases pulling power. There probably is an optimal point for weight at which pulling power is max. Of course in practice, when there’s work to be done, you just try this and that to see what works best without worrying much about tests, definitions and optimal points. It's when I'm sitting here that I'm interested in such things.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38901

Tom, you told that story about the mobile home in another thread. That is the very reason I checked the braking power first. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38902

Mark;
I think the main problem was low tougue weight. If the tougue weight is low then the balance shifts as you go up hill and the water weight shifts it unloads the tougue and you loose traction. As you go up the hill your pulling power is primarily on the rear tires. If you are effectively reducing the weight at the back then you loose traction.
I have a little pup trailer that I used for collecting fire wood. Loaded it has a similar weight to you water. I initially used it with the 750 JD.
There is a big difference in stopping power between the 4x an the 2x. I got caught a couple of times in 2x as I started down a hill. Again the weight shifts to the front and all the stopping power is at the front. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38903

I actually started out with a carefully balanced single axle rig, but as you pointed out the weight transfer, especially with fluid, was a big problem. Once it teetered past the point of no return, I was forced to empty the tank to get it back on an even keel. I bet it was able to exert 500 to 800 pounds of upward pressure or actual lift on the rear hitch. And since I am towing off the three point to accommodate extra ballast and a ready supply of water it might be even worse because there is nothing but gravity to hold the load on the three point hitch down and that is enough weight to overpower and lift the ballast. Dual axles with a neutral tongue weight seemed like the only way to go. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38915

Mark;
I would be inclined to move your tank forward so that you are placing more weight on the tougue. I would put a jack on the tougue and then allow the weight of the water to give you the increased weight on the tractor. All the forest service water trailers were set up with the more than 500 lb tougue weight.
I don't think I would want to tow that much weight off the 3pt hitch. Do you have a 3pt attachment or a straight tow bar?
For reference I purchased 3 pallets of sod, 1500-2000lb each and had them set on my equipment trailer. I moved the trailer up a steep dirt hill with the my small tractor 955 which is the same weight as yours, no ballast in the tires, no weight in the FEL and maybe 500-800 lb tougue weight. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DennisCTB
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 2707 NorthWest NJ
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38917

I had a similar problem hauling some heavy stuff in a trailer with a tractor, my eventual solution was to tow it around with my 5000# 4x4 pickup instead. For me I had just lost site of what tools would be better for different apps, and I just used the tractor for everything

It was a scary feeling when I jack knifed sliding down my driveway for about 20 - 30 feet with the tractor simply unable to get enough traction to stop all that weight coming after me, we all do something thoughtless at some point ;>), and hopelfully we can laugh about it later.

Dennis
CTB ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-22          38922

Dennis proper trailer loading is as important to safety as vehicle weight. My truck is well over 6000lbs unloaded yet I have had problems when the material was improperly distributed. The tendency to want to swop ends is more the tongue loading than the weight.
I took my trailer back down the hill today with 2 pallets on it, but still had a lot of tougue weight. I never felt the load push the tractor. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Wingnut
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 7 york county, pennsylvania
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-05-23          38924

Mark, I feel tongue weight is pretty damn important unless you have a big tractor. I also wouldn't use the 3 pt system but a special draw bar. Good Luck ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-23          38928

My mobile home 'cross the highway story was quite awhile back. I didn't realize Mark was reading the page back then. My neighbour likely would be happy that his misfortune may have prevented somebody else from sharing the experience. the story did keep me from trying to move our 40' construction trailer with my 1710. Hope I got this year’s story shorter than the original.

If I've understand the hookup it's probably something like a 3ph-trailer receiver attachment. I don't know if any of these devices lock down the 3ph, but I think that a heavily unloaded trailer tongue would tend to float the 3ph upward. If true, then the loss of rear ballast would be only the trailer tongue weight, but I guess a trailer tailgate could end up dragging the ground.

Well, maybe it wouldn't work that way when on a steep hill, but of course even the loss of tongue weight on the rear tractor wheels could be enough to break traction. As Peters notes, weight transfers from the front to the back axles when going up hills. On a steep hill, the front wheels aren't doing much pulling.

I don't know if ball hitch receivers are made that attach to a drawbar. The safety stuff I'm familiar with indicates that it's safer to do such jobs from the drawbar. Of course, a trailer may not be very level if attached to a drawbar.

