Self Leveling Loaders - Let's explore other options

[@troyclancy406]

Thank you for making tractors what they should have been from the get go

[@minutemanmac]

In the $1200 price point I'd be very interested. The turning it on and off is the biggest interest for me and the reason why I passed on the MSL.

[@oimate4201]

Another great concept in the context of a small tractor. I appreciate your innovative and purposeful approach to continually looking for better ways to solve problems. You have some great solutions and options, and it’s great to see your product line grow and streamline over time. I’m looking forward to this one. Keep us posted!

[@jimsmith8789]

This is a great idea. The ability to turn it on and off is wonderful especially not having a computer to operate everything I am very interested in this keep up the good work

[@donalexander4083]

the option to turn on self leveling when needed would be very useful

[@robertbarker8209]

That would be amazing to have self leveling in my 1025R. I can't wait to add the mods I ordered from you last week and I will order the self leveling kit as soon as you have it ready....don't care how much it costs, it'll be worth it.

[@gregkroll2464]

I think it’s GREAT, I also enjoy your videos

[@bibleandbibs6407]

I truly enjoy your methods and insight. Keep pressing forward. BTW thanks for your help a couple weeks back.

[@Slider68]

I used to run a tractor from the ~1950's (may have been older) that had a 4th option for self leveling that I'll explain below. Before the 4th option.... we've been talking about adding self leveling to our 1025R (if the price was right or less than ~$1500) so I am quite interested in what you come up with. We recently picked up a "safety cage" box that attaches to our pallet forks and while I can manually self level with my wife in the box or when moving pallets, she tends to lurch me up, then level, then up some more, then level, etc until I'm high enough to do whatever I'm trying to do (trim the tall hedges, cut branches with our pole saw, repair evestroughing, change lightbulbs, etc). Being able to add self leveling would be very useful. Now for the ~1950's 4th option... The farmer I worked for for many years collected many 1000's of bizarre antique tractors. One of the obscure makes from the 1950's (ish) had a hydraulically self leveling loader. The way it worked was two hydraulic cylinders were added to the "shoulder" or lift pivot (the one physically closest to the steering wheel). The extra cylinders connected to a slightly different pivot location to ensure the hydraulic flow more accurately matched the leveling needs. The hydraulic fluid from each side of these cylinders was connected to the hydraulic fluid going to the appropriate side of the "wrist joint" (the bucket pivot) cylinders. One cool benefit this provided was when the hydraulic self leveling feature was enabled (there was a valve to enable/disable), the front end loader could actually lift more than when disabled. The hydraulic pressure from the wrist/bucket joint flowed into the secondary cylinders at the shoulder joint, which helped to lift the shoulder joint. The increased lift force was surprisingly substantial (I'd estimate 25% more weight could be lifted). Another cool feature is there was a pressure bypass valve that connected each side of the secondary shoulder cylinders together so if the wrist hit the end of travel, continued movement of the main "shoulder" pivot wasn't restricted (but you did lose the extra lifting force so it was better to manually adjust the wrist/bucket joint to not hit the end of travel). One minor downside was the hydraulic flow wasn't actually perfectly matched at the extremes of movement (I don't actually recall the details because it wasn't an issue but the bucket didn't remain 100% level however it was more than close enough). Normally, when loading the bucket with fill or single cycling the pallet forks (that attached to the bucket) this wasn't an issue at all (in fact you didn't really notice). I'm not sure which solution is less expensive (option #3 or #4) but excluding adding the extra cylinder mount, my guess is a pair of small cylinders, hoses and the pressure relief valve shouldn't cost much more than about $700.

[@HydrosPlus]

I love it. If you noticed in the video, I said, "there may be one other". I almost said, "there are only 3 ways to do it...", but as I was saying that, I was thinking, "I know someone has come up with at least 1 other option if not 5". Which, technically that is a variation on the mechanically self leveling option, but I think it's different enough to qualify as its own way. I think I mentioned in the video that I've seen the mechanism below and then it goes above, and I didn't mention that I've also seen it where the cylinders for the tilt are anchored to the mast and the arms after the pivot are just steel. We'll likely never see it done with your 4th option again due to cost, but it's a very cool concept. My estimation is that if you buy off the shelf valving and hoses today, once everything is said and done (hoses, fittings, shipping, etc.) you'll probably end up spending about $2500, give or take a few hundred. Hopefully, I can get that down and make it easy for people to pick up and install. After using my setup for just a bit, it's definitely something I want, especially since I can turn if off. Thanks for sharing you example. Definitely one I haven't seen yet, and I'm amazed it was on a 1950s tractor AND you can turn if off and on.

