(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

What do you guys think of this comment?

Ultradog MN

Ultradog MN

Well-known Member
Location
Twin Cities
A guy on another board wrote this.
It sounds goofy to me but I am wondering you you folks think.

[i:654c4848f0]"Adding weight to the rear tires takes zero weight off the front axle...and actually can slightly increase the front axle loading because it increases the total weight of the tractor. If the machine gets heavier, and there isn't any weight added behind the rear axle, the front axle loading will increase. People often argue this but people have proven it with scales, rather than theory."[/i:654c4848f0]
 
Well, that makes sense to me.

Any weight added DIRECTLY to the rear axle, ie on the wheels, should increase the rears, and not the fronts, however "mid mounted" weight so to say, would increase both? Not sure I understand the question? Bryce
 
I'm with you , if the weight is added to the wheels , wheel weights or liquid , how can that weight be transferred to the front axle ? I would have to see the scales. And you are not taking weight off the front axle , but the added traction of the rear wheels may now be able to cause the front to lift , that's how I see it.
 
Interesting thought; I have not weighed my front end with/wo.
I might agree with the first part of his statement.
Until you let the clutch out that is.
 
if the CG of the added weight is directly over the rear axle then none is added or subtracted from the front axle.
 
I saw the original post and thought it was odd. However, if you think about it the theory may not be all wet. Given a few caveats. With pie weights only the top and bottom part are centered on the axle. Half of the remaining are in front of the axle, half of the remaining are behind it. They should cancel themselves out and only add the weight to the rear end. When they weigh a semi they weigh the front axle. Some of that van trailer is in front of the rear axle.

Anyway, I still retain my original thought - loaded rears or weights don't add to the front axle weight because it is evenly in front and behind the axle. And not by much, either. I have some little auger tractors that I have driven a good deal without them loaded and then with the rears loaded. There was no change in steering difficulty.

I feel like I just spent five minutes running around a tree.
 
If the scales is saying something other than what simple logic and proven engineering principals dictate they'd better check to see what other variables are factoring in.
 
I don't think he has ever tried to put out round bales with a rear lift bale carrier on a two wheel drive tractor in the Louisiana gumbo in the winter time.
 
Adding weight to the rear wheels wouldn't add an ounce to the front end. If though weight was added to the rear end that could add a little to the front end.
 
Sitting still I can't see how it would add or subtract from the front axle but once the tractor is started in forward motion added rear weight would take take weight off the front axle as long as the tractor is accelerating (think wheelie).Any weight added behind the center of the rear axle on the frame would lighten the front end like hanging something heavy on a boom pole.
 
Statically speaking, that is not true. If the added weight is centered on the rear axle, it has no effect on the front axle weight.

DYNAMICALLY, it is a different matter, but one that can't be measured easily on a scale. Adding mass to the rear wheel increases its inertia, which means it takes greater torque to accelerate it. When accelerating in a forward gear, the downward force on the front axle is reduced, but it is increased when accelerating in reverse. Since tractors don't do a lot of accelerating, you're unlikely to actually notice this effect.
 
Whatever he's smoking, Its good stuff. Just not good for commenting. Weight added to the wheels not in motion, doesn't even add weight to the rear axle. Only the tire and downforce if the footprint of said tire.
 
"Adding weight to the rear tires takes zero weight off the front axle." That part is true. Rear ballast in tires or wheel weights doesn't transfer weight off the front axle.

By keeping the rear wheels on the ground, you can pick up for weight with front loader and that can increase the weight the weight on front axle. Actually if you loader can lift enough so your rear wheels come off the ground, All the weight of the tractor will be transferred to the front axle. SO REAR BALLAST IN TIRES DOES NO GOOD AT TRANSFERING WEIGHT OFF FRONT AXLE. So in a way, the weight on the front axle is increased, but not by the rear ballast.

I have made 6 75# concrete weights that I can put on a 2 inch pipe. I pick up the pipe up with the back hook of my terramite. Depending on where I position the rear bucket, extending the back hook away from the tractor, 450# can transfer all the weight off my front end, tractor does a wheelie. All the weight of the tractor is transferred to the rear wheels.

If I'm working in the woods and need to transfer weight off the front axle, I can pick up a log with back hook, it works great especially if I'm lifting a log with the front bucket.

So picking up a log with the front bucket can put all the weight of the tractor on the front wheels, lifting my rear wheels off the ground. And the opposite is also true, lifting a log with the rear bucket on a backhoe can lift the front of the tractor off the ground, transferring all the weight on the rear wheels.

Ballast in tires and wheel weights do nothing to transfer weight. This is your junior high physical science lesson for the day. Test on Monday.
 
