B 6100 Tractor, New FEL.

[parttime1017]

I have a B6100 tractor. I'm in the process of building a FEL for it. I have a B219 loader manual and the schematics list shows ¼ inch hydraulic hose used in the hydraulics plumbing. I plan to plug into the onboard tractor hydraulics. Should I increase the new hoses and hard lines on the loader to 3/8inch or will the ¼ inch be enough? Thanks for any input.

 

[Lil Foot]

Can't help with your hose question, but here is a thread with info on building a FEL for the same series tractors:

B6100 front end loader hydraulics

I picked up a b6100 a week or so ago and want to add a front end loader on it. I plan to build it myself and have a few questions. Number one is what kind of lift capacities an I expect? Second is do will the pump off the back of the injection pump run a loader? No need to be fast but need it to...

www.orangetractortalks.com

 

[North Idaho Wolfman]

1/4" will be quite adequate.

 

[TheOldHokie]

I have a B6100 tractor. I'm in the process of building a FEL for it. I have a B219 loader manual and the schematics list shows ¼ inch hydraulic hose used in the hydraulics plumbing. I plan to plug into the onboard tractor hydraulics. Should I increase the new hoses and hard lines on the loader to 3/8inch or will the ¼ inch be enough? Thanks for any input.

Use 3/8" tube for hard lines but 1/4" hose is plenty.

Dan

 

[Vigo]

If you’re running it off the onboard hydraulic pump you only have flow to justify 1/4” hoses, believe me. It will not be fast. . You can make the best of that by not using the really large bore cylinders that the b219 does. Smaller cylinders operated at a higher pressure will be faster and just as strong when running off the onboard hydraulic pump.

On my b219 i find i care more about the bucket curl speed than the loader arm speed. I operated skid steers (a little) before i ever operated tractor loaders and finding out i had no hope in hell of ever ‘shaking something off’ the bucket was a BIT of a letdown.

 

[parttime1017]

Thanks guys for all the info.
I have a hydraulic pump that fits the PTO, I may use instead. From the comments it sounds like the onboard pump may be very slow. I don't use the PTO at all and it's not too late in my build to make a tower the reservoir.

 

[Bountyhunter]

Thanks guys for all the info.
I have a hydraulic pump that fits the PTO, I may use instead. From the comments it sounds like the onboard pump may be very slow. I don't use the PTO at all and it's not too late in my build to make a tower the reservoir.

The pto on my B6100 stops turning whenever I push in the clutch. That would be a major PIA when operating a loader

 

[parttime1017]

The pto on my B6100 stops turning whenever I push in the clutch. That would be a major PIA when operating a loader

You're right. Oh well, pump will also fit on the front. Just need to do a little metal working. Thanks

 

[torch]

From the comments it sounds like the onboard pump may be very slow. I don't use the PTO at all and it's not too late in my build to make a tower the reservoir.

I'm not sure I would characterize it as "very slow". I have a very similar B7100. Like your machine, the pump is a 3gpm pump. I built my FEL with 2" diameter cylinders, 16" long, powered by the on-board hydraulics. 4 cycles of the lift arms from bottom to top and back down again took 63 seconds -- just a hair under 16 seconds per cycle.

It turns out 2" cylinders were overkill. They can lift far more than the front axle of the tractor can handle without risk (can lift roughly 1,900 lbs at 10° angle at the pins). 1-1/2" diameter cylinders would have been more appropriate (can lift almost 1,100 lbs at 10° angle) to the capacity of the tractor (500 lbs material + weight of FEL itself).

Had I used 1-1/2" diameter cylinders, the calculate cycle speed would have been about 9 seconds, which is quite respectable. Note that is based on an empty bucket, I would expect the time to lift a full bucket would be longer, particularly for a given weight -- the increased speed is at the expense of greater load on the engine and could slow it down as things load up. But then, the same is true of a PTO mounted pump -- you don't get anything for free and the engine can only provide so much power no matter how you connect to it.

For the sake of comparison, I ended up replacing the stock 3gpm pump with one rated 6gpm, but only saw a 20% speed improvement (13 sec/cycle). Nothing to write home to Mother about, but quite usable in actual practice. In fact, I find I need to slow the engine speed right down for better control when using the forks.

As for your original question about hose diameter, I think it depends on how long your hoses are. If you are running hard lines for most of the length, with short lengths of hose limited to the actual cylinder connections, then 3/8" hard lines with 1/4" hose is fine.

However, if you are running the whole thing in hose (as I did), then I suggest you increase the main runs from the spool valves to the tee in 3/8", since that section is feeding two cylinders and has to carry twice the volume, plus friction loss and fluid heating is a function of both diameter and length. I ran the T line from the spool valves through 1/2" hose to the transmission sump for the same reason -- at times it could be carrying the volume from 4 cylinders.

 

[Vigo]

It turns out 2" cylinders were overkill. They can lift far more than the front axle of the tractor can handle without risk (can lift roughly 1,900 lbs at 10° angle at the pins). 1-1/2" diameter cylinders would have been more appropriate (can lift almost 1,100 lbs at 10° angle) to the capacity of the tractor (500 lbs material + weight of FEL itself).

Had I used 1-1/2" diameter cylinders, the calculate cycle speed would have been about 9 seconds, which is quite respectable.

PERFECT real life example!

So yes, use the onboard pump if you desire but just size the cylinders appropriately for the flow and pressure and everything will be fine. If you 'copy' a b219 to the letter and run it off the stock pump, it would be horribly slow. So change the cylinder sizes.

 

[TheOldHokie]

PERFECT real life example!

So yes, use the onboard pump if you desire but just size the cylinders appropriately for the flow and pressure and everything will be fine. If you 'copy' a b219 to the letter and run it off the stock pump, it would be horribly slow. So change the cylinder sizes.

The lift cylinders on a B219 loader are 2" bore? That would generate way more lifting capacity than the 500# advertised for the loader. What could they have been thinking?

The cylinders on the B1630 loader used on a B6200/B7200/B8200 are only 1.5" bore and the cylinders used on the LA525 used on the L2501/L3201/L3901 with more than double that capacity are 1.77" (45mm) bore. Even the OD of all of those cylinders is still well under 2".

Dan

 

[Lil Foot]

The lift cylinders on a B219 loader are 2" bore? That would generate way more lifting capacity than the 500# advertised for the loader. What could they have been thinking?

Yes, they are. I assume they were cheap/available at the time.

 

[TheOldHokie]

Yes, they are. I assume they were cheap/available at the time.

Thanks - I will put that tidbit in the memory banks.

Dan

 

[parttime1017]

Yes, they are. I assume they were cheap/available at the time.

And for some reason still are cheap in comparison to small ones. Surplus Center has them on EBay for cheap. Why Ebay, who knows.

 

[TheOldHokie]

And for some reason still are cheap in comparison to small ones. Surplus Center has them on EBay for cheap. Why Ebay, who knows.

Burden sells a lot of their stuff through Ebay. Reaches people that would never see them otherwise.

 

[Vigo]

Yup, weirdly huge cylinders. But only 500-750psi operating pressure. If you hooked the 3pt system which i believe is relief around 1700psi to it, you could probably bend something pretty easily.

 

[torch]

One advantage of 2" cylinders is they typically come with 1-1/4" rods. As opposed to the 1" rod typically found in a 1-1/2" cylinder. Less susceptible to bending the rod.