I would not be surprised if the lift specs are just calculations done by engineers, not real world test. When they are done, measurements are done in a lab environment under perfect conditions. I have looked at fork truck lift capacities in the past. Confusing.....In the real world, employees are expected to get the job done with the equipment provided. The engineer that put out the specs is not there to help adjust positioning each time you pick a load up. The specs are important not only to protect the machine, but the operator from getting hurt. My operation of said machines was to get a feel for when I would not feel comfortable in the seat. Course that would vary on skill level too. Mainly the ones arguing over these numbers are just looking at the color of the tractor. Keep up the good work. I enjoy seeing the tractors out working much more than trying to make sense of these numbers. I know they are important. I am just a novice on the small tractors. Take it easy Tim, I want to shake your hand again one day.........
Good analogy guys. Just consider that tire pressure/type would affect lift height when comparing to factory specs. Imagine how high you could lift if the front tires were steel. But in any event you answered the 64-thousand dollar question...lift capacity for both is virtually the same in the real world. Its even harder now to justify the added expense of self-leveling.
I think your test was great. I don’t think at the pin measurements matter. Your test is much more real world. Who cares about specs I just need to know which one is gonna get the job done better. I was ready to try and trade mine in but not ready to give away 2 or 3 inches of left height. It already suffers in that area
Nice job Tim. It certainly looked like a practical comparison to me. I had never thought about any capacity difference on the non MSL vs. the MSL. I would just appreciate the self leveling feature itself, all things being similar. Glad to hear that you are feeling better and getting along well with the stint. Í´m sure Christy will keep an eye on you. Blessings to you both!
Try having the bucket start at full curl and keep it at full curl measure to the bottom of the pin. That should make test easier and repeat better. Pick a fix point front and rear furthest point out that’s just to get and ideas of tire deflection or rear lift. Good to hear you are feeling better!
Tim, I think you did a great job administering a fair a subjective test. You were consistent between the two tests which is the most important thing as you eluded to. I've worked as a professional engineer for more years than I care to say and I always appreciate your well thought out methodical approach to all of your comparisons and tests. You obviously know what you are doing. I have learned so much from you and Christy! Thank you for everything you do. Thanks Terry Smith
Tim, you're intro graphics with the tractor loading the a into Tractor Time with Tim is going to have to feature a new loader with MSL. Tim, it looked like a good test to me. I wonder where JD is getting those increased figures for the MSL? I still think it's a cool feature, but not willing to get a new loader just yet.
Take care you two. My Grandpap recently passed at age 84 but moving weights on and off is what first put him in the hospital. Offer some fans to come help move weights for an episode so y’all can rest. Take care God Bless.
Tractor Time with Tim my uncle died from a dislodged stent when picking up a bag a dog food within a couple of weeks of the procedure . But that was back when this procedure was in its infancy. I had triple bypass two years ago. I went to work too soon. The area around my scar is herniated and looks like I have a golf ball under the skin in the center of my chest. Doctor said not worry unless it starts to hurt
The way you did your test is more real world. If i was going to buy a new tractor, id more than likely would get the MSL loader, especially with a set of forks. To upgrade, myself, can't justify the money for my use. The info was great and i think you nailed it. Glad youre feeling better, just don't overdo it. Keep selling tractors.
I’m glad to see you’re doing well! Easy with the weights though... I blew a couple stitches out of my eye about 3 years ago by over doing it... Excellent video! I love these real world comparisons you do. I think they’re a far better way for people to see what 500lbs actually means as opposed to reviewing a spec sheet with a dealer. If you could find time... I’d love for you to do a comparison of pulling pallets off a trailer with both loaders since that is really one of the primary reasons one would get a self leveling loader.
Another great test run. So much information but I don't see that much weight difference to be a determining factor of which one to buy. The MSL is clearly the winner just in the self leveling ability. Do you happen to know the weight difference between the 2 loaders not counting a bucket? Need any more help Time give me a call. Were so glad your continued health improvement.
Tim, Love your work! Keep it up! Listen to your doctors and please avoid the cheeseburgers! (we need these videos to keep coming!) There is a point that has been missed or briefly touched upon on all 120R MSL video reviews (by yourself and others) and that is the 4-bar linkage where the bucket attaches to the loader. I've noticed that the larger tractors and corresponding loaders have this linkage, yet the 120R does not, or did not before the MSL. The curl cylinder on the standard 120R attaches directly to the link that moves the bucket. On the 120R MSL, there is a 4-bar linkage between the tilt cylinder and bucket, and that is where the curl cylinder attaches. I'm a Mechanical Engineer but new to tractors and this has really had me questioning this linkage on larger tractors and backhoes, and why it was left off of the 120R (non MSL) (note: your 3 series JD has this 4 bar bucket linkage). What this can accomplish is a larger angular travel out of your bucket tilt with the same cylinder travel. What you have proven is that John Deere testing (or probably marketing) has probably been sandbagging on the numbers to sell this MSL or added the linkage to get another selling point. My theory is that you can rock the bucket back further, get the weight closer to the "pin" and get higher lift capacity. If you re-do this test, can you please put a digital angle finder on the bucket of each setup to measure angular curl of each setup and also re-do the weight capacity lift test at full curl? Your "500mm" measurement eliminates the linkage from the equation and just proves the lift cylinders are the same. Thanks, Cody Mechanical Engineer with an affinity of Kinematics and now 1 series John Deere P.S. My "finance department" thinks another color could have saved us money, but told her that Tim has proven that the green is a superior machine!
Very good test. Nice job as always. The results surprise me based on the specs, but when I really think about it, it does not surprise me. These tractors will pick and carry whatever fits in the bucket, and then dump it over the side of a dump trailer. But that alone can be enough to tip you over if not careful, even with a backhoe, wheel weights, and loaded tires. I can't see adding more capability to it and having anything to gain, besides marketing. I've got a JD 2305 and have had a big enough log on the grapple it stalled the power steering...had to set the load down to turn tires and continue. It doesn't need the ability to lift anymore than they already do.
It might be a good idea to calculate the max lift capacity. You have pressure already, now you just need the total piston area to get piston force in pounds. Then measure the change of piston angle and do some trig and you'll have your theoretical max vertical lift capacity. Loaders are just a big lever when you get down to it.
The specs are that calculation. But I don’t think it is that simple, as the ‘lowering’ of the curl during the lift (to keep it level) should have a positive impact on the lift capacity.
Hi Christy, Glad you and/or Katriel no longer have to ride the bucket for Tim's tests. Always great videography. Tim, good you are feeling better. Now - get to work so Christy doesn't have to carry you. Thanks and take care all.
In my mind your testing is a more practical example of the actual performance owners can expect to achieve - rather than the paper numbers of the spec sheet.
Tip of the hat to TTWT for the "real story" on the MSL's performance and the graphs before and after hydraulics were adjusted to "standard". That took a lot of time to put a short segment together that had a lot of detail behind the scenes. Keep well Tim!
