My Tractor Forum banner

JOHN DEERE 455 FEL model 40 dimensions

11K views 29 replies 7 participants last post by  Duff Daddy 
#1 ·
Hello,

I start to make my own FEL for my tractor John Deere 455. In a days i will make a picture. Now i have problem with bucket. I dont know it what size i shoud make it. I see that on forum many people have this tractor with JD 40 FEL or 44. I will by very grateful if somebody will measure dimension of bucket, and tell me what steel thicknes i shoud bought.
 
#2 ·
The bucket body and end plates are made with 1/8" (3.2 mm) plate, the cutting edge is 1/2" x 4" (12.5 mm x 100 mm) bar stock, and the width is 48" (1200 mm) minimum to 54" (1370 mm) maximum for GTs of this size.

Height and depth (front to back) are variable, depending on the primary purpose when building your own bucket. For dirt, about 16-18" (405-460 mm. for both dimensions. If it will also be used for snow, up to 22" (560 mm) is good. A bucket made with these materials to the maximum dimensions listed will weigh approximately 220 lb (100 kilos).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mtimm
#3 ·
Thanks for that,

I know that it was long time from last post but i do not have time for my tractor.

This how it looks today:








This how i weld profiles, I have 160A MIG/MAG (it should by about 200A) so i have to do cut like this:



While i welding i have an accident becouse i saw smoke from engine, fastly i open the hood and i saw the fire (About 5 inch high flames) so i flooded with water from a hose. Unfortunetly nothink wrong witch engine. Only old grass with diesel burned out. There is some lampblack at side panel:

 
#5 ·
The subframe is actually a little light. It has to transfer the horizontal component of the arm cylinder lifting force and the load on the bucket cutting edge to the tractor's frame, as well as transferring the rear axle torque from the axle to the loader posts.

In combination, these forces can exceed 2000 lb (900 kilos) easily at the base each post. The rear tire is at risk from the post support if the post moves backwards at all.

I've seen this result on my own GT when the repetative axle torque loads broke a 5" welded splice in the frame and the rear tire advanced 2" in relation to the post. It's not good enough for the parts to withstand a 1000+ kilo load once. They have to be able to survive several thousand repeats of that 1000+ kilo load over the life of the tractor or loader.
 
#6 ·
TUDOR:

You are right that 1000 kilos hitting hundrets times can spoil it. You say that your FEL something broken, can you show your subframe?

I finish my bucket which is made from 4mm steel, it is better than oryginal 3,2mm (1/8 ") in 40 Loader, but heavier. next i will weld all together and i will measure the cylinder length. I don't know what diameter of cylinder should i use, What are your size of hydraulic cylinder?

I also add metal sign (JD Parking Only) on my garage. Is it look nice?




 
#7 ·
When I installed a loader on my Massey Ferguson 12 horsepower GT about 40 years ago, I didn't get the subframe correct and the rear axle torque broke a splice weld in the tractor's frame. After the third repair to the splice, I finally figured out why it was happening and took corrective measures. When I installed the loader on my newer, bigger, and heavier MF1655 in 1984, I applied the lesson and have not had a problem with that installation.

By 'lighter', I was not referring to the thickness of the steel, but to the front-to back- width of the piece supporting the front of the posts where it fastens to the tractor frame. The pic dies not show that area as clearly as might be desired.

Since my GT is set up as a loader tractor only, the subframe is much more simple than what you require to also accommodate the mower. It's a simple 'H' shape with 50x75 mm rails with 3.2 mm walls and a cross member of 50x50x6.4 mm square tubing, butt up against the rear axle tube and fastened to the tractor frame near the front axle.







The cylinders for my loader are 2x18" (50x450 mm) for the arms, and 1.5x13.5" (38x340 mm) for the bucket. I believe that JD uses something closer to the smaller size for both applications.

