Building a Loader for a Garden Tractor - Phase 4: Steel Structure
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2024
- Part 4 of a multipart series covering the entire process of designing, building and installing a quick-attach front loader for a Case/Ingersoll garden tractor.
In this episode we fabricate the actual steel structure of the loader. The crossmember, permanent upright receivers/standards, and entire removable loader assembly (upright towers, lift arms, and front adapter for the removable bucket/attachment.) are all laid out, cut out, and welded up before being assembled/installed into their respective positions.
Then we lay out and weld on the the brackets and bosses to fit up the hydraulic cylinders.
Great build series. Thank you
Following this with interest. Enjoy the way you figure out what needs to be done and then do it, modify it if needed and carry on.
Last yr grandson’s life time good build
I busted the steering gear in my Ingersoll 3016, it was just cast iron, I tried to turn not moving with a heavy log on the loader. 😬 That stock hydraulic pump was fast with the loader hooked up though I was impressed, tapped into the deck lift ports. Nice video 💯👍 hope everything worked out for you.
Glad to see you're back, I hope that all your hard work pays off well and that you get years of service out of the loader.
Thanks. Daniel
Looking good Bob. I am anticipating the video of the quick attach in action.
Has anyone ever said that you have a Richard Dreyfuss vibe going on? Kinda soothing, nice clean professional work.
LOL. No one's ever said that! I'll have to go watch some Richard Dreyfuss clips and see what I think.
Back when I had hair, people said I reminded them of Bill Murray. But never Richard Dreyfuss.
Thanks!
Very impressive. I like how you think. I can literally feel synapses being built while I watch your videos. Looking forward to the next!
What a way with words you have! Lol!
Hey no judgement ,on your work, from me. I think you’re a very gutsy dude for taking on this project. Can’t wait to see more. When you’re on the last video I hope you can tell us about how long this project took. Thanks for taking us along. Great video, I love that you tell us the how and why you build things the way that you do.
Thanks, Rodney! I appreciate it!
Looking forwared to the next part of the build!
ok, that jack trick was genius! i can't tell you how many times i've had hot chips falling down my neck, or my sleeve into my shirt and then painfully using me as a heat sink to cool off, much to my annoyance. never again, i say! that just earned another subscriber.
Glad to hear it!
Looking good.
Great job
I have been looking forward to seeing this. Looks great, very well built.
Thanks Randy!
Can't wait to see phase five!!! Very nice job!
Coming along nicely. We shared this video in our homemade tools forum this week :)
Awesome! Thank you!
Waiting on phase 5 of this build :) Cheers
Best loader build on yt!! Awesome!!!
Pretty good job! The details are impressive....and makes me wonder how I would ever duplicate a similar effort for my own project.
Excellent inspirational video series with really decent thorough detail. I'm planning to add a few more parts to make an articulating bucket design so less hydraulic bucket long term work. Would be awesome to see you go through a backhoe build... though man... excellent all you share. I have pallet structural steel stock now too and more other tube/pipe/beam/channel stock to use for my build. The 1/4" thick stock is just too thick for most the parts I'm thinking I have stashed away as 2.5"x2.5" square tube stock originally planned for most the parts... though need to do some math before moving forward on actual fabrication work. Thanks for sharing! Looking forward to the next videos.
An interesting project, good job! Maybe stronger and heavier then needed for your little tractor but as long as it will carry it you may be okay. It actually looks stronger then the loader on my 60 hp tractor.
Anyone can make something strong enough to work but it takes an engineer to make it just barely strong enough to be fully functional and economical.
That's a really good point. And I tried to be clear on camera. I don't consider myself to be a real engineer. I feel confident that I can make this thing strong enough erring on the side of being too strong. The cost benefit is very clear: The benefit is it never breaks and I never hurt myself. The cost is I make it 20 to 50 lb heavier than it needs to be and use several more welding rods than are absolutely necessary. And more of my time. Which it's a hobby so passing time is part of the benefit.
But you make an astute observation. Thanks for your input.
Just so you know for future reference what you call the extensor port is called the blind end port and the other is called the rod end port in the trade . I have to say your welding appears to have improved as the project has progressed.
Thanks for that! You learn something new everyday.
Really enjoying this project. My only concern is that it might be an overkill in terms of strength as this would be strong enough for a compact tractor and all the extra weight is going to over stress the steering components and transmission more than needed. But I know nothing about your tractor. I envy your skill and talent and always enjoy your projects. Thanks
Thanks for your excellent and thoughtful question.
