Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Tractractor

What do you do with your Quadratrack?

Recommended Posts

th_quadratrack2.jpg

th_quadratrack1.jpg

Don't like to interupt the discussion, but, here is a couple pics of the Quadratracks I mentioned about earlier....have been idle for the past week, or so, due to wet weather.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
th_quadratrack2.jpg

th_quadratrack1.jpg

Don't like to interupt the discussion, but, here is a couple pics of the Quadratracks I mentioned about earlier....have been idle for the past week, or so, due to wet weather.......

Nice!!! :D Does anyone make a special purpose belt for the quads? Are you using any sort of outo steer type computers for your jobs?

I see another machine in the background of picture one, what is it??

Yhanks for the pics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I win! His drawbar appears lower than mine so tightening the chain would raise him off the ground thus losing precious traction.

Pokeyman, I'm not specifying any particular kind of dirt, just dry dirt, no sand, mud, rocks, concrete, snow, oil slicks etc. As long as we have the same medium to play in. On concrete I'm sure he could win. I suppose if it was clay dry and hard enough that my growsers wouldn't dig in I would still lose but that's what makes the whole thing so intruiging.

Gonna try to crush some cars again this weekend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I win! His drawbar appears lower than mine so tightening the chain would raise him off the ground thus losing precious traction.

Pokeyman, I'm not specifying any particular kind of dirt, just dry dirt, no sand, mud, rocks, concrete, snow,  oil slicks etc. As long as we have the same medium to play in. On concrete I'm sure he could win. I suppose if it was clay dry and hard enough that my growsers wouldn't dig in I would still lose but that's what makes the whole thing so intruiging.

Gonna try to crush some cars again this weekend.

Sounds like fun, take some pictures. Hope the weather holds out this weekend for you.

The banks tractor pull and bbq is this weekend. (banks oregon) Hopfully I'll make it and the weather will cooperate this year. Last year they had to cancell part of it and the combine demo derby cause of rain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old Pokey; I THINK the machine in the background is a D5H.... sorry 'bout the double post....have a tendency to to to stutter.... operated a D6H for awhile....was really imprerssed with the power and traction...one thing I didn't care for was the severity of the brakes and steering clutches...iether on or off, no feathering...a real bummer around the big rigs when helping with rigging up.......guess I operated the older stuff for too long.... have a good one, R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought this discussion was in a lull, good to see it going again, I can't see where a TD24 couldn't dig in except on concrete, pavement is no problem, it would have to be very dry & compacted clay.

Ragnor, that D5 sounds like it has the same braking problems the early TD20E's had, they made a couple changes including adding feathering notches to the brake spools, playing with apply points & residual pressure, after that they worked great. I forgot where you lived, did you get to the show in Wetaskewin? Russ B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi: I have not read every word posted on this topic, but I would like to add a few comments. At the start the quad was pulling a pan or scraper as we call them. In fact, they sometimes are set up to pull two in tandem. The first advantage of this system, is that there are no wheels on the front of the front scraper. The weight of the front of the scraper sits directly on a special hitch on the quad. I have no idea how much weight this adds to the quad. As the scraper fills, more and more weight is added. When pulling a scraper with a front axle, very little weight is transferred to the tractor, and if the centre line of the axle is higher than the tractor drawbar, the line of draft will actually try to lift the rear of the tractor.

When the quads were first introduced, horse power was automatically reduced in the first 3 gears to prolong life of power train and traction belts. I don't know if this still applies.

A 500 hp unit will always get more work done than a 250 hp unit, if it can get traction. A 50,000 lb tractor will get more traction than a 30,000 tractor, but will use a lot of hp just to move itself.

When a tractor is pulling, it naturally tries to lift the front end. This is because the drive train is trying to climb the front of the final drives. 4-wheel drive tractors are generally ballasted about 55-45 front to back. Under load, they will be 50-50. Just pop the clutch on a John Deere Model "R' with the motor at full speed. and no load hitched up. The first Fordson tractors had a very short drawbar, and a slow worm drive. They would go right over backwards.

Enough for now! CardaleBob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi: I have not read every word posted on this topic, but I would like to add a few comments.  At the start the quad was pulling a pan or scraper as we call them.  In fact, they sometimes are set up to pull two in tandem. The first advantage of this system, is that there are no wheels on the front  of the front scraper.  The weight of the front of the scraper sits directly on a special hitch on the quad. I have no idea how much weight this adds to the quad. As the scraper fills, more and more weight is added.  When pulling a scraper with a front axle, very little weight is transferred to the tractor, and if the centre line of the axle is higher than the tractor drawbar, the line of draft will actually try to lift the rear of the tractor.