Tim, if you can stomach it, Neal over at Messick's did a video recently where he demonstrates lift capacity and shows curl strength. They have a strain gauge connected to a chain that is run 10 feet underground to some concrete or something, Different brand (superior LOL) but probably similar to what you are talking about.
I do have to say your methodology is a very good way of testing. but you do have to consider the curb weight of the loader by itself without the tractor or bucket. The MSL Loader has more mechanisim to is so it will have a higher curb weight than the NSL loader. Thus weighing down the front of the tractor and yielding different max lift heights with and without weight. An easy way to adjust for this is to take a measurement from the same point on the front of the tractor frame and the variance of that between each loader will be a gauge of how much the loader will vary. Due to principles of levers and physics it will not be a direct adjustment of the difference applied to the loader height. In short, Great comparison. I look forward to seeing more content and review of the MSL loader.
I think your test, for what you were trying to compare, is quite valid since you used the same techniques on each loader. And, BTW, it IS leave-her, not lev-her. A single "v" makes the first vowel long. If that first "e" was to be short, there would be two "v's". Yeah, so I was a nerd in English class!
I think your test was more "real world" application, good video Tim. It would have been interesting to see one run at full curl, not sure how much difference that would have made to actual everyday use for an owner.
Full curl would lift more because closer to the pin. But the distance in front of the pin would change on the NSL as the loader is lifted. So, the NSL would win that test easily at max height
I stand corrected! I see nothing wrong with the testing. Same weights, same positioning in the bucket, closer to real world scenarios as you can get. Mind you just my opinion. Great job and thanks for clearing that up. Not what I expected! Continue to get yourself well. Prayers to you and your family.
@@TractorTimewithTim got it Friday after a trip to JD to get some quick hitch bushings, then cutting the pto driveshaft I was up and running. Knocked out 7 saturday and 3 sunday (all solid fat lighter) only about 70 more to go. So far I love it, takes about 20-30min per stump well worth the money so far.
First, well done with your tests! I saw nothing wrong with your testing methodology. I do have to say I'm completely surprised that the MSL loader didn't lift appreciably more with the "real world" weight in the bucket loading scheme. Like you've already mentioned, I now have to wonder how the manufacturer (not just the Green guy!) is getting their published specifications for their MSL loaders.
Well i dont feel like i am missing out now. Test looked fine to me. Lifting the loader thats bolted to a load cell on the ground could be cool to try though.
But has to be well underground to be able to have room for load center and still test lift at ground level. In my opinion, lift at ground level is more interesting than lift at full height.
If you're looking for some ideas on how to measure and compare these two loaders then it would help to measure the distance from the floor to the pivot pin where the loader arms mount to the frame, the distance from the same pin to the pivot point of the roll back of the bucket and the distance of the attachment points of the lift cylinders so that you get the triangle at totally lowered and fully lifted empty. You could also put a cheap gravity operated angle finder on the arm to see the difference in angles (you could even use it on top of your bucket when doing the loaded tests to make sure you keep the same amount of level setting as you try to measure from the bottom to the floor). Another way to measure the height might be to use a soft measuring tape (like a tailors measuring tape) attached to the curl pivot pin and see what the distance is to the floor and not have to worry about your curl being exact. Just some thoughts, your pressure multiplied by the surface area of the pistons in the cylinders lifting the boom and the geometry of the angles will tell you a lot about the lift capacities of each. Good luck and enjoyed the science theater.
I would be curious if temperature makes any difference. I don’t know that it would make any difference between the bucket systems, but I would find it interesting if it made any difference to the hydraulic system as a whole. An old wood splitter we used was real temperature sensitive. Enough so that we needed to instal a small cooler on the return line. On that splitter the return was spring loaded, it didn’t use hydraulic to return. While I have seen temperature effect hydraulics on others machines, I wonder if it has any affect at all on a tractor. It is very good to see you are feeling better! I hope that trend continues!
I would have assumed that with the new loader there would be a small mechanical advantage over just the conventional loader. But I also think that the way you do the real world test is the way to go. Take it easy and get plenty or rest and if you don't know what Leever A does Leever B. Thanks for Sharing Tim.
Your height measurement may be lite due to tire pressure or tire size/type. To test the bucket roll hang a chain over the front. If you need help let me know I will come up and help.
Do you have any way of measuring curl force? A load cell perhaps? I’d be interested in seeing if there’s any additional leverage provided by the leveling arms.
Just ordered my ISO tunes head phones thank you for them. You test is more real world because the weight is in the bucket just like using the loader. If the weight was closer to the pin it would lift more, how ever when loading dirt the bucket is full from the splash guard to the cutting edge.I think you did just fine, and im glad your feeling better!!
Thanks! Question for you. I’m assuming you ordered the over the ear variety. Why do you prefer the over the ear style to the earbud style? Just curious...Gathering input :-)
@@TractorTimewithTim I run alot of heavy equipment and the ear buds just dont have enough noise control to cancel out the engine. I have been wearing bose headsets but wow do they cost. Thought i give these a try, will let you know how they do.
Hi Tim, I had the same stent put in that you did. The meds I was put on held my pulse rate to low. I would start doing some work and have to sit down and let my heart rate catch up. Pay attention to your rate as a change in meds might make a huge difference in your endurance. My pulse was low 50s at rest. Thanks and wishing you the best
It would be better to check the pressure with a T connection inline with the line you actually are using since that test won't show a leaky cylinder. You could check the flowrate somewhat by connecting each hose to a grappler and check that the movement time from min to max is the same for all lines (pinched or deformed lines can rob you of working pressure) Remeber that lubes and alignment issues can greatly influence the amount of work that actually goes in to lifting the weights
Second the Neil Messick load cell comment. Also, would it make sense to use a magnetic level to make sure both were dead on level rather than worrying about floor? That aside - with these results, not sure I'd run out and switch loaders for no apparent practical benefit. Any comment from Deere?
Glad you're back at it! The test that personally gave me the most comparative information was when you tested deere vs kubota using pallet forks loading a pallet onto your trailer. Maybe this time load 100 lbs plates at each corner then the rest in middle of the pallet. After capacity for flatbed is reached I'd be curious how much weight to get over your dump trailer half wall as well. This type of test also lets you curl a little but not completely so weights don't come flying back at you. I think it helps with more realistic conditions, accepting a little curl may be possible.
@@TractorTimewithTim totally agree and understand. Guess I'm looking at the test as more realworld of a pallet loaded with left over pellets at the end winter season or something' that most of us are too lazy to back load the pallet to help the loader. If I bought a loader with a closer pin I wouldn't be trying to make the load further out to be fair to a loader I don't have (not snark, just explaining, I promise! haha.) Guess it's more of an cosmic crisp (apples) to red delicious (apples) comparison that I think would be helpful to see rather than making it as fair as possible. Regardless, your content is awesome and appreciate all the effort you put into them! Excited to see your new building full of all your toys.