With regard to your cute sign, you will note that my GT is red and it is more accustomed to lifting, transporting, and burying green things than allowing them precedence for parking space. :D :sidelaugh
 
#8 ·
Tudor:


Now you can see how my FEL look like. After i sow your old tractor subframe i understand that i should think to add some more steel plates to strengthen frame.

I ordered cylinders 2x 50x400x589 and 2x 50x450x639 (diameter/extension/cylinder)
What size of hydraulic hose do you use? 1/2 inch?
I see that JD have their own Quick Coupler Plug so i must buy four of this pcs oryginal: John Deere Hydraulic Quick Coupler Plug - AM102420

Here are some image:







 
#9 · (Edited)
Hydraulic hose for your application is 1/4". If using steel tubing, 3/8" x 0.036" wall.

Sorry to tell you this, but you need to redo the bracing from the posts to the front of the tractor. What you have is not going to survive a reasonable service life and risks damaging the hood when it does fail. Flat stock has a limited lateral (side to side) strength and is subject to lateral motion from vibration. Add a vibration component to a compression load that can exceed 1800 lb (820 kilos) and failure is pretty much guaranteed. The bolts holding the splice together won't like that kind of load either.

Flat stock and structural angle are not good choices for bracing when dealing with compression loads. As mentioned, flat stock vibrates, and angle has a tendency to twist. The more stable square or rectangular tubing is much preferred.

Going back to my previous pics, the red self leveling link above the arm was originally 3/4" pipe and it bent several times under the compression load of lifting the front of the tractor while back dragging material. It finally failed catastrophically at the front connection when picking up a normal sized payload and was replaced with 32 mm square tube. It has not been a problem in the past approximately 1500 hours. You can see in the pic that it is still dead straight.

All connections and structural members work in harmony make a loader strong, but the smart fabricator makes each strong enough to survive on its own, or with only a little help from the other components. Use at least 38 mm square tube from the posts and 50 mm square tube across the front of the tractor. If you go back to my pics, you will see that my bracing is overkill by a substantial margin with 50x100 mm tubing, but I have used mine for loads exceeding 500 kilos many times over a 22 year period without a single structural failure in the parts that I fabricated.

Here is a pic of the post to brace connection on my GT using a 1/2" dowel and a pair of 3/8" (10 mm) bolts. The mounting pad is welded and gusseted to the post to handle the compression load and there is no real load on the dowel and bolts except to keep the brace from sliding off the mounting pad and keep them together under the limited negative load when the bucket is forced down hard enough to lift the front of the tractor.

 
#10 ·
Tudor:

I know what you mean, Unfortunately now in Poland it is cold autumn, and i don't have time to weld again new frame suport. I agree with you about squares shape is much better than flat stock. I tryed to rebuild the oryginal john deere 40 FEL. Now you realized my that I should make this more heavy-Duty.

I will try to instal cylinders before first snow.

But on the first warm day on spring i will make what you say.

I will post images from instaling hydraulic soon.
 
#11 ·
Actualization!

Now in Poland there are hard weather to finish FEL but i want to make it before my holiday in march, i am going to go to USA.

I bought all hydraulic parts with hoses, cylinders, connectors. I paid 500$ for all. I also have an offer to hydraulic for this tractor which cost was above 2000-3000$ for all but i dont know if me tractor need so profesional hydraulic parts.

I have done connecting front cylinders, In next week i want to make subframe cylinders and connect hosses.



 
#13 ·
.
I bought all hydraulic parts with hoses, cylinders, connectors. I paid 500$ for all. I also have an offer to hydraulic for this tractor which cost was above 2000-3000$ for all but i dont know if me tractor need so profesional hydraulic parts.

In North America, the cylinders alone will cost about $400-500. Add another $200 plus for hoses and fittings. A complete hydraulic system dedicated to the loader, including pump, valves, hoses, steel tubing, and fittings will cost $2000-3000 for a hydraulics shop to make. The cost will be about $500 less to do it yourself, but it will absorb several hours of your time and well over $100 for specialized tools.
 