      When the quads were first introduced, horse power was automatically reduced in the first 3 gears to prolong life of power train and traction belts.  I don't know if this still applies.

      A 500 hp unit will always get more work done than a 250 hp unit, if it can get traction. A 50,000 lb tractor will get more traction than a 30,000 tractor, but will use a lot of hp just to move itself.

  When a tractor is pulling, it naturally tries to lift the front end.  This is because the drive train is trying to climb the front of the final drives.  4-wheel drive tractors are generally ballasted about 55-45 front to back.  Under load, they will be 50-50. Just pop the clutch on a John Deere Model "R' with the motor at full speed. and no load hitched up.  The first Fordson tractors had a very short drawbar, and a slow worm drive. They would go right over backwards.           

  Enough for now! CardaleBob

Hi CardaleBob. I dont blame you for not reading the entire thread. A basic run down though is just to hook the td24 up to the drawbar of the quad and do a pulloff. No weight transfer from the work load, just a straight pull at the drawbars. Problem is we cant seem to find all the info we need to do this pulloff on paper. Obviously we dont have the resorces to do it in real world, so we were hoping to do the pulloff with written info we found or could somehow rationalize, that was available.

Do you know where we might find some more info about something like this??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like I win! His drawbar appears lower than mine so tightening the chain would raise him off the ground thus losing precious traction.

Pokeyman, I'm not specifying any particular kind of dirt, just dry dirt, no sand, mud, rocks, concrete, snow,  oil slicks etc. As long as we have the same medium to play in. On concrete I'm sure he could win. I suppose if it was clay dry and hard enough that my growsers wouldn't dig in I would still lose but that's what makes the whole thing so intruiging.

Gonna try to crush some cars again this weekend.

I think you'd better get the tape measure out. Those tractors and pans are big, and looks can be deceiving.

Chads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rocko, Hi Russ, no, didn't get to the show, busy haying...sent you an e-mail last nite......the way this 'puter is acting, don't know if it got through....on the feathering, would have been an excelent idea on the controle spools....that thing left me sitting backwards in the seat, more than once......years ago, a fellow here had a Massey Ferguson track hoe that was the same way...he fixed it himself by tapering the controle spools slightly....may not be the way to go, but, it worked for him....have a good one, R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys, I've been trying to find some info on the quad. There is a spec sheet on CIHs web site, but I was not able to get into it. I don't know what is there but if some one else wants to look.

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi guys, I've been trying to find some info on the quad. There is a spec sheet on CIHs web site, but I was not able to get into it. I don't know what is there but if some one else wants to look.

Ryan

Hey Ryan, which one were you looking for?

Chads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure why it wont let me view the page, I think it has some thing to do with my Accrobat Reader.

Here is a link to the page.

Quad specs.

You have to click on the specifications to get there.

Thanks to anyone who gose and looks. Like I said before I don't know if there is anything there that will help us in the debate. But it cant hurt.

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hugh what do you know I just tried my own link and I got into the specs page. Darn computers never want to work when you want them too.

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay heres what they've got to say.

Max operating weight 54,000 lbs

Track width std. 30" opt. 36"

Peak Torque 1743 lb ft

Peak Power 550 hp at 1800 RPM(they say at 1800 RPM you can get a extra 50 hp out of it)

Positive drive, not to sure what that means but it sounds good. :D:D

Here is the link to the actual specs.

specs.

Ryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to scraper work maximum pulling power is secondary, what really matters is yards of dirt moved per day or the total $$ invested in machinery. A Quad Track will pull two fully loaded scrapers as fast as you can stay in the seat where a steel track tractor is limited to say around 5-6 mph. Second go price a new STX-500 and a D11 and see which one you would want to buy, you could probably buy mutiple Quad Tracks and scrapers for the price of a single D11. When it comes down to the cost to haul a yard of dirt the Quad Track is going to come out ahead over a steel track machine almost every time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi: I am back. I don't know hw to hook your tractors together with paper, but I don't think it is a good idea to connect them with iron. I don't know how either machine might react to being pulled backwards, which could happen. I know of a couple of rubber tired farm tractors that stalled while climbing out of road ditches, and started running backwards before the operator could disengage the clutch. The oil pump does not work the same when the engine is running backwards. After the over-haul. the dry air cleaner element was not replaced, and the engine lasted about six hours.

