Really really really want a tractor

[Cliff R]

I wouldn't want a manual transmission compact tractor for loader work just like I wouldn't want a hydro trans small tractor for plow or pulling a disk all day work. Shuttle shift manual trans are OK, but you still have to find the brakes when you push the clutch in. On a hydro unit they engine brake when you back of the hydro pedal, excellent feature, especially on hilly ground like I have here.

I mow with a JD X740 and love it. I'd never go back to a manual transmission mower either. The ONLY time I ever use the brake pedal is parking it when I finished for the day.

Getting ready to drop the hammer on a small compact tractor. Right now I have the following on my list. None of them are perfect, they just don't make a machine that has all the items I'm wanting but these will all work or can be made to work.

Kubota L2501, Kubota LX2601, John Deere 3032E, and Yanmar SA424. I was looking at the Kubota B2601 as well, but took it off my list. Same with the JD 1025R and 2025R.

I haven't tested the 3032E yet, but non liking the brake operated diff lock but could probably get used to it, no mid PTO option.

The Kubota L2501 also lacks any ability (no mid PTO) for making a mower out of it, plus it's too heavy anyhow. It would make the best loader of the ones listed, it's a beast!

The LX2601 is lighter and mid PTO.

The SA424 amazed me what it could do for the size of the machine. The place selling them had a rental unit on site and I spent some time with it. No ballast, just loaded tires and it was very stable even with a full bucket of gravel. Not the best looking in the bunch but for sure a very capable tractor for the size and weight. The hydraulics were smooth and quick compared to the Kobota models and it has 1200' lift capacity. The hydro was also quieter and much more "solid" when applied than the Kubota's. The 3rd range on the L2501 is next to useless unless you have an empty bucket, a slight downhill grade and a tail wind. Another negative for the SA424 is no skid-steer loader mount and the biggest bucket available for their quick mount is 54". I really wanted a 60 or 66" bucket to move firewood to the boiler.

The John Deere is the best looking of the bunch, but also considerably more expensive and the attachments for the loader are way up there in price as well.

Another BIG plus for Yanmar is the financing, zero for 84 months till Feb 22nd.......decisions, decisions.......

 

[rwoods]

To each his own on the hydro vs. gear; however, I have a gear tractor with a power reverser that with the flip of a lever you can go from N to F or R or from F to R or vice versa. It is just as smooth as manually clutching and sometimes better since it doesn't get tired or distracted. I would hazard to say on level ground handling material with a FEL it is easier on the operator than a hydro, but I don't do that type of work. It uses a hydraulic clutch and I have experienced three drawbacks - you can't roll the tractor off to start, it won't hold a tractor in place when parked, and if the tractor is seriously low on hydraulic fluid the clutch will disengage on a forward slope (or trailer ramp) with gravity sending you backwards then engaging when the terrain levels out taking you forward- a real recipe to flip. I don't know who all offers this option or how old the design is. My Dad had a 1958 JD 420 that had a reversing lever. He said it was designed for loader work. We didn't have a loader, but he loved it because it reversed the pto as well which allowed him to unscrew a stuck post hole digger. It did not change the mechanical bond of the clutch, so it didn't have the drawbacks I mentioned. I would love to have for play an old but pristine small JD dozer with a reverser.

Ron

 

[pdqdl]

I live in the Clearwater mountains of North Idaho. The terrain is rugged, uneven and steep. My Kubota R410 will do things on a steep hillside that a comparable sized 4x4 tractor with loader would not even be close to capable of. I'm not guessing here. I have used all of the machines in question extensively. If the articulated design was so inherently unstable, skidders wouldn't all be designed that way. I'm talking about loader work here, not farm tractor tasks involving a PTO or 3 point hitch. Obviously the tractor works best for that because it was designed for it. Tractors are designed to pull and lift loads from the back.

I can't agree with that. Firstly, how many tractors or loaders have you personally rolled or seen rolled? I've got 3 different occasions under my belt, as I have had lots of helpful employees. Done one myself.
Skidders, on the other hand, are built specifically for steep terrain, as are LCG (low-center-gravity) tractors. Different horses for different courses.