The testing across both seams fair. One thing to help quantify the data is measure each weight to validate total weight being lifted. Another impact to lift ability is geometry and how the load is placed for both styles. The load orientation/placement really should be identical in relationship to geometry of cylinders and the cylinder pins. Maybe add standard deviation info to the results? Standard deviation is a bit much for what you are doing but some of engineering / quality geeks look at it.
We oriented the weights the same, and pushed them back against the back of the bucket with same approach both times. I think since we did this test twice at two different pressures with essentially identical results, that our weight placement seems equitable. Most inaccurate parts were the height measurement itself, and the tilt/curl of the bucket.
That looks like a pretty good lift test to me. You could try a curl test with pallet forks, since they stick out further than the bucket. Glad to hear you're feeling better.
Does hydraulic oil temperature come in to play at all? You can also use a digital magnetic level to insure the bucket is "level" at each of the measurement points.
I'd say its lifting more because the MSL has more weight by design. the loader arms weigh more with the added linkage. add that additional weight and technically it lifts more. of course that is just a guess on my part who knows.
Great experiment, if you were working in a lot of uneven terrain that could increase safety quite a bit. What is the maximum out of level distance you can go before the MSL is no longer effective? Glad you are doing good health wise! God Bless!
One thing I think is worth pointing out about a "Mechanically Self Leveling" loader is that the "self leveling" part of the name is a bit misleading. It in no way "self levels" the FELs attachment. Rather, the MSL system keeps the attachment’s curl position at whatever angle the operator sets throughout the full range of travel of the FEL's boom positioning. If it's set level to the ground, that’s where is stays. If it's curled all the way back to its maximum roll back angle, the attachment will maintain that same roll back angle relative to the ground throughout the booms full range of motion. With a NSL loader, that roll back angle increases as the boom arms are raised. If the operator doesn't manually compensate for that unintended roll back angle increase by manually dumping the curl angle, this is where things can go bad in a hurry. At best, you can start dumping material out the back of the bucket onto the tractor's hood. At worse, material can fall back towards the operator.
Nice teaser at the end, and I look forward to my chance at stardom. It seemed like a fair comparison to me - it stands to reason that the comparative results would be the same at any pressure, but it is good to be thorough.
Maybe a magnetic level stuck on top of the bucket to make sure that it's level being you're already sitting on level ground. But that's splitting hairs.
Not sure it would make a huge difference but maybe use a magnetic angle finder on the bucket. That way you wouldn't be guessing on the tilt of the bucket. Great videos.
My only suggestion would be to clamp a level to the side of the bucket so you know it is level and your measurements would be less subjective. That would keep things equal at least with the increments. Or you could measure to that pin. Also, I'm glad you're feeling better.
I like this test, but it's really testing more of a pallet fork use not a dirt in the bucket use. Which I would guess is what Deere's specs may be based on? I think there are 2 tests that would give the true difference between the loader arms. Breakout force, which you could test with a load cell hooked to the front edge of a level bucket and anchored to the ground or you could put the tractor on a trailer and use the trailer as anchor. Test curl strength at 1' , 2' and 3' heights. Pretty common heights when you are scooping material out of a large pile. Flat on the ground curl would be tougher, but if the tractor is on a trailer the load cell should be able to hook lower than the deck height? The other test would be with the buckets at full curl as low as they sit to the ground. Load the buckets with weight until they won't lift at all. Then reduce weight like this test and measure heights achieved in 100 pound decreases again. Clamp a level on the bucket side so you can maintain the same Max curl each bucket starts with. Or you could use the level only at the top to make sure the NSL doesn't get an advantage from the bucket tipping back further than the MSL? Either way these tests show if one setup has the advantage for moving loose material like loam, gravel or even firewood. Thanks for all your efforts! It's great information to learn.
I would probably suggest doing it the way Neil did it from Messick's. Also making an attachment if you don't already have one where your load point would be the 21 inch like the specs call for, and also using a level to make sure everything is identical.
💥 One suggestion I have is to use a load cell for you lifting tests instead of weights. The position of the weights in the bucket can cause discrepancies. That would save you a lot of lifting as well. I like what Neil does if you’ve seen his lift tests. *Keep on tractoring!* 👍
Yes, but that would have to be at least 24” maybe 30” deep just to the top of the hole. How would I keep that dry, clean, etc? The ‘tie down’ would have to be below that.
I don’t have all the answers, just suggestions. 😁 However, something like a cinder block well pit with a cover for when not in use. Might be more work than it’s worth but it would make you cooler than Neil! 👍 ..... maybe You did make a pit for a trampoline. Another idea, if you have a loading dock ramp. 🤔🤔
If you were to put on your pallet forks and stack weights nearer the far end of a pallet the MSL shouldn't lose lift capacity "way out front" as much as the NSL does. That said, looks like another case of Deere being selectively optimistic with specs for marketing purposes. It reminds me of how they try to portray the 220R loader as being about equal to the 320R when they're not at all. Great video, really looking forward to the next one with some thoughts on real world use.
Close enough for a good comparison. The only thing you can do to eliminate the tire squatting is put a jack stand under the axle but I don't think it's necessary for your comparison. Thanks Tim
Nice test Tim. I was really hoping to see a test using pallet forks as I've never really had issues lifting anything with my bucket but I've needed more lifting power many times when using a load on the pallet forks.
@@TractorTimewithTim If you use the same forks for the test it's apples to apples, right? Suppose you could try 2 different length forks on each set of arms.
testing looks correct. the pin is roughly one inch different by you measurements in previous video. JD lifting capacity is measured in relationship to the pin. so on paper the MSL has advantage.
Tim one other area to test is how fast the MSL can lift a loaded pallet and unload onto a shelf versus the NSL where you are constantly having to adjust. For me this is important as the saying goes time is money.
There’s also an adjustment on your hydraulic pump I believe it’s sort of a governor/limiter and I’ve seen several people say they can get it up to about 2300ish by adjusting that out. As far as your test being a little different, it’s possible that they didn’t adjust the bucket for level and you were measuring off of the bucket not the pin so that may have accounted for a tiny bit of difference they may have just left the bucket which might’ve made it higher or lower, not sure.
The two of you always make excellent quality videos. Your explanations are always accurate and understandable. Congratulations. I think you can come closer to the factory specs by either standing up the weights in the back of the bucket, or maybe making some kind of rod that goes through the weight handles and locates the weights the same distance from the pins.
Great test. I think most of us are looking for "real world" not lab results. For the price point difference, the increase in safety, especially in pallet moves, it looks to be worth the price. Now if you're not using pallets, moving large loads of brush/logs, and just mostly move mulch... might not fit your needs. You talked about measuring at the pin.... well JD moved the pin on the new loader arms, so it would come down to difference in height measurements - right? LOL JD's not making a direct comparison easy for you are they.....
Thanks for the video Tim, did you have problems with the MSL cast bucket mount being slightly too wide to fit the 49" bucket at all? I think your test was just fine for a real world comparison. Of course there are ways you could be more accurate with exact CG of the weight in the bucket but given how these machines will be used its clear the operator will not notice a increase in lifting capacity.