#16 ·
Looks good. You have great idea of making some test runs with it before you apply paint. It is not uncommon to encounter a design revision that requires additional welding. What were you thinking for rear ballast?
 
#17 ·
I already add ballast, two concrete curbs50lb each. It is enought i dont want to put too much becouse this is garden tractor :) . I think about welding sleeves becouse now all construction is working on a long screws. It is not done yet but i thinking about next project - mayby log splitter. Making attachment for own tractor is crazy hobby but i like it.
 
#18 ·
When I have the snow thrower on, I run 6*42 pound suitcase case on a 3-point drawbar/receiver on one 455 and eight on the other. I've been utilizing this set up for over 10 years. So you could safely add ballast. I think you'll need it with the loader.
 

Attachments

#19 ·
Are your rear tires the 2-ply, that have a recommended inflation of 10 psi? If so, you'll likely have issues with flats. My 455s are AWS, so I don't have loaders for either of them as JD stated it is unstable. I do have a 51" plow that I converted into a clam style bucker with a kit by Superior Manufacturing (I believe it is now being marketed exclusively by John Deere.) When I'm working the tractor hard moving earth with it to the point of a fair amount of wheel slippage (as your video depicted), it was just about a given I was going to have a flat tire the next day. Tubes didn't help. The problem was the low inflation psi of the 2-ply tires. It just wasn't enough to keep the tire bead seated to the rim.

I finally stumbled upon the same turf tire in a 6-ply version. Now I can inflate the 6-ply to 30 psi. No more tire issues. The turf tread design works well for me, as sometimes the ground/lawn becomes too soft for any of the more aggressive tread designs.
 
#20 ·
It works well!! :thThumbsU

Two things of note in the video:

- While a mowing deck does add weight for traction on a loader equipped tractor, half of that weight is on the front axle where it is of no benefit. The mower itself is at risk of damage when doing the type of work demonstrated in the video.

- The tractor needs ballast at the rear for improved traction. Your tractor appears to have no ballast at all.

Ballast can be a non-freezable liquid in the tires, wheel weights, rear mounted weight, or some combination of all 3.

Liquid ballast can be a mixture of calcium chloride and water which would add about 70 kilos to each rear tire, but that will rust the rims in about 12 years and require new rims. Non- corrosive alternatives are windshield washer antifreeze or plumbing antifreeze which will add about 50 kilos to each rear tire.

Wheel weights are usually about 22 kilos each.

The maximum recommended weight for the rear (3 point hitch) of your tractor is 220 kilos.

Liquid ballast and wheel weights do not increase the load on the axle, but the weight mounted on the rear of the tractor does.

I recommend a minimum combined ballast weight of 200 kilos, and 300 kilos is preferred.

Chains on the tires, in combination with the added ballast, improve traction considerably.

My loader and winter tractors get liquid ballast first. It's always there and out of sight. It also provides the best stability for loader duty. Contact your local agricultural dealer for potentially heavier liquid ballast options than windshield washer antifreeze.

Do NOT use engine antifreeze, unless it is non-toxic. Freeze protection should be compatible with your climate. Here, I require protection to at least -35° C.
 
#21 ·
Martincom:

I am not sure how many ply my tire have but i put about 30 PSI on it. I have only one issue with flat tire but it was on front tire. The reason was a broken glass. How can i check ply in my tire? Too much pressure is not the best to friction. I agree with you that turf tread are needed on a lawn.

Tudor:

You are rigt, I have to remove deck, i thinking that it will give a balast but it only makes a problem.

Non-freezable liquid in tire? Really I never heard about it. How to pour it into a tire? I can paint rim to prottect them.
Wheel weight are not the cheapest option. We have big taxes in poland - it didnt help :)

I will ask my dealer about this fluid. It sound great especialy that it not increase the load of the frame and rear axle. What do you think about pouring some cheap oil? I wil never corrode

My ballast now have about 80 kilos, as you write i need at least 200 kilos.
 
#22 ·
Check the tire specifications label that is molded into the sidewall. It will indicate the ply rating there as well as maximum load rating and maximum inflation.