Ag tractors generally have wheels that can be moved further outboard for much greater stability on slopes. I don't know of any loaders with that feature.

The user manual of a Kubota R410 says this:
"Do not go up or down a 30° or steeper hill. Otherwise, the machine may skid sideways or turn on its side. If the ground is ungraded or soft, limit the slope below 15°"

You will also find that when a slope rating can be found for an ag tractor, it too comes in at 15°, although they are generally not included in the owners manual. I can assure you that I have casually run tractors on 15° slopes, and I have been up to 27° sideways without ever rolling. It was quite scary to pull off, however.
Keep in mind I'm talking actual degrees, not % slope.


Given that an articulated wheel loader shifts its center of gravity sideways when it turns, I don't see how you figure they are more capable of turns sideways on a steep hill. Eventually, you are going to need to turn the wrong way, center of gravity will shift downhill, and over you go! YES. A skilled operator can avoid that scenario by turning uphill and backing into position.

Here is a riddle for you: in what position on a hill is an ag tractor most likely to roll?

 

[husky455rancher]

The dealer I spoke with who sells the yanmar and Massey actually dosent have anything in stock so I didn’t go. He said he should have a Massey with a hoe at the end of the month I can check out. The yanmar he’s not really sure. I’m gonna check around tonight and see if there’s any dealers I should go check tomorrow.

 

[sb47]

Each type has it's pro's and con's. Once you decide what you want, then consider how close is the nearest dealer and shop. Nothing worse then having to drive a long way just for parts or support should you need it.

 

[Bearcreek]

I can't agree with that.

A man's entitled to his opinion.

Firstly, how many tractors or loaders have you personally rolled or seen rolled?

I have yet to roll one myself. Guess I'm either good or lucky. Seen a few tractors rolled, and a skidder.

 

[esshup]

I prefer a manual transmission over a hydro static all day long. I don't like having to keep my foot on the pedal to make it go. I like putting in in gear and letting out the clutch and not having to have my foot on a peddle. Hydro's are noisy and wine like they are in a constant bind.

If I'm going a constant speed, the JD hydro has cruise control. So, I just get it going as fast as I need, then push a button, then take my foot off the go pedal.

 

[Ryan'smilling]

The dealer I spoke with who sells the yanmar and Massey actually dosent have anything in stock so I didn’t go. He said he should have a Massey with a hoe at the end of the month I can check out. The yanmar he’s not really sure. I’m gonna check around tonight and see if there’s any dealers I should go check tomorrow.

One thing to find out about the Masseys is who actually makes that tractor. I know their bigger compacts were made by Iseki, but I'm not sure if that's still the case, or if that's who makes the little ones also. Iseki is also Japanese and they make great tractors, but personally all else being equal I'd rather buy a tractor from the manufacturer rather than a restickered one. I'm mostly thinking about parts in twenty years when I say that.

 

[Cliff R]

I used a compact tractor with a loader once and rolled it. It was a rental used to move topsoil for a weekend. Not really my fault, grew up on a farm using tractors from 25 to 200hp and plenty of loader work. I know not to lift heavy loads high and travel with them. I was dumping a full bucket of topsoil to cover the septic tank, this was back in 2003 when we built this place. Just as I started to lift the bucket to dump the right front tire dropped into a small depression in the ground and I rolled the tractor right over! It happened so fast no time to do anything but tuck and roll when it threw me from the seat. I remember putting PLENTY of distance between me and the machine as it was on a hill at the time. I came up on my feet and turned around to look at the carnage.

I was lucky, it didn't shut down (must have had the seat switch bypassed or it didn't have one) so I crawled over and turned off the engine. About all that happened was it lost about a cup of hydraulic fluid and busted one of the hazard lights on the rollbar. I took my Dodge diesel and attached it to the rollbar and brought it right back up and finished the job. I was only 43 years old when this happened, just retired from the Military and could whip my weight in Wolverines. If that happened today at 63 the outcome wouldn't be quite the same as I'd have trouble fighting my way out of a wet paper bag!.....LOL..

