Jump to content

Unofficial Home of Old Simplicity & Allis-Chalmers Garden Tractors

Maybe Front Loader Project


Guest

Recommended Posts

Following are a few pictures of the Kwik-Way front loader that I purchased recently on eBay. It is shown set up in what I would think is an approximate position for the loader on my Pow'rmax. The loader didn't come with any of the mounting hardware or framing. So, it is held in position by 2x4s and yes, supported by paint cans. I just wanted to see what it would look like and flush out any interference problems before proceeding to the next step. The most obvious problem is the lift cylinder hitting the front wheels. What do you guys think? Should I go ahead with the project or scrap the idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BEESER i think that you can make this loader fit. i don't have one or have never tryed to install one. but some time that the best part of working on this old tractors is making something work on it that wasn't made for it. JJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a few things I'd keep in mind. It'd keep the front cross member as close to the hood as possible to help transfer as much weight as possible to the rear. This will help in all kinds of ways. Secound, it wouldn't take much to narrow the frame at few inches so the cyl. clears the front end. Nothing wrong w/ a wide frame other than the clearance issues. You might try relocateing the cyl. mounts so the angle of the cyl. changes. If done right you'll keep the correct amount of lift height. There are several things I'd look at before scrapping the idea. Just look at all the options before you start cutting on it. Also a lot of what I'd consider would have to do w/ your resources and abiliaty. I wouldn't do anything I didn't feel comfotable with.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Levi - I'll take the second one. The lights on top of the uprights are especially cool. Regarding the lift cylinder hitting the front wheels, notice where the lift cylinders attach to the uprights. They both seem higher than on the Kwik-Way. The same is true of the Johnson loader shown on the Pow'rmax for sale now in the classified section. Would I be better off just raising the attaching point than narrowing the frame? Actually, narrowing the frame will not be enough anyway because it would still be very close to the axle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just finished building a loader from scratch. If you change where the cylinder mounts it will change your lift height. Trust me moving that mount a inch or two will make a big differnce. I would raise the mounting point of the uprights up. Tilting the loader frame forward till it cleared the front tires. It would not hurt a thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beeser you might want to extend the arms that go to the bucket to get your uprights straight up and down and your cylinders up in front.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:
Originally posted by wilm169
Beeser you might want to extend the arms that go to the bucket to get your uprights straight up and down and your cylinders up in front.
I forgot to mention that the uprights are tilted in the pictures because they are literally teetering on some 2x4 supports. I don't understand what you mean by "... your cylinders up in front." though. Could you explain a little more? Good observation about the arms leading to the bucket. Using the Johnson loader as a guide, they could stand to be a little longer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently on the hunt for a hydraulic motor for the loader project. The goal is to shake out all the loose ends and come up with an approximate cost to get the job done and then decide whether its better to just buy something already made up for my tractor. Heck, with all the implements that I'm trying to find, it might be easier and cost effective to start over with another tractor purchase. Anyway, back to the topic on hand, another member here suggested a pump in the 0.4 to 0.6 cu. in. range. Is it a gear pump that I need? Are any manufacturer's pumps better than others?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most any gear pump is OK as far as brand is concerned. I haven't payed much attantion to the displacement of gear pumps. I go by the GPM rateing on the pump. I'd recomend something in the area of 10-15 GPM. This will cycle the cyl. at a good rate. Anything less would take it forever.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm... 10-15 GPM translates into 1.2-1.9 cu.in./rev. Is there a concern for how much hp is needed to drive the larger size pump?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I talked about in an earlier topic, the application of HP verses GPM X pressure is the key. When you use a cyl. or any hydraulic system for that matter, the oil free flows until you actuate a valve and direct the flow to do a task. So if the relief valve is set for 2000 psi and you have a 10 GPM pump, you won't flow 10GPM till you set the rpm's of the engine at the required pump speed to get to that rating. i.e.. most pumps have several sets of specs. 