John Deere 2510 with 148 Loader

How much can a 148 loader handle on the 2510 (not diesel). Its a darn big loader and I don't currently have it mounted to rear axel (although considering it). I don't want to overwork it, causing problems. Looking for some help first.

Thanks!

My dad had a 148 loader on a 4020, and we also used it on a 3020. The loader would easily handle 1,500 pound round bales. I would be more concerned with over-loading your 2510. The 148 loader will handle just about anything you can throw at it.

Why does 3,000 lb ? come to mind ? the 158 is 4,000 lbs.
don't worry if it breaks in half you own both pieces.

I think the 148 is too big for 2510, too easy to break things.

That was my concern when seeing how big the 148 was in person. What loader would fit it then? I only saw where the 148,158 could

ha. True. Concerned it's too big but haven't seen what other loaders may fit the 2510..?

Plenty of 148 on 3020 models. I don't know how different a 2510 engine block is for strength ?

Gotchya. I saw where guys weld brackets to rear axels. Wasn't sure that would make a huge difference and save me a lot of headache or what the solution is... Would like a loader for this 2510 though (in shop now and would like to save $4,000 if this is the case)

John Deere 48 is sized for that tractor, or a Westendorf.

OK. DUMB question. ... is 148 and 48 the same loader? The 48 is the one actually being put on my 2510

The 48 is the correct loader for the 2510, the 148 would be a better fit on 4020.

So if you have a 48 going on 2510, then good news.

Putting the 148 loader on a 4010/4020 led many farmers to look for a
4430 front axle for their tractor, after the factory front axle broke.

(quoted from post at 14:30:59 07/18/17) The 48 is the correct loader for the 2510, the 148 would be a better fit on 4020..

Click to expand...

I sold & mounted new 48 loaders on new/used 4020's back when I was employed by a JD dealer

I would not want a 48 on 4020, just too easy to break.

A 148 is just fine for a 2510. You will not break it. Sold lots of 2510,2520,3010,3020's with 148 loaders. If you abuse it you will break the factory front end. 48 loaders are good to but I like the 148 better as it has two bucket cylinders instead of one like a 48. Tom

(quoted from post at 15:59:06 07/18/17) I would not want a 48 on 4020, just too easy to break.

Click to expand...

Evidently JD engineers did not agree with you. Yes I like 148 loader with 2 bucket cylinders & better constructed mounting frames better than 48.

Well here is some history.

The JD 48 loader was the earlier model JD loader made to the middle to big row crop tractors. It only had a single bucket cylinder mounted in the middle of the bucket. This really limited the roll back force. It also made that mid mount be a weak link in on the loader. You see the majority of them with the bucket cylinder mount broke all to heck.

The JD 148 loader replaced the JD 48 loader. The main improvement was twin bucket cylinders. The JD 148 loader was built for close to 15 years. This became the loader of choice on the JD 3020 and JD 4020.

I do not see why you think you need axle brackets on a JD 148 loader that is going on a Waterloo built tractor. If you have the mounting bracket bolted on correctly with the mid support in place you will break the loader in two pieces before you break anything on the tractor behind the clutch housing. Now if your putting a JD 148 loader on a JD Mannheim built tractors like a JD 2840 or 2940 then you would need some axle supports. They do not have full frame rails.

Now for your first question. A JD 148 loader will bolt right on your JD 2510. You have plenty of loader for that tractor. I have mounted JD 146 loaders on JD 2520 and that was a better fit. The trouble is there where many fewer JD 146s loader built than the JD 148 loader.

So forget the darn axle brackets. You see them on the after market loaders because they did not have strong enough mounts to handle the stress without the axle brackets.

I felt the same way, I put a 145 loader on my 2510 although I would have preferred a 146 loader. I also fabricated my own mounting to the rear axle. I see opinions vary, but putting that beam to the rear axle really stiffened the whole system.

The only negative is you will not get the height and reach of a 148 loader. How will you use he loader?

Paul

I have a 4010 with a 48 loader. My dad bought both new and nothings broke yet. I would prefer a 148 because of the 2 bucket cylinders instead of just 1. I'm not getting rid of the one I've got though. If you try hard enough I'm sure anything can be broken. Some people try to use a tractor and loader like a bulldozer and are amazed when something breaks.

(quoted from post at 18:12:25 07/18/17) I felt the same way, I put a 145 loader on my 2510 although I would have preferred a 146 loader. I also fabricated my own mounting to the rear axle. I see opinions vary, but putting that beam to the rear axle really stiffened the whole system.

The only negative is you will not get the height and reach of a 148 loader. How will you use he loader?

Paul

Click to expand...

chores around the farm. loading bucket with rock, field stone, fire wood, etc. hauling manure

The problem with a 148 loader on a 3020 is that the 3020 engine has only two mounting bolts at the rear of the engine, vs four on the 4020...and those bolts break under stress from the loader. They can be drilled larger one time, then either weld them in place or buy a new engine block. My neighbors have had to do that. I tapped one size bigger, then designed and built a mount that goes to the rear axle. That was decades ago, and it has not broken since. I"ve post those pics on here, should be in archives, but Photoshop won"t allow any further posting unless I pay their fees. The original design is JD poor engineering.

(quoted from post at 01:50:52 07/20/17) The problem with a 148 loader on a 3020 is that the 3020 engine has only two mounting bolts at the rear of the engine, vs four on the 4020...

Click to expand...

Both early & late model 4020's have two(2) rear frame to engine block mounting bolts on each side same as 3020. Most frame mounting bolt failures are caused from frame bolts not being properly torqued before loader frames were installed. Many,many 3020/4020's have survived loader use without frame bolt failures.



[/url]