Green Tractor Talk banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Have been contemplating our need for wheel weights on 1025r. Tires are not loaded, just have some JD version of Slime because of all the mesquite thorns that are around. Think I had a revelation that I don't need the wheel weights, unless my thinking is warped (more than usual). Max Lift at full height is 512 lb for the H120 loader. Using the Ballast Calculator, can lift 648 lb with the 260 BH OR iMatch+477 lbs ballast - neither using wheel weights. Am I missing something? Do have a couple of old 30? lb wheel weights from our long ago scrapped Sears Suburban (think they'll fit) that I'm thinking about adding. IMHO, black wheel weights are much more aesthetically pleasing than the yellow. :laugh:
Had posted this in GM, but after thinking about the JD ballast recommendations, I'm really confused about the JD specs vs the Ballast Calculator. Cotton-picking cast iron wheel weights are SO expensive & will be tough for us to install...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,331 Posts
Not missing anything that I know of. Lots of people use the back hoe, suitcase weights hanging off a Heavy Hitch on the 3pt or a ballast box. I would say more people probably do that than have the cast iron wheel weights. The one advantage to wheel weights or fluid filled tires is that the axle doesn't carry the weight. However the weight is more effective if hanging off the back of the machine because of leverage.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,275 Posts
Max Lift at full height is 512 lb for the H120 loader. Using the Ballast Calculator, can lift 648 lb with the 260 [/COLOR]BH OR iMatch+477 lbs ballast - neither using wheel weights. Am I missing something?
What ballast calculator are you using? There is no ballast calculator for determining 3PH ballast for a loader. The JD ballast spreadsheet that's floating around is mostly for ballasting the front of the tractor to offset heavy rear implements.

Have you consulted the H120 Operator's Manual? It lists what is recommended by JD as the "minimum" recommended rear ballast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
What ballast calculator are you using? There is no ballast calculator for determining 3PH ballast for a loader. The JD ballast spreadsheet that's floating around is mostly for ballasting the front of the tractor to offset heavy rear implements.

Have you consulted the H120 Operator's Manual? It lists what is recommended by JD as the "minimum" recommended rear ballast.
http://www.greentractortalk.com/forums/sub-compact-utility-tractors-scut/32945-1025r-ballast-calculator.html#post413897
Guess I don't see difference of ballast calculations for front/heavy rear & back/heavy front (FEL). Yes, I've seen the JD mins in the OpMan - that's partly why I'm confused. For me, it would be so much easier to understand with lb/position goals instead of only 3 combos of which 2 are with filled tires.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
I've yet to find to much ballast. I am a fan of fluid, wheel weights, and rear ballast.

Fluid is usually cheapest, so I start there
You apparently have never battled Mesquite thorns. :laugh: Fluid not really an option. I did discuss this with several dealers before purchase; tires were "slimed" by dealer at purchase.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,275 Posts
Guess I don't see difference of ballast calulations for front/heavy rear & back/heavy front (FEL). Yes, I've seen the JD mins in the OpMan - that's partly why I'm confused. For me, it would be so much easier to understand with lb/position goals instead of only 3 combos of which 2 are with weighted wheels.
Technically a ballasted tractor is a ballasted tractor but that spreadsheet has nothing to do with the payload of a loader. It also does not have a section for a 1-series. The main purpose of that sheet is to calculate front weight required so you don't do a wheelie when you raise up a heavy 3PH implement. If you notice on the spreadsheet the only load it has you select is a rear implement. Having a FEL can add weight to the front which is why the sheet has a selection for whether or not you have a loader. You'll also notice the sheet doesn't have any selection for pallet forks vs. a bucket. Pallet forks require even more 3PH ballast than does just using the bucket.

The loader manual is just trying to make things easy for the operator. Attach X-amount of weight where they tell you and no worries. Since it has a front axle that pivots, the only thing that makes a tractor stable is keeping the rear tires firmly planted on the ground.

The weighted tires is going to give you stability on a side slope and also smooth the ride a bit.