....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-23          38931

Tom;
Northern sells a 3 pt hitch arrangement that accepts the standard reciever. The price is fairly steep $200 so I was considering building one. They are probably cheaper by the number any on else need one?
I normally use the tow bar on the small tractor. My tractor, the 955 has a bend in the bar to give you the proper height. On my old tractor I bought a 2" high ball to give a 3" rise and the proper height. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Art White
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 6898 Waterville New York
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-23          38934

The three point hitch is for mounted or semi-mounted equipment, not for towing trailers. I do see people doing it and for some cases it does work. The problem is the trailer can push the three point hitch arms up which will cause the system to fail. The proper place is the drawbar which pulls from the bottom of the tractor to give you the most pulling power in the safest place to hook. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-23          38940

Art is correct. I use mine primarily on the larger tractor to pull the small pup trailer. I use the lift on the tractor to provide dump action on the trailer. I would like the 3pt arrangement rather than the 2 pt to provide a more stable reversing. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-23          38949

Your guys are all correct. Especially about the dangers of towing from the three- point hitch. But this is a little different. Think of it as a loaded ballast box with a Class 3 receiver under it. Maybe I should explain my hitch arrangement.
I needed a ballast box but I thought they were too one dimensional for my needs. I wanted something that would stay on the tractor 95 percent of the time and do multiple jobs and be easy to handle. I started with a sturdy set of carryall forks from Gearmore. I bolted extra ¼ inch steel angle to the bottom. To that I bolted a slab of ½ inch thick by 8-inch wide steel and to that, I bolted a class three receiver. To the top of all this, I added a 24x48 expanded steel platform. Actually it is the top half of one of those garden wagons with the fold down sides you see in the hardware stores this time of the year. If my tractor were bigger I would have used a 20x60 luggage platforms designed to attach to a receiver hitch.
The device will do a multitude of jobs. Two 55 gallon drums, any number of garden tools or two large trash cans will fit on it, and, though I haven’t tried it, so will a couple bales of hay. It is also the right size to hold one winter night’s firewood. When I need ballast for loader work, I can add 9 cinder blocks (250 lbs) to the carryall/hitch (150 lbs) and have 400 lbs in less than a minute. Nine blocks fit exactly into 48x24 inches. If I need more ballast, another row of blocks gives me 650 lbs and the third and final row gives me 900, which is close to the maximum my three point is rated to lift.
If I am going to pull a small trailer with a couple hundred pounds of firewood I don’t worry about the ballast too much. But when I hook up the 225-gallon water trailer or I am pushing my 3600-pound 5th wheel travel trailer into its parking spot, I fill one drum with water (total about 650 lbs.) or do at least two rows of cinder blocks.
So although I am “towing” from the three-point hitch, I am really towing from a fully loaded ballast box. Different idea and a lot safer I think.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-25          39034

I did not want to have the last word here. Most of you guys have a lot more experience than I, so what about the concept of a neutral tongue weight trailer towed from a loaded ballast box with a hitch on the bottom?
I understand the tractor is working pretty hard but I am also only using it about 50 hours a year and only about a quarter of that time it will be fully loaded and pulling a heavy trailer up hill.
Recapping: the idea is to have a ready reserve of water (the 55 gallon barrel on the three point hitch) and a PTO powered water pump on the tractor at all times during fire season to deal with potential lightening strike fires. The 225 gallon trailer will primarily be used to water the fruit trees around the lot, but will also function as a last ditch supply to defend the house and the fence line,if necessary, again using the PTO mounted pump.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-26          39061

Mark: I have very little trailering experience so I'll duck the last word too. I do know that I have to watch my box scraper carefully when I use the rear blade like a dozer. Many times the blade digs in and tries to jack-knife the hitch. I figure I have to be going slow enough so I can see it happening and stop the tractor before the hitch floats up against its stops and breaks something. A good push from a trailer when going down hill might do the same thing. I suspect that more rather than less weight on the box would help keep the tongue down but who can say how much and what is safe.

Regarding fires. Yesterday I took a course for our volunteer fire department. I was surprised to find that the Township has three or more backpack pumps, a larger one and one that floats on water. There's almost a mile of 1 1/2" hose as well.

The backpack pumps weigh about 70-pounds less fuel and put out 75gpm at 300 lbs. pressure. That's enough to at least discourage a bush fire but 250-gallons wouldn't last long. Fortunately it's real hard to be further than a mile from a significant body of water around her, but less true in Nevada I imagine.

I can appreciate that 250 gallons may make the difference between a smudge and a huge brush fire though. I recall that you are a fire fighter and undoubtedly know much more about pumps used in fire fighting than I do, so here's another place where I'll duck the last word.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-26          39067

Actually, I was a cop. I am flying by the seat of my pants here. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-27          39081

Sorry Mark! I knew that. I think somebody else responded who was a fire fighter.

I don't want to appear like I know anything about wild-land fire fighting--one-day courses don't do much (but there will be more). However, we did use portable pumps. They are pretty impressive and I can see that the volumes and pressures from garden hose and hardware store pumps can't be expected to do much.

A general idea might be that if there's a fire in an area where it has to be 'discovered' and then equipment has to be fetched, the fire is likely to be entrenched. Some serious cooling of areas adjacent to the fire would be required to make any impression, and specialized equipment is needed.

