(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

What is the point of tie rods in the front

mikewood869

mikewood869

Well-known Member
What is the point of tie rods in the front of the wheels ? Wouldn’t you start killing them when hitting brush. I saw this on the Kabotas and on the newer New Hollands
mvphoto26720.jpg
 
I know on the Kubota axle it?s up so high you really have to
work hard to clip them. With a normal planetary maybe it
wouldn?t work so well.
 
I should add the first set on my Kubota lasted about 5000 hours. My little Kubota the rubbers got torn up around 2500 hours but I?m frequently driving over 2? diameter trees bush hogging.
 
Engineers aren't always the smartest of people. Alot of them are college educated idiots that are book smart and
have zero common sense. Another reason may lie with the manufacturer. The placement of tie rod ends may of come
down to something as simple as shortening up power steering lines by a few inches. Save a few nickels on each one
of these they make, and wammo, they just kept quit a few more profit dollars.
 
It is pretty difficult to mount a transverse steering cylinder, input drive shaft for axle, and everything that is mounted on the front of an engine in the space between engine and front axle. mounts. It all boils down to available space and reasonable serviceability. Nothing to design around other than front axle mtg.when on the front. The engineers did build some shielding and I would think that most operators display some common sense when operating. (the operative words here "most operators")
Loren
 
Red,

I have dispute what you said, and blame it on your ignorance, as Engineers do the best with the constraints they are given.
 
Most likely has to do with turning radius. When turning, the inside wheel has to turn at a sharper angle than the outside wheel. This results in tie rod interference with the axle quicker if the tie rod knuckle is behind the axle vs in front of the axle. The question is if this turning radius advantage outweighs the disadvantage of having the tie rod exposed to greater risk of damage.
 
Red ..... yeah you're right, anyone who went to college is probably an idiot and is clueless about what they're doing. Would that be all college graduates or just engineers?
 
Cost, sales, risks and profits. Do you use an existing axle at a known price or do you design and test something new at your companies expense, build new casting molds, jigs and tooling at your companies expense, delay a new product introduction long enough to get all that done, and then hope sales are high enough to recover the extra investment without loosing too many sales because of the higher price?

Customers always prefer extra features, but will they pay any extra for it? Will customers buy on price alone and jump to a competitor's product, or will they step up to a different model in your line that already has the extra features? Most manufactures have several product levels to suit different customers requirements. Its a balancing act between what your competition is offering any what your customers are willing to spend. In a strong market you can sell everything you can build with high profits, in a weak economy you can't sell anything.
 
(quoted from post at 08:58:31 11/12/18) Red,

I have dispute what you said, and blame it on your ignorance, as Engineers do the best with the constraints they are given.
Click to expand...

It isn't always the engineers who are responsible. More often than not the bean counters play a BIG part in how something is built.
 
All about steering angel, the four wheel front axel on the KUBOTAs will turn as sharp or shorter than lots of two wheel units. We have very few bent or damaged tie rods, as the posters noted most folks do not use the tractors for dozers.
 
Engineers as a whole catch a lot of flak and occasionally it is deserved. However, in many cases it is a result of someone taking exception to one thing without seeing the whole picture. The engineer's job is to see the whole picture and make the best machine with as few compromises as possible given the deadlines, resources, project budget, and product cost he's held to. At the end there's typically going to be something that someone is going to complain about and the engineer will be called an idiot. However, those throwing the criticisms rarely have any understanding of what goes into bringing a machine from concept to production in a successful manner.
 
That?s due to the type of outboard reduction it uses not the tie rod location. With the power transmitted via a shaft aligned with the steering axis it has no u-joint steering angle limits.
 
If all components are designed properly, the steering geometry should not change. I fought that problem in designing farm wagons. The steering arm must be designed differently for front or rear tie rods.
 
If you are catching "brush" that is stout enough to bend those tie rods, it ain't brush. Tractors are not meant to be RAMMED into TREES.

You probably think millenials came up with the idea. Tie rods in front has been around for 80+ years.
 
Maybe just because the driveshaft would interfere coming in from the back so they put them in front. I drove IH Scouts for a long time. They had the tie rod to the front. Most vehicles have some toe-in on the front but need toe-out on turns, which you get with them behind the axle. Tie rods in front cause toe-in. I could always feel the tires scrubbing in a tight turn.
 
Ken I do agree with you that the no u joint also leads to a better front axel but having the rods in front also makes it easier to gain that sharp steering angel.
 
Usually easier behind for geometry, in front the tie rods have to get very tight to rims to maintain the correct Ackerman. Behind you can pull them in away from the rims and keep steering geometry. This is helpful as the steering cylinder can?t be low behind the axle as it interferes with the driveshaft / 3rd member.

As the other fellow mentioned, a lot of solid axles for trucks they have to compromise and pick the right Ackerman for a given wheelbase used to be reg cab pickup and the short blazers and crew cab long boxes had incorrect steering geometry causing some scrubbing.
 
What you say is very true and is something that might not be readily obvious. A given angle of the steering arms can only provide the ideal Ackermann geometry for a single specific wheelbase length. This geometry is locked in by the steering knuckle casting and since the same front axle is used on many different lengths of truck the geometry must be a compromise for all but one. Shorter-than-nominal wheelbases will show the problem worse than longer-than-nominal because the resulting smaller turning circle makes the error proportionally greater.

The same problem comes up with adjustable width axles on tractors - the geometry can only be correct for a specific track width.
 
Six of one half a dozen of the other.

Some people rip things off trying to get out of what they are stuck in.

Some wreck things on the way in.
 
could be alot of things.

HOWEVER. we're talking about foreign built and designed tractors. => foreign engineers so who knows. I'm sure they probably haven't operated one in the US in a bush filled field to bust thru.

I've found foreign engineers tend to be lazier and quite offended if you criticize their work/design/idea OR they have NO idea what they are doing. Maybe not so much with the Japanese.
 
I didnt say "anyone" that went to college. That would include everyone that did. I just said alot. And yes, not just restricted to the engineering field. Only reffered to engineers because of nature of original post. Call me out if you want, but please dont twist my words around and include words I didn't say.
 
Apperently, you must not of read my entire reply. Did I not say the problem might lie with the manufacturer???
 
OK, consider yourself called out if that makes you feel better. "A lot" to me means more than half, I hope it's not true, I like driving on safe bridges, etc.
 
Archie Bunker? LOL. Glad to be referred to as a celebrity. Maybe we should also see what Edith and Meathead have to say??
 
OK. LOL. Alot to me means more than needs to be. Not nescisaryly more than half. But it could be in some cases. LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U
FORD 6600 I can not get this thing out, any tips?
Replies
9
Views
575
Destroked 450
Destroked 450
C
H tie downs
Replies
5
Views
327
Jim.ME
J
3
Welding rods left out in the rain
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Keith Molden
K
F
John Deere 335 round baler
Replies
12
Views
322
ford4wd08
F
T
B414 Gas starter motor help!
Replies
9
Views
255
JimB2
J
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top