I understand you not wanting to use fluid filled tires. IMHO... the loaded tires are probably the least important ballast. If you attach a 3PH ballast of the minimum required weight you will likely have no issues with your loader.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
Agreed, the loaded tires are more for traction purposes, aren't they? I never considered them as ballast. Think of ballast as a counterweight for what you are doing on the frontend of the tractor.
It can be to a certain degree, in the loader manual it will list two different ballast weights required. 1. with loaded tires/wheel weights 2. without loaded tires/wheel weights
The amount of 3 point ballast required is greater without loaded tires/wheel weights.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Technically a ballasted tractor is a ballasted tractor but that spreadsheet has nothing to do with the payload of a loader. It also does not have a section for a 1-series. The main purpose of that sheet is to calculate front weight required so you don't do a wheelie when you raise up a heavy 3PH implement. If you notice on the spreadsheet the only load it has you select is a rear implement. Having a FEL can add weight to the front which is why the sheet has a selection for whether or not you have a loader. You'll also notice the sheet doesn't have any selection for pallet forks vs. a bucket. Pallet forks require even more 3PH ballast than does just using the bucket.
This calculator sure appears to have 1025r options. I've selected my FEL (H120+53 bucket) + entered the payload...

Only goal right now is to feel more comfortable that using just the existing wheel weights is ok so I can spend $$$$ on implements instead of cast iron weights.

Thanks for stopping by. :good2:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,429 Posts
This calculator sure appears to have 1025r options. I've selected my FEL (H120+53 bucket) + entered the payload...

Only goal right now is to feel more comfortable that using just the existing wheel weights is ok so I can spend $$$$ on implements instead of cast iron weights.

Thanks for stopping by. :good2:
They should fit fine. Both tractors have 12” rims as far as I know. Those weights only weigh 30lbs each though, if they are the ones I’m thinking of.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,429 Posts
Agreed, the loaded tires are more for traction purposes, aren't they? I never considered them as ballast. Think of ballast as a counterweight for what you are doing on the frontend of the tractor.
As Pjr said fluid is every bit of wheel weight as cast iron. It’s actually a bit better due to a leer center of gravity. My only worry is axle strain, so for loader work it’s wheel weight and rear weight. I want enough rear weight to basically balance the load. Wheel weight then is primarily for traction and stability.



I have 170 lbs of rim gaurd fluid
200 lbs cast iron
Almost 400 lbs of rear weights.

It looks like Diane can’t use fluid, so this is just for our discussion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,275 Posts
This calculator sure appears to have 1025r options. I've selected my FEL (H120+53 bucket) + entered the payload...
I see what you mean. Keep in mind that particular spreadsheet was created by a forum member.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,429 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
They should fit fine. Both tractors have 12” rims as far as I know. Those weights only weigh 30lbs each though, if they are the ones I’m thinking of.
Yes, 30-33 lb range is what I remember. Bought those with the NEW Suburban a lifetime ago. :laugh: Still have a lot of the implements; adapted that 3pt hitch to the Sears 6500. Actually thought about adapting again to 1025r, but think they'd just look like toys. :laugh: Another reason for keeping the 6500.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,847 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
There is a foam weight option to consider in the future.
http://carpenter.com/docs/tire-fill/tirefill_weight_chart.pdf

I’m not a slime fan. It seems to be as corrosive to rims as calcium chloride.
Wonder if that produces a somewhat solid tire. We have those on our wheelbarrows. If so, think that'd make a pretty hard ride.

Not a real fan of potential side effects either, but we've been using Slime successfully for years and years on our mowers/garden tractors. So far, so good ... at least AFAIK :laugh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,429 Posts
Wonder if that produces a somewhat solid tire. We have those on our wheelbarrows. If so, think that'd make a pretty hard ride.

Not a real fan of potential side effects either, but we've been using Slime successfully for years and years on our mowers/garden tractors. So far, so good ... at least AFAIK :laugh:
Solid tires really are solid. Foam has some give, it would be interesting to see it compared to an actual pressure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Those of you that are using fluid filled tires and wheel weights does this combination destroy your grass when using a mid mount mower?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,408 Posts
Those of you that are using fluid filled tires and wheel weights does this combination destroy your grass when using a mid mount mower?
I haven't noticed any damage to mine.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top