I nosed around the web a bit and found that there is some moderate priced equipment around that is designed for rural homeowners. Actual forestry equipment is designed to be banged around a lot as well as producing working pressures over nearly a 1/2 mile of hose. It is expensive and individuals probably don't need this type equipment.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-27          39086

Tom, could you scroll through your history and get the web site you found? I have ordered a 24 gpm/400 psi PTO pump from Northern but they are back ordered at least another month. I contacted the manufacturer in Italy but they don't answer. I am looking for pump options. Thanks. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Peters
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3034 Northern AL
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-05-27          39101

Alternate Source? ....


Link:   Pumped

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-28          39108

Mark: The sites I looked at were for stand-alone pumps that can be carried on a backpack. Most have their own 2-stroke engines. This type of pump is needed for forestry use pumps have to be gotten through almost impassible bush and pump from most anything that's 6" deep. From your description, you wouldn't have these requirements. This note is long but there are some ideas and maybe will be of some interest.

I mentioned that main pumps we used were speced at 75 gpm @ 300 psi. High pressures are needed because a lot of pressure is lost over long hoses and when pumping uphill. Unless primary pressures are high, only short hose runs can be made before inserting a tandem pump or going to smaller nozzles. I don't imagine these problems exist for you and a lower pressure pump might work.

The floatable pump we used is rated for around 150 psi and are intended for short hose runs. Both pump types have 2" suction and 1 1/2" discharge fittings. My impression is that 150 psi @ 30 gpm or so might be fairly minimal for serious fire work, although I think I saw some residential equipment that has lower specs. I looked at the link Peters mentioned and the equipment looks pretty good. I do anticipate a problem though. PTO pumps may be mostly for ag straying applications which don't involve long hose runs. Ag pumps may be a bit lacking in the pressure specs for fire fighting applications.

Although you wouldn't be operating in a forestry environment, I wouldn't under-estimate the lengths of hose required. The basic idea of wild-land fire fighting is that you don't try to put it out at first. It has to be deprived of new fuel and cooled down before it can be put out. Firebreaks are made and water is sprayed ahead of flame fronts to stop new combustion. Encirclements are made. You have to spray around a fire and then go back when the water evaporates. Go too fast around a fire and not enough water is sprayed so the fire breaks through behind you. Go too slow and the fire escapes around the other side. If you're working alone and pumping from the tractor with fairly a short hose, you could end up having to gather up the hose and move the tractor a lot.

Anyway that's the sort of stuff we learned in the course. Hope I never have to use it. Maybe this book learning on my part helps provide some perspective for what you want to do.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-05-30          39178

Guess I got so carried away with my new pumps and water learning that I forgot to mention that none of the fires (four) fought by the township during the past three years used the pumps. I have some interest in setting getting some pumping equipment myself. However, I have to recognize that shovels and sand are the main equipment, with 4-gallon backpack pumps to mop up hot spots.

As I understand, the first crew has to make a judgement if a fire can be contained using hand tools. If so, it's better to do so than let the fire get bigger while taking the time to set up pumps. Fortunately, hand tools contained all four fires, but it was touch and go for a couple. It’s good to know that pumps are around and forest service fighters can be called in if needed.

Fire shovels are specialized and I'll probably buy my own to keep around the house and camp. They are smaller than a garden shovel, with a different angle and have one side sharpened for cutting small roots and branches. Basically, they don't wear you out as fast as a regular shovel, which is important given my age. Fire fighting really is a young person's business. However, us early retired folks are in demand on volunteer forces because we're available during the day--even if we can't lug stuff through the bush and fling sand for hours on end.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Mike Collinsworth
Join Date:
Posts: 1
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-06-08          39408

When I read the original post I thought certainly safety or design limits but be exceeded somewhere. Overloading a machine can exceed tire limits (been there-done that), bearing/gear teeth loading, stability from the free surface effect of the water, and just general wear and tear on a machine not designed for what it is being used for. Just putting a load like this on a hill with uncertain traction makes me cringe. I saw one machine flip like that. Being an engineer, it made me think about this situation. Actually the above was not the point I was trying to make. We can all figure that out for ourselves.

However, I just came across an ad for a pto driven trailer that was used to haul a few cords of wood and thought that it would be a safer solution to hauling a heavy trailer over soft ground considering it is made to supply it's own traction. I have never seen one of these. Has anyone ever used one? I can see a few problems with it such as gearing. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

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

2002-06-08          39411

The way I understand the idea is that the trailer has a driven axle power by the pto. Sounds interesting because it would put another set of tires on the ground.

