John Deere Tractors

[B-Edwards]

I am looking to buy a tractor and wanted to ask if anyone here knows anything about the John Deere 5095m series. I looked at the Kubota m7040 first and tried out a used one, the clutch jerked bad when trying to ease it out. Found out Kubota uses dry brakes and clutches in that model and is around 1k to 1.5k lighter in weight. The Deere costs more but has wet clutch and brakes and engine is a better design. I think my mind is made up but would like to hear a few thoughts. Experience is what guides me but the last tractors i operated on a daily basis are dinosaurs now. The models I am looking at cost more than my first house with 3 acres.

 

[dingeryote]

It's sorta similar to saws really.

Kubota and Deere both are solid with some advantages from model to model.
The big factor is the dealer bieng available for support.

The Deere is really a Yanmar with Green paint.
Yanmar has no flies period. Thier diesels are unreal in durability and reliability.

Can you expand your choices to include New Holland(Shibura)and McCormick(Agco/Landini)? If you have dealer support locally, both would be directly comparable to the Deere in that category and competitive.

Don't let the Kubota dry clutch and brakes bug you.
They hold up fine.

Between the Kubota and Deere, I would look at Hydro capacity and if it has a constant speed PTO option, and from there err on the side of the better Yanmar Mill. Some of the McCormick line can be had with 540,750,1,000rpm pto which is a great thing to have for fuel conservation.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote

 

[autobaun70]

I can't comment on the specific model Kubota that you mention, however I do have a 99 model M6800 which has turned out to be an outstanding machine. It currently has around 3500 hours on it, with the only non maintenance items done on it to date being a key switch that had to be replaced about a month ago when key broke off in it and couldn't be replaced and one alternator which let go at around 2000 hours. Personally I like the dry clutch, just due to it feeling more like a truck clutch in operation. Most of the time we use it to pull either a 7' three point hitch bush hog, or a 12' hybrid, which it handles with ease. It also sees around 100 hours or so per year pulling a 8' Taylor Brothers cutting harrow, which it handles fine as well.

 

[Storm56]

They are both good machines. For about 9 years I have had a John Deere 4700 with the loader and backhoe option, and for 10 years before that I had a John Deere 850 with loader & backhoe. So far the 4700 has been perfect and I do not ever recall any problems with the 850 either. What I can share with you that I learned while shopping was that hosepower for horsepower the John Deere was always a heavier machine. Now I am from the old school that thinks heavier in tractors is a better thing, heavier frame, castings etc which should make for a stronger unit. More weight should also improve productivity through better traction. That said, there are no flies on Kubota products either. JD does have better resale value too, plus green & yellow just looks better than orange to my eyes!

 

[autobaun70]

What I can share with you that I learned while shopping was that hosepower for horsepower the John Deere was always a heavier machine. Now I am from the old school that thinks heavier in tractors is a better thing, heavier frame, castings etc which should make for a stronger unit. More weight should also improve productivity through better traction.

This is a very good point. We have had to add wheel weights on our 6800 for it to perform properly with a set of harrows. The old school method of water has somewhat gone away, due to tire manufacturer concerns on the newer tires. Aside from the cost, I'll take the weights any day over water now that I have used them. I haven't compared recent models as much, but at the time our Kubota was purchased, the biggest place the weight difference came into play was due to it being a shorter wheelbase than a comparable HP JD. This is actually one of my favorite things about the tractor, as it makes getting in and out of tight spots with a 3pt hitch bush hog a breeze. In this area (SC) John Deere still holds a strong advantage in terms of full time farm tractors, but the Kubota's are taking over the utility market, which is the area where they excell IMO.

 

[Walt41]

Hydro speed....lifting capacity don't forget em, they matter ALOT when you're in the saddle all day

 

[B-Edwards]

Ordered the 5085m. the difference in it and the 65hp all the way up to the 105 model is only in the injection system computer. 105hp back through the 65hp are all the same size and weight. I doubt I'll ever need any more than 85hp for what I will be doing . Question for you guys. Can these pumps be manipulated like a Power Stroke or Cummins with "chips"? Never heard of it being done but I dont see why not. Thanks for replies fellows

 

[Walt41]

Not sure on the diesel pump, but hydro limiters can, make sure you can dig a hole in undisturbed hard ground without bucket squeal, if it squeals, have the dealer turn em up, nothing more crazy than scooping dirt or rock with a green squealer IMO
don't skimp on the 50hr, it is the vital one!

 

[dingeryote]

This is a very good point. We have had to add wheel weights on our 6800 for it to perform properly with a set of harrows. The old school method of water has somewhat gone away, due to tire manufacturer concerns on the newer tires. Aside from the cost, I'll take the weights any day over water now that I have used them. I haven't compared recent models as much, but at the time our Kubota was purchased, the biggest place the weight difference came into play was due to it being a shorter wheelbase than a comparable HP JD. This is actually one of my favorite things about the tractor, as it makes getting in and out of tight spots with a 3pt hitch bush hog a breeze. In this area (SC) John Deere still holds a strong advantage in terms of full time farm tractors, but the Kubota's are taking over the utility market, which is the area where they excell IMO.

auto,

Take a look at "Rimsaver" for tire weighting.
It dosn't freeze and wont rust out the rims, and best of all it's made outta Michigan sugar beet byproduct and wont eat your tire gauge or air chucks.
Absolutely zero issues running it.

It's also heavier than water.

Beats chloride like a red headed step child.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote

 

[autobaun70]

auto,

Take a look at "Rimsaver" for tire weighting.
It dosn't freeze and wont rust out the rims, and best of all it's made outta Michigan sugar beet byproduct and wont eat your tire gauge or air chucks.
Absolutely zero issues running it.

It's also heavier than water.

Beats chloride like a red headed step child.

Stay safe!
Dingeryote

The biggest reason I like the weights over fluid filled is the lower repair cost for fixing punctures. With the amount of bush hogging we do, thorns are inevitible, the tire services add on about $50-$75 bucks per tire if they are fluid filled when they come out on a road call.

on the differences on the power on the Kubota's, when we bought our 6800, the big difference between it, and the next size up (7200 at the time) was that the 7200 & up were turbo charged engines, and had a different top end & pistons. According to our dealer, they can be turned up a bit, I assume in the pump, but of course they say that it is inadvisable to do so due to heat issues.

 

[B-Edwards]

. According to our dealer, they can be turned up a bit, I assume in the pump, but of course they say that it is inadvisable to do so due to heat issues.

The salesman told me the only difference in the 65hp and 105hp model was the software or programing of the pump, that's it. The weight is the same ,everything is the same save the decals .