Search YouTube for videos on how to load tires with fluid. There are several that describe several methods to do it. I utilize one of these cheap pumps to do it. You have to disconnect and allow the air to escape a few times in the process.

https://www.amazon.com/ABN-Multi-Use-Siphon-Transfer-Liquid/dp/B00KB8BREO/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1492292025&sr=8-5&keywords=hand+transfer+pump

Oil weighs 7.5 pounds per gallon (you need to perform the conversion to metric). Water weighs 8.0 pounds. Here in the US, most utilize windshield washer fluid as it is cheap and will not rust the rim. Next, is RV (Recreational Vehicle) anti-freeze. The calcium chloride mix will provide the most weight per gallon, but you have the corrosive issue, handling issue, and cost. On a garden tractor, the weight gain with calcium chloride verses windshield washer fluid is insignificant, considering the volume the tire can hold. On a big boy tractor, it is. Search online for tire size verses fluid fill capacity charts.
 
#24 ·
The difference between calcium chloride (CaCl) and windshield washer fluid is equal to more than the weight of a set if 50 lb (23 kilo) wheel weights. I do not consider that to be an insignificant difference on a GT.
Well, yes it is. Liquid filling tires is a great way to improve stability and add weight for traction, but it's effectiveness as loader ballast is limited. When working with a loader, nearly all the payload weight is bearing down on the front axle and the front tires. Ballast is used to shift the fulcrum point of the load rearward, transferring a portion of the loader payload on to the rear axle/wheels. Liquid filled tires do absolutely nothing to accomplish this. You need ballast aft of the rear axle. Obviously, the further aft of the rear axle the better, but there comes a point of practicality and the risk of swinging it into something when turning.

In your case, loading your rear tires has other implications. I know you mow quite a bit with your 455. Loaded rear tires can leave depressions, even trenches, in a lawn depending on soil type and moisture content.

The above reasons are why I utilize a 3-point mounted weight bar. The weight is as far aft as practical and can be easily removed when I mow.

From this post and others, I know things can be crazy expensive in Poland. What many do here to moderate the cost is to utilize scrap metal or concrete rebar and build a simple 3-point frame. The then construct a plywood or other wood sheeting box around it and pour it full of concrete, with the dimension of the form sized to yield the weight desired.

Here is a post that further expounds on this points with good illustrations:

What is "Rear Ballast"? And why do you need it?
 
#25 ·
Well, yes it is. Liquid filling tires is a great way to improve stability and add weight for traction, but it's effectiveness as loader ballast is limited. When working with a loader, nearly all the payload weight is bearing down on the front axle and the front tires. Ballast is used to shift the fulcrum point of the load rearward, transferring a portion of the loader payload on to the rear axle/wheels. Liquid filled tires do absolutely nothing to accomplish this. You need ballast aft of the rear axle. Obviously, the further aft of the rear axle the better, but there comes a point of practicality and the risk of swinging it into something when turning.

In your case, loading your rear tires has other implications. I know you mow quite a bit with your 455. Loaded rear tires can leave depressions, even trenches, in a lawn depending on soil type and moisture content.

The above reasons are why I utilize a 3-point mounted weight bar. The weight is as far aft as practical and can be easily removed when I mow.

Here is a post that further expounds on this points with good illustrations:

What is "Rear Ballast"? And why do you need it?
The maximum load on the rear wheels of a tractor occurs when the bucket is on the ground with enough force to lift the front tires off of level ground. At ALL other times, there is less load on the rear tires. This is especially so when there is a payload in the bucket since the weight of the payload must be balanced with an equivalent load taken from the load on the rear tires.

The fulcrum is the front axle and does not move. All calculations are based on the center of mass of the weights involved and their respective distances from the center line of the front axle and are expressed in foot-pounds, as in the torque of a lever acting on a fulcrum.

For general calculations applicable to payloads in a FEL bucket, the balancing weight is 60% of the payload weight. For reference, the chart in Post #10 of this thread, and do some number crunching.