(quoted from post at 23:13:10 06/04/15) A guy on another board wrote this.
It sounds goofy to me but I am wondering you you folks think.

[i:34679633de]"Adding weight to the rear tires takes zero weight off the front axle...and actually can slightly increase the front axle loading because it increases the total weight of the tractor. If the machine gets heavier, and there isn't any weight added behind the rear axle, the front axle loading will increase. People often argue this but people have proven it with scales, rather than theory."[/i:34679633de]
Click to expand...

see this argument a lot on Kubota boards.
He is right...then he is wrong.
loader tractor, adding rear tire/wheel weight does nothing to take the load off the front axle.(just helps keep the rears on the ground)
Pick up something heavy enough, and get the rear skating and
then yes that wheel weight is also transferred to the front...bad.
gotta get the weight out behind ya. Make a 3-point counterweight heavy enough and you can lift the front, the loader, and the loaders load off the ground.

as far as the tire weight [i:34679633de]at rest[/i:34679633de] making the front heavier..doubt it.
Like said, it doesn't even change the rear load.
take a tire off your truck, fill it with cement, put it back on.
Did your suspension sag any?
 
First part is true, weight centred at rear axle won't take weight off front axle.

The second part he's confusing the issue. Ballast on either end is so you can increase loading on the tractor. Suitcase weights up front so you can add more implement at the back or 3 point hitch weight so you can lift more with the loader without tipping.
 
Very simple... if adding centered weight (fluid or wheel weights) to the rears could change the front weight while static then when you took off the rears they would roll forward. It would be flippin magic.
 

Any weight transfer from the wheels through the bearing to the chassis would require some pretty bad wheel bearings. :roll:
 
(quoted from post at 06:54:41 06/05/15) Statically speaking, that is not true. If the added weight is centered on the rear axle, it has no effect on the front axle weight.

DYNAMICALLY, it is a different matter, but one that can't be measured easily on a scale. Adding mass to the rear wheel increases its inertia, which means it takes greater torque to accelerate it. When accelerating in a forward gear, the downward force on the front axle is reduced, but it is increased when accelerating in reverse. Since tractors don't do a lot of accelerating, you're unlikely to actually notice this effect.
Click to expand...

That's what I was thinking, put into words.
 
It's exactly right. I've made that argument myself a few time on here. The only way adding weight to the rear takes a load off the front is if you hang it so far back that the rear axle becomes the fulcrum.
 
Too many assumptions if you ask me. First; it says adding weight to the rear tires, not weight at the point of or near or on the frame at the rear tires. And even then, one is assuming the weight is added "uniformly" at the center of the tires.
 
rrlund, Ken M and others have it right. There is no mystery it is all about what is called statics,mechanics and dynamics in science.. Engineering text books explain it all. And you guys out in the real world use it to good advantage.
Bonnan ...retired mechanical engineer
 
Part of what is said is correct. Adding weight to the rear wheels does not reduce the weight on the front axle. The part that's wrong.... is that it doesn't increase it. If you add weight to the wheels then I hope that weight is centered around the wheels or the ride is gonna get a little bit rough.... so it should simply get heavier on the rear end.
The part that is perhaps missing has to do more with dynamics... If you heavily ballast a set of rear wheels that were previously lacking traction... then the increase in ballast will increase the traction... and the increase in traction will INCREASE the torque reaction of the tractor chassis as it attempts to rotate about it's rear axle... So in that scenario, with enough torque and enough ballast/traction, the front end WILL LIGHTEN under those dynamic forces. That's probably not something that will be particularly noticeable but in theory, exists.

Rod
 
Thinking good wheel bearing would be needed. Or were you thinking the bearings would become worn sooner?
 
Adding weight to the rear tires will not only decrease weight on the tractor front while accelerating, but also when the tractor is pulling a full load at the limit of tire traction. The more traction, the more torque lift that is applied to the front end by the gear train of the tractor.. When stationary, adding weight to the rear tires will not change front weight at all.
 
Stab your loader in to something and lift the rear wheels off the ground. Now add enough weight to the rear wheels to bring them back down to the ground. Are you telling me it won't add even more weight to the front axle?
 
(quoted from post at 08:21:59 06/05/15) Thinking good wheel bearing would be needed. Or were you thinking the bearings would become worn sooner?
Click to expand...

neither. What I was getting at is that in order for weight on rear wheels to affect weight on the front would be if the wheel bearings were so bad that If you hung some weight on the wheel towards the front and none on the back that you would have rotational force on the rim which due to the friction of a really bad bearing could translate to torque on the axle and thus moment arm, and then downward force on the front axle.
 