However, coordinating the tire rolling circumference ratios sounds like a problem. I wonder how it would be done with HST where ground speed and engine rpm (which deternines PTO rpm) are independent? I also wonder what would happen if the tractor tires lost traction and the trailer wheels didn't? There's probably some mechanism at work that I've never heard of, and that sure makes the idea interesting.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
DRankin
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 5116 Northern Nevada
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster  View my Photos  Pics

2002-06-08          39417

Good questions Mike. I am not an engineer; sometimes I wish I were, so consider the following:
As bad as it sounds, in this case adding 2000 pounds of ballast to a 1500-pound tractor, it appears to be within design limits. My 4100 owners manual outlines the “minimum ” safe operating parameters for loader work. It includes loaded tires or a full set of wheel weights (360 lbs) a ballast box (+/- 800 lbs) the loader (obviously) and of course the load of wet soil, or muck as our British cousins say, in the bucket.
Add in the big German farm boy and you are over 4000 pounds. Now the question I have for you and anyone with a formal education in this area, is this: How much more stress does a 2000+ pound rolling load with a neutral tongue weight add to the equation? It would seem to me that pulling a plow or a soil buster or a box scraper through heavy wet soils would be a bigger drag on the drive train than a heavy rolling load. I came to that conclusion because I can easily operate the tractor and trailer in an uphill environment in the top half of my gear range, i.e. 5th, 6th and 7th out of 8 gears.
If I unload some of the weight and try to pull the box blade I must use the lowest 3 or 4 gears to operate without killing the engine. I can only guess that a plow would create similar drag forces.
Your observations about handling characteristics are on track. And I operate with extreme caution, low ground speeds, high rpm’s and only in 4wd. I pick my ground very carefully. But also consider that the tractor, as I have configured it, greatly outweighs the load it is pulling. My Tundra pick-up weighs 4700 pounds curb weight and is rated to pull a 7200-pound trailer, providing that load has it own braking system. Perhaps I need to add some sort of brakes to my water trailer to make it safer.
Your thoughts and input would be appreciated.
....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
Big Eddy
Join Date:
Posts: 1
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-06-12          39517

I've always used the rule of thumb that the load should not exceed the weight of the pulling vehicle, unless the load has its own braking. Looking at Deere literature, that seems to be consistent, at least with their garden tractors and their gators. I think it even says similar in my 855 manual although won't swear to it. I know on the recent X-Series forum, that same guideline was quoted for the new tractors.

Another rule of thumb often used around here. Go downhill in the same gear you would go up. Works for geared tractors - If you substitute speed for gear on an HST I submit the same applies.

Just remember - if you lose traction going down, you're not stopping until you regain traction ie. the bottom. Dynamic friction is always less than static, so once you are sliding you won't stop. The best strategy (which seems backwards) is to get off the brakes and try to steer it back into control. Easier on a gear tractor where you can press in the clutch. There are more tractor roll-overs in my area each year pulling trailers (hay wagons) downhill than from any other cause, and the results are not always positive.

Having had fun with loaded maple sap tanks behind 4-wheelers on steep hills, I can identify with all Mark's experiences. Since I moved to pulling the same tanks in 4wd with the 855 there is no comparison. Still, I prefer to stay rightside up, so I went to mutiple small (100 gal) tanks for my maple operation, rather than 1 big tank. Even then, on the steep hill home, 1000lbs loaded will push the 855's rear around any time the road (pavement) is damp or has loosesand on it, if I forget to use 4wd (which I only did once!!!)

Big_Eddy ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
MRETHICS
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 190 Star City, Indiana
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2002-07-29          40790

Good advice big ed!

Now my two cents worth:

I must have alot of thumbs, because I have several rules for them, and I learn more every day.

Here is another we use occasionaly. A wheel will stop 60% of it's load without skidding, on an improved surface.

Farm wagons are getting so big and moveing such large amounts of weight, it is the norm these days to sell them with brakes on the wheels. such trailer brakes would make a downhill water run alot safer. ....

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



Notes on compact tractor traction

View my Photos
lbrown59
Join Date:
Posts: 1
TractorPoint Premium Member -- 5 Tractors = Very Frequent Poster

2004-10-18          98702


<< My mobile home 'cross the highway story was quite awhile back. I didn't realize Mark was reading the page back then. My neighbour likely would be happy that his misfortune may have prevented somebody else from sharing the experience. the story did keep me from trying to move our 40' construction trailer with my 1710. Hope I got this year’s story shorter than the original.
TomG >>
============
I once worked in a MH plant.
When they had to move them around out in the yard they did not use a tractor. They used a small fork truck because it's safer than using a tractor.
I once had a guy move a home about a 100 feet or so for me.
He had one of the larger full size JD farm tractors.
As he started to move ahead the front wheels lifted about 3 or 4 feet off the ground.Had he started out much quicker or not let off on the tractor soon enough the tractor would have went on over backwards right into the front of the home.
I don't recommend moving these homes with a tractor.That's what the tote trucks are for.

....

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


  Go Top Go Top

Share This
Share This







Member Login