No issues with the JDQA. I think folks misunderstood my statement in the first video. The connector to the. Bucket is identical...but the back side of the bracket is larger.
@@TractorTimewithTim Correct, thats what I assumed you meant in the first video. I just heard my dealer was having to grind some material off of the cast bracket to fit the 49" loader.
Did you contact JD as to why your lift capacity was different then their stated capacity for the MSL? I would love to get about 200 lb more lift capacity out of my 1025r. If I knew going to light weight forks and MSL would get me there I would be one happy camper.
Just a thought, try curling the bucket all the way back because it will bring the weight closer to the pin and in theory allow the loader to lift more. Just to clarify my thought process on this having the bucket curled all the way back is how you’re going to carry almost every load except if you’re using forks.
The purpose of this test is to objectively compare lift capacity. The two loaders have radically different curl back angles, and the curl back would vary at different heights. In my opinion, impossible to get an objective test. Welcome to our channel!
@@TractorTimewithTim, thank you for the welcome. You are correct it’s hard to get an objective test on these two loaders because they have different geometry. And who knows what kind of standard Deere used for testing to get there numbers for the comparison of the loaders so I would say your test and the numbers it produced are probably more accurate and real world than what Deere is publishing. It almost reminds of the Horsepower wars in the late 90’s between the big three with Diesel pickups and it produced catastrophic results for Ford.
Tim - I listened to your explanation yet I still do not understand why you needed to re-level the self-leveling loader. My take-away is the self-leveling loader is not, well, self-leveling. I will re-watch the video, but not sure I will get a answer to my question. So, no more lift capacity, not self-leveling, lower maximum lift height. From what I’m seeing, the new loader gets a fail grade from me.
Tractor Time with Tim I fixed a typo in my post, and re-worded it a bit, haven’t had my 2nd cup of coffee yet, but I think you understood what I was saying.
By having to adjust up with the self level at lower than mid height and then having to adjust down above mid height, it sounds like the bucket stays relatively level, but someplace in the center the level geometry is off just a little bit. So I suspect that without the adjustment that Tim had to make the bucket would be level at ground level and at full height but may get a little off temporarily in the middle.
My experience is that this is true for most self-leveling loaders. The challenge for the engineer is that there is a trade-off between making the components of the loader as compact as possible and perfection in controlling the arc. As a user, I would much rather have a small variation than a larger loader.
The need for level adjustment through the lift arc, is the difference you are seeing between the hydraulic self leveling and the mechanical self leveling. But the cost difference in needing the extra cylinder isn't justified for Deere to develop the hydraulic leveling bucket. Currently you can order the mechanical self leveling option for just about $600 more than the non self leveling. This was not an option before July, and today an upgrade kit to change from nsl to msl is not available.
Hey Tim. You mentioned in a reply to a comment in the previous video that you will likely keep the MSL and return the NSL. If the 1025r was the only tractor in your barn would you make the same decision?
Tim, I hope this questions makes sense. What is the difference in weight between the two loader systems (including bucket, arms, hydraulics, etc.)? The 120R MSL loader looks to be a bit heavier that the Non Self-leveling loader. Do you know if John Deere includes this extra weight in their specifications, thereby giving the MSL a perceived heavier lifting capacity?
Your question does make sense. However, you are misunderstanding the lift capacity specification. The spec includes the loader and the bucket. So, it is specifying how much cargo the bucket can left 19.5” ahead of the pin. So, any differences in loader arm weight would already be accounted for in this spec.
Great information and very timely for me as I am right now this week deciding which 120r I will buy. Honestly though if the msl was not available, I would buy the nsl version, and in general, I would like to learn to use both functions on the loader, so I’ve been leaning toward the nsl unless there are good reasons to spend extra $ on the msl. Question... I am a new tractor owner with zero experience using a loader... how tricky/difficult is it to learn how to use the nsl well?... And since the msl is available, should a new tractor owner buy the msl just for the “ease of use and error prevention capability? TY I’m looking forward to the “real world” test video coming up on Friday!
I'm sure it varies from person to person on how quickly you will get the operation down. I feel like as long as you keep in mind the bucket, forks are tilting as you raise and lower you'll be OK. The smooth, quick operation will come with time. Higher rpm gives more pump flow and helps when using both hydraulic circuits at same time. Which you have to do to maintain level while raising/lowering. That was an essay.
I would not be surprised if the lift specs are just calculations done by engineers, not real world test. When they are done, measurements are done in a lab environment under perfect conditions. I have looked at fork truck lift capacities in the past. Confusing.....In the real world, employees are expected to get the job done with the equipment provided. The engineer that put out the specs is not there to help adjust positioning each time you pick a load up. The specs are important not only to protect the machine, but the operator from getting hurt. My operation of said machines was to get a feel for when I would not feel comfortable in the seat. Course that would vary on skill level too. Mainly the ones arguing over these numbers are just looking at the color of the tractor. Keep up the good work. I enjoy seeing the tractors out working much more than trying to make sense of these numbers. I know they are important. I am just a novice on the small tractors. Take it easy Tim, I want to shake your hand again one day.........
Interesting view. I think the specs SHOULD be valuable to prospective buyers to help choose the model they need.
Good analogy guys. Just consider that tire pressure/type would affect lift height when comparing to factory specs. Imagine how high you could lift if the front tires were steel. But in any event you answered the 64-thousand dollar question...lift capacity for both is virtually the same in the real world. Its even harder now to justify the added expense of self-leveling.
32 psi in front tires.
I think your test was great. I don’t think at the pin measurements matter. Your test is much more real world. Who cares about specs I just need to know which one is gonna get the job done better. I was ready to try and trade mine in but not ready to give away 2 or 3 inches of left height. It already suffers in that area
Nice job Tim. It certainly looked like a practical comparison to me. I had never thought about any capacity difference on the non MSL vs. the MSL. I would just appreciate the self leveling feature itself, all things being similar. Glad to hear that you are feeling better and getting along well with the stint. Í´m sure Christy will keep an eye on you. Blessings to you both!
Try having the bucket start at full curl and keep it at full curl measure to the bottom of the pin. That should make test easier and repeat better. Pick a fix point front and rear furthest point out that’s just to get and ideas of tire deflection or rear lift. Good to hear you are feeling better!
Ok. May try it...I suspect the NSL wins in a weight slide :-)
Tractor Time with Tim I don’t expect much difference on the lift, but you could find a difference in the curl due to the linkage leverage.
That automatic load leveler is gonna be awesome when you’re running the pallet forks I’m trying to put stuff on and off of shelves.
Great test good information thanks Tim. I'm glad to hear that you are feeling better praise God.
Tim,
I think you did a great job administering a fair a subjective test. You were consistent between the two tests which is the most important thing as you eluded to. I've worked as a professional engineer for more years than I care to say and I always appreciate your well thought out methodical approach to all of your comparisons and tests. You obviously know what you are doing. I have learned so much from you and Christy!
Thank you for everything you do.
