You judged my earlier post and challenged me to prove it. I gave concrete examples. I don't have any from your position at all - price and specification are different than quality, durability, and a company that stands behind their product. I do not get your point.
Old or new, John Deere has it. An 8N was not as good as a John Deere D then just as a Kubota is not as good as a John Deere today.
Solid, stable, still John Deere. Still building an awesome product.
It has not changed, my friend.
I didn't challenge anything, I just pointed out that the "improvements" you listed weren't necessary for machines to last virtually indefinitely.
I didn't compare my 8N, just answered your question about how old it was.
Yeah, Deere "has it"....a higher price tag, that is.
Hey, if you're happy with inferior performance, at a higher price, for a possible slight increase in longevity, that's wonderful for you.
"Stable"? You mean like forcing small, responsive, local dealerships out of business? That's really, solid, and stable moves that do wonders for the consumer!
"Quality" should include performance, but you're suggesting it's something independent, because it ruins your argument.
If Deere was really offering a "better" product, at their higher price, they would at least roughly match the performance of far less expensive alternatives....but they aren't.
