[Dan33Klein]

Hey guys,
Figured I would share my excitement from friday night. I rolled my uncles yard then took the roller home and loaded up a bucket of firewood for him(not much weight at all).

I pulled into his driveway and turned the wheels and nose dived into the concrete.

It sheared the spindle shaft right in half. Don't ask me how.
No dealers local had the part in stock. Ended up just ordering it online and saved 45$ and will have it wednesday. (Soonest the dealer could get it in also)

I think the force of the tractor sitting on the tire really pressurized one side of the steering cylinder and ruined the seals on the cylinder and the steering valve. There both leaking now.

Heres some funny pictures!

 

[bmurph44]

That really sucks but on the bright side that chrome stack still looks sweet.

 

[CADplans]

If you research that type failure, the "sandy beach" (looks like waves washed the sand) appearance is an indicator of fatigue due to overloading, repeatedly.

Expect it to reoccur, unless you reduce the force on the spindle (more rear weight or a smaller bucket).

The other side is probably showing the same failure.

 

[SonnyT]

Pitty!! The black part of the spindle indicates it has been cracked for awhile. The silver looking part is all that was holding when it snapped. :fing32:

 

[Dan33Klein]

I might replace the other side as well.
I moved 25 ton of dirt last weekend going through rough terrain in a yard with ruts and such from installing a new septic.

I am assuming thats what did it in.

 

[danbike]

Good one. The corrosion is the give away.

Pitty!! The black part of the spindle indicates it has been cracked for awhile. The silver looking part is all that was holding when it snapped. :fing32:

 

[Diesel Powered]

Ouch. Time to fill up that rear weight rack. :fing32:

 

[Dan33Klein]

Ouch. Time to fill up that rear weight rack. :fing32:

Yes!!

I normally have 2 42lb weights and two 106lb full size tractor weights. and my loaded tires.

I have to take the big weights off when rolling as they interfere with the roller frame.

 

[Oldoak]

Not intended as a derogatory remark, but I am surprised this is not more common with so many GTs being pushed beyond their limits where a SCUT or even a larger CUT may be more suitable for some projects. :dunno:

 

[Dan33Klein]

Not intended as a derogatory remark, but I am surprised this is not more common with so many GTs being pushed beyond their limits where a SCUT or even a larger CUT may be more suitable for some projects. :dunno:

I couldn't agree more.
I know I was pushing the gt to its limits.

But it was for family and he was in a pinch to get get it done. So me being the nice guy did it for him.

Made more than enough to replace the part tho. From now on I will be using it as intended.

 

[Mach-1]

OUCH!!! Nosedive indeed! Glad you were not flipped over the steering wheel and hurt!

My trade in life is nondestructive testing and I dabble in metallurgy. What you have there is a classic case of fatigue failure. The shiny part is the faying surface of the crack, polished smooth by deformation of the material.

When the crack propagates (gets deeper) to the point that the remaining material can no long bear the load, it fails catastrophically via fracture.

If you were to magnetic particle inspect the other spindle, I'd bet you'd find fatigue cracks in that one too.

 

[Diesel332]

That has to be a whole lot of rough driving to break that big old spindle. The other one is probably hanging by a thread, so I'd jack up that side as well.

 

[Dan33Klein]

Thanks for the info on what actually happened.

I would be tempted to change the other side also, But at over 110$ a piece...
I'll wait until it is needed

 

[Leinie]

I'd be willing to say - it is needed. If the other one breaks, it may be in a much more dangerous situation !
You got a wakeup call- don't ignore it- Please !

 

[smithrngr]

sorry to hear, but that's why I would not put a bucket like that on any tractor of any size. all of the weight is hanging off the front end putting to much stress on the axes. and I don't care what mfg says they just want someone to buy them.

 

[Dan33Klein]

sorry to hear, but that's why I would not put a bucket like that on any tractor of any size. all of the weight is hanging off the front end putting to much stress on the axes. and I don't care what mfg says they just want someone to buy them.

My style of loader (Buford bucket) would put more stress on the front of the FRAME.

But the weight on the front axle would be the same.

Where the loader frame mounts don't affect weight on front axle.

Now how far the bucket sits in front of the axle would make a difference.

But if you were under the impression a front mount loader puts more weight on the axle then a mid mount( such as the 40 or 45) you would be incorrect.

But a mid mount would be easier on the frame for sure.

 

[Harryc]

Sorry to see that happen, but for what it's worth I see a lot of dried caked dirt and not a lot of grease anywhere ... :dunno:

 

[Dan33Klein]

On the steering parts? There's grease oozing out of the tie rod of the cylinder. And there was plenty of grease on the spindle shaft and the wheel bearings...
Greased it right before I moved all the dirt.

 

[moondawg]

My style of loader (Buford bucket) would put more stress on the front of the FRAME.

But the weight on the front axle would be the same.

Where the loader frame mounts don't affect weight on front axle.

Now how far the bucket sits in front of the axle would make a difference.

But if you were under the impression a front mount loader puts more weight on the axle then a mid mount( such as the 40 or 45) you would be incorrect.

But a mid mount would be easier on the frame for sure.

The bolded statement above is incorrect. The location of the loader mount has a direct effect on how much loading each of the axles receive.

If you want to prove it to yourself, grab a brick and a bathroom scale. Put them 5 feet apart, and put an 8 foot board across them, with a little hanging off each end.

Now, stand in the middle of the board, and have someone read the value on the scale, if you can't read it.

Walk toward the scale. The number will increase as the scale (representing the front axle) receives more of the load, and the brick(representing the rear axle) receives less.

Walk all the way to the scale. The number on the scale should have just about doubled as you walked.(it depends on how heavy you are compared to the board!) Now, CAREFULLY walk past the scale. The board will come off the brick, and the weight on the scale will show even higher. Why? Because now the scale is receiving not only your entire weight, but also the weight of the board. This is exactly the same situation as a front-mount loader. The front axle takes ALL of the weight of the loader, plus the weight of the load.

The location of the loader mount does affect the loading on the front axle, and it can be significantly higher than a mid-mount loader, all else being equal.

(edited to remove a part I wasn't sure about!)

 

[Dan33Klein]

Moon dawg, it's my understanding using your example as I walk towards the scale, the force would go up. The load is closer to the measuring point. That is correct. But that's not what is happening to the loader.

If 200lbs is in the bucket 2 feet in front of the axle with the Buford bucket
And 200lbs is in the bucket 2 feet in front of the axle with the 40 loader the weight on the axle would be the same.
Doesn't matter where they are mounted.

If you designed a loader that mounted to the BACK of the tractor and had 6ft arms all the way to the front. And had 200lbs in the bucket 2 feet in front of the axle. The load on the front axle would be the same as the other two loaders.

Maybe I am missing something. But the general research I did on the topic states that the load on the front axle is the amount of the weight and the distance it is in front of the front axle. Wouldn't matter where it is mounted to the tractor frame.
If you wanted to split hairs you could say that the Buford bucket would be slightly more because even empty the entire weight of the loader is in front of the axle. But do it less material, it would probably be the same as the 40 loader anyways.