Thanks
Terry Smith
Thanks very much Terry.
Tim, you're intro graphics with the tractor loading the a into Tractor Time with Tim is going to have to feature a new loader with MSL. Tim, it looked like a good test to me. I wonder where JD is getting those increased figures for the MSL? I still think it's a cool feature, but not willing to get a new loader just yet.
Take care you two. My Grandpap recently passed at age 84 but moving weights on and off is what first put him in the hospital. Offer some fans to come help move weights for an episode so y’all can rest. Take care God Bless.
The doc wants me working.
He said there is NO WAY that I can dislodge the stent. ...and 84 is a bit different than 54
Tractor Time with Tim my uncle died from a dislodged stent when picking up a bag a dog food within a couple of weeks of the procedure . But that was back when this procedure was in its infancy. I had triple bypass two years ago. I went to work too soon. The area around my scar is herniated and looks like I have a golf ball under the skin in the center of my chest. Doctor said not worry unless it starts to hurt
The way you did your test is more real world. If i was going to buy a new tractor, id more than likely would get the MSL loader, especially with a set of forks. To upgrade, myself, can't justify the money for my use. The info was great and i think you nailed it. Glad youre feeling better, just don't overdo it. Keep selling tractors.
Tim, have to admit you ALWAYS do a fantastic job with your videos! well spoken as well as thought out. keep up the great work!
I’m glad to see you’re doing well! Easy with the weights though... I blew a couple stitches out of my eye about 3 years ago by over doing it...
Excellent video! I love these real world comparisons you do. I think they’re a far better way for people to see what 500lbs actually means as opposed to reviewing a spec sheet with a dealer.
If you could find time... I’d love for you to do a comparison of pulling pallets off a trailer with both loaders since that is really one of the primary reasons one would get a self leveling loader.
Another great test run. So much information but I don't see that much weight difference to be a determining factor of which one to buy. The MSL is clearly the winner just in the self leveling ability. Do you happen to know the weight difference between the 2 loaders not counting a bucket? Need any more help Time give me a call. Were so glad your continued health improvement.
Put a magnetic level on the side of the bucket to verify level state.
Would love to see a video of how you adjusted the hydraulics
Same here
Tim,
Love your work! Keep it up! Listen to your doctors and please avoid the cheeseburgers! (we need these videos to keep coming!)
There is a point that has been missed or briefly touched upon on all 120R MSL video reviews (by yourself and others) and that is the 4-bar linkage where the bucket attaches to the loader. I've noticed that the larger tractors and corresponding loaders have this linkage, yet the 120R does not, or did not before the MSL. The curl cylinder on the standard 120R attaches directly to the link that moves the bucket. On the 120R MSL, there is a 4-bar linkage between the tilt cylinder and bucket, and that is where the curl cylinder attaches. I'm a Mechanical Engineer but new to tractors and this has really had me questioning this linkage on larger tractors and backhoes, and why it was left off of the 120R (non MSL) (note: your 3 series JD has this 4 bar bucket linkage). What this can accomplish is a larger angular travel out of your bucket tilt with the same cylinder travel. What you have proven is that John Deere testing (or probably marketing) has probably been sandbagging on the numbers to sell this MSL or added the linkage to get another selling point. My theory is that you can rock the bucket back further, get the weight closer to the "pin" and get higher lift capacity. If you re-do this test, can you please put a digital angle finder on the bucket of each setup to measure angular curl of each setup and also re-do the weight capacity lift test at full curl? Your "500mm" measurement eliminates the linkage from the equation and just proves the lift cylinders are the same.
Thanks,
Cody
Mechanical Engineer with an affinity of Kinematics and now 1 series John Deere
P.S. My "finance department" thinks another color could have saved us money, but told her that Tim has proven that the green is a superior machine!
So glad that you are feeling better. Stay safe and warm.
Very good test. Nice job as always. The results surprise me based on the specs, but when I really think about it, it does not surprise me.
These tractors will pick and carry whatever fits in the bucket, and then dump it over the side of a dump trailer. But that alone can be enough to tip you over if not careful, even with a backhoe, wheel weights, and loaded tires.
I can't see adding more capability to it and having anything to gain, besides marketing. I've got a JD 2305 and have had a big enough log on the grapple it stalled the power steering...had to set the load down to turn tires and continue. It doesn't need the ability to lift anymore than they already do.
Hey Tim 🚜 great log glad to see that you're feeling better and able to do things that you want to do love your videos watch you everyday 🇺🇲💯
It might be a good idea to calculate the max lift capacity. You have pressure already, now you just need the total piston area to get piston force in pounds. Then measure the change of piston angle and do some trig and you'll have your theoretical max vertical lift capacity. Loaders are just a big lever when you get down to it.
The specs are that calculation. But I don’t think it is that simple, as the ‘lowering’ of the curl during the lift (to keep it level) should have a positive impact on the lift capacity.
Good job, glad you're feeling better (don't over do it)
Thanks Tim for your nice videos ( 23s owner here )
Hi Christy, Glad you and/or Katriel no longer have to ride the bucket for Tim's tests. Always great videography. Tim, good you are feeling better. Now - get to work so Christy doesn't have to carry you. Thanks and take care all.
If doing this kind of test again. Set the gauge up in line with the lift line so you can see the pressure with the actual load
In my mind your testing is a more practical example of the actual performance owners can expect to achieve - rather than the paper numbers of the spec sheet.
Tip of the hat to TTWT for the "real story" on the MSL's performance and the graphs before and after hydraulics were adjusted to "standard". That took a lot of time to put a short segment together that had a lot of detail behind the scenes. Keep well Tim!
Thanks for the kind words, Hugh!
Tim, if you can stomach it, Neal over at Messick's did a video recently where he demonstrates lift capacity and shows curl strength. They have a strain gauge connected to a chain that is run 10 feet underground to some concrete or something, Different brand (superior LOL) but probably similar to what you are talking about.
I do have to say your methodology is a very good way of testing. but you do have to consider the curb weight of the loader by itself without the tractor or bucket. The MSL Loader has more mechanisim to is so it will have a higher curb weight than the NSL loader. Thus weighing down the front of the tractor and yielding different max lift heights with and without weight. An easy way to adjust for this is to take a measurement from the same point on the front of the tractor frame and the variance of that between each loader will be a gauge of how much the loader will vary. Due to principles of levers and physics it will not be a direct adjustment of the difference applied to the loader height.
In short, Great comparison. I look forward to seeing more content and review of the MSL loader.
I think your test, for what you were trying to compare, is quite valid since you used the same techniques on each loader.
And, BTW, it IS leave-her, not lev-her. A single "v" makes the first vowel long. If that first "e" was to be short, there would be two "v's". Yeah, so I was a nerd in English class!
I think your test was more "real world" application, good video Tim. It would have been interesting to see one run at full curl, not sure how much difference that would have made to actual everyday use for an owner.
Full curl would lift more because closer to the pin.