5 gpm at so many rpm's, 10 gpm at so many rpm's, etc. The requirement for lots of HP are related to the amount of work you want it to do. If your lifting buckets of mulch it won't need nearly as much psi to lift the light bucket as opposed to lots of pressure to dig a bucket of dirt and to lift it. The system is capable of producing most pressures at just above idle, so if you try to "work" the loader at higher pressure you may choke the engine as no matter what pressure you run, the pump will try to pump oil flow at it's rated gpm setting at what ever rpm your putting into it regardless of the pressure your using. I hope your following this. RPM dictates the flow rate, but the back pressure from the load you apply dictates working pressure. The pump trying to flow oil at the increased pressure is what will eat your HP up. You want a larger than needed pump so you don't have to rev the engine as high to get good speed out of the loader while doing lighter work. However, depending on what your doing you may need to rev the engine a little more to get the engine up in rpm so it has some recovery time for the govn. The increase of engine rpm will of course increase the amount of power you can put into the system as far as flow goes and at high working pressures it will require more HP. But the key is to get the rpm's at a happy medium verses what your requiring it to do. I think you'll find that the 20HP is enough to do what you need at a high working pressure to hit the max pressure setting on the relief valve. No matter what you do with what pump, never exceed the rating of the system by increasing the relief valve. Most working systems use 2000-2200 psi max. Going over this could burst hoses or bust the pump.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a 10-15 gpm pump is a overkill for a quik-way loader. That loader was only designed to lift around 300 - 400 lbs at around 1000 psi. Look on this web site. It shows a loader for a 40-60hp ag tractor only has a 11 gpm pump. It also shows a loader for a 15-25 hp compact tractor having a 6 gpm pump. http://www.bushhog.com/specsheets/agloaders-031405.pdf It would only need a 2-5 gpm pump. The allis b-12 I had with a l-12 loader only had a 1.5 gpm pump and it worked great.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The manual for the Kwik-Way loader describes the hydraulic pump as a C210. No other information is given. So I googled "C210 hydraulic pump" and what surfaces is a pump made by MTE Hydraulics. The C210 lists a displacement of 0.4791 cu.in./rev. Do you think this is the same pump used by Kwik-Way?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beeser: I have no opinion on fitment, other than wondering if you could get front wheels with a (radically) greater offset, but I'm betting that would overstress the spindles, given that they sell beef-up kits for some GT's that are designed to accept a loader. Re: the pump. I WISH I could lay hands on the manual for my Northstar Trencherman (mini-backhoe). But I can't. But from memory, I think that has a 3.0 GPM pump, and it's a 5hp B&S. I believe the maxium breakout force was adverstised as approx. 3,000lbs., given the mechanical advantage inherent in a backhoe. I don't recall the operating pressure either, but 2,000lbs. comes to mind? You could probably go on Northstar's site for the latest figures--mine was a smaller, 900lb. machine--they weigh more now. Good luck! Peter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter - Thanks for the suggestion about the front wheels but I think it would be easier and cheaper to just raise where the lift cylinder attaches to the uprights.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd probably scrap the idea. That cat looks like it's in charge and, despite their agility, cats are known to have poor driving skills.8D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom - No doubt you visited our home. I'm at least 3 or 4 tiers below in the food chain. What really surprises me is that no one has offered to 'pimp my garage' yet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a new thought on the support structure for the loader. It appears that Simplicity's current loader on the Legacy is not supported in the back but rather solely at the front of the tractor. After some thought, it seemed to me that the closer you provided support at the pivot point (front wheels) the better it would be. Or am I missing something? Here's a picture of the Simplicity loader I'm talking about. http://cgi.ebay.com/SIMPLICITY-4WD-SUBCOMPACT-LOADER-MOWER-3PT-540-PTO_W0QQitemZ7552068331QQcategoryZ91953QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG!! That's beautiful, even given the color (j/k!). I am amazed that you could do that without plans--I'd need more than plans to do that--lol!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • gwiseman
    • SmilinSam
    • Tom45
  • Recent Status Updates

    • gwiseman

      gwiseman

      As you know SimpletrACtors.com has changed some recently. Working through this so PM me with questions, suggestions, and/or challenges you have. Appreciate your patience and feedback.
      · 0 replies
    • gwiseman

      gwiseman

      Site programming updates were made 3/23/2024. As a result some things have changed including dues payment options. We will continue maintenance and work with technicians to regain credit card payment option and clear up minor challenges. On positive it appears attaching pictures is now easier. Good day. Gene 
      · 1 reply
  • Adverts

×
×
  • Create New...