[@Slider68]

@@HydrosPlus The 1950's were an interesting time tractor wise. It is considered to be the golden age of tractors. In 1951 more tractors were sold than in any year prior and any year since. There were also literally several hundreds of different manufacturers, each selling something unique to draw up business. Personally I'd take a serious look at the added hydraulic cylinder option because of how simple it is and how it increases the lift capacity without requiring a higher operating pressure nor larger lift cylinders. You essentially get the equivalent of both larger lift cylinders and self leveling for a total cost of the larger lift cylinders alone. Keep in mind that the added cylinders are considerably smaller than the regular lift cylinders and depending on the pivot locations selected you have the option of using anywhere from small diameter similar length to lift cylinders to larger diameter, short cylinders. The volume of oil flow required to self level is a small fraction compared to the regular lift cylinders (about 20% to 25% of the lift volume). Another advantage is you get to select precisely the amount of oil flow delivered per amount of lift angle change and without any messing around it immediately works in both directions (up and down motion of the shoulder or lift). When you pick up the oil flow exiting the regular lift cylinders (as you are currently) you need to do all sorts of complicated valving in order to maintain up and down loader force and to self level in both directions. The added pair of small cylinders solution gets rid of the complex valving entirely. The extra cylinder hoses simply T directly into the bucket tilt hoses if you are willing to accept a small amount of self leveling drift (as the 1950's loader did).

[@JBEAS1980]

I would love this!

[@brianemerick9517]

Cool idea. It sounds like this would avoid most of the cons I've heard about the current MSL loader Deere has. I don't have forks yet so that isn't currently a concern personally, but this could still be a help with some bucket uses until that day comes. The ability to turn it on & off as desired is also a big plus. I'll be watching to see how you develop this further. One thing I would suggest to keep in mind (if possible) as you move forward is to remember the folks that have the single point hydraulic connector. You mentioned that space could possibly be an issue with the components, but didn't really show how things are arranged. Hopefully you can come up with a routing that will work for either setup. Also, are the valves adjustable enough to be able to dial in the ratio for a stock setup or with some (or all) of your add-ons? More to think about, but the more universal you can make it, the more potential customers you will have. Keep up the great work.👍

[@briancarpenter8297]

I would love to have hydraulic self leveling for my 3R cab tractor!

[@williambartholomew5680]

In the case of skid-steers the lift geometry is designed so it naturally tilts less going up/down than typical loaders do like on your 1025R. That's kind of what these need but the amount of added weight+space with the big links needed under the arms could be problematic, it would really split the difference though where your load at bottom is level, then at 3' high is inclined 10° then at 6' high is 20° etc with plenty of adjustability at any point to tweak your load as needed in between.

[@mymorristribe]

That's pretty neat. Personally, I wouldn't be a customer since I don't use pallet forks and I don't find self leveling to be important for 90% of bucket work. But it's a fascinating concept to make it work hydraulically with the existing loaded. Maybe TTWT would be a another good testing ground for it.

[@5075E]

A fourth way would be the way they do it with telehandlers. Adding cylinders on the lower boom to act as fluid transfer cylinders. As the boom is raised or lowered, the lower cylinders transfer fluid to the curl cylinders to keep the bucket level. If you went electronic, you could use digital level technology and tell it to maintain any position with respect to earth level. Then it would also adjust the angle itself in real time as you were moving to maintain that position as you went up and down hills.

[@HydrosPlus]

Yep - I like this idea and it's my backup plan if I can't work it out with a valve setup. I like the valve approach better because it can be used on any tractor with minimal changes. If using auxiliary cylinders to displace the fluid to maintain level, it will have to be built or calibrated based on each loader model.