 

[Bill G]

Get a John Deere 2755 with a fork, works great for moving bales, I'm sure you could throw a bucket on and go to work! Holy cow it can climb any hill, up/down, or drive on it sideways! The 2755 also goes pretty fast on the road, like 40 I'd say.

WHAT! The 2755 were/are good farm tractors but WAY oversized for what the OP listed as his intended use. The 2755 was sold as a 65Hp tractor and performed at that level.

As for 40mph that is not even close to reality. When that tractor was sold there were no domestic tractors that I know of that were capable of over about 22-25mph. Now that is no longer true. Go drive a late 1980's tractor at 20mph and then come back and tell us if you soiled your shorts. They were not built for that especially as the steering gets loose.

 

[Bill G]

40? Thats fast as hell aint it?

Yes it is and UNSAFE in most situations

 

[holeycow]

WHAT! The 2755 were/are good farm tractors but WAY oversized for what the OP listed as his intended use. The 2755 was sold as a 65Hp tractor and performed at that level.

As for 40mph that is not even close to reality. When that tractor was sold there were no domestic tractors that I know of that were capable of over about 22-25mph. Now that is no longer true. Go drive a late 1980's tractor at 20mph and then come back and tell us if you soiled your shorts. They were not built for that especially as the steering gets loose.

17mph. That was the norm. And that was plenty fast enough.

 

[Gumneck]

I've got several old tractors that do not have hydro transmissions so I can't really say how great they are or not. I also have a New Holland 2008 T2410 55HP with shuttle shift and electric syncro transmission(High, Med,Low 4 speeds each range). I set the range to what the job needs, place it in the gear I know I'll be using and the rest is no clutching just Forward or Reverse, I've never needed more and I know its rock solid for my needs.

The best advice is make sure you get a FRONT END Loader regardless of what you get. I would also recommend just going ahead and not leaving the dealer without at least 2 sets of rear remotes. Mine came with one and I told the dealer to put the second on. I regret not getting the 3rd factory set installed now which it would have been easy for them to do and what would another $600 really hurt back 13 years ago on a $23,000 machine...slow learner.

For those pushing for a heavier machine.... they are right on track. If I could have a small CUT I would only because of want not necessarily a need. If you could get a heavier machine and give up the Hydro transmission to get a geared shuttle shift rig IMO you would be better off for what you plan to do and what you may not know you need to do in the future.

I would save money by NOT getting a mower deck underneath. I say this because a tractor is not a mower, yes it can be used as one. I used a 50' Ford 8N with a 60" Ford finish mower to cut 3acres of yard and 10 acres of grapes for 20 years, it did a fine job.
Demo'd an Exmark 60" Lazer Z and realized I've been mowing wrong for 20 years...slow learner. Versatility has it's place but if you got alot to mow, get a heavy built zero turn you'll thank me later and probably send me one of your best cool antique saws. Just PM for addy so you're ready!

Finally, get a set of forks with the brick guard and really think about the grapple rake. Mine is a monster and very heavy for my loader but I dont use it when I need to pick up a giant log....takes 5 mins to quick change it over to the forks. The great thing about the heavy grapple is that added weight when pushing through roots for small trees and such IMO helps but you still have to realize your front end loader is not a bull dozer so go easy.

And I just assumed you had a tractor due to your avatar. Every time I'd read one of your post my wife bust in to see what I'm reading.....your avatar is like a MAGNET.

 

[Bill G]

I have spent the time to read through most of the posts here and many folks have brought up some very valid points. There is no "one size fits all" for anyone so there is not one member that can select the right piece of equipment for someone else. A lot of folks "think" they need this and that when in reality they only want it and do not need it. I am very guilty of that. If I wasn't I would not have well over 500 saws. I have seem the discussion over tractors vrs wheel loaders vrs skidloaders vrs tracked skidloaders. Every one of those has it sweet spot where it performs the best. Not a single one is best at everything. If they were then there would be no need for the others. Some folks cannot see the use in one type because they simple do not need it for what it does well. An example is the mentions of wheel loaders. In my mind a wheel loader should not even enter the conversation. I had never even seen the small ones that Kubota makes. To the people that have a use for them they make perfect sense. In this area a lot of guys have large wheel loaders for loading silage in feeder/mixers. They are the fastest and most efficient method to accomplish the task. To others they cannot see spending over $100,000 on a new tracked skidloader but to those who have a use it makes perfect sense.