But the distance in front of the pin would change on the NSL as the loader is lifted. So, the NSL would win that test easily at max height
I stand corrected! I see nothing wrong with the testing. Same weights, same positioning in the bucket, closer to real world scenarios as you can get. Mind you just my opinion. Great job and thanks for clearing that up. Not what I expected! Continue to get yourself well. Prayers to you and your family.
We were stunned!
Just ordered a stump grinder using your code from GD... thanks for the extensive reviews can't wait to get it.
You’ll love it! Thanks!
@@TractorTimewithTim got it Friday after a trip to JD to get some quick hitch bushings, then cutting the pto driveshaft I was up and running. Knocked out 7 saturday and 3 sunday (all solid fat lighter) only about 70 more to go. So far I love it, takes about 20-30min per stump well worth the money so far.
First, well done with your tests! I saw nothing wrong with your testing methodology. I do have to say I'm completely surprised that the MSL loader didn't lift appreciably more with the "real world" weight in the bucket loading scheme. Like you've already mentioned, I now have to wonder how the manufacturer (not just the Green guy!) is getting their published specifications for their MSL loaders.
Well i dont feel like i am missing out now. Test looked fine to me. Lifting the loader thats bolted to a load cell on the ground could be cool to try though.
I support this, try repeating this test with a load cell chained to the ground. That should yield different values (higher ones).
Would be easier for repeatable test and less worry about I hurt from the weights. Also can test pulling power and 3 point lift
But has to be well underground to be able to have room for load center and still test lift at ground level.
In my opinion, lift at ground level is more interesting than lift at full height.
Excellent job Tim and Christy. So glad that you're feeling much better Tim.
If you're looking for some ideas on how to measure and compare these two loaders then it would help to measure the distance from the floor to the pivot pin where the loader arms mount to the frame, the distance from the same pin to the pivot point of the roll back of the bucket and the distance of the attachment points of the lift cylinders so that you get the triangle at totally lowered and fully lifted empty. You could also put a cheap gravity operated angle finder on the arm to see the difference in angles (you could even use it on top of your bucket when doing the loaded tests to make sure you keep the same amount of level setting as you try to measure from the bottom to the floor). Another way to measure the height might be to use a soft measuring tape (like a tailors measuring tape) attached to the curl pivot pin and see what the distance is to the floor and not have to worry about your curl being exact. Just some thoughts, your pressure multiplied by the surface area of the pistons in the cylinders lifting the boom and the geometry of the angles will tell you a lot about the lift capacities of each. Good luck and enjoyed the science theater.
I would be curious if temperature makes any difference. I don’t know that it would make any difference between the bucket systems, but I would find it interesting if it made any difference to the hydraulic system as a whole. An old wood splitter we used was real temperature sensitive. Enough so that we needed to instal a small cooler on the return line. On that splitter the return was spring loaded, it didn’t use hydraulic to return. While I have seen temperature effect hydraulics on others machines, I wonder if it has any affect at all on a tractor.
It is very good to see you are feeling better! I hope that trend continues!
I would have assumed that with the new loader there would be a small mechanical advantage over just the conventional loader. But I also think that the way you do the real world test is the way to go. Take it easy and get plenty or rest and if you don't know what Leever A does Leever B. Thanks for Sharing Tim.
Your height measurement may be lite due to tire pressure or tire size/type. To test the bucket roll hang a chain over the front. If you need help let me know I will come up and help.
32 psi.
Again, not so concerned about exact number. The point is that the MSL did not lift as high with a level bucket.
@@TractorTimewithTim I was not talking so much bucket to bucket as bucket the book Numbers
Need a good set of work 🎧 going to try these, thank you Master Tim! 👍🙂
Probably a stupid question, but how did you adjust the hydraulic pressure from 1800 PSI to 2000 PSI?
Do you have any way of measuring curl force? A load cell perhaps? I’d be interested in seeing if there’s any additional leverage provided by the leveling arms.
ISOTunes was sending you a hidden message that you need to switch colors. :)
Brad Myers, the owner of ISOtunes must be a Kabota dealer and needs the business! HaHa!
Thanks Tim! At least I know I won’t lose any capability by going with the MSL! Praying for your continued health improvement.
You're losing 2 to 3 inches of lift height capability.
Just ordered my ISO tunes head phones thank you for them. You test is more real world because the weight is in the bucket just like using the loader. If the weight was closer to the pin it would lift more, how ever when loading dirt the bucket is full from the splash guard to the cutting edge.I think you did just fine, and im glad your feeling better!!
Thanks! Question for you. I’m assuming you ordered the over the ear variety. Why do you prefer the over the ear style to the earbud style? Just curious...Gathering input :-)
@@TractorTimewithTim I run alot of heavy equipment and the ear buds just dont have enough noise control to cancel out the engine. I have been wearing bose headsets but wow do they cost. Thought i give these a try, will let you know how they do.
Hi Tim, I had the same stent put in that you did. The meds I was put on held my pulse rate to low. I would start doing some work and have to sit down and let my heart rate catch up. Pay attention to your rate as a change in meds might make a huge difference in your endurance. My pulse was low 50s at rest. Thanks and wishing you the best
It would be better to check the pressure with a T connection inline with the line you actually are using since that test won't show a leaky cylinder.
You could check the flowrate somewhat by connecting each hose to a grappler and check that the movement time from min to max is the same for all lines (pinched or deformed lines can rob you of working pressure)
Remeber that lubes and alignment issues can greatly influence the amount of work that actually goes in to lifting the weights
Can you feel a difference in the curl of either? Maybe getting a load cell like Neil Messick uses for his tests?
Second the Neil Messick load cell comment. Also, would it make sense to use a magnetic level to make sure both were dead on level rather than worrying about floor? That aside - with these results, not sure I'd run out and switch loaders for no apparent practical benefit. Any comment from Deere?
Glad you are feeling better.
Glad you're back at it! The test that personally gave me the most comparative information was when you tested deere vs kubota using pallet forks loading a pallet onto your trailer. Maybe this time load 100 lbs plates at each corner then the rest in middle of the pallet. After capacity for flatbed is reached I'd be curious how much weight to get over your dump trailer half wall as well. This type of test also lets you curl a little but not completely so weights don't come flying back at you. I think it helps with more realistic conditions, accepting a little curl may be possible.
Hard to be objective because distance from loader pin to weight is CRITICALLY important in that test.
@@TractorTimewithTim totally agree and understand. Guess I'm looking at the test as more realworld of a pallet loaded with left over pellets at the end winter season or something' that most of us are too lazy to back load the pallet to help the loader. If I bought a loader with a closer pin I wouldn't be trying to make the load further out to be fair to a loader I don't have (not snark, just explaining, I promise! haha.) Guess it's more of an cosmic crisp (apples) to red delicious (apples) comparison that I think would be helpful to see rather than making it as fair as possible. Regardless, your content is awesome and appreciate all the effort you put into them! Excited to see your new building full of all your toys.
