LX2610 Backhoe AND Filled Tires - WSM Says No

[timb365]

Hi,
The LX2610 I ordered is now at the stage of waiting for its backhoe subframe to arrive and be installed...

I have read through the WSM and it mentions not run the backhoe with loaded tires.

This will be my first tractor, so I don’t have that experience behind me to have an opinion one way way or the other. The manual says no, but...

One of the core reasons I am getting the LX is to mount a snow thrower on it to tackle my 1/8 mile paved drive that winds around and is relatively steep. The weight in the rear has seemed to be pretty important for the grade and what not.

Thoughts out there?

Heed the advice of the WSM or fill the rears? And whys for your suggestion.

Thanks!
Tim

 

[je1279]

Hi,
The LX2610 I ordered is now at the stage of waiting for its backhoe subframe to arrive and be installed...

I have read through the WSM and it mentions not run the backhoe with loaded tires.

This will be my first tractor, so I don’t have that experience behind me to have an opinion one way way or the other. The manual says no, but...

One of the core reasons I am getting the LX is to mount a snow thrower on it to tackle my 1/8 mile paved drive that winds around and is relatively steep. The weight in the rear has seemed to be pretty important for the grade and what not.

Thoughts out there?

Heed the advice of the WSM or fill the rears? And whys for your suggestion.

Thanks!
Tim

I wouldn't fill the rear tires. You can use the backhoe or another rear implement for ballast when snowblowing. The filled tires along with the backhoe and a full loader bucket may be too much for the frame or drive train componets. I can't say for sure, but I wouldn't risk it.

 

[85Hokie]

The ol book says that toooo much weight will hurt the transmission .............

As mentioned on other posts - weighted tires are different than weight on a tractor - even thought they BOTH supply counter balance and down force for grip.

I have weight in my rears (only 300 lbs in both- came FROM the dealer that way!) and a backhoe - and never had a problem. AND if loaded tires add pressure to the transmission then I don't get it!!!

If you had a tractor tire and rolled it on the ground ..... it would not take a lot of pressure to roll it - now if filled 50% plus and you rolled it, would it take an extreme effort to move it while the liquid sloshed inside?

I think the entire manual is a document of "CYA!" ..... kubota simply covering their asses.

 

[greg86z28]

If the WSM or OM says not to do something I would follow that advice, even if it seems overly conservative.

 

[number two]

I'm new to OTT,but have been on TBN for awhile and have seen this discussion many times.
Best I can derive from this is the ROPS cannot support the tractor with the backhoe and loaded tires,
Good Luck!

 

[Njtool]

I have a 2610 cab with filled R-14 tires and a backhoe. I see no problem with the setup.
The only negative I can think of is tire pressure. The books say a BH77 weighs 850 pounds, plus the bucket, plus the frame support. So probably over 1100 pounds added weight.
Maybe the concern is with tire pressure? A filled tire has very little air in it. The increased weight, especially when you drive the tractor and go over bumps, might exceed recommended or maximum tire pressure???
Other than that, I can’t think of a downside.
Again, I have filled tires and a backhoe and I haven’t had any issues. And I haven’t heard of anyone with issues.

 

[timb365]

The ol book says that toooo much weight will hurt the transmission .............

As mentioned on other posts - weighted tires are different than weight on a tractor - even thought they BOTH supply counter balance and down force for grip.

I have weight in my rears (only 300 lbs in both- came FROM the dealer that way!) and a backhoe - and never had a problem. AND if loaded tires add pressure to the transmission then I don't get it!!!

If you had a tractor tire and rolled it on the ground ..... it would not take a lot of pressure to roll it - now if filled 50% plus and you rolled it, would it take an extreme effort to move it while the liquid sloshed inside?

I think the entire manual is a document of "CYA!" ..... kubota simply covering their asses.

I presume the manual will have a fair share of CYA and "warranty" support related cya for Kubota, but math is math and they felt it necessary to make a blanket statement (as opposed to "do not fill more than x or only use removable weights, etc. etc. etc"), because the math of adding an amount of fluid does "something" that they don't recommend for what they have engineered. It's interesting that the statement is rather abrupt:

While the backhoe is installed on the tractor, the
liquid ballast in the rear tires should be
removed.

With that said, I have a note out to the salesperson referencing the WSM and whether or not they agree or not.
We shall see.

 

[timb365]

I'm new to OTT,but have been on TBN for awhile and have seen this discussion many times.
Best I can derive from this is the ROPS cannot support the tractor with the backhoe and loaded tires,
Good Luck!

You're likely correct that ROPS is more of the "issue" as opposed to anything else. At some point weight and metal have some sort of breaking point and then a manufacturer can only account for so many scenarios outside of their control.

 

[timb365]

I have a 2610 cab with filled R-14 tires and a backhoe. I see no problem with the setup.
The only negative I can think of is tire pressure. The books say a BH77 weighs 850 pounds, plus the bucket, plus the frame support. So probably over 1100 pounds added weight.
Maybe the concern is with tire pressure? A filled tire has very little air in it. The increased weight, especially when you drive the tractor and go over bumps, might exceed recommended or maximum tire pressure???
Other than that, I can’t think of a downside.
Again, I have filled tires and a backhoe and I haven’t had any issues. And I haven’t heard of anyone with issues.