Now back to the topic of tractors. There are many types and sizes for one reason and one reason only.........people buy them. If they did not then the manufactures would not produce them. Some say "you do not need a backhoe attachment" Well that is true to those who cannot see the use of it. Tell that to the guy running the business end of a tile spade.

Not a one of us can say what the OP needs as none of us know what he will use it for. He does not either as he does not have it yet. Who knows how much he will use it. How many of us have bought a tool or machine with the big ideas of using it for all kinds of tasks. Then 2 years down the road it sits collecting dust after doing one or sometimes no jobs. If you do not think you are guilty of that then go ask your spouse or kids. I bet they will have a different opinion.

As usual a lot of talk has centered around horsepower which very well be the most confusing and lied about rating ever discussed. The horsepower rating manufactures give to their products is almost 100% arbitrary. Yes the mathematical calculation of horsepower is a constant and should be simple but that is not what is used nearly all the time. Take for example the guys racing to the good duck blinds on Lake Odessa with their 300hp outboards. How would that boat engine compare to a 5.9 Cummins in a 1989 Dodge truck? They were rated at 160HP and 400lbs of torque.

Now looking at tractors. Take a look at a JD X330 lawnmower. According to them it is 22HP. How do you think that will compare to their 1023E which they rate at 21.5HP. If horsepower is horsepower then it is a no brainer go get the lawnmower. How would each compare to a 1947 Ford 2N which had a 120 cubic inch engine rated at 12HP? I will tell you not well. Now for those saying I am comparing apples to oranges well I am not. The tractor companies like to throw out horsepower ratings that are wholly misleading. This is not something new at all. For those of you interested at all in tractors you know of the Nebraska Tractor Tests. In 1919 a Nebraska legislator was fed up with the lies claimed by tractor companies. They passed a law that basically required any model of tractor that was to be sold in Nebraska would undergo extensive testing at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. That began in 1920 and has the been the gold standard of tests since. It is real life testing not influenced by ridiculous claims by manufactures. I cannot speak to what all is tested today but in the past they would run the tractors at varying loads long term. Some tests would be in excess of 50 hours. Of course horsepower was the main thrust but they also checked fuel economy, actual weight, ballasted weight, and others. The two horsepower ratings important for a tractor are drawbar and PTO.

I tried to find some recent Nebraska test results but it appears they have not been testing sub-compact and compact tractors. I looked through the tests done from 2000-2010. Also it appears the smaller tractors they did test were only checked for PTO and not drawbar. Although these are larger tractors then what has been discussed in this thread here are some results.
2000 Kubota M5700DT 48 drawbar and 52 PTO
2002 Massey 4325 42 drawbar and 54 PTO
2002 CIH JX55 37 drawbar and 45 PTO
2004 New Holland TN60A 38 drawbar and 48 PTO
2005 JD 4320 0 drawbar and 41 PTO I am not sure why drawbar HP was not tested on the JD's
2005 JD 4520 0 drawbar and 46 PTO
2005 JD 4720 0 drawbar and 51 PTO
Now go do a little research and see what those were rated at by the manufacturer.

A lot of useless thoughts.

Bill

 

[husky455rancher]

I've got several old tractors that do not have hydro transmissions so I can't really say how great they are or not. I also have a New Holland 2008 T2410 55HP with shuttle shift and electric syncro transmission(High, Med,Low 4 speeds each range). I set the range to what the job needs, place it in the gear I know I'll be using and the rest is no clutching just Forward or Reverse, I've never needed more and I know its rock solid for my needs.

The best advice is make sure you get a FRONT END Loader regardless of what you get. I would also recommend just going ahead and not leaving the dealer without at least 2 sets of rear remotes. Mine came with one and I told the dealer to put the second on. I regret not getting the 3rd factory set installed now which it would have been easy for them to do and what would another $600 really hurt back 13 years ago on a $23,000 machine...slow learner.

