Kelley 400 Loader

[89 MJ]

I have done research on these and haven't had much luck finding anything. I'm hoping someone here might know or have a manual about them. My 68 Oliver 550 has a Kelley 400 loader on it. It has a trip bucket and does not put any down pressure on the loader (no clue what the correct tractor terminology for that is)

My main question is what is the lifting capacity? Are these a fairly rare piece? I've only seen the one on my tractor.

 

[caterpillar guy]

Most more modern loader built in the last 40years will lift most round bales if you have enough tail to hold it down in the tractor. So probably in the 1500-2000 range of lift. Tractors hydraulics will also dictate that.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

Single-acting loaders were very common up through the 1960's. Their primary purpose was mucking out animal pens, and the single-acting hydraulics allowed them to be used on older, more basic tractors.

There is only one hydraulic hose going to the bottom of each cylinder. No way it can provide down pressure. The cylinders currently on the loader cannot be converted to dual acting as they have no piston. The rod is the piston, and there is no room for oil to go in the top to push them down.

From the picture it appears to be a light-duty loader. Model numbers often indicated the lifting capacity of the loader, so 400 = 400lbs of capacity.

 

[rrlund]

The 550 is a great little tractor, but I doubt you will or should, lift over 800 pounds with it. The weight of the tractor and the limits of the hydraulics aren't going to let you lift much more with it safely. As has been stated, they were built to replace a man and a manure fork and we were darned glad to have them. We didn't know anything any better like we do now. It's not going to do the work of something 50 years newer.

 

[89 MJ]

Most more modern loader built in the last 40years will lift most round bales if you have enough tail to hold it down in the tractor. So probably in the 1500-2000 range of lift. Tractors hydraulics will also dictate that.

This loader is a lot closer to 60 years old, I would estimate.

Single-acting loaders were very common up through the 1960's. Their primary purpose was mucking out animal pens, and the single-acting hydraulics allowed them to be used on older, more basic tractors.

There is only one hydraulic hose going to the bottom of each cylinder. No way it can provide down pressure. The cylinders currently on the loader cannot be converted to dual acting as they have no piston. The rod is the piston, and there is no room for oil to go in the top to push them down.

From the picture it appears to be a light-duty loader. Model numbers often indicated the lifting capacity of the loader, so 400 = 400lbs of capacity.
View attachment 97538

That’s a cool history on them, I appreciate it. Now that you say it, 400lbs makes a lot of sense for the capacity. I’ve exceeded that, it’s not happy about lifting a lot more than that.

The 550 is a great little tractor, but I doubt you will or should, lift over 800 pounds with it. The weight of the tractor and the limits of the hydraulics aren't going to let you lift much more with it safely. As has been stated, they were built to replace a man and a manure fork and we were darned glad to have them. We didn't know anything any better like we do now. It's not going to do the work of something 50 years newer.

The 550s do seem to get light in the rear end. That’s good to know about the limits of the hydraulics. I’m sure these loaders were awesome to have when they were new.

This is probably the sketchiest thing I’ve done with the tractor. We put this car on barrels because towing it on a trailer would’ve torn it apart because it was so rusty. This would allow a rollback tow truck to load it much easier. It was picked up end by end and was just picked up, not picked up and driven with.

 

[rrlund]

This loader is a lot closer to 60 years old, I would estimate.


That’s a cool history on them, I appreciate it. Now that you say it, 400lbs makes a lot of sense for the capacity. I’ve exceeded that, it’s not happy about lifting a lot more than that.


The 550s do seem to get light in the rear end. That’s good to know about the limits of the hydraulics. I’m sure these loaders were awesome to have when they were new.

This is probably the sketchiest thing I’ve done with the tractor. We put this car on barrels because towing it on a trailer would’ve torn it apart because it was so rusty. This would allow a rollback tow truck to load it much easier. It was picked up end by end and was just picked up, not picked up and driven with.
View attachment 97545

The first utility loader tractor we had was a Super 55 with a Freeman trip bucket loader and single acting cylinders. We thought we had the world by the tail. It was a huge step up from a narrow front Farmall H with a straight frame loader. Round bales only existed as those little things to you rolled with an Allis Chalmers Roto-Baler, so it was just for loading manure, but we built a pan that slid over the tines to load dirt. We had a straight blade for it too and eventually a boom pole. What the heck, if you have something like that, you use it for anything that you can. We found the limits of it eventually when the front axle broke while loading manure. No doubt cracked from all the years of abuse prior.

I've got an Oliver 1365 front wheel assist with a loader now, but I still have a Super 55 here too. When I get on that little mouse, it's hard to imagine that we ever used one as a loader tractor. It feels more like a lawn tractor now, but like I said, it was all we knew then.

 

[89 MJ]

The first utility loader tractor we had was a Super 55 with a Freeman trip bucket loader and single acting cylinders. We thought we had the world by the tail. It was a huge step up from a narrow front Farmall H with a straight frame loader. Round bales only existed as those little things to you rolled with an Allis Chalmers Roto-Baler, so it was just for loading manure, but we built a pan that slid over the tines to load dirt. We had a straight blade for it too and eventually a boom pole. What the heck, if you have something like that, you use it for anything that you can. We found the limits of it eventually when the front axle broke while loading manure. No doubt cracked from all the years of abuse prior.

I've got an Oliver 1365 front wheel assist with a loader now, but I still have a Super 55 here too. When I get on that little mouse, it's hard to imagine that we ever used one as a loader tractor. It feels more like a lawn tractor now, but like I said, it was all we knew then.

That sounds a lot like me. My 550 is the only tractor my family has so it gets used for everything. I’ve got a boom pole and a rear blade for it, along with a finish mower I’ll use once I get the PTO clutch working again. For what I use it for, it’s really the perfect tractor. Definitely would be too small for a farm I’m sure though.

It’s funny you bring that up. It’s crazy to think the progress that was made between the Super 55 and later the 550s being produced to the larger Oliver tractors that were 15 or so years later.

 

[BarnyardEngineering]

Now that you say it, 400lbs makes a lot of sense for the capacity. I’ve exceeded that, it’s not happy about lifting a lot more than that.

There is often a large difference between "rated" and "what it will handle." There are a lot of "2000" loaders out there with a 2000lb capacity, but lifts of 3000-4000lbs or more are commonplace...