The testing across both seams fair. One thing to help quantify the data is measure each weight to validate total weight being lifted. Another impact to lift ability is geometry and how the load is placed for both styles. The load orientation/placement really should be identical in relationship to geometry of cylinders and the cylinder pins. Maybe add standard deviation info to the results? Standard deviation is a bit much for what you are doing but some of engineering / quality geeks look at it.
We oriented the weights the same, and pushed them back against the back of the bucket with same approach both times.
I think since we did this test twice at two different pressures with essentially identical results, that our weight placement seems equitable.
Most inaccurate parts were the height measurement itself, and the tilt/curl of the bucket.
That looks like a pretty good lift test to me. You could try a curl test with pallet forks, since they stick out further than the bucket. Glad to hear you're feeling better.
Does hydraulic oil temperature come in to play at all? You can also use a digital magnetic level to insure the bucket is "level" at each of the measurement points.
I'd say its lifting more because the MSL has more weight by design. the loader arms weigh more with the added linkage. add that additional weight and technically it lifts more. of course that is just a guess on my part who knows.
Super educational and very fair.
Great experiment, if you were working in a lot of uneven terrain that could increase safety quite a bit. What is the maximum out of level distance you can go before the MSL is no longer effective? Glad you are doing good health wise! God Bless!
Very interesting. I like the real world application-test. Great job!!!!
What’s the temperature difference between the first time with cold hydraulic oil and second test with hot oil that would make a difference
One thing I think is worth pointing out about a "Mechanically Self Leveling" loader is that the "self leveling" part of the name is a bit misleading. It in no way "self levels" the FELs attachment. Rather, the MSL system keeps the attachment’s curl position at whatever angle the operator sets throughout the full range of travel of the FEL's boom positioning. If it's set level to the ground, that’s where is stays. If it's curled all the way back to its maximum roll back angle, the attachment will maintain that same roll back angle relative to the ground throughout the booms full range of motion. With a NSL loader, that roll back angle increases as the boom arms are raised. If the operator doesn't manually compensate for that unintended roll back angle increase by manually dumping the curl angle, this is where things can go bad in a hurry. At best, you can start dumping material out the back of the bucket onto the tractor's hood. At worse, material can fall back towards the operator.
I think the name MSL is pretty good and pretty accurate. I mean, I get your point, but this name seems pretty good.
Super cool demonstration. This is why I love your channel.
Thanks!
Nice teaser at the end, and I look forward to my chance at stardom. It seemed like a fair comparison to me - it stands to reason that the comparative results would be the same at any pressure, but it is good to be thorough.
Maybe a magnetic level stuck on top of the bucket to make sure that it's level being you're already sitting on level ground. But that's splitting hairs.
Very good lift comparison between the two loaders!
Not sure it would make a huge difference but maybe use a magnetic angle finder on the bucket. That way you wouldn't be guessing on the tilt of the bucket.
Great videos.
My only suggestion would be to clamp a level to the side of the bucket so you know it is level and your measurements would be less subjective. That would keep things equal at least with the increments. Or you could measure to that pin. Also, I'm glad you're feeling better.
I like this test, but it's really testing more of a pallet fork use not a dirt in the bucket use. Which I would guess is what Deere's specs may be based on?
I think there are 2 tests that would give the true difference between the loader arms. Breakout force, which you could test with a load cell hooked to the front edge of a level bucket and anchored to the ground or you could put the tractor on a trailer and use the trailer as anchor. Test curl strength at 1' , 2' and 3' heights. Pretty common heights when you are scooping material out of a large pile. Flat on the ground curl would be tougher, but if the tractor is on a trailer the load cell should be able to hook lower than the deck height?
The other test would be with the buckets at full curl as low as they sit to the ground. Load the buckets with weight until they won't lift at all. Then reduce weight like this test and measure heights achieved in 100 pound decreases again. Clamp a level on the bucket side so you can maintain the same Max curl each bucket starts with. Or you could use the level only at the top to make sure the NSL doesn't get an advantage from the bucket tipping back further than the MSL? Either way these tests show if one setup has the advantage for moving loose material like loam, gravel or even firewood. Thanks for all your efforts! It's great information to learn.
It's impressive these little tractors lift this much. The base tractor only weights 1500 lbs.
The tyre sag can be eliminated by placing blocks under the front axle. Perhaps check the tyre pressure before and after each loader test.
32 psi
Tire sag is real world. We don’t really WANT to remove it. We are all about ‘real world’.
Front tires were at 32 psi.
I would probably suggest doing it the way Neil did it from Messick's. Also making an attachment if you don't already have one where your load point would be the 21 inch like the specs call for, and also using a level to make sure everything is identical.
💥 One suggestion I have is to use a load cell for you lifting tests instead of weights. The position of the weights in the bucket can cause discrepancies. That would save you a lot of lifting as well. I like what Neil does if you’ve seen his lift tests.
*Keep on tractoring!* 👍
Don’t know how to test lift at ground level with the load cell.
What if the load cell lift system was recessed in a hole. 🤔 Then you could even test lift capacity slightly below grade.
Yes, but that would have to be at least 24” maybe 30” deep just to the top of the hole. How would I keep that dry, clean, etc?
The ‘tie down’ would have to be below that.
I don’t have all the answers, just suggestions. 😁 However, something like a cinder block well pit with a cover for when not in use. Might be more work than it’s worth but it would make you cooler than Neil! 👍 ..... maybe
You did make a pit for a trampoline.
Another idea, if you have a loading dock ramp. 🤔🤔
Yea, we talked about using our lift. ...then figured the safety nazis would not approve.
If you were to put on your pallet forks and stack weights nearer the far end of a pallet the MSL shouldn't lose lift capacity "way out front" as much as the NSL does. That said, looks like another case of Deere being selectively optimistic with specs for marketing purposes. It reminds me of how they try to portray the 220R loader as being about equal to the 320R when they're not at all. Great video, really looking forward to the next one with some thoughts on real world use.
I’ll try to come up with a way to test forks ‘way out front’
Close enough for a good comparison. The only thing you can do to eliminate the tire squatting is put a jack stand under the axle but I don't think it's necessary for your comparison. Thanks Tim
Nice test Tim. I was really hoping to see a test using pallet forks as I've never really had issues lifting anything with my bucket but I've needed more lifting power many times when using a load on the pallet forks.
Harder to be objective with pallet forks. Distance from pin is critical
@@TractorTimewithTim Understand
@@TractorTimewithTim If you use the same forks for the test it's apples to apples, right? Suppose you could try 2 different length forks on each set of arms.
testing looks correct. the pin is roughly one inch different by you measurements in previous video. JD lifting capacity is measured in relationship to the pin. so on paper the MSL has advantage.
Someone mentioned this on Facebook as well. Seems like a reasonable explanation for part of the discrepancy!
hey Tim just want to say your looking good!! Interesting results!! Thanks for another quality video!!
Tim one other area to test is how fast the MSL can lift a loaded pallet and unload onto a shelf versus the NSL where you are constantly having to adjust. For me this is important as the saying goes time is money.
