MF 7700 series rear wheel weights.

[Farma Parma]

The point I was trying to make is that extra wheel weight might be frowned upon in the 7726 as everything in there is already on its limit as it is the largest of the range. As regards the 7600 range they are identical in output to the 7700 range. They didn't even make a vt 7626, it was dyna6 only as at that time they said that size of vt transmission couldn't stick it.

Dyna-vt is higher spec on later 7700S models i know that for sure
poss the all the 7700 were also dunno?
The change from Horizontal to Vertical Linkage Rams is what you will notice & more lift available
my 7499 has the older 820 fendt rear end basically & lifts 9.3t
Current 7718/19S has similar type to 718-724 Fendt, Rams Vertical fully visible like most tractors but lift 9.6t
Both much better than D6 Rear ends a lot more so on the smaller chassis massey's

 

[shumungus]

Well hedge cutter would be hanging towards the other

Axle brackets or linkage?

 

[James]

Axle brackets or linkage?

Axle bracket

 

[shumungus]

I always thought that wheel weights were the least stressful on the tractor as you are placing forces on the rim and tyre and not so much on the tractor. I think that if you had one side weighted 700 kg heavier than the other there would be a big difference in braking on the road as the hedge cutter would be folded in and spreading the weight more evenly across the rear end. If you were brakjng I think that the un weighted wheel would be prone to lock up as it would have less grip? Can you not weight both wheels? thus evening it out a bit.

 

[its.... only me]

The point I was trying to make is that extra wheel weight might be frowned upon in the 7726 as everything in there is already on its limit as it is the largest of the range. As regards the 7600 range they are identical in output to the 7700 range. They didn't even make a vt 7626, it was dyna6 only as at that time they said that size of vt transmission couldn't stick it.

I wouldn’t of thought that it was on its limits - as in about to reach breaking point, as they are in a larger chassis, bigger axles, engines etc. than lesser horse powered in the range. The point I was really trying to find out when I posted the thread - was really to see if the tyres were up to managing two wheel weights on either side ( with out tyre issues down the line) ?
I have neighbours with 7726’s with two rear wheel weights per wheel - but are on 650/75 x 38 Mich. MachXbibs not Multibibs.

 

[d williams]

Why I ask is because I was talking to head salesman at local MF open event and was asking him had they changed the gearing ratios on the bigger frames 7700 as there was a 7726 sat shod in 710 70 r42 instead of the usual 710 60 r42. He said no the gearing was still the same but there was enough scope in the ratios to use the larger tyre on the dyna 6 but not the VT as there was a question over that VT being able to handle the larger torque required by the bigger wheel or indeed wheel weights giving better grip.
As Speedy correctly pointed out there are tractors being sold with tyres that are not rated for the hp of the tractor they are attached to, mine is one of them that is why I had interest in this as when changing tyres I would like to have went from the 710 60 r42 xeobibs up to 710 70 r42 axiobibs or trellys as they are rated for the hp. Also I find on my tyres that there is significant transmission wind up on 4wd and changing to the larger tyre would help this.

Max load on 710/60r42
4625kgs at 30kph at1.0 bar
10200lbs at 20 mph at 15psi