Plenty of subtle details one can argue over, but basically seems exactly right?

Its just a playground teeter totter, the front and rear axles are the middle pivots, you can affect thrm differently depending where you put the weight. I guess you end up with a compound teeter totter with the two axles?

Putting weight in the middle of the rear axle won't affect the weight on the front axle if that is the only thing done. If you add a loader and add weight onto the loader bucket, then the weight on the rear axle will let you put more weight on the loader, and so you can end up with much more weight on the front axle.

But, all by itself, putting weight on the center of the rear axle won't affect the weight on the front axle much at all.

Paul
 
RR,
Don't read into that comment more than is there.
You are correct in your statement and no one is disputing that.
But there is NO mention of a loader in the above comment.
 
I made another assumption that wasn't there when I read this line in the original post I guess.

"Adding weight to the rear tires takes zero weight off the front axle...and actually can slightly increase the front axle loading"
 
OK,now that I know we're talking about "front end loading" in terms of weight and not in using a front end loader,I'll change my statement.
I think if you put a scale between a jack and the front of the tractor,with it in neutral,it wouldn't change the weight of the front end in the least.
However,if it was pulling,I believe the added weight would translate to added traction,and therefore added torque that would be transferred to the front end being pushed down by that torque and would indeed increase front end weight.
Buy that's kind of apples and oranges. It's true weight vs the effect of torque.
 
A few guys got are in the ball park. The issue is static weight and dynamic weight. To those who have taken college physics the answer is rather obvious. As loading rear wheels with cast and liquid ballast is both above and below the axle centerline the weight of the front end/axel will be slightly heavier as the chassis will transfer its static weight.. and the amount is a function of wheel base... lever physics. Dynamically is a different story. Under load the added traction will tend to lift the front end somewhat and the effect will be a lighter front end. The added traction will actually transfer weight from the front to the rear.. especially doing heavy tillage work. This what traction control does using a 3pt implement. Using a tractor with a loader is a different physics problem altogether... the issue is pushing or pulling and the physics of each activity. I keep my loader tractors in the shed while doing tillage work.
 
i see add that unless weight was on the wheel itself axle breakage could be a problem as with a mounted picker.
Thank you Bill
 
years ago local fellow had an axle break on 350 IH while plowing with 3 bottom mounted. Wheel pinned him with leg trapped by TA leaver. He was alone till dark. Pinned for 3 or 4 hours.
 
That's a different principle entirely than what was posed in the original question. In your scenario, yes, weight would be transferred... for the simple reason that the front end is now the fulcrum rather than the rear axle. You might also note that attempting to reverse out of the pile with the rear end in the air will worsen the problem while pushing ahead will probably plant the rear end on the ground again. Again, torque at work in a dynamic situation.

Rod
 
(quoted from post at 13:47:37 06/05/15) A few guys got are in the ball park. The issue is static weight and dynamic weight. To those who have taken college physics the answer is rather obvious. As loading rear wheels with cast and liquid ballast is both above and below the axle centerline the weight of the front end/axel will be slightly heavier as the chassis will transfer its static weight.. and the amount is a function of wheel base... lever physics. Dynamically is a different story. Under load the added traction will tend to lift the front end somewhat and the effect will be a lighter front end. The added traction will actually transfer weight from the front to the rear.. especially doing heavy tillage work. This what traction control does using a 3pt implement. Using a tractor with a loader is a different physics problem altogether... the issue is pushing or pulling and the physics of each activity. I keep my loader tractors in the shed while doing tillage work.
Click to expand...

Well, I have had college physics, and It sounds like you are saying that a slight amount of weight will transfer through the chassis because some of the weight is above the axle. If you are going to say a slight amount I think that you should be able to put a quantitative component to that. I will add that if you were to take just an axle housing and let it just hang from the bearings, Then rigidly attach a ten foot piece of three inch Channel stock to that housing, I would hold the other end up for you while you added five hundred pounds pounds or five thousand pounds to the Wheel center or inside the tire, and I would not feel one ounce of that weight.
 
To all, I say that the question is so absolutely obvious that I can't believe that it received 41 posts!!!!! :?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
What do think, snow blade
Replies
3
Views
927
stevieb49829
stevieb49829
M
Ford 5500 backhoe oil pan/pump removal
Replies
6
Views
1K
motard
M
T
How big of a bush hog should I buy for '55 ford 850
Replies
6
Views
988
RayJohnson
R
K
What do I need if in the desert if I'm not farming?
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
modirt
M
Geo-TH,In
Tire Ballast vs rear ballast
Replies
8
Views
2K
Geo-TH,In
Geo-TH,In
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top