was a 4052r new, now 4105 on the market?

[ArlyA]

Folks, we've been raising funds to purchase a new 4052R and of course talking with our dealer about details. A 4yo 4105 just went up FS here with 100 hours on it. They are asking 22K for it and includes a box blade but any warranty is gone. This is about 10K less than the 4052 but doesn't have the tier 4 pollution gear on it. We have moving towards this slightly smaller tractor that seems like a decent price.

This has about 10 less HP but folks tell us the pre-tier 4's do better with less. This weight about 800lbs less than the 4052.

What do you think about this in general?? I did search the archives here and found darn few complaints about the 4105's.

 

[Garrett Wiggins]

The 4105 with loader sold new for 26K with 0% interest for 72 months. Unless this is a cash deal, you need to figure out your APR and add it back to the cost of the used tractor. The 4052M has a low, medium, and high range if I is hydro. The 4052m is a lot better built tractor than the 4105 IMO. The 4052m I think comes with a 6 year warranty. The 4044m Deere is more comparable to the 4105 Deere.

 

[Piston]

That loader is only a 300cx, compared to the 400cx on the 4052. That alone would keep me away from the 4105.

 

[Wagtail]

That's the exact tractor that I have (+ a 3rd function on the FEL) and I've had no complaints, for what I use it for.

It's a solid, bare-bones, HST unit. Load the tyres & have them run a 3rd function for a grapple (see if they'll do that as part of the deal) and you'd be good to go. 100hrs is practically new, depending on what it was being used for.

Note that the 'CX' line of FELs have been replaced.

 

[ArlyA]

I looked at the break out and all the capacities of the loader, and thought it was only slightly less than what the 4052 has. I also compared the tractors weights, turning radius and three point lift capacities of both of them. Some numbers were the same while others slightly lower on the 4105. It seems like its between the modern 30 and 40 series. Nonetheless, I couldn't find anything that was a red flag to me. Bare bones machine is fine by me.

That's the exact tractor that I have (+ a 3rd function on the FEL) and I've had no complaints, for what I use it for.

It's a solid, bare-bones, HST unit. Load the tyres & have them run a 3rd function for a grapple (see if they'll do that as part of the deal) and you'd be good to go. 100hrs is practically new, depending on what it was being used for.

Note that the 'CX' line of FELs have been replaced.

 

[ArlyA]

Why???

That loader is only a 300cx, compared to the 400cx on the 4052. That alone would keep me away from the 4105.

 

[Rara Avis]

Why???

Lift capacity at pivot pin (max height): 400x = 2341 lbs, 400cx = 2378 lbs.
Lift capacity at 500mm ahead of pivot pin (max height): 400x = 1716 lbs, 400cx = 2565 lbs.

Lift capacity at pivot pin (59" height): 400x = 2695 lbs, 400cx = 2691 lbs
Lift capacity at 500mm ahead of pivot pin (59" height): 400x = 2149 lbs, 400cx = 2633 lbs.

Whereas Lift capacity of a 300cx is just about 1600 lb

 

[Piston]

Why???

Lack of lift capacity. On the 4105 the 300cx specs out to only 1k lbs of lift.


If you don't need much lift then it could be a great tractor for you, I'm just pointing out a major difference in case you had overlooked it. :thumbsup:

 

[ArlyA]

We located the 300cx loader lift capacity numbers and now agree, they are rather low and lame. We're cooling off on this purchase.

Thanks for the insights!!

 

[Wagtail]

We located the 300cx loader lift capacity numbers and now agree, they are rather low and lame. We're cooling off on this purchase.

Thanks for the insights!!

Hey now, there's no need to be like that.

The 300CX is perfect for what I use it for and is why I got it for my 4105.