High draft pulling without planetary reduction?

[Excuse Me]

Hi all. New member here. I think I got all the notices and rules read. Lots to read, so I may have to re-read some.

I'll jump right in with a couple questions if you dont mind. ?

I am wanting to pull various soil engaging implements behind a 6x6. Mostly requiring a very slow speed of 4-6mph. High torque loads, and a near 100% duty cycle.

My reasons are many. However one is the eliminate the limitations of the standard ag tractor. Two is to get out from under the proprietary parts and service of the ag tractor companies.

The 5 ton with the Rockwell double reduction, has a parallel shaft final design with the bull gear style reduction. Given that using a 6x6 will divide the torque load over 3 axles instead of 2 as an ag tractor would, what sort of duty cycle can this type of reduction take?
Typically, I believe the main reasoning for using the planetary reduction on an ag tractor or the like, is for the gear ratio reduction to use the tall diameter tires. In my situation, I dont need that reduction. However, each differential will have to take the full torque load of 2 wheel sets, whereas a planetary reduced tractor has the final reduction done at each wheel set.

Part 2.
Assuming the 250 cummins is left at 250hp, might a set of 10 ton axles be the better choice for non-planetary pulling? I have not been able to find the actual parts breakdown of the 10 ton axles, but one parts diagram I did see that was "supposed" to be of the 10 tonners, shows a planetary reduction inside the ring gear. I believe this is the final or secondary reduction of the axle, and is used in place of the bull gear parallel shaft design of the 5 tonners. Is this right?

Thank you for any information. I will certainly have many more questions as we near the time to order the first truck to be used as a tractor.

Also thank you to the admins of this great site.

Don.

 

[Andy1234]

I can't help w/ any of the planetary questions, but here is what I know of the 10 ton axles:

(This info is for the axles off of an M123 series truck.)

Only the front (steering) axle is a planetary (portal?) design, the 2 rear axles are scaled up 5 ton axles.

The gear ratio is approx 9:1 for the tractors and 10:1 for the M125 (cargo version).

Parts: I have never tried sourcing any parts, but I would be willing to bet that ag tractor parts are easier (and cheaper) to find then 60 year old military axle parts.

If you want some pics of the axles, I can take them and post them for you.

Note: here's a partial of the front axle knuckle.

Andy

 

[wreckerman893]

Just a few thoughts on using a 800 series truck as tractor:

1. Turning radius will kill you, even with power steering. If I remember correctly the M123 had a set up where individual wheels could be braked to turn tighter.

2. Everything on a 5 or 10 ton is heavy...engine, tranny, transfer case, axles, hubs, tires and hunting parts can sometimes be difficult and expensive

3. The 250 Cummins is an obsolete engine.....I just sold my M816 wrecker due to the costs of repowering it. The internals (pistons, liners, etc) are hard to find...for example, if you need one piston you will have to buy six because the new ones have a different number of rings in them. If you find original parts you will pay premium for them.

4. You will have to put tractor tires on all four (or six if you dont bob it) corners for traction, stock NDTs are not going to cut it...this will mean custom rims in most cases. I have seen 5 ton tractors used as "pull out trucks" by loggers with ag tires on them....renders them useless on the highway.

5. Given enough time, effort and money, anything is possible but not everything is practical.

Have you onsidered a 6000 pound rough terrain forklift.....they might better suit your needs....they were geared very low, had four wheel steering, were hydrolically powered which would allow you to use hydrolically operated implements.
They pop up on GL from time to time.

Just my rambling thoughts for what they are worth.

 

[Stretch44875]

A 5-ton M818 would be best for turning radius. I would put ag tires on, single the rears, and add about 5 tons on the back end. Could also use chains on the tires if you want to take the time. All the axles have an extra gear set in the diff to make the axle double reduction. Also a tranmission from a gasser 5 ton would give you lower gears to work with. I think it would work.

 

[fasttruck]

Remember m123 ten tons have a live king pin set up with elaborate bevel gear sets on top and bottom of the king pins. Burn up a set of these and you will junk the truck as new ones (from mack as they built the axle) are unavailable.this set up is illustrated in john montville's book on mack trucks.

 

[Excuse Me]

Thanks for the replies.
Stretch, I think you have an idea of what I am trying to accomplish. ? I found a Trelleborg tire that is aprox. 48" tall and radial. I can fit duals easily, possibly triples. These tires are also speed rated to 40mph, not that I will be going that fast. Biggest issue is they need and ag rim which I would have to have custom made, as the bead angle on an ag tire os different than that of a DOT tire.

I realize this is difficult to figure why someone would want to do this, so I will try to give a bit more info that may help explain this......maddness sort of thinking.

In farming, there are 2 basic forms of farm tillage practices. 1 is labelled "conventional tillage", the other usually falls intot he label "conservation tillage". Conventional being the plow and many following trips over the fields to break down the clods before seeding. Conservation being the newer, less understood version where usually a very large, somewhat cumbersome looking seeder, plants directly into the previous crops stubble. There are of course variations on each method, but that's for another forum.

I am trying to transition toward the conservation methods, as I feel this is the future where we can keep the dust down and noise and fuel burnt to a minimum.

Ok, for example a "new" as in from the showroom, tractor in the 250 hp range, would cost nearly $300,000. For this money I still only get a limited amount of hydraulics, a limited amount of electic power, and a very slow road speed to hold up traffic with. Once warranty is off, the parts and service become my responcibility, and that !!!!!!!!! is where the fun ends. The ag equipment production companies no longer charge a fair honest markup for their parts, they charge what the market will bear. Many examples can be seen on ag forums of just how out of control this has become. Also, the proprietary manufacture of these machines and parts has made it all too easy for the manufacturers to limit production of the parts which in turn removes all competition for sale of said parts and supplies. But I digress.

Enter the truck as an ag tractor concept. In the 1980s, the farm economy crshed hard. Many farmers were faced with bankruptcy, and many close to it. Some, that were improvisional natured, lost their tractors to the bank and had to improvise a way to get their next crop in and hope it would pay the bills for another year. Many, especially those in the hills of eastern Oregon and Washington state, took old over the road trucks and put ag tires ont he rear, welded the rear axle solid tot he frame to avoid spring wrap, and put a hydraulic kit on them. It worked. It got them through to the next year, and many a couple more years to where they could get their financial feet back under them and move on.

One thing about even an old military truck over an ag tractor, is the component nature of the manufacture. If I were to crunch an axle of a truck, any truck, be it a KW or an Oshkosh, I can replace said axle in short order. If I were to crunch an axle gear in an ag tractor, it would take out many proprietary parts that are no longer made, and contaminate the entire hydraulic system that uses the same reservoir as the transmission oil. Making repair just as cost prohibitive as a new tractor.
The hydraulic systems for the truck would be installed by me, from an off the shelf supplier locally, using off the shelf parts and components. They would also be a stand alone setup so as to eliminate the multiple component destruction or contamination should something go wrong.
So there's just a bit more of my reasoning for this venture. If it is not possible to do this, I will drop the subject and go back to the ag tractor, but I wish to give it all the effort I can first.

For an example of what I am doing right now to get going in the conservation planting methods, here is a link to a public agriculture based forum that I posted a thread on a short time ago. It has a few pictures of my current......."contraption". Turning radius is obviously not an issue right now
Viewing a thread - One pass spring wheat planting attempt. (with pictures)

Using a fifth wheel for hitching the implements vs. the ag tractor's drawbar will allow much superior weight transfer to the power unit. It will also shorten the turning radius a lot.

I am on my backup computer as my main crashed last week. I have not found my passwords for my picture storage sites online yet, so I am somewhat at a loss for pics right now. However, I usually have a camera handy and have lots and lots of pictures of some of the farming I do.

Thanks.
Don.

 

[saddamsnightmare]

May 14th, 2010.

Excuse Me:

Anyone on here ever suggest to you about looking at an S404,406,408 or U1300L Unimog? The 406 or 408 were sold in the US by Case, and they have the capability to operate many implements, and, if like the S.404's, there should be a auxillery transmission adaptor to give you 6 or 8 gears in the low range. On the S404.114's L/L give a ground speed of 450 FT per hour, the differentials have a positive mechanical lock in FWD,plus they can take front and rear PTO's, side PTO's and 3 point hitches front and rear, and the newer ones can drive implements hydraulically, like a newer farm tractor. A lot of the Cases were fitted with twenty or so speed transmissions to make them adaptable to the field and the road, and the MB's are adaptable the same way. The Unimog was concieved of as a high ground clearance AG machine that could run on the road up to 40-45 MPH in transit, and like our SEE's they can be fitted with payloader and backhoes too... Parts can be high now and then, but the older military Unimogs often have surplus parts availability and many were low mileage/KM vehicles. My 1963 S404.114 Swiss has only about 19,000 original miles on it, and I have put on 10 or 12K of them. since 2007.
A good S404.114 should set you back around $6 to 10K depending on condition, the SEE's are between $20 and 30+K ditto, and the U1300L's are $30K & up ditto, but much cheaper then a new tractor of comparable power..


N>B. I can't speak about upper end horsepower, the S404.114 used a Mercedes Benz M180 134CID 6 cylinder gas engine rated at 80HP. The farm tractors in Europe at that time were mostl;y 25/50hp machines, as they were taxed on HP. The newer Unimogs probably go up to 180 HP and above on their diesel engines, but the whole system is designed to permit the maximum application of power for whatever the intended uses are, and I suspect that with glycol inall four wheels, the Unimog would be fairly formidable as a puller, especially with weight in or on the beds. Cases will have to be found used, but Freightliner was handling the Unimogs last time I heard (new ones, that is).
Just a thought,

 

[NDT]

Very interesting post. I too have noticed being bent over at "Dear John" for parts for my lawn equipment. There is something to be learned from the timber industries' use of 5 tons tractors as "set out" trucks, i.e. pulling loaded log trailers through the woods to the highway. My understanding is that the prolonged hard pulling in low gears quickly wears out the transmission. The Timken Detroit /Rockwell double reduction axles seem to do well. I have seen plenty of regular truck components used in the field on fertilizer machines, but on never ground engagement equipment. Also, don't forget the 5 ton truck's front axle does not pull until the rears are slipping (sprag clutch). If the implement needed full drawbar pull all the time, this action would wear out the rears and I'm sure the sprag unit as well. Good luck.

 

[SixSpeed]

I think the weight and size of a 5-Ton 6x6 would be terrible for agricultural purposes. They have no turning radius to speak of.

Have you considered a Unimog? Most are geared towards Ag. purposes. Is there something you need from a 6x6 truck that couldn't be accomplished with a Unimog? Just curious...

 

[Stretch44875]

You know how much a tractor weighs? My 60hp is over 8,000lbs. They are stupid heavy. Are there any unimogs that are 250hp?

 

[SixSpeed]

You know how much a tractor weighs? My 60hp is over 8,000lbs. They are stupid heavy. Are there any unimogs that are 250hp?

Yes I do, it takes an awfully big tractor to equal the weight of a 5-Ton.

There are plenty of 250+ HP Unimogs, but they are all newer. Which would be expensive.

I will admit to not knowing too much about anything Agricultural, but I'm not sure if 250hp is needed unless he has some seriously big machinery he needs to run off the PTO, feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Excuse Me]

No, you are not "wrong" Six Speed. Thanks for being honest about not knowing much in the way agriculture. And please, if you ever have any questions that I can answer, definately feel free to ask them. I enjoy learning about things I am not familiar with.

As Stretch mentions, an ag tractor in the 250 horse range may weigh near 30,000 to 35,000 pounds. There are currently being built, ag tractors with over 600 hp, on tracks, and with price tags of over a half million dollars. Even at 600 hp, there are farmers needing more power for their even larger equipment.

The unimog is an awesome machine. I wish I had access to my pictures, I have saved one that an ag factory in the UK uses for their support rig when demoing new combines. This unimog has front and rear pto, front and rear hydraulic outlets and even a front hitch. It is a do all rig. However, the built size is not enough for my intends.
I will have to check out the Case unimog and see what that is all about. SOunds interesting for sure.

Today in agriculture, there is a huge influx of electonic control devices including gps guidance and auto steering. If you think about this, that auto steering and gps guidance, eliminates the need to sit in the middle of the tractor. So,......why pay for that proprietary cab when a truck cab is more comfy and roomy anyway.

An ag tractor cannot transfer the weight of the implement as well as a fifth wheel truck. The turning radius is reduced severely when one can hitch the frame work over the truck axles, reducing the length of the tongue on the implement. The long tongue is needed for an ag tractor cause the hitching point if a ways behind the axle(s), not over it.

The implements I am using and intend to be using coming up, do require quite a bit of low speed torque. They are also very, very heavy. These new type implements may weigh up to 25 ton.

As I stated in my opening questions, what I am looking to do is learn what others know about pulling high torque loads without the use of planetary reduction. Talking with the Boyce bros., it sounds like those Rockwells are built to take some serious power and abuse. If I were to use at least 3 axles, perhaps even add a second front axle to make it 4 axles, I cant imagine that not being enough gear engagment to handle things. However, I have no experience not using planetary reductions.

I recall many years ago, adds and film footage of old Jeeps and Powerwagons pulling small plows and other farm implements. They were actually adds from the factories of those rigs that showed them pulling these tools. Those rigs did not have planetary reduction. I believe only because they did not requre the large diameter ag tires that are now common place.

I feel that too much in todays agriculture is based on tradition. I feel that the current farmers are stuck in that tradition and it is costing them. Many of the reasons for making those proprietary tractors have been eliminated with modern farming practices and gps technology. Not to mention that a pair of todays radial ag tires can out pull several pair of yesturdays bias tires.

 

[Excuse Me]

Very interesting post. I too have noticed being bent over at "Dear John" for parts for my lawn equipment. There is something to be learned from the timber industries' use of 5 tons tractors as "set out" trucks, i.e. pulling loaded log trailers through the woods to the highway. My understanding is that the prolonged hard pulling in low gears quickly wears out the transmission. The Timken Detroit /Rockwell double reduction axles seem to do well. I have seen plenty of regular truck components used in the field on fertilizer machines, but on never ground engagement equipment. Also, don't forget the 5 ton truck's front axle does not pull until the rears are slipping (sprag clutch). If the implement needed full drawbar pull all the time, this action would wear out the rears and I'm sure the sprag unit as well. Good luck.

Thank you for this information NDT. I was told that the 5 ton t-cases were different from the 2.5s, but was unsure of why. I thought they were like the NP 203 t-case for the full time 4x4 of a pickup. It is good to learn that's not quite the case.
Here's a link to a local loggers site. It is a huge site and chock full of great info about logging in the PNW. He uses an M123 to pull some huge loads as you mention is typical of logging.
VanNatta Forestry, Logging Machinery, Log Skidders, Timber Museum

 

[Stretch44875]

I was doing a little thinking on this. The 5-ton M818 tractor weighs around 20-22,000lbs. They are light on the rear, which is why I suggested the 5 ton weight on them. That would put you at 30-32,000lbs, or right at the same for a tractor.

With the going to 48 in tires, you are going to raise your ground speed, and increase the load on the driveline. Stock tires are at 42, so not a huge increase.

The transfer case would only be driving the rears, unless the rears are slipping. I know tractors are designed to pull with some slippage, so not sure how that would work out. The front axle is driven 6% slower than the rear, and has a one way clutch to allow it to spin faster than the rear tires. Once the rears slip that 6%, the one way clutch would catch, driving the front axle.

One choice is the transfer case out of the 900 series trucks, which is more like a normal transfer case. They use air to shift the transfer case in and out of front wheel drive, and are direct drive. Might think about using a 925 tractor, it will have that transfer case. They are automatic, not sure how that would hold up.

I'm not sure how the full load work at low speed will affect the transmission, transfer case, and axles. I would guess the axles to be okay. The transfer would see a lot more torque than driving the truck normally. Don't know if you would end up wearing out the 1st and 2cd gears in the tranny under that load.

They do have plantary drive axles under some of the larger tugs used to pull aircraft. Maybe look at a tug, or use the axles under a 5-ton. You would lose your road speed.

Dennis

 

[Westech]

I just have a couple thoughts. My Tractor (little diesel Japan thing) has a leaver to lock all the diff's. A M800 or even 900 will have open dif's, unless it is a Marine truck like mine. So unless you have lockers its going to be a one wheel wounder and your going to get stuck or not have enough traction and just dig and dig and dig, or spin if you are on hard stuff.

How many times have we heard of people taking the hubs or front drive shaft off and getting stuck going up a little hill or just smoking the rear tires trying to get out of a drive way or what have you?

Really a military truck is not all bad a55ed and can do everything, if you are going to subject it to working it to its max your going to pay for it in parts or to make it performe the way you want it to.

 

[M880 GC]

Excuse Me,

Sorry, I have no worthwhile info on your Prime Mover project.

I did look at your link to your project, again, I have never farmed but we have ALL enjoyed your efforts every time we put a fork in our mouth. What I saw was a series of attempts with serious challanges and some real down on the farm efforts to keep it going. Hope you get the sucess to go along with the efforts.

Good luck with your project.

BTW, I traveled around SE Washington State and those guys farm on challanging terrain, using old Cat's and serious terracing practices.

Very interesting.

 

[rizzo]

pulling a disc. no big deal

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/frankrizzo1972/my trucks/IMAGE_00204.jpg


my 108 pulling a cultivator. I had the depth set at max and it would dig pretty good (clay). I never used it very often for very long so I have no ideas on long term affect.

http://i20.photobucket.com/albums/b213/frankrizzo1972/my trucks/IMAGE_00205.jpg

 

[Excuse Me]

I was doing a little thinking on this. The 5-ton M818 tractor weighs around 20-22,000lbs. They are light on the rear, which is why I suggested the 5 ton weight on them. That would put you at 30-32,000lbs, or right at the same for a tractor.

With the going to 48 in tires, you are going to raise your ground speed, and increase the load on the driveline. Stock tires are at 42, so not a huge increase.

The transfer case would only be driving the rears, unless the rears are slipping. I know tractors are designed to pull with some slippage, so not sure how that would work out. The front axle is driven 6% slower than the rear, and has a one way clutch to allow it to spin faster than the rear tires. Once the rears slip that 6%, the one way clutch would catch, driving the front axle.

One choice is the transfer case out of the 900 series trucks, which is more like a normal transfer case. They use air to shift the transfer case in and out of front wheel drive, and are direct drive. Might think about using a 925 tractor, it will have that transfer case. They are automatic, not sure how that would hold up.

I'm not sure how the full load work at low speed will affect the transmission, transfer case, and axles. I would guess the axles to be okay. The transfer would see a lot more torque than driving the truck normally. Don't know if you would end up wearing out the 1st and 2cd gears in the tranny under that load.

They do have plantary drive axles under some of the larger tugs used to pull aircraft. Maybe look at a tug, or use the axles under a 5-ton. You would lose your road speed.

Dennis

Dennis, thanks for the reply.
I could get 42" tires as well, just found a good deal on the 48"s from the Trelleborg dealer.

Are you familiar at all with the older articulated farm tractors branded "Versatile" or Stieger"? These tractors used either the 3406 Cat or the 855 Cummins mostly, and the larger ones were in the 300-325 hp range att he time. The powershift technology had not been perfected yet, and the ag industry had nothing in that line for tractor use. What those factories did was use a 5+4 trans setup out of an over the road truck. They were standard off the shelf transmissions, and gave the operator 20 speeds to choose from. The drawback was that if you stopped, you had to lift the implememtn and back up a couple feet, then let out the clutch and lower the implement.

Later, some began using the Allison auto with a cooler out front. It was very successful and many of those tractors are still working today with over 10,000 hours on them.

I called Clark International Logistics,.....(I think that's the name) and asked about a 900 series. They have them in stock and can built to suit. Price sounds reasonable too. I think the automatic would work well actually, and if there was room behind it, I could put in a 3 or 4 speed box that would allow the auto to run in a higher gear, lessening the strain on it. ??

Anyway, if I can use a truck with a 5th wheel, I can transfer about 5 ton from the implement to the truck. as the seed and fertilizer are applied, the implement will get lighter and as such, so would the truck, but the draft would be lessened accordingly as well. Might work?

I called a Red Dot air conditioning dealer about an air unit for this truck project. Sounds like an easy fix to get air cond. in it.

I know I can get the truck with a "wet kit" which is an intermittent use, pto operated hydraulic system. That would work well for most of myneeds, and I can get a front mount pto from a local supplier to drive a continuous hydraulic system for the rest of the needs.

Looking at the rear suspension on the 5 ton, it looks like each axle is held well with 3 torque arms for each axle. That would eliminate or at least reduce any spring wrap.

I'm leaning toward giving this experiment a try. I think the pros out weigh the cons at least for giving the effort a try. If it dont work, I still have a truck to either part out or find another use for. Main reason for selecting a military truck over a civilian unit, is the component mounting and simplicity. A civilian unit uses a lot of fiberglass and lighter weight aluminum to shave grams for payload. The military units are built with rugged dependability in mind, and have heavier cabs and mounted components.

Thanks for your thoughts and time.

Don.

 

[Excuse Me]

Thanks Rizzo. That wrecker with the cultivator sure looks clean and uncluttered. Did you do that, or are they naturally that organized?

Are those the 1400x20 tires on the disk truck?

 

[Excuse Me]

Excuse Me,

Sorry, I have no worthwhile info on your Prime Mover project.

I did look at your link to your project, again, I have never farmed but we have ALL enjoyed your efforts every time we put a fork in our mouth. What I saw was a series of attempts with serious challanges and some real down on the farm efforts to keep it going. Hope you get the sucess to go along with the efforts.

Good luck with your project.

BTW, I traveled around SE Washington State and those guys farm on challanging terrain, using old Cat's and serious terracing practices.

Very interesting.

Thank you very much for that M880.
IMO, we are all in this together. I cant do what I do without good folks like you and everyone else. Thanks.