Dougster

Well, there is more to this story than I was able to get to in my initial post. Last year I was told by certain dealers that my backhoe's performance was suffering considerably based on the use of a rear remote set instead of the "new" Bradco-recommended plumbing arrangement, which essentially sends ALL main pump hydraulic flow directly to the backhoe bypassing all other components. I am somewhat skeptical about this, but I'm trying to keep an open-mind and would love to test this arrangement with temporary plumbing to see if there is any truth to it before going any further. That being said, I still have reason to believe that there are probably one or more other more mundane issues as listed above. They have to be addressed first.

I believe the "rear screen" found on early 4110's was deleted before my 4110 was built (to be reconfirmed)... so I just have one main hydraulic filter (and yes, it could definitely be partially plugged - I had big problems with two bad cylinders on my root/rock grapple).

This is a topic I addressed in detail last year with one very helpful Mahindra dealer who pointed out that: 1) Main relief adjustment was a very difficult, dubious, inaccurate (trial & error) and time-consuming task on the 4110... and, 2) Fine tuning of the main relief, in his experience, did not achieve much in the way of increased FEL lifting power. But YMMV and I'm sure it all depends on how "off" you are to start. I am suspicious that I could be off considerably (by as much as 25%) either in the main relief setting or in the Bradco relief setting or both.

All that being said, suction side air inleakage still seems to be the number one reported culprit in cases of observed/perceived FEL weakness... and one of the very first things to check!!!

Dougster™

Dougster

Which items in particular do you see as overly expensive?
Oh, I'm not going to be exceeding any component design ratings... just trying to approach them a little more closely (read: a LOT more closely) than I am right now.

Dougster™

Dougster

Just to clarify for the sake of some readers, my two rear remote sets are fed off of the "power beyond" (PB) connection on the FEL control valve. One option under consideration (the "old" Bradco arrangement) is to bypass the rear remote set control valves and feed the backhoe directly off that PB connection on the FEL control valve. The other option under consideration (the "new Bradco arrangement) is to bypass even the FEL control valve and feed the backhoe directly from the main pump. To confuse folks even more, there are assorted variations to these two basic options!
But this is supposedly the whole ballgame. Assuming all good components, the maximum static (i.e., locked movement) pressure should be identical regardless of how hydraulic flow eventually gets to the backhoe and should only be dependent on relief settings... agree? But from what folks are telling me, it is all about the pressure that can be delivered under full flow cylinder movement. If this is truly the case (I am not totally convinced, mind you!), then dynamic measurements... taking into account component and line pressure drops at full flow... are all that really matter.

This all makes certain assumptions about hydraulic supply and component flow characteristics including relief valves... but enough confusion for now.

Dougster™

Dougster

I have confirmed by spec and by test that the tractor's main pump flow at design RPM is within the range specified by the backhoe manufacturer for this model backhoe... albeit at the mid to lower end of that recommended range and far below the bypass setpoint.
This is where folks are now saying that the rear remote set control valve (and other upstream components in the PB circuit) may be seriously affecting backhoe performance.
Well put Mickey. The key question here is what sort of margin have I got to work with and that I could comfortably reduce without creating a safety issue for myself.

Dougster™

PaulChristenson

For example...

http://www.hydracheck.com- TK1000, test kit, hydraulic, flow meter

Paul in VT

I used to own an ant farm but had to give it up. I couldn't find tractors small enough to fit it.
-- Steven Wright

Dougster

Yikes!!!

Oh Lordy Paul... I sincerely hope I don't need anything nearly so sophistocated. Their basic set of tech tools (at ~$1,500) would be more than adequate for anything I could possibly want to do in a lifetime:

http://www.hydracheck.com- TK500, test kit, proactive, diagnostic

But I certainly hope to do this testing & experimentation for a lot less or I will turn it over to the local hydraulics repair shop if more sophistocated instrumentation is warranted. This is where I am hoping Kenny and Mighty can help to steer me in the right direction.

Dougster™

Mickey

Well, for a moment I thought my comments were being overlooked as I said this subject was outside my comfort zone.

IMO all static pressure is going to tell you is, the set point of the releif valve(s). Depending upon how things are plumbed, restrictions in the current arrangement could be limiting flow and revising the plumbing could inmprove things. Think dynamic pressure is going to be an interaction between pump flow, cyl capacity, resistance in the plumbing and applied load.

It's not clear to me what you are trying to accomplish. Improved capacity or improved speed of movement. Whacha trying to improve Doug?

1970 Bolens 1257 w/tiller
2005 Cub 3204 48" deck
Yanmar Fx24D
5' Howse rotary mower
RSB 1300 Yanmar tiller

Dougster

I would never ignore you Mickey!!!

We are on the same page here!!!

I am trying to improve (read: increase) what I would term "useful digging and lifting power" (a Dougster™ "term of art" better explained by example than words or mathematical formulae).. not speed of movement (although a commensurate increase in speed might occur).

Dougster™

Mickey

Doug, seems to me like you have only a few options beyond making sure current plumbing isn't part of the problem.

* make sure pressure is up to spec.

* up cyl size which will help with work force but with the tradeoff of speed.

* new higher capacity/pressure pump. may need to up cyl size to take advantage of increased flow and pressure.

Oh, have you given any consideration of the possibilty of interal leakage in the cyl's that could be contributing to reduced "lifting" ability?

1970 Bolens 1257 w/tiller
2005 Cub 3204 48" deck
Yanmar Fx24D
5' Howse rotary mower
RSB 1300 Yanmar tiller

Dougster

{Points numbered by the old Dougster™ to facilitate reply}

1) This is obviously step one. Easy to test. Not necessarily easy to fix if found to be deficient.

2) Not under consideration based on comments received from KMW... and neither practical nor cost effective for the Bradco.

3) This was actually a possibility I explored in the past and the pump manufacturer in South Korea does make a logical (if not inexpensive) upgrade. Obtaining one such unit here in the USA and installing it is another matter... and it only helps if lack of flow is the deficiency. Maximum static pressure is still controlled by the main relief circuit... backhoe pressure by the main relief or backhoe relief.

4) I see no evidence of excessive leakdown or any other telltale signs. My sense is that the cylinders themselves are all pretty much okay.

One idea I've got is to effectively replace the existing difficult-to-adjust main relief components with an add-on third party-supplied relief circuit that would be easier to monitor, adjust and control. In fact, plumbing changes aside, this idea and adjusting or replacing the Bradco relief circuit are the key component upgrades I am hoping to explore here.

Dougster™