I pulled a gov't hi-way fuel truck once that was planted to the axles in sod. I had a 280 engine hp Versatile 4-wheel drive with new single 30.5R - 32 tires. The gov't orders were to use their brand new 30,000 lb rated nylon strap, to avoid damage to their truck. The strap was reduced to 2 smoking piles of string. One under the bumper of the truck, and the other under the drawbar of my tractor. I was not looking! We hooked up our 50 ft of 1 1/4 inch steel cable and got the job done. This cable will hold our D814A, but I would not trust it with your TD24. On a straight, level pull it might hold a "quad".

If you were to pin the drawbars together, it would be a competition between operators and their ability to get the clutch engaged first. It would be more of a contest to see who could get the load started. CardaleBob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those are some very interesting theories, (pull backwards wrecks the engine, etc) and the Steiger Quad that weighs 54,000# I am not pulling against. I lose my unfair advantage of weight. It appears there are a lot of sizes and several brands of these quads. I saw one locally about a month ago and was impressed. I wonder if it shakes the ground when it motors off like my 24 does? My ace in the hole (growsers) did this to our lawn today, but it was fun! Other pix is putting on the bellypan. (not fun!)

post-275-1124503024.jpg

post-275-1124503134.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Folks.

This is one interesting thread with a lot of differing ideas thrown in. I don't have any experience with the quad-tracks but I do have a little experience with steel tracks and with 2 wd and 4 wd wheel tractors and I don't think anybody has yet come up with a more efficient method of getting power on the ground than steel tracks. I repeat, ground, as in g-r-o-u-n-d. Dirt, where the grousers can sink in and get a bite. Not necessarily the same with ice, snow or concrete. Unless the concrete was grooved to take the grousers of the TD24, the rubber tracks of the quad-track would massacre the '24 on concrete. Even a BIG wheel tractor would stand a chance of doing that.

Somebody earlier mentioned that a 200hp crawler was equal to a 300hp wheel tractor. That is about right, but a quad-track is NOT a wheel tractor.

With its planetary steering, the TD24 has pretty much the same ability as the quad-track in turns but is limited to one rate of turn where the quad-tracks are more variable but still DO lose traction as they turn harder.

Another poster, talking about Ferraris, reckoned that the Ferrari would develop more torque as it was geared down. NO, the Ferrari engine would not develop more torque as it was geared down. What would happen is that lower gearing would work like flattening out a hill or reducing the slope of an inclined plane - or increasing the gearing of a winch. Or in other words, if traction is taken as being granted, the lower gearing would allow the Ferrari engine to move more load at a lower speed. It would not change the torque or horsepower output of the engine.

When the first TD24's hit the market in 1947 they were 10 hp more than the current Cat D8's of the time, the 2U series, and 3,000 pounds heavier. Cat and IH leap-frogged in the horsepower stakes for several years, until Cat brought out the first of the D9's, the 'D' series, which was in a whole nuther class.

There has been some talk of weight transference. Interesting. Most 2 wd wheel tractors are designed with more weight on the front wheels than on the rear when standing, commonly round 60-40 to the front. Put their full load on behind them and start pulling and the weight balance goes the other way, 60-40 to the rear. This why front-wheel-assist tractors don't have all that big an advantage over a well-designed 2 wd tractor, 'cos they are taking weight which is required for traction OFF their front wheels as the load comes on.

4 wd tractors are designed somewhat differently from their front-wheel-assist counterparts and much more like the quad-tracks in that their weight is even further forward and the weight transference even greater when the load comes on. However, both are designed to have roughly equal weight on front and rear drives when under full load to utilise the fact that both ends are putting power to the ground.

What causes this weight transference is the pinion trying to climb up the crown wheel against the load behind the tractor. The higher the hitch point, the more likely the pinion is to win. The lower and further forward the hitch point is the more likely the tractor is to win. The talk about high hitch points on the quad-tracks is, to my way of thinking, a negative. I'd want the hitch point engineered so that at maximum drawbar pull the tractor is sharing its weight equally between front and rear tracks. But what the **** would I know about it. I've only sat on my butt on many types of tractors for over 45 years and never used a slide rule in my life. My brain is probably fossilized by now from lack of exercise.

Just as matter of interest, there was an Australian manfacturer of largish 2 wd wheel tractors, Upton Engineering. who maintained that his 350 hp 2wd tractors were the equal of many 450hp 4 wd tractors and he proved it several times -- and it all had to with weight distribution, balance and weight transference. You can read more about these tractors at the following site:

http://www.puddingsworld.com/Machinery/Upt...ntents_page.htm

You can also find information on a lot of other tractors there too. If you go there, may I suggest that you drop him a note and thank him. He's put a fair bit of work into his site. And I don't mind if you tell him I sent you either.

