Open discussion on load expectations using forks on your loader
Results 1 to 9 of 9
Like Tree15Likes
  • 10 Post By Artillian
  • 1 Post By meburdick
  • 1 Post By Carvel Loafer
  • 1 Post By Gizmo2
  • 2 Post By Artillian

Thread: Open discussion on load expectations using forks on your loader

  1. Top | #1
    GTT Vendor Artillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,527
    Thanks
    515
    Thanked 584 Times in 251 Posts

    Open discussion on load expectations using forks on your loader

    Jgayman mentioned wishing he knew the lift capacity using his forks on his tractor. This is a difficult question to answer in one sentence, but I can at least try to offer the variables that affect it. Here are some that come to mind, but there may be more.

    **This assumes having adequate rear counterbalance, or ballast.**

    Attachment weight - Obviously, the heavier the attachment the less potential it will have to lift other things. If you don't need the backrest (aka headache rack, brush guard, etc), take it off and you gain lift capacity.

    Distance of the load center of gravity (CG) away from the loader - Obviously, the farther out, the less you will be able to lift. There is a graph here for a point of reference. Always plan your load placement to keep as much weight in close to the loader as safely possible.

    Elevation of the load - If you are starting from the back of a pickup truck, your lift capacity will be less than starting from the ground because loaders lose potential as they go higher up.

    Curl Angle - If you can curl your load up (and back) it moves the CG closer to the loader, which increases lift capacity.

    Pitch angle - If your tractor is sloping uphill, you will be able to lift more than if you are sloping downhill. This is because the CG of a given load will naturally be closer to the loader on an uphill.

    Fork tine length - Longer fork tines have higher weight and a CG farther away from the loader. Take two forks, one 48" long and one 24" long. That extra two feet compounds the loss in lift capacity because the weight of that extra length is multiplied by its distance away so a 48" fork that weighs 40 Lbs more than the 24" one might have a 50 or 60 Lb effect on the lift capacity of the whole system.

    Fork tine taper - Full taper fork tines have a CG that is closer to the loader than a Standard taper fork tine. See here for an illustration of the difference.

    I hope this helps. If more come to mind, I'll add them. Unless you think of them first....
    Last edited by Artillian; 06-01-2013 at 11:56 AM. Reason: mild clarification
    Tractor Attachments Maximized for Versatility
    www.ARTILLIAN.com
    Email: [email protected]

  2. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Artillian For This Useful Post:

    andy b. (06-01-2013), Bubber (06-01-2013), Carvel Loafer (07-26-2013), dieselshadow (06-01-2013), Foggy Bottom (04-03-2015), fuelhog2000 (07-26-2013), jgayman (06-01-2013), Kennyd (06-01-2013), Oberhaz (04-03-2015), RonS (07-27-2013), sterling40man (06-01-2013)

  3. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

  4. Top | #2
    jgayman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:19 PM
    Location
    Central Pennsylvania
    Posts
    9,772
    Thanks
    366
    Thanked 1,604 Times in 1,218 Posts
    Good info. Thank you!

  5. Top | #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Central CT
    Posts
    2,334
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked 220 Times in 174 Posts
    Would it be reasonable to add a comment about engine speed and PTO potential?

    Specifically, what I'm thinking is this:

    If you run the engine outside of the rated speed, you lose potential for lift (especially if you're running slower). And, to that end, I try to always run mine at the very bottom of the recommended PTO range so that I can get just a very little bit of extra "oomph" if I need it.

    Also - on some machines, the hydraulic pump that raises the loader is the same one to provide fluid pressure to the HST. So, if you're moving at all, you lose lift potential.
    Oberhaz likes this.
    ---

    2011 JD 2520 with 200cx loader, 61" materials bucket, and Artillian JDQA Pallet Forks (42" forks). 62D MMM, ballast box, turfs, and loaded rears.

  6. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

  7. Top | #4
    Carvel Loafer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Online
    09-15-2019 @ 09:42 AM
    Location
    Carvel, Alberta
    Posts
    2,870
    Thanks
    329
    Thanked 449 Times in 263 Posts
    Those are all very good basic forklift principles. I've said it before that I wish I would have purchased Artillian forks vs the Frontier that I did buy. The extra weight on the Frontier 48" is probably all I would need to lift those extra 10 pieces of firewood. At least I should have selected 42" forks rather than the 48". Don't get me wrong, the Frontier is a well built piece of equipment but I learned that the extra weight is robbing from the low lift capacity of the 1026R. I do work with it regardless and use some of the suggestions Artillian posted which helps. Anyway, a good topic.
    Gizmo2 likes this.
    Workin hard at loafing!
    2012 1026R c/w H120 FEL, 42" Frontier Forks, 6T49 CL Tooth Bar, CL7 Weight Bracket

    RC2048 48" Rough Cut Mower, Buhler Y550R 60" Finishing Mower, 60" Frontier RB2060L Back Blade, JD Ballast Box
    Femco Hitch Adapter 2" Receiver, 60" Farm King 3PH Snow Blower, I Match, BB2048L Frontier Box Blade

    6' Kodiak Landscape Rake, Braber Equipment PHD c/w 9" & 12" X 48" Augers, HLA 1000 60" Snow Blade

    1980 317 L&G Tractor c/w 48" Mower and 48" Snow Blower

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Carvel Loafer For This Useful Post:

    Artillian (07-27-2013)

  9. Top | #5
    Senior GTT Super Slacker Gizmo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    Today @ 12:34 PM
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    34,170
    Thanks
    5,769
    Thanked 3,948 Times in 2,911 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Carvel Loafer View Post
    Those are all very good basic forklift principles. I've said it before that I wish I would have purchased Artillian forks vs the Frontier that I did buy. The extra weight on the Frontier 48" is probably all I would need to lift those extra 10 pieces of firewood. At least I should have selected 42" forks rather than the 48". Don't get me wrong, the Frontier is a well built piece of equipment but I learned that the extra weight is robbing from the low lift capacity of the 1026R. I do work with it regardless and use some of the suggestions Artillian posted which helps. Anyway, a good topic.
    Here as well. In my defense, when I bought our Frontier forks Artillian was just a slacker and had not designed his yet, I saw no other choice.
    Last edited by Gizmo2; 07-27-2013 at 08:00 AM.
    Artillian likes this.
    Keith

    JD 2320, 200CX FEL/61" bucket , 46 BH/16" bucket, Artillian Forks, 72" Snow Blade, Landscape Rake, Ballast Box, PHD, The Wife
    BX42 Chipper, XUV 560 Gator, Z915B ZTrak

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Gizmo2 For This Useful Post:

    Artillian (07-27-2013)

  11. Top | #6
    GTT Vendor Artillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,527
    Thanks
    515
    Thanked 584 Times in 251 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by meburdick View Post
    Would it be reasonable to add a comment about engine speed and PTO potential?

    Specifically, what I'm thinking is this:

    If you run the engine outside of the rated speed, you lose potential for lift (especially if you're running slower). And, to that end, I try to always run mine at the very bottom of the recommended PTO range so that I can get just a very little bit of extra "oomph" if I need it.

    Also - on some machines, the hydraulic pump that raises the loader is the same one to provide fluid pressure to the HST. So, if you're moving at all, you lose lift potential.
    It is my understanding that engine speed has no effect on pump pressure, ie lift capacity. It only affects the speed. If that is accurate, then it's certainly possible that the extra speed could give extra momentum, which might seem like extra lift capacity, and actually become extra lift capacity in the algorithm of reality (aka the 'real world').
    Tractor Attachments Maximized for Versatility
    www.ARTILLIAN.com
    Email: [email protected]

  12. Top | #7
    Carvel Loafer's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Online
    09-15-2019 @ 09:42 AM
    Location
    Carvel, Alberta
    Posts
    2,870
    Thanks
    329
    Thanked 449 Times in 263 Posts
    Another very important thing to remember is that with forks on a FEL you still do not have a forklift, it is a FEL with forks. When you curl up or down you have to be extra careful because it curls so far back or tips right over compared to a real fork truck that simply tilts the load to shift the COG. Once you master this unique difference though it offers another useful function to carry brush etc. and tipping the load off too.
    Workin hard at loafing!
    2012 1026R c/w H120 FEL, 42" Frontier Forks, 6T49 CL Tooth Bar, CL7 Weight Bracket

    RC2048 48" Rough Cut Mower, Buhler Y550R 60" Finishing Mower, 60" Frontier RB2060L Back Blade, JD Ballast Box
    Femco Hitch Adapter 2" Receiver, 60" Farm King 3PH Snow Blower, I Match, BB2048L Frontier Box Blade

    6' Kodiak Landscape Rake, Braber Equipment PHD c/w 9" & 12" X 48" Augers, HLA 1000 60" Snow Blade

    1980 317 L&G Tractor c/w 48" Mower and 48" Snow Blower

  13. Top | #8

    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Online
    08-31-2013 @ 07:47 AM
    Posts
    28
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Reply

    You also need to consider that it isn't always possible to have the COG evenly between the forks. Having more weight on one fork than the other will make a big difference.

  14. Top | #9
    GTT Vendor Artillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,527
    Thanks
    515
    Thanked 584 Times in 251 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gizmo2 View Post
    Here as well. In my defense, when I bought our Frontier forks Artillian was just a slacker and had not designed his yet, I saw no other choice.
    The Frontier forks are great, of course, and what I still recommend to folks with larger machines when asked about a larger capacity frame. They were also basically the genesis of Artillian. Having a machine at the time that could lift around 700-800 lbs, there just wasn't much point to me in using 400 of them on the attachment. Sort of left me scratching my head and, long story short, here we are. Still a slacker though, ha ha. Just one who works a LOT more hours. Who let this guy in here anyway?
    Gizmo2 and Carvel Loafer like this.
    Tractor Attachments Maximized for Versatility
    www.ARTILLIAN.com
    Email: [email protected]

  15. Remove Advertisements
    GreenTractorTalk.com
    Advertisements
     

Similar Threads

  1. Green Farm Parts goes the above and beyond expectations!!!
    By Zebrafive in forum Green Farm Parts
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-27-2016, 06:30 PM
  2. Pallet Forks Don't Fit Loader!
    By RickL in forum Large Frame Compact Utility Tractors (LCUT)
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-01-2013, 11:52 AM
  3. Home-built set of forks for JDQA loader
    By dieselshadow in forum Metalworking & Fabrication
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 08-20-2012, 08:51 PM
  4. Artillian Pallet Forks for the Loader
    By RandyM in forum Implements & Attachments
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-15-2011, 08:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •