Is it just me, or does this go too far?

[MessickFarmEqu]

http://www.deere.com/en_US/ProductCatalog/HO/series/HO_cut_2000_series.html?link=lcff


Lift up to 1277lbs†

"†Up to 1.5 meters or 59 inches."

I've got a problem when tractor companies do this. I think we are starting to verge on deceptive advertising here. Right on the main page for the 2000 series Deere is claiming that the 200cx lifts 1277 lbs. But keep reading, no where does it say where they came up with that figure. Its over double the loaders real world performance! In all liklyhood its from the pivot pin where no loads are lifted from. In the fine print they point out that its up to 59" - so its not to full height where every other company takes their measurements. At somepoint someone is going to have to file a false advertising lawsuit to stop these kinda things. There are too many companies stretching the truth too far. The average comsumer has no idea what they are buying and no fair basis for comparing two machines.

Yes, I am a competing dealer - however I'd be saying the same thing is Kubota or New Holland did this stuff. I've called out Mahindra and Kioti for doing this too. This instance deserves mention though because its the first time I've seen anything measured below full lift height.

 

[JDFANATIC]

From my experience actually Deere underates their capacities. Here is an example (2210 tractor with 210 loader and 53" bucket):

I have seen a few posts asking what a 2210 can actually lift. I had a bunch of 50 lb. boxes of welding rod in the truck the other day so I decided to find out. I first found out what I could lift to full height and then added 50 lbs. for each consecutive lift and measured from the cement floor to the center of the bucket pivot pin. Multiple lifts of the same weight proved the height to be very repeatable. All lifts were done with the bucket curled fully back. Tilting the bucket forward just a little had a big effect on lift capacity. Here are the results:

750 lbs. Full height 68"
800 lbs. 61"
850 lbs. 51"
900 lbs. 45"
950 lbs. 38"

At this point I was out of weight and the bucket was full so I sat on the loader and had my buddy pull back on the lever.

1170 lbs. 16"

At this point I decided good enough because the front tires were almost flat and I was out of weight. I always figured this little tractor would pick up 1000 lbs. and move it. Hope this satisfies some 2210 owners curiosity.

Not bad for a loader Deere rates at 620 lbs.

This same policy of underating capacity applied to my JD755.

Cheers

 

[rockyridgefarm]

Aw come on Neal, you are just being your old orange bleeding self!!!

I mean, right under For Horse Enthusiasts it sez it can lift 1277 Lbs. And 60 inches is the height of a bale feeder. My bales are only 1300 Lbs. Figure they are being conservative, and I can lift them - no problem! So you hold the feeder real still and I'll sling one of these bales in there.

OK maybe being on the ground will be safer than the operators station...

I hate to admit it - but you are absolutely right. Write your congressman!
(as if THEY could smell a baldface lie...)

 

[Bob_Skurka]

I've got a problem when tractor companies do this. I think we are starting to verge on deceptive advertising here. . .
Yes, I am a competing dealer - however I'd be saying the same thing is Kubota or New Holland did this stuff. . .

I've called out Mahindra and Kioti for doing this too. This instance deserves mention though because its the first time I've seen anything measured below full lift height.

Neil, I've not been posting as much as I used to, but I think you are right on target.

I've often wondered what the Deere adverstising really means, because it seems like they have taken to offering their own version of specs. I'm not saying they are deceptive because Deere does provide full specs in some places of their website. However I think they often provide some very confusing information in their marketing materials. Mahindra, Kioti, Nortrac, and others provide specs that I find questionable as well. I love what Woods does with their loaders, suggesting a capacity but that capacity requires hydraulic pressure that many tractors don't provide. So the loader will lift what the company claims, but ONLY if the tractor is up to the task and most don't seem to provide the pressure required to hit the maximum lift so a buyer purchases a loader thinking he is getting a specific capacity but in fact the tractor can't provide the hydraulic pressure so the lift capacity may only be 80% or 85% of the claimed capacity.

Most buyers don't have a clue. Deere, in this case seems to be making things even less clear? And if they are using pivot point numbers that some people claim are legitimate, then not only does it seem misleading to me, but they (and other companies) have apparently brainwashed insecure buyers into believing what is simply untrue.

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

What really blows my mind here is this 59" business. As "JD Fanatic" pointed out, loader lift capacities vary by huge amounts depending on simple physics. All tractors show these same results, the 2210 is not special. Loader specifications are not over or under ratted, they are taken using a method spelled out by the ASAE which Deere normaly conforms to. The figures in question here where not, as the ASAE specs are all done at the loaders full lift height, preferably at the center of the bucket - but sometimes at the pivot pin.

I what to know who decided to stop at 59.5" inches?
Why not 58", the lift would be higher at that point wouldn't it?
Why 1277lbs? They could have picked a nice round number - say 1200? or 1400 even?

So what exactly are they trying to accomplish here?



the same info is up for the 3000 & 4000 series, "Dig with a 60" bucket up to 8.5 feet deep. Thats gotta by a typo, maybe these same marketing types just coined the "LBX-MATCH" that allows you to attach your loader buckets to a backhoe.

 

[AKfish]

I saw the "60 inch bucket to 8.5 feet" claim on the Deere webpage and had to chuckle... I don't think a 325 Cat excavator could swing that! AKfish

 

[DavesTractor]

What really blows my mind here is this 59" business.

I what to know who decided to stop at 59.5" inches?
Why not 58", the lift would be higher at that point wouldn't it?
Why 1277lbs? They could have picked a nice round number - say 1200? or 1400 even?

Neil, I take it as my mission some days to argue with you, just to make sure all sides are fairly represented, , but there is some truth to what you are saying and what Bob occasionally gets vocal about. It goes beyond lift capacities, as it seems HP numbers are messed with also. Up the rpm by 200 and give us 3 more HP, things like that. I think we really need a "Nebraska Test" for compacts. Some sort of independent lab that could spec out the tractors. This would included dimensional info, weight, lift capacities, hp at the PTO, etc. It probably isn't so easy, but it sure would be nice.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

Hey, maybe it isn't so bad. While this is a new level of low in marketing gimmickry, it reinforces the only absolute:Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware.

All specs are subject to verification, subject to change, and subject to environmental variables.

You are right to bemoan Deere's marketing mishandling. But, be assured, they have a battery of legal folks who have made certain that their tactics are 'legitimate'.

If I were selling a different color, I'd latch onto full specs from all the brands. Deerer has had loader specs posted that show the arc of the loaders lift with all values listed at each pertinent point. If Kubota doesn't show all the same info, at least compare what the do. A thinking person can guestimate the other points.

And buyers can do the same.

Don't trust the numbers the marketin/legal types push.

I have wondered why it seems like Deere is almost exclusively marketing to folks who have no idea of what a tractor is. But I think it is no coincidence that they push 'just as easy as an automobile' or 'just like a lawn tractor' while posting misleading specs on the equipment.

I will try and locate the complete loader specs. But I don't think I have ever seen them on the current offerings. Imagine that!

 

[Bob_Skurka]

... it reinforces the only absolute:Caveat Emptor. Buyer Beware...

You are right to bemoan Deere's marketing mishandling...

And buyers can do the same...

I will try and locate the complete loader specs. But I don't think I have ever seen them on the current offerings. Imagine that!

Mike, how can buyers confirm numbers if Deere hides them. Earlier I posted that JD posts the full specs, but I've spent over an hour looking for them and can no longer find them. So either they have been hidden VERY WELL or they are no longer posted. But if they are not available, how can buyers compare the correct specs? Or any specs? As I pointed out, it is more than just Deere that is doing this. But it seems that Deere may now be setting a new "low" in marketing???

Neil, I take it as my mission some days to argue with you, just to make sure all sides are fairly represented, , but there is some truth to what you are saying and what Bob occasionally gets vocal about.

Dave, ONLY OCCASIONALLY??? I think I can be given due credit for consistantly being a jerk about these things. Heck owners of brands that are not "big 3" brands think I pick on them and always support the "big 3" but it is only because they don't read my rants against the Big 3. I do think there would be an opportunity for something like the Nebraska tests for CUTS but I also think that too many consumers are too ignorant to actually look them up. Many of the 'brand loyalty' people who senselessly argue their brand is better despite the proof to the contrary are proof enough of that. Every brand has weak offerings, every brand has strong one, even the best of a brand has weak points. The problems really raise their heads when the MARKETING people at the tractor companies use legal means to mislead consumers.

 

[rockyridgefarm]

How about 793Lbs to max height taken at the pivot pins.
(so is that about 555Lbs in Skurkas? (a skurka being the unified measurement standard for CUTs..))

(see attached pdf)

Of course, this is also a European spec, which they can claim only applies to the market that it is listed...