The people who take the blades off their crawler tractors when pulling pans do so for added manouverability but they also lose a fair bit in the traction department. Myself, I think I'd rather have the traction. Not having it has gotten me well and truly bogged once.

Somebody else mentioned the straight grousers versus the angled cleats of the rubber tracks and wheel tractor tyres. From my experience, I'd hate to bet that that is going to be too much of a significant factor. Those straight steel grousers have to be pretty much filled level to the top of the grousers for around half the length on each plate to lose significant amounts of traction and dry dirt won't do that.

Any contest of this nature would only be fair if it was done with stock standard, straight-out-of-the-factory running gear. No add-ons, cut-offs or equal width shoes crap.

In closing, I'd hate to bet either way but I certainly wouldn't rule out R-Cubed chances of winning that contest - if his 24's final drives didn't 'have a coronary' from the extra 150 hp being delivered to them. You see, those folks who were spouting about the length of the quad-track's frame forgot one tiny minor detail. R-cubed's TD24 has a fairly substantial counterweight built into the front of it. It's called a 'dozer blade ---- and it weighs about four tons ------ and it's WAY out in front.

So when is the 'BIG EVENT' -- and I want 50% of Sawmill's ticket concession -- and the book and movie rights..

You all have a wonderful debate. Best wishes. Deas Plant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deas Plant, as I live and breathe! I was wondering what ever happened to you. I didn't do what you suggested last Sept which was to dig a big hole and bury it, needed to get it running to dig the big hole. You got a lot of your theory right except the one about the Ferarri and torque. If you don't get increased torque by downshifting then why do we need all these different gears? I DID spend 40 years with a sliderule. You don't gain HP by downshifting obviously, just torque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, R-Cubed.

I think you miss my point about torque. Gearing does NOT increase the total torque output of any given engine --- AT THE FLYWHEEL. What gearing does is effectively increase that engine's 'leverage' (minus the friction loss) over the load by moving the load at a slower rate. This will either allow the engine to move the same load more easily or move a bigger load with the same effort.

F'rinstance, with absolutely NO change in horsepower or torque output, a given truck can move a small load up a steep hill in low gear or the same load up a moderate hill in a higher gear -- or it can move a bigger load up a flatter hill in low gear -- simply by increasing the engine's 'leverage' over the load. (Or in the last case, by increasing one component of the load - the weight- while decreasing another component of the load - the resistance.)

Tractors are no different in their general principles from prime mover-type trucks. They are simply machines designed to move a load, just in different environments. What I didn't mention in my previous post 'cos I wasn't sure of it -- and I still ain't sure of it but I suspect that I AM right -- is that you may have a distinct advantage with your great yellow beast in being lower geared in your bottom cog. I think you would beat the 320hp Case-IH quad-track hands down for straight out traction, especially with your standard track shoes, full grousers and the blade on up front, which would bring it back to gearing and power.

Much as I don't have a lot of faith in their drive train and R Send, I'm glad you didn't dig large hole for your beast. I don't really know why, given their hsitory, but I still do have a slight affection for the old 14's, 18's and 24's and a fair bit more for the TD6's and 9's. I guess the fact that they all have tracks may have a bit to do with it. I'm a hopeless case when it comes to a good undercarriage, be it hard tracks -- or ------ SOFT LEGS. (Ooooppss! Where are the thought police?)

So how in h**l are we gonna resolve this paper tug-o-war when it seems to me the paper keeps ripping in two?

You have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Folks.

There is one other point that I intended to mention in my first post on this thread and it kept escaping me -- guess I must be slowing down in my fossilisation.

If my memory serves me right, there now several steel-tracked crawler tractors that have equalled or exceeded their own weight in drawbar pull in the Nebraska tests. The first that I am aware of, and for sure the first Caterpillar to do it, was the 1939 Caterpillar D5. It was basically the D6 engine of the time in a D4 frame. It weighed 11,230 pounds and pulled 11,300 pounds in first gear at test.

You don't hear much about that series of D5 'cos there were only ever about 46 of them made. The next series of D5 came out in 1967 and was basically the earlier (discontinued) D6B gone powershift for earthmoving or still in stick-shift for agricultural use.

Does anybody know of ANY rubber-tracked or quad-tracked tractors that have done the above feat?

Y'all have a wonderful day. Best wishes. Deas Plant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...