Kubota Says No Wheel Ballast With a Backhoe.

[GreensvilleJay]

It'd be interesting to know what is officially written about other TLB and loaded tires. A bigger tractor probably has a bigger rear end and axles,so could be stronger,use different grade of steel, heat treating and take more abuse than the SCUT.
Just because you can go over the 'design limits' doesn't mean you should.
Like taking a curve on a highway that's posted for 60..you're safe. Do it at 70, bad things can happen....and it's 'just 10 over, officer'.

 

[Grandad4]

And doing a bit more research - the added weight could be a roll over addition IF the machine were to hit a tip over point, Newton's second law - F=M*A - more mass moving could, possibly increase the roll past the ROPS stopping you from the next roll.

Bingo! At least this is what the dealer told me 20 years ago when I added a Kubota BH to my L4610. A 2000 lb backhoe + 1000 lb of tire ballast + 5000 lb of tractor and loader would need a he## of a ROPS if the thing started flopping sideways down some hillside. Made sense to me at the time, so I never ballasted the rear tires.

 

[nbryan]

My BH77 stabilizer legs take enough of a beating carrying the tractor's rear weight with no tire fill, and getting thrown around by the backhoe. The tractor's rear gets pushed off the ground and side-to-side regularly, and I'd hate to think what loaded rear tires would add to the stress levels on them.

 

[fried1765]

Bingo! At least this is what the dealer told me 20 years ago when I added a Kubota BH to my L4610. A 2000 lb backhoe + 1000 lb of tire ballast + 5000 lb of tractor and loader would need a he## of a ROPS if the thing started flopping sideways down some hillside. Made sense to me at the time, so I never ballasted the rear tires.

Makes sense to me also!

 

[Smokeydog]

My BH77 stabilizer legs take enough of a beating carrying the tractor's rear weight with no tire fill, and getting thrown around by the backhoe. The tractor's rear gets pushed off the ground and side-to-side regularly, and I'd hate to think what loaded rear tires would add to the stress levels on them.

Probably make it more stable.

Not a big fan of Ag tractor backhoes. On our hillside being able constantly swing the boom, raise or lower stabilizers from the loader facing seat a must. Use ballast on all my tractors. Even ones with a backhoe.

 

[Mowbizz]

Baloney. My BX25D has been going strong for 10 years. Backhoe is RARELY off. Rear tires filled at dealer before delivery. Only problem I have had is the valve stems (inner thingy) going bad.

 

[2001TLB]

The operators manual for my L48 states:
"When the BT1100 backhoe is installed to the tractor, rear ballast should be removed."

To be honest, I do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is or is not ballast installed. Though I did have the backhoe off one time soon after I brought the machine home. I was spreading some driveway stone with the loader and I noted that with a full load in the bucket the stability was less than confidence inspiring. So, I THINK that there is no ballast installed. Since then, I bought a ballast box and filled with sand, though I have not had the backhoe off since then.

Doug

 

[GreensvilleJay]

EASY tests for ballast.
1)
rotate tire ,put valve stem at 6 O'clock,let some air out...
only air, no ballast
any 'liquid' comes out , you've got ballast

2)
remove tire/rim from tractor. if it's bloody heavy and rolls away nearly killing you... yup, it's got ballast in it

 

[MapleLeafFarmer]

You can always find someone to tell you why the manufacturer is wrong and they know better.

I agree...

Trying to outguess what the engineers/designers recommend in the WSM's or owners manual often tend to deliver bad results.

But to each their own.

Seems the less expensive tractors / machinery is the more "mods" people make to them.

Rarely do I see a pimped out $1 million combine getting mod'ed beyond what the manufacturer says is OK but on scuts and cuts happens all the time.

 

[fried1765]

The operators manual for my L48 states:
"When the BT1100 backhoe is installed to the tractor, rear ballast should be removed."

To be honest, I do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is or is not ballast installed. Though I did have the backhoe off one time soon after I brought the machine home. I was spreading some driveway stone with the loader and I noted that with a full load in the bucket the stability was less than confidence inspiring. So, I THINK that there is no ballast installed. Since then, I bought a ballast box and filled with sand, though I have not had the backhoe off since then.

Doug

I think most of us with the L48 TLB, (BT1100) very rarely remove the BH.
I have never had my BH off!

 

[GreensvilleJay]

I've never had the BH off my BX23s nor will it ever have a MMM !
Loader has been off ONCE, to be repaired(bad factory weld..)

 

[Jchonline]

In my owners manual (BX23S) it says don't fill rear tires with ballast if you have a backhoe mounted.

Curious if anyone has any input on this?

I didn't know and had my tires filled (salesman didn't say anything).
I'm not really worried, it isn't doing wheelies or anything (unfortunately ). I've had the front straight up on a roughly 30* slope and it's fine.
FEL or pallet forks mounted always (so far).

Just wondering if anyone knew Kubotas reasoning?

It is fine, and very common to do. I don't "think" Kubota would void warranty if there was an issue.... My M62 had filled tires from dealer also..

 

[hagrid]

nor will it ever have a MMM !

But that's what it does bestest!

 

[Grandad4]

It is fine, and very common to do. I don't "think" Kubota would void warranty if there was an issue.... My M62 had filled tires from dealer also..

Who might be liable in court after a fatal or injury rollover? If the owner ballasted the tires against manufacturer recommendations, probably not the manufacturer. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not defending it, but that's what these "don't ballast" statements are about.

 

[Jchonline]

Who might be liable in court after a fatal or injury rollover? If the owner ballasted the tires against manufacturer recommendations, probably not the manufacturer. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not defending it, but that's what these "don't ballast" statements are about.

If the dealer still installs it without question then they would have some liability as well. Kubota would not allow the dealers to install ballast with a backhoe machine if they were truly trying to remove all liability.

 

[fried1765]

If the dealer still installs it without question then they would have some liability as well. Kubota would not allow the dealers to install ballast with a backhoe machine if they were truly trying to remove all liability.

There is a good chance that mother Kubota is totally unaware, when a dealer installs tire ballast.

 

[Jchonline]

There is a good chance that mother Kubota is totally unaware, when a dealer installs tire ballast.

But if so many are doing it...dont you think there would have been one incident over the past decade that would have prompted Kubota to respond to dealers? I do.

 

[fried1765]

But if so many are doing it...dont you think there would have been one incident over the past decade that would have prompted Kubota to respond to dealers? I do.

Perhaps there has not been "one incident".
My point is, that if there were to be "one incident", Kubota would likely go with plausible denial.

 

[fried1765]

But if so many are doing it...dont you think there would have been one incident over the past decade that would have prompted Kubota to respond to dealers? I do.

Perhaps there has been such an incident.
The worldwide Kubota population does not avail themselves of OTT membership.

 

[torch]

Two possibilities come to mind:

1. A confusion in translation. Japanese engineer said "tire ballast is not required if you have a BH". English technical writer heard "don't add tire ballast if you have a BH".

2. The additional weight of tire ballast puts undue strain on the outriggers or subframe when the wheels are raised off the ground in use.