Ballast behind the second fulcrum on a tractor, the rear axle, involves a similar set of calculations to find the actual load on the rear axle without a payload in the bucket to check against the manufacturers maximum static load rating for that axle. It also reduces the load on the front axle by the counter balancing weight needed to offset the counterweight. As with a payload in, or attached to, the bucket, distance behind the rear axle counts.

I note in the chart in post #3 of your link, that Kennyd miscalculated the ballast needed for loader work. He only looked at the counterweight on the 3PH (506 lb in Option #2) and did not include the liquid ballast (windshield washer antifreeze in this case) in Options #1 or 3, or wheel weights in Options #2 or 3. The total ballast loadout recommended is actually 806-810 lb. In theory, that weight could be achieved with CaCl liquid ballast, 3 sets of cast lead wheel weights of the same dimensions as the standard cast iron wheel weights, and a set of tire chains, plus a 20 lb plate bolted to the rear of the tractor. No one particularly wants calcium in their tires anymore, and lead has its own environmental issues.

Few GT owners try to lift payloads of the same weight as a 1 series tractor, so ballast requirements are not quite as high. For this reason, I stand by my recommendations for total ballast for a GT/FEL.

The footprint on the ground of the turf tires for these tractors has a width of 10.5-11.5" and a length of 6-9". That's 63-103.5 sq-in to support up to 160 lb of CaCl liquid ballast, or about 1.5-2.5 psi added ground pressure over just air filled tires. For any other fluid, the ground pressure will be less. If the ground is so soft that that extra ground pressure will make ruts, lower the tire pressure to compensate, or use a LT.
 
#26 ·
The fulcrum is the front axle and does not move. All calculations are based on the center of mass of the weights involved and their respective distances from the center line of the front axle and are expressed in foot-pounds, as in the torque of a lever acting on a fulcrum.
Thank you for correcting my wording error. My brain tends to "autocorrect" when I proof and I'll read past my errors. Also, here on MTF, if I spend too long composing a message, I'm gathering my login will time out and then I can't post the message. The forum software also doesn't appear to perform an "autosave" that I can recover once that happens, so once my login times out and I attempt to post the message it is gone and I have to start over again. Very frustrating. Interruptions while creating a post are regular and, at times, lengthy. So often I'm hurrying to submit the post, so I can address the interruption, and then I'll come back later, if I remember, and edit the post to make corrections. It is why many of my posts are edited after the initial submission.

Such was the case with my wording incorrectly claiming the fulcrum point moving. What I meant to say is, "Ballast should be used to shift the payload weight rearward of the fulcrum point, transferring a portion to the rear wheels."

The point I thought I was emphasizing and I believe Kennyd did, as well, was the huge impact loader payload places upon the front axle, front tires, wheel bearings, the axle pivot point, and the steering linkage. Again, liquid filled rear tires do absolutely nothing to reduce loader payload impact on these components.

The 'Seat of the Pants" engineering measurements Diesel Powered made in the link you referenced very clearly establishes that ballast aft of the rear axle has a substantial impact on front axle load. Specifically, his measurements indicate that 6 suitcase weights (6 x 42 pounds = 252 pounds) hung on a rear weight transferred between 100 to 430 pounds from the front axle, depending on loader height.

Diesel Powered rear ballast weights were hung on a weight bracket. Hanging the same weights on a 3-point hitch drawbar would move the ballast aft several more inches and have a significantly more substantial impact reducing the amount of loader payload placed upon the front axle and the impact to it and related components.

KennyD did not miscalculate the ballast, as the emphasis of his post was the impact of loader payload to the front axle components, front tires, and steering components. As loaded rear tires do nothing to reduce or minimize the impact to these components, he appropriately did not include them.