I stand accused by my family and friends of overbuilding practically everything I've ever built. I don't do it on purpose, I just want to make things as good as they can be within reason for the limits of time and cost.
So you may be right, I may very well be overbuilding it.
Having said that, my design assumption is that it should be able to comfotably lift and maneuver 1,000 lbs. That does turn out to be the factory rating of a Deere 1025R, which is a larger machine than this. I also envision "hard" digging with the bucket, defined as using running start/momentum to break hard ground or dislodge stones, etc. I expect to be able to do that without fear of damaging either the loader itself or the tractor.
Both of those design requirements may be overly optimistic. There's only one way I can find out for sure.
Until then, I'm making design/material decisions with those specs in mind. If for whatever reason the 1,000lb capacity isn't workable, then I will have to face that I've overbuilt it. But the consequences of that will be mitigated by the fact that the loader assembly is detachable, so day-in and day-out I won't be hauling around the extra weight and bulk. Only when it's time to actually use the loader.
Either way, I'll do a 6 month follow up video with my best shot at a brutally honest assessment of how it actually works.
@@TheBuildist I suspect the issues with the 1000lb idea will be whether or not you can hang sufficient counterweight off the stock 3pt without the 3pt either being damaged or not being able to lift that much counterweight without assistance (and then needing to be chained in up position once it's up). I'm certainly curious to find out! I have the other older style of 3pt on mine and in looking at it, while the lift force can be increased easily by adjusting the pressure relief on that circuit, it might turn into trouble for the attachment design to the rear of the tractor if it's cranked up much! Liquid filling the rear tires and adding bolt-on wheel weights are other options but they're not as far behind the fulcrum as weight on the 3pt. Great vid.
@@Vigo327 excellent observation, and thanks for the compliment. As it turns out the three-point hitch is custom as well. And not really by choice just by good luck, the cylinder I found that had the correct throw is also larger in diameter than stock. It's 3 in ID. I have a previously lifted at least 700 lb with it, and I don't think I'll need quite that much. My best guess is somewhere in the range of 600 lbs. But we'll deduce that scientifically when the time comes! I do really like the idea of the loader being removable and the counterweight being removable so that day in and day out the tractor is very close to stock in its weight and handling. So I don't really want to do the liquid filled tires or wheel weights or whatever.
I like your video I started to do one on an old wheel horse tractor mower do all the plans for it had the 8in C Channel and all the 4in angle iron and my wife decided by a bobcat for me that was 30 years ago I recently ran across the plans that I drew up but I don't have any of the metal anymore that was very interesting watching you do this
While thinking of trying to balance a drill with a jack (upside down maintaining a straight hole), I'm surprised you haven't invested in a magnetic base drill yet. I bought a JHM Slugger, I use it like you use your mill. For boring something smaller than the base footprint, I made up a small plate a little larger than the mag area to tack weld to the item being drilled. It beats laying on your back with a corded drill getting metal all over while fighting to see with a face shield. While I wasn't able to afford a set of annular cutters all at once, Amazon has had well priced individual ones as I've needed them. I am enjoying a rainy day watching your trials and tribs building a loader, I would like to build one for my 68 Sears Suburban some day.
Better than my machining and building skills,but it sure does look heavy duty.two heads are better than one is what they say,so take advantage of the criticism people give you and.use it to better your skills.good job .
Love the series man, lengthy and very detail oriented project I’m sure. Can’t wait to see how it turns out.
Why not use tractor pins at the bucket end of your loaded arms? Instead of drilling for roll pin, you could use a pin and add a cotter or spring loaded clamp….seems like it would be quicker to take off.
Cheers!
Terence
That's a great point. I wasn't sure going in if I needed to minimize any pin stick-out to the outside, so that it wouldn't hit anything as it slid into the receiver/adapter plate on the bucket or forks. Knowing what I know now, I think you're absolutely right. But at the time I was trying to keep an eye on that.
Thanks for the good suggestion!
👍😎
Well Awesome Job Ya Got this Thanks For Sharin Your Project trying to build one out of Sears garden tractor having problems with pump and frame work thks again any Plans on Yours for Looking at ? Keep it Up
You are did a great job making the Loader, but you are over thinking it, you should have made strengthening plates for the bend in the loader then put on the pivot points for the hydraulics. You added more weight than needed! Look to loaders that are factory made. Although you did indeed need to beef up the chassis (frame) the over strengthening wasn't needed.
I have a 1969 Case 220. I could see foot controls being useful so you don't have to take your hands off the steering to control the loader while moving the travel lever. Adapting regular brakes onto the axles might also be useful with that much weight. I think your newer tractor has the holding valve to help slow it down. Mine does not, so I don't know how well your hydraulics hold the tractor back going down a hill or coming to a stop.
My first Case was a 1972, and after I found out what a difference the holding valve makes, I went and bought one to put on the 1972. It makes an huge difference, especially since my property has a lot of hills. I've given thought to foot control, and I may install it if it seems like it'll provide a meaningful benefit. I've given serious thought to upgrading the brakes. I have the correct disks and calipers, but I'm still working on an effective pedal/cylinder design that fits in the available space and doesn't break the bank. I'll film it if and when I get it done.
Thanks for your input!
The Over Buildist!
Touche! 😄
Enjoying the series just watched the videos last night. I think we might have a few creative differences but your a hell of a lot better at welding than I am hahah. I have a 320GTX Massey sitting here which is the same as a 4020PS, sturdy little tractor. Should make for a hood loader, I thought about making one myself for a long time but eventually ended up buying an Ingersoll 7020, lot more money but they sure are a capable machine. I think personally I would have looked for a 648 or 6018 before modding the 4020 but it sure is interesting to watch it come together
I get your point. But here in this part of the country (Atlanta) I have never actually seen a Case or Ingersoll loader in person. I just have to believe, based on the pictures I see on the internet, that they actually exist. 🧐 So unless I'm willing to make a 20 or 30 hour round trip, buying one is pretty much out of the question. If I want a loader I have to make it happen myself. The good news is, because no one around here knows what they are, I only paid $600 for this 4020PS! And if it turns out the way I hope, with an easy to use detachable loader and easily detachable counterweight, then I think I get the best of both worlds. A very usable 4020 and a very usable loader when I need it.
Thanks for your thoughtful input!
@@TheBuildist you got a great deal on it, I don’t want to sound like I’m trying to tell you what to do with your tractor or anything like that just thought I’d make a few remarks is all, it’s yours so do with it as you please and I’ll be here to watch it’s all good 👍 Up here in Canada where I am, Case Ingersoll loaders were looking more like a 50-60 hour round trip to buy, so I ended up finding this 7020 in Maine and imported it. So it was only a 30 hour round trip with a few favours called in, a border crossing and a lot of $$$, but in the end I guess I probably have one of the only 7020’s in the country, for whatever that’s worth 🤣 but the 7020 isn’t as good of a GT as the 4020 would be, it’s just not nimble it’s big clumsy and slow, and no mid mount deck either !
@@macfarms No offense taken my friend! I've just had a couple folks ask, "why not buy one instead of building" and it partly because I'm cheap, but also because they're just hard to find around here. But I enjoyed your comment!
Easy fix mail the end of the cylinder to get the proper width
I took a Massy 18 horse and put a 2 cylinder Deisel in it, then built a replica of a Ease On Loader identical to a full size farm tractor loader, then made rigs and two rims and put duals on it. ending by putting Power assist steering from a early 80's ford car. winning at that one I took a Lgt 145 ford and put a 3 cylinder deisel in it, and built a replica of a johndeer quick attach loader same as for a full size farm tractor, only changing rear wheels to skid steer tires i was given. the next one I did was took a jondeer 366 i think was, put a 2 cylinder deisel in it and built a replica of a Degleman plow blade, then made duals for it but it and the ford were stolen before i got to putting the power assist diff i was working on for the johndeer. so I can say I am possitive some one got to or is enjoying two very awesome little tractors. my son seized the motor in the massey and i sold it before it took flight as well.
I just bought a new(ish) bucket for my farm tractor to replace a worn out one. The new one is a different shape and type with Euro hook and eye mount. I plan to put direct pins and holes but am not sure how high or low on the bucket to put the pins. I was hoping to hear the considerations you go through on yours. You better get crack'in - I need to get mine done soon ! ha
I think I can actually answer that. I ended up reading the complete specs on a modern compact tractor with a loader. And on that tractor with the bucket level the bottom of the bucket could sit 2 in below grade so that you could dig a 2-in deep level channel. I decided with my tractor based on its limited mass and low traction tires that I will have my bucket be able to be set 1.5 in below grade with the bucket level. So whatever your sense of how deep you want your level bucket to be able to go, that's the defining question. So you put your loader arms fully in the down position. Put something that's an inch and a half thick or whatever height you choose under all four tires, And with your bucket sitting on flat ground, that's the height that it should attach to the loader arms. Then the question comes of rollback. As far as I can tell a bucket should have between 7 and about 11 degrees of rollback sitting on the ground with the bucket tilted all the way back. So first establish the bucket height then with your bucket control cylinders fully retracted tilt the bucket 7 to 11° and that's where it gets welded on.
But now you've made me do a spoiler for my next video! 😆
A wonderful series of videos my friend. Does the guy you bought the metal from have any more? I am repairing the frame on my Ranger and have some other projects to dive into. I am in Pennsylvania. Thank you. Those are some beautiful welds!!
No, sorry. I bought 6 pieces, all that he had.
love this video series, I'm just learning to weld and this is one of the things I am looking to do. So happy I ran into your videos, Total inspiration! I'm all for over engineering! So with that in mind, to save weight could you build the arms or anything else out of Aluminum and still have enough strength? what would the weight saving look like?
The weight saving would probably be a hundred pounds or so. The problem with aluminum is that the materials are more expensive, the welding process is much more difficult and therefore more expensive. And anytime you have aluminum staying in constant contact with steel you have the potential for bi metal corrosion. So if the need really arises you might consider building the whole thing out of the aluminum. But if the majority is going to be steel there's not a good reason to build part of it from aluminum.
But great question! Probably something that a lot of people would wonder.
When can we expect to see the rest of this series ?? Thanks ...
leaf collection season has meant that I needed to leave the deck installed and the leaf vacuum trailer hooked up. So no progress has been made since about October. As soon as the holidays are over I'll get back to making and filming progress, and have the next installment published by... March?
With the grease trough inside the oilite bearing, I was wondering if one could use the lathe to exactly configure the slots with machine exactness instead of jiggly by hand spiral slots. You could imagine using the tool post and maneuvering the spiral cut after producing a tiny cut that you expand into machine style spiral grooves. The problem seems to me to be how in the devil do you connect a Dremel tool to a tool post so it does exactly how you want the cut, cut.
I'm sure you could. It strikes me as an area that the hand cut slots will work just fine, and because it isn't even visible, it doesn't have an aesthetic aspect to it.
But a person could surely mount a Dremel in the tool post and rig up a gearing something like... 1/8 thread per inch?
Judge no#1: Your welcome. LOL
I don't know if theres space/room, can you shorten the pin sleeves?
At that spot the entire end of the cylinder ends up being up inside there. And I can't thin down the cylinder itself. So that wasn't an option.
The pins hold the weight, so just use them and move your cross support further out on the boom rail?
Give me a timestamp so I know what you're referring to...
Why didn't you just grind the end of the cylinder down to width of lower end. You can see it is wider than width of cylinder.
Because the whole cylinder end, not just the pin boss, has to fit up in there between those flanges.
It might have been just barely possible. But I just wanted those flanges to be wide enough to accomodate an unmodified cylinder.
Good observation.
@@TheBuildist Well if the other end fit without doing anything and you ground it down to the same size both ends should fit with no problem. And for all the trouble it took and money spent you could have bought one already made.
@@jimbo16720 Well, that's where we both made the same mistaken assumption: The two ends of the cylinder are different widths. The rod end is narrower than the cylinder end.
And beyond the decision point and change of plan that I discussed on camera, there was no big consequence. A bit of extra time, a bit extra steel. No cash cost at all.
So given the same choice again, I'd mitigate the mistake the same way.
I appreciate your input, though!
Why not just bore the pin bosses off center?
Great project!! Got one general question about the tractor. I am familiar with Case tractors, but having not seen one in person for well over a decade, what is the metal thickness of the frame on the one you have? Was thinking it looked thicker than some I have seen, but only going by memory
Off the top of my head, I think the thickness of the metal in the c channel is just under an eighth of an inch.
Yeah I guess I said it on camera. And I wouldn't have given such a precise number if I hadn't recently measured it. So it's right around 80 thousandths
@@TheBuildist Right I just found that comment about 80 thousandths. I was under the impression Case used almost 3/16" but I guess I was wrong.