For those pushing for a heavier machine.... they are right on track. If I could have a small CUT I would only because of want not necessarily a need. If you could get a heavier machine and give up the Hydro transmission to get a geared shuttle shift rig IMO you would be better off for what you plan to do and what you may not know you need to do in the future.

I would save money by NOT getting a mower deck underneath. I say this because a tractor is not a mower, yes it can be used as one. I used a 50' Ford 8N with a 60" Ford finish mower to cut 3acres of yard and 10 acres of grapes for 20 years, it did a fine job.
Demo'd an Exmark 60" Lazer Z and realized I've been mowing wrong for 20 years...slow learner. Versatility has it's place but if you got alot to mow, get a heavy built zero turn you'll thank me later and probably send me one of your best cool antique saws. Just PM for addy so you're ready!

Finally, get a set of forks with the brick guard and really think about the grapple rake. Mine is a monster and very heavy for my loader but I dont use it when I need to pick up a giant log....takes 5 mins to quick change it over to the forks. The great thing about the heavy grapple is that added weight when pushing through roots for small trees and such IMO helps but you still have to realize your front end loader is not a bull dozer so go easy.

And I just assumed you had a tractor due to your avatar. Every time I'd read one of your post my wife bust in to see what I'm reading.....your avatar is like a MAGNET.

Yeah I’ve gotten a lot of compliments on it over the years in here.

I was all set to go kioti 2610 or 3510 with the loader. Now I’m considering a subcompact with the backhoe and mechanical thumb and a set of forks. It kinda comes down to sub with the hoe or compact and no hoe. I really can’t swing a compact with a hoe price wise.

 

[Bill G]

Since you are in CT do you plan on trying to move any logs in the winter? I assume so. No matter how much power you have it will not move a matchstick without traction. The type of tire will not help much either. The only way to move anything in snow, ice, or even frozen ground is with tire chains on. No matter what you go with if you are wanting to use it in the winter get good chains. Last week my brother called me up and said he had the skidder running and wanted to know if I wanted to pull some logs up. He showed up a little later and I laughed at him. I said what are you going to pull without chains on. He reply was oh I don't need them on the jobs I am using this machine on. It takes 4hrs to put them on and the main skidder has chains on. I laughed and said OK lets go. There was not anything to skid on the flat so we headed down the bluff. I live on the top of the bluff over the Mississippi River. It is near straight cliffs in many places but I have roads that are not to bad. Well off he goes down one. He stops well before it gets any steepness at all. He realizes he is in trouble and tries to back up the road. Well of course the skidder will not move. We stretch the winch line up the hill to a medium Ash that I was going to cut. Then he pulls himself back up. I drop the Ash and his son backs up to it and grabs it with the grapple. Well that did not go well at all and he dropped the front end in a ditch. Finally get him convinced to just get up the hill aways and winch it. Well that works and eventually we reach the top. The entire process took a long time and my brother says "I don't think we better try anymore today" I look at him and say "well no sh..t" The point of that story is the skidder had all the horsepower needed, the grapple had all the hydraulic power needed, still it could not even move it's own weight. Simple tire chains would have solved the entire issue.

Bill

 

[MiserblOF]

Frame size is a much bigger factor than hp, IMO. A 30hp B series is no comparison to a 30hp L series. I am referring to the older models - no idea on the nomenclature of the new ones. I personally don't see the value in spending $30k on a compact tractor when one can be had for 1/3 of that and provide years of service, but to each their own.

For traction and size / strength of loader, you are right. But I would submit, just for one example, that the Kubota L2501 is too much tractor for the horsepower. One real hp hog, and one of the main reasons I got a bigger tractor is to run a chipper/shredder or chipper. The deal with chippers is that while you might never chip an 8" log, you want that 8" chipper because of the smaller stuff you can push thru it without having to trim it so much. I went from a 3" gas powered to a 5.5" PTO, that I bought used, and if I live long enough and am able to afford it, will go for an 8" PTO chipper. For that, depending on the brand, my 32 hp at the PTO is either on the low end or not enough. But since I'll never chip an 8" log, low end is enough.