Thanks. The thing, I quickly realize is that by "filling" the tire, the available air space ends up being rather limited and thus if you're running over say, a rock, that the tire is going to absorb some amount of that obstacle. Throw a ~900 pound BH attachment to the back and the "push" is even more.

I think based on everyone's comments so far (and thank you, btw), it's a balance struggle of the unknown and the variables that could impact the unknowns that doing anything other than keeping the tires empty allows the tractor to operate "as intended". I think ultimately that what I am asking to do hasn't been tested in enough configurations to make Kubota comfortable and it's easier to just say "no"..

 

[nbryan]

I didn't see mentioned in the discussion the added tire liquid ballast weight will need to be supported by the backhoe stabilizers too, so maybe that's at least part of why it's recommended against. I know that even without tire ballast I put those BH77 stabilizer arms through a lot already!

 

[Njtool]

I didn't see mentioned in the discussion the added tire liquid ballast weight will need to be supported by the backhoe stabilizers too, so maybe that's at least part of why it's recommended against. I know that even without tire ballast I put those BH77 stabilizer arms through a lot already!

The stabilizer arms are crazy powerful. In fact, all the hydraulics in the bh77 are very powerful. The backhoe can, and does, lift up the back of the tractor if you move the controls the wrong way. It lifts the back of they tractor without effort.
I doubt the stress on the backhoe hydraulics is even an concern.

 

[nbryan]

The stabilizer arms are crazy powerful. In fact, all the hydraulics in the bh77 are very powerful. The backhoe can, and does, lift up the back of the tractor if you move the controls the wrong way. It lifts the back of they tractor without effort.
I doubt the stress on the backhoe hydraulics is even an concern.

The stabilizers are powerful as far as cylinder force, and indeed can lift the tractor and more, but they are only mounted on 2 pin sets and are subject to sometimes severe twisting forces. Add tire ballast to that? Not so sure they mounts are made for it.

 

[B2710]

My L45 TLB has similar CYA's on tire loading. If the tires were not loaded, the backhoe would push the tractor around like a rag doll...

Just my opinion, I would not worry about the weight of the tires on the ground affecting the frame stress very much. And I would not own a tractor without weighted rear tires...

 

[Njtool]

My L45 TLB has similar CYA's on tire loading. If the tires were not loaded, the backhoe would push the tractor around like a rag doll...

Just my opinion, I would not worry about the weight of the tires on the ground affecting the frame stress very much. And I would not own a tractor without weighted rear tires...

I agree. I haven’t heard of anyone having issues with stabilizing arm pins, bearings, bushings, tire blowout, damage, access wear etc. if it were a problem at all, I’m sure there would be real world reports on it.
Instead, there are thousands, if not more, of tractor owners that run a backhoe with loaded tires and not one person has reported any issues, at least on this forum.

 

[je1279]

Thinking about this a bit more, I think the biggest concern with this setup would be if the operator also shimmed the relief valve and tried to lift a large amount of weight with the loader. The extra ballast would allow for it but other components might not be able to tolerate it.

 

[85Hokie]

The stabilizers are powerful as far as cylinder force, and indeed can lift the tractor and more, but they are only mounted on 2 pin sets and are subject to sometimes severe twisting forces. Add tire ballast to that? Not so sure they mounts are made for it.

Stabilizers are not meant to hold the weight of the tractor with or without loaded tires......

the four point of touching the ground at the rear is far better than the support of the stabilizers by themselves.

If they are used to hold the tractor off the ground and backhoe used - they will end up taking a beating with the hydraulic movements of the hoe and the forces placed on the tractor and stabilizers.

 

[BigG]

Stabilizers are not meant to hold the weight of the tractor with or without loaded tires......

the four point of touching the ground at the rear is far better than the support of the stabilizers by themselves.

If they are used to hold the tractor off the ground and backhoe used - they will end up taking a beating with the hydraulic movements of the hoe and the forces placed on the tractor and stabilizers.

I am not trying to be argumentative but the stabilizers are used to "square up" the hoe to the ground so that you can dig straight down. The stabilizer must be able to support the tractor without the wheels on the ground otherwise you will have some pretty strange leanings to the ditch side walls.

 

[85Hokie]

I am not trying to be argumentative but the stabilizers are used to "square up" the hoe to the ground so that you can dig straight down. The stabilizer must be able to support the tractor without the wheels on the ground otherwise you will have some pretty strange leanings to the ditch side walls.

that is true! I will agree 100%

 

[SDT]

If the WSM or OM says not to do something I would follow that advice, even if it seems overly conservative.

Bingo.

Kubota has its reasons.

We can speculate all day about the reasons and I have mine but we will not determine herein why the Kubota engineers saw fit to include the prohibition.

SDT

 

[timb365]

Great conversation everyone, thanks for all the participation.