While we all seek to minimize our costs, often folks jump at the low price remedy without factoring in all the issues. To that end, liquid filling the rear tires is a very low cost method of creating ballast and tends to be what is implemented for that reason. Absolutely, it is ballast and will play into to providing the counter weight to keep the rear tires planted on the ground, assist traction and braking. However, often the impact to the front axle, front tires, and steering components is over looked. Not to mention GT front tires have much less surface area to spread the load over and working in loose soil, which is frequently the case when performing loader work, increase the stress to these same components considerably. Further, loaded rear tires do nothing to lessen the impact to steering maneuverability and traction issues when the tires sink in and the loose materials acts like wheel chocks around the front tires. Shifting loader payload weight from the front axle to rear, with ballast aft of the rear axle, will lessen that impact.
 
#27 ·
I totally agree with you that the "autocorrect" function of the brain can be a PIA at times, especially with the more technical posts that I generate. I understand it, therefore it's correct . . . or so I thought before proofreading it a second or third time. :banghead3 Then comes the editing for word choice, spelling, and punctuation that sometimes takes another hour or two. I've spent as much as 5 hours making a post that most can read in less than a minute just to try to ensure that the neophyte to hydraulics can understand the basic concepts without boring the heck out of others who already have the basics locked down.

What I meant to say is, "Ballast should be used to shift the payload weight rearward of the fulcrum point, transferring a portion to the rear wheels."
The only time that a portion of the payload weight gets shifted rearward is when climbing a hill. At all other times. a portion of the ballast weight gets shifted forward to balance the payload weight on the font axle. Remember, there are TWO fulcrums on a tractor, the front axle with the payload ahead of it, and the rear axle with counterweight behind it. Set up a see saw with that configuration and then apply a payload to the opposite end with the counterweight, then consider the distance between the payload and the front axle and the distance between the counterweight and the front axle.

KennyD did not miscalculate the ballast, as the emphasis of his post was the impact of loader payload to the front axle components, front tires, and steering components. As loaded rear tires do nothing to reduce or minimize the impact to these components, he appropriately did not include them.
There is a difference between ballast and counter weight. Ballast is all encompassing and counter weight is a specific type of ballast. The primary purpose of liquid ballast, wheel weights, and tire chains is traction. The secondary purpose is to counter front mounted loads. The primary purpose of counterweight is to offset the effects of the implement on the front of the tractor. With enough additional counterweight that does not remove so much weight from the front of the tractor that steering becomes a problem when no payload is involved, then it can add to the traction component.

For those who have asked about FELs on GTs, I have consistently emphasized the effect of payload and counterweight on the load carried by the front axle. I literally have dozens of posts over the years stressing this point and explaining the how's and why's.
 
#28 ·
I think now i undestand "how's and why's". The mower deck was illogical ballast. I did not have any problem with leaving depression by rear and fron tires when i had load my FEL but even if, do not have golf lawn it is also used by many machines i do not need equal lawn.

I do not know exacly what is weight of my FEL, but i think it shuold be about oryginal between 400-500lb. You are right i need to add ballast in about 200-300 kilos liquid ballast have good and bad sides. But i think 45 kilos on each tire will not damage ground and grass and only help to have better traction in fact that it will not shift the fulcrum point. Liquid ballast should help. The other thinks that i saw is when i move with full bucket with out sufficient enough ballast the rear axle jumping on bumps. It is very dangerouse for tractor frame becouse it is like 500 lb kilos hammer hiting into the frame. Tractor dont like Swing motion with big payload and big ballast is healther for bearing and axles than without it - thats my conclusion

I start looking for 3 point hitch for my tractor. and i have to order palette of windshield fluid :)

I have 2 ply tires and 10Psi on each:
 
#29 ·
I sold one of my 455s last week. The purchaser did not need/want the rear PTO or the 3-point, nor any of the snow removal equipment. So I'll be selling all of that. I suppose the freight would be the issue if you purchased my 3-point. It is an early Ruegg CAT1 that is basically a beefier copy of the JD CAT0. It is a full CAT1---not one of the present "Frankenstein" hitches with the oddball top link that has a CAT0 eyelet on one end and a CAT1 on the other.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top