Not only how ‘fast’, but how smooth and safely it can be done!
Tractor Time with Tim very good point. Maybe have a test between you and also a rookie operator.
There’s also an adjustment on your hydraulic pump I believe it’s sort of a governor/limiter and I’ve seen several people say they can get it up to about 2300ish by adjusting that out.
As far as your test being a little different, it’s possible that they didn’t adjust the bucket for level and you were measuring off of the bucket not the pin so that may have accounted for a tiny bit of difference they may have just left the bucket which might’ve made it higher or lower, not sure.
The two of you always make excellent quality videos. Your explanations are always accurate and understandable. Congratulations.
I think you can come closer to the factory specs by either standing up the weights in the back of the bucket, or maybe making some kind of rod that goes through the weight handles and locates the weights the same distance from the pins.
Great test. I think most of us are looking for "real world" not lab results. For the price point difference, the increase in safety, especially in pallet moves, it looks to be worth the price. Now if you're not using pallets, moving large loads of brush/logs, and just mostly move mulch... might not fit your needs. You talked about measuring at the pin.... well JD moved the pin on the new loader arms, so it would come down to difference in height measurements - right? LOL JD's not making a direct comparison easy for you are they.....
I am a math teacher and I agree with this completely. Lab vs. real world gets 2 different results. Good test.
Thanks for the video Tim, did you have problems with the MSL cast bucket mount being slightly too wide to fit the 49" bucket at all? I think your test was just fine for a real world comparison. Of course there are ways you could be more accurate with exact CG of the weight in the bucket but given how these machines will be used its clear the operator will not notice a increase in lifting capacity.
No issues with the JDQA. I think folks misunderstood my statement in the first video. The connector to the. Bucket is identical...but the back side of the bracket is larger.
@@TractorTimewithTim Correct, thats what I assumed you meant in the first video. I just heard my dealer was having to grind some material off of the cast bracket to fit the 49" loader.
I have a 49”. I will try it if I get a chance.
@@TractorTimewithTim Maybe I missed it, but what bucket are you using in the video?
Discussed near the end. 53”
Hey Tim question about the 1025r. Mine doesn't cut lawn the greatest. I take the deck off and on quite bite. 54in deck any thoughts
You need ISOTUNES to do a custom “wrap” for the headphones, like with a cheese burger and/or the TTWT logo. But they need to come in green!
Very informative video...Glad you’re feeling better!
Good info Tim! Glad you’re doing well!
Did you contact JD as to why your lift capacity was different then their stated capacity for the MSL? I would love to get about 200 lb more lift capacity out of my 1025r. If I knew going to light weight forks and MSL would get me there I would be one happy camper.
hopefully its in your plans to show the curl range differences ....they are considerable on some nsl vs msl loaders
What kind of weight can you lift when you curl the bucket??!.
Excellent real world effort, love all your videos! God Bless
for the curl test use a digital tilt gauge
Nice video tim and kristie and good to hear it is going good with your healthy 💪💪👍
Just a thought, try curling the bucket all the way back because it will bring the weight closer to the pin and in theory allow the loader to lift more. Just to clarify my thought process on this having the bucket curled all the way back is how you’re going to carry almost every load except if you’re using forks.
The purpose of this test is to objectively compare lift capacity. The two loaders have radically different curl back angles, and the curl back would vary at different heights. In my opinion, impossible to get an objective test.
Welcome to our channel!
@@TractorTimewithTim, thank you for the welcome. You are correct it’s hard to get an objective test on these two loaders because they have different geometry. And who knows what kind of standard Deere used for testing to get there numbers for the comparison of the loaders so I would say your test and the numbers it produced are probably more accurate and real world than what Deere is publishing. It almost reminds of the Horsepower wars in the late 90’s between the big three with Diesel pickups and it produced catastrophic results for Ford.
Tim - I listened to your explanation yet I still do not understand why you needed to re-level the self-leveling loader.
My take-away is the self-leveling loader is not, well, self-leveling. I will re-watch the video, but not sure I will get a answer to my question.
So, no more lift capacity, not self-leveling, lower maximum lift height.
From what I’m seeing, the new loader gets a fail grade from me.
Correct. It didn’t stay perfectly level. A bit surprising!!
Tractor Time with Tim I fixed a typo in my post, and re-worded it a bit, haven’t had my 2nd cup of coffee yet, but I think you understood what I was saying.
By having to adjust up with the self level at lower than mid height and then having to adjust down above mid height, it sounds like the bucket stays relatively level, but someplace in the center the level geometry is off just a little bit.
So I suspect that without the adjustment that Tim had to make the bucket would be level at ground level and at full height but may get a little off temporarily in the middle.
My experience is that this is true for most self-leveling loaders. The challenge for the engineer is that there is a trade-off between making the components of the loader as compact as possible and perfection in controlling the arc. As a user, I would much rather have a small variation than a larger loader.
The need for level adjustment through the lift arc, is the difference you are seeing between the hydraulic self leveling and the mechanical self leveling. But the cost difference in needing the extra cylinder isn't justified for Deere to develop the hydraulic leveling bucket. Currently you can order the mechanical self leveling option for just about $600 more than the non self leveling. This was not an option before July, and today an upgrade kit to change from nsl to msl is not available.
Thinking the 120R MSL will be a fantastic pair with the Bucketeer.
Hey Tim. You mentioned in a reply to a comment in the previous video that you will likely keep the MSL and return the NSL. If the 1025r was the only tractor in your barn would you make the same decision?
Hard to say.
Tim, I hope this questions makes sense. What is the difference in weight between the two loader systems (including bucket, arms, hydraulics, etc.)? The 120R MSL loader looks to be a bit heavier that the Non Self-leveling loader. Do you know if John Deere includes this extra weight in their specifications, thereby giving the MSL a perceived heavier lifting capacity?
Your question does make sense. However, you are misunderstanding the lift capacity specification.
The spec includes the loader and the bucket. So, it is specifying how much cargo the bucket can left 19.5” ahead of the pin. So, any differences in loader arm weight would already be accounted for in this spec.
You changed your hydraulic pressure? Did I miss a video on how / why you did that?
I believe you did a great job on the test
Great information and very timely for me as I am right now this week deciding which 120r I will buy. Honestly though if the msl was not available, I would buy the nsl version, and in general, I would like to learn to use both functions on the loader, so I’ve been leaning toward the nsl unless there are good reasons to spend extra $ on the msl.
Question... I am a new tractor owner with zero experience using a loader... how tricky/difficult is it to learn how to use the nsl well?... And since the msl is available, should a new tractor owner buy the msl just for the “ease of use and error prevention capability? TY
I’m looking forward to the “real world” test video coming up on Friday!
I'm sure it varies from person to person on how quickly you will get the operation down. I feel like as long as you keep in mind the bucket, forks are tilting as you raise and lower you'll be OK. The smooth, quick operation will come with time. Higher rpm gives more pump flow and helps when using both hydraulic circuits at same time. Which you have to do to maintain level while raising/lowering. That was an essay.