Question. The picture in the beginning of the video looks different to what is in the video. Have you increased the distance between the front wheels and the bucket and the curl cylinder mounting.
Good catch! The ugly truth is that at the time I released the first video, the loader didn't yet exist. (As of this moment, the hydraulics are not yet finished either. I'm filming as I go.)
But you HAVE TO have an eye-catching thumbnail for your video, right? So I found a picture of a similar-ish loader and photoshopped it onto a picture of my tractor. It turned out better than I expected. But in the final video I'll release an actual unretouched picture of the finished product.
What did you for a hydraulic pump
could you have notched your inserts around the protruding bolts.(in the side bars)
If you're talking notching out the arm reinforcement plates to make room for the cylinder pins, then I think that would be a bad idea. I think the notch would weaken I reinforcement plate too much.
Ok lookin back on your Videos How Do Make the Pump Work And Were Does it Go to Operate the Controls Just askin if ya Could help Me Out Cause Cant find it At All ? Is there Another Video Comin ? Thks For Sharin Keep us Posted
The next video will cover hydraulics. Sorry it has taken so long, but the hydraulics had me stumped for a while.
@@TheBuildist thks again Paul
@@TheBuildist Howdie well I'm on hold for awhile Massive Heart Attack on April first no joke makes my Number three and I,m 65 to got projects to finish winter is comin hear soon guessin next yr will try to getter done like your work lots keep it up if I don't get Bk to Ya Merry Christmas My Friend
AT 1:01:58 why not drop your cylinder in your mill and face off each side? Seems the simplest and cleanest looking??
Good suggestion. But it's not just the crosstube that's too wide, it's the entire cylinder itself. By the time I took off .300" on each side, I would have greatly weakened the pressure chamber, maybe even breached into it. So that just wasn't an option. I thought about cutting off the existing crosstube and welding on an extended head on that end of the cylinder, one that I could cut down as you describe. But then the tractor forever requires these custom made cylinders. In addition, the cylinder's overall length is then too long and I would have struggled to get it to fit into the gap between tower and the crook of the loader arm. I think it's probably physically possible. But I decided to go the route that was certain could actually work, even if it meant extra effort.
But great observation.
I got a front end loader on cub cadet in don’t know what kind of pump to put on it how many gallons per minute
I'd guess you want between 2.5 and 5 gpm. It's like gearing ratios, it's a tradeoff of speed vs. power. The higher gpm will move the loader faster, but requires more hp to run it. The lower gpm will move slower, but allow for a smaller hp engine. My best guess is, If your engine is beefy (18hp and above) go for the 5 gpm, if your engine middle sized, 14-16 hp, then I'd do about 4 gpm.
If your engine is 12hp or less then I'd use a 2.5 or 3 gpm pump.
is there ample room to get on and off the machine?
Yes, that has been fine. It wouldn't be true to say that it's not different. But it's not too challenging at all.
Look at a case 646
will you offer a set of drawings?
I THINK so. It would have to be with a strong caveat, "USE AT YOUR OWN RISK" I'm no engineer. I think the design is good enough, but if I'm wrong then someone could hurt themself. So I'm thinking about it.
Love the engineering but bobcat loaders are this beefy!! I think you went wayyy overkill on the strength of this thing!!
You're the 5th person to say that! I'm beginning to feel like there might be a pattern... :-)
@@TheBuildist I think that having extra support /strength in your set-up is just sensible. Why make it to a standard when you can make it workproof?
Hello. Which type is the U assembly? Thx.
@@TheBuildist so you halved a hollow section? I thought it was basically made of U iron.
@@TheBuildist i am curious about what he is pointing to at 5:19
@@orova1997 The crossmember that is bolted to the bottom of the tractor frame. In the center of the tractor. Perpendicular to the tractor frame. The cross member sticks out about as far as the width of the wheels. And supports the base of the vertical towers. At 5: 19 I'm pointing at the two pieces of the cross member that have not yet been welded into a singular box beam.
@@orova1997 Disregard my first answer. I didn't understand the question.
Fancy words and over engineered.. .but nice work...its not a 988 cat loader...could tip forward with bucket empty...lol just saying...
It'll have 1,000 lb or greater breakout capacity when it's done. I'm not denying it's overbuilt. But it is intentionally heavier duty than "your garden variety homebuilt loader."
The moral to the story.... Artificial highs lead to long term consequences🤔
"Artificial Highs" Nice pun there!