Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts

   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts
  • Thread Starter
#11  
Isn't the Sync Reverser a very reliable and time tested transmission ? I won't be doing repeated material moving tasks requiring frequent direction changes which would make the Power Reverser appealing. I admit the wet clutch is attractive on the PR. But even for modest loader work the Sync Reverser accommodates direction changes but not as many gear ratio choices. Are there any known reliability problems with Sync Reverser? It is synchronized while in any one of the 3 transfer case ranges.
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts
  • Thread Starter
#12  
My mistake on transmission name . The Sync Shuttle is what I described, not Sync Reverser.
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts #13  
Isn't the Sync Reverser a very reliable and time tested transmission ? I won't be doing repeated material moving tasks requiring frequent direction changes which would make the Power Reverser appealing. I admit the wet clutch is attractive on the PR. But even for modest loader work the Sync Reverser accommodates direction changes but not as many gear ratio choices. Are there any known reliability problems with Sync Reverser? It is synchronized while in any one of the 3 transfer case ranges.
Second to reverse works in all three ranges.
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts #14  
Second to reverse works in all three ranges.

Actually it's synchronized between any forward gear and reverse in each range. So you can shift from 1st, 2nd, to 3rd, or from any of those to reverse without stopping. The ranges are not synchronized however.

As for the power, if implement calls for 45pto hp minimum, they truly mean minimum to make the thing function. You will not get good performance at all when operating at the minimum power level. For a bush hog that calls for 45hp min, I'd want at least 55hp, so that puts you into a 5065e.
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts #15  
We have a 5065E with a 553 loader that we've got just over a hundred hours on now. Would recommend budgeting for at least 4 rear wheel weights if you're going to do much pulling, or a weight box if u are mainly doing FEL and PTO work. Good tractor so far, just found it to be a little light.
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts
  • Thread Starter
#16  
So if I get my rear tires filled I should be fine? The FEL capabilities on 5055e and 5065e are identical with same hydraulic pump flow, same 553 loader and I am getting the 16.9 rear tires like you have. Are your rear tires filled or are you substituting wheel weights for water ? Thank you for your advice. I am a newbie. I believe the water will add 700-1000 lbs between both rears. Anyone have an accurate estimate of weight added for water?
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts #17  
So if I get my rear tires filled I should be fine? The FEL capabilities on 5055e and 5065e are identical with same hydraulic pump flow, same 553 loader and I am getting the 16.9 rear tires like you have. Are your rear tires filled or are you substituting wheel weights for water ? Thank you for your advice. I am a newbie. I believe the water will add 700-1000 lbs between both rears. Anyone have an accurate estimate of weight added for water?

16.9-28 tires hold 747 lbs of calcium chloride solution per tire." Rimguard" is slightly different. (from page 70-5 of the owners manual)
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts
  • Thread Starter
#18  
Dealer uses water and antifreeze. Will that rust the interior of the wheels?
 
   / Comparing 5055e to 4000 series compacts #20  
So if I get my rear tires filled I should be fine? The FEL capabilities on 5055e and 5065e are identical with same hydraulic pump flow, same 553 loader and I am getting the 16.9 rear tires like you have. Are your rear tires filled or are you substituting wheel weights for water ? Thank you for your advice. I am a newbie. I believe the water will add 700-1000 lbs between both rears. Anyone have an accurate estimate of weight added for water?

That should be good for weight, ours aren't filled. The last loader tractor we had, had calcium filled tires, trying to stay away from that though as any small leak causes the rims to rust badly, and it's hard on clutches, but for what you're doing it should be fine.
 
 
Top