 

[Bill G]

This is another example. I pulled this tree up tonight. I measured it as I figured I would post the pic in this thread for a example. It is a small Elm tree only about 18" on the butt and 8" at the top. It is 38 ft long. I dropped it along the edge of my hay field on a very slight grade. I hooked on to it with a 140hp tractor and it would not move it with giving it a little running pull. Even then I ran out of traction a couple times and had to re-adjust. I gut to the gravel and that was fine until I made the turn into the driveway (which was a dumb move on my part). In any event I got it where I wanted but it was not without some hassle. The tractor has plenty of power but as much as I preach tire chains I do not have a set for that tractor. It rarely get used in the winter but now I must use it due to issues with other equipment. Now if you never plan to touch snow or frozen ground you will not need chains but in your area I am thinking you will.

 

[pdqdl]

Since you are in CT do you plan on trying to move any logs in the winter? I assume so. No matter how much power you have it will not move a matchstick without traction. The type of tire will not help much either. The only way to move anything in snow, ice, or even frozen ground is with tire chains on. No matter what you go with if you are wanting to use it in the winter get good chains. Last week my brother called me up and said he had the skidder running and wanted to know if I wanted to pull some logs up. He showed up a little later and I laughed at him. I said what are you going to pull without chains on. He reply was oh I don't need them on the jobs I am using this machine on. It takes 4hrs to put them on and the main skidder has chains on. I laughed and said OK lets go. There was not anything to skid on the flat so we headed down the bluff. I live on the top of the bluff over the Mississippi River. It is near straight cliffs in many places but I have roads that are not to bad. Well off he goes down one. He stops well before it gets any steepness at all. He realizes he is in trouble and tries to back up the road. Well of course the skidder will not move. We stretch the winch line up the hill to a medium Ash that I was going to cut. Then he pulls himself back up. I drop the Ash and his son backs up to it and grabs it with the grapple. Well that did not go well at all and he dropped the front end in a ditch. Finally get him convinced to just get up the hill aways and winch it. Well that works and eventually we reach the top. The entire process took a long time and my brother says "I don't think we better try anymore today" I look at him and say "well no sh..t" The point of that story is the skidder had all the horsepower needed, the grapple had all the hydraulic power needed, still it could not even move it's own weight. Simple tire chains would have solved the entire issue.

Bill

No doubt about that traction in snow problem. Ag tires don't hold snow too well unless it is deep and somewhat warm. Then it packs down and gives traction.

You should have seen me many years ago trying to tow-start my tractor on a cold day, so as to load some salt. No amount of fresh batteries would spin the engine. We towed that ***** down the road up to 30mph, popping the clutch in high gear. COLD engine just said "Nope! Ain't gonna turn."

The rear wheels would then go crazy, one spinning forward holding traction, and the other spinning backwards. I'd stomp on the left brake, right brake, reversing the tire spinning effect, and that tractor would be sloughing all over the road. After a couple of miles, we got it started, but it was really crazy.

 

[husky455rancher]

View attachment 958679

This is another example. I pulled this tree up tonight. I measured it as I figured I would post the pic in this thread for a example. It is a small Elm tree only about 18" on the butt and 8" at the top. It is 38 ft long. I dropped it along the edge of my hay field on a very slight grade. I hooked on to it with a 140hp tractor and it would not move it with giving it a little running pull. Even then I ran out of traction a couple times and had to re-adjust. I gut to the gravel and that was fine until I made the turn into the driveway (which was a dumb move on my part). In any event I got it where I wanted but it was not without some hassle. The tractor has plenty of power but as much as I preach tire chains I do not have a set for that tractor. It rarely get used in the winter but now I must use it due to issues with other equipment. Now if you never plan to touch snow or frozen ground you will not need chains but in your area I am thinking you will.

traction is a good point. Funny you bring that up because I was thinking of doing a little splitting Friday after work and I got home and went out in the yard and it’s all ice. So that didn’t happen but it made me think about the traction issue. Honestly with the way the yard is now even if I did have chains and could get the equipment setup I’d surely wipe out and hurt myself. Chains is definitely something to think about which I haven’t really considered.

this thread has been very helpful. Thank you everyone for your thoughts. Feel free to keep adding them.