[@tfunkhou88]

So as I understand it, with this method you wouldn’t get the additional lift capacity that the 220r MSL seems to offer, but you’d get self leveling capability at a much lower cost (and without curl limitation) than trading in your loader on a new one.

[@HydrosPlus]

Yes and you get the advantage of being able to turn if off and on as well as much more range of motion for the bucket. I originally thought that the bucket curl limitation was the only down side, but it also affects things like using a limb saw. You can't reach nearly as high with the MSL. Also, simple things like navigating tight spaces with forks. You can't point them up to make your effective length shorter. On turning it off and on, I thought that I would just leave it on all the time, but as it turns out, I only want it on if I'm loading dirt into a truck/trailer or if I'm using pallet forks. In every other case, I personally want it off . That was surprising to me.

[@tfunkhou88]

@@HydrosPlus interesting stuff…I am constantly impressed with what you’re coming up with and the obvious thought and attention to detail in everything! Kudos to you!

[@terryfalldorf4401]

I have been trying to find someone that has the knowledge of hydraulics, to help me do what you're talking about, except on a kioti cs2520. In my research I'm thinking maybe using a counter-balance valve tied between the boom cylinders and the dump cylinders. I would be interested in seeing your views on that Idea? Blessings to you.

[@kimcauthen7233]

I’m interested. $1500 price point sounds good. Since i have stock cylinders, i will be watching how well it performs.

[@ricktieken7025]

That is very cool! Yes, the technology is proven and available. Why doesn't Deere offer this as an option from the factory? Thanks for showing us what can be done. I would like to have self leveling, but it is not worth the cost of admission to me for the way my 1025R is used.

[@EricEdstrom]

I'd probably be a customer at that price point depending on how involved the installation prodecure is.

[@fsj197811]

I don't use my forks enough to make it worth the investment but it's a neat idea.

[@curtcarter3945]

I just saw this video ! I bought a brand new John Deere 3039R with the 320R loader ! By the way the 3 series John Deere does NOT offer a self leveling loader on ANY of the 3-series tractors !! WHY NOT ???? John Deere can’t answer! They don’t even know why !! They offer the self leveling loaders on the one and two and of course the 4 series all the way up to the 7 series ! So again I ask John Deere why they didn’t just use a hydroelectric bypass like Kubota does to split the hydro flow between the lift cylinders, and the tilt cylinders ! They don’t care about improving their so called perfect tractor ! Believe me it could be a lot better than it is ! In fact besides very minor BS like moving the cab handle and led lights and blue tooth radio there is NOTHING new or different in almost 20 years since the 20 series compacts came out !! Same cab same e-trans talk about BS !! Love to know more about this !!

[@MarkEagleUSA]

Yes please!!!

[@chrismagandy9308]

I would be interested, especially with the ability to turn it off.

[@bxb590]

Do you offer any detailed plans for this? I would gladly pay for it..

[@HydrosPlus]

I'm still working on this solution. There is some nuance to it that I have to work through so that it's a solid solution.

[@ryanhunt7330]

Love to have it

[@HydrosPlus]

This is still in the works, but it's still a ways out at this point. There are some nuances to it that I need to better understand.

[@lazydawgranch]

Most of what I do is bucket work, but every time I use my forks I wish I had self leveling. Can't see spending additional money I'm not going to take full advantage of this function....

[@HydrosPlus]

Just to make sure I'm following your comment, I think you're saying that "while you would like to have self leveling when using forks, you don't use them often enough to warrant additional cost for those few times you want it"

[@craigflatley7370]

👍

[@donalexander4083]

any progress on this endeavor?

[@HydrosPlus]

I have a functioning version, but it's not going to be the final configuration. I'm waiting on parts that are supposed to ship today and arrive next week. That said, the price is still going to be the challenge.

[@donalexander4083]

@@HydrosPlus that's the world we live in these days 😁 thanks a bunch for all your work on upgrades for these small workhorses

[@donalexander4083]

@@HydrosPlus i'm still very interested 😄

[@BillyP55]

I don't think I'd spring for $2k, but $1200...

[@cliffturner7245]

I'd buy it for 2000, 3R owner

[@truckerray7533]

Please please please DONOT add computers to these baby tractors😳😲🥺