CK20, CK25 or CK30???

[Aragon]

I'm looking for my first tractor and would appreciate some advice. I have 10 gently sloping acres (5 pasture & 5 wooded). I need to bushhog the pasture, box blade a 1500' gravel driveway and eventually clear off another 2 to 3 acres for more pasture. Trees are scattered throughout the existing pasture so there are NOT a lot of straight runs that can be made with a tractor.

I am leaning toward hydrostatic, (even though I am old-school and believe in keeping it simple) because the turning and hills have me worried about the clutch and brakes. I also want to use the tractor around the barn after we get some horses, so maneuverability is an important factor. Are my worries about gear drive unfounded on sloping property that will include some tight turning? I have heard that braking one wheel while turning with HST can be difficult and would like to hear more about this.

I am looking at the Kioti CK25HST or CK30HST which appear to offer a lot of value for the money. Has anyone put a CK25 to the test with an FEL to see what it can do? I am concerned about the weight to horsepower ratio on this tractor when using an FEL and would love to get some feedback on this.

Does anyone think these tractors are overkill for my needs? Would the CK20 be adequate when it comes time to do some land clearing including hauling midsize logs, dragging out stumps and rocks, grading, etc?

Thanks in advance for helping a newcomer.
The discussion boards at TBN have been a great help getting me this far.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

I would favor the CK30 hydro.

I dislike the CK25 because of its size/weight/hp ratio, to me makes it underpowered for the size. The CK30 is pretty much perfect. Both the CK25 & CK30 use the same 130 loader, which is a very good loader, the capacity of the loader is the same with either the CK25 or CK30. For 10 acres you could get by with the CK20, but I think you'd live to regret it. The CK30 will pull larger implements than the CK25, but even with that statement, the implements will still be fairly small (6' mower deck instead of 5' deck, or a 60" box blade instead of a 48").

As for hydro on hills. It is much safer. As for keeping it simple, please understand that hydro transmissions are simple. Simple to use. Simple to learn. And the theory of how they operate is simple too, which is why they are designed to last for 5000+ hours of operation with no trouble. As for brake turning on a hill with a hydro, that is something that depends on the pedal configuration of the tractor. Some tractors have cruise control, so all you have to do is set the cruise and work your brakes. Personally I find that when I brake turn I tear up the sod too much so I don't do it. I find that I can adjust the mowing pattern so that I have very few sharp turns to deal with, or I simply loop around to make the turn. Either way, it I don't think I brake turn more than a couple times a year.

 

[readytogo]

Have been trying to decide between the CK 25 and 30 myself.
Have to keep in mind that some of the "oldies but goodies"
were some pretty heavy tractors, and not always high horsepower. They got the job done, and many still running today.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

<font color="green"> Have to keep in mind that some of the "oldies but goodies" were some pretty heavy tractors, and not always high horsepower. </font>

Yup, I like to restore those when I have time. But many of those, especially the machines from the 50's, were designed for totally different purposes. No power steering and not designed to operate a FEL at all. Some FELs were added, but they are very weak by today's standards and often with small trip buckets. Eventually power steering was added. But when we talk about utility class tractors from that era, many were designed to pull a single or double bottom plow and that is not something that the CK class of tractors is designed for at all. Sure, the 30 probably could pull a single bottom if it had AG tires and maybe it could pull a double bottom, but that would be a mighty strain. It is simply designed for a different purpose. Sort of like a dairy cow versus a beef cattle. You can eat either, but one is bred to increase milk output, the other to increase bulk quickly so it can be slaughtered.

 

[JayC]

I would recommend the HST, too. However, if differential braking is important to you it will be a problem with the treadle pedal setup. Like Bob said, you could use cruise control, but I would not want to use cruise in the woods or on a hill. If you will have to use cruise you may as well get a gear. That is the biggest gripe I have about treadle pedal setups. If they put the brakes on the same side they might as well get rid of the dual brake setup altogether. I like the Kiotis alot, but this treadle pedal thing is a concern to me. I haven't used one, but I did sit on a machine with one and I didn't like it too much. The only machines with the dual pedal HST setup where differential braking would be possible, are the John Deeres (2210 and under, 4000 Ten & Twenty, 110TLB), Case/New Holland SCUTs (DX18E & 24E; TZ18 & 24) and large chassis CUTs (DX35, 40, & 45; TC35DA, 40DA, & 45DA) respectively, and the FarmTrac 330 and 390.

 

[shoppintractors]

<font color="blue">I dislike the CK25 because of its size/weight/hp ratio, to me makes it underpowered for the size. </font>

Bob, To keep current, have you had any actual seat time on a CK25 yet? If not, your just assuming that the CK25 is underpowered based solely on reading the spec's and forming this opinion?

Don

 

[KiotiJohn]

The only way you're going to be sure of how the CK25 is going to handle is to go try one out, making sure it has a loader on it, and some conditions in the test field that could challenge the work.
I found the CK25 pretty capable as far as strength, but it didn't have a loader on it yet. The CK30 did have the loader, and it was AWESOME compared to my CK20, and it's been doing pretty darn well itself!
If I were going to do it all over again, and I had the money, I'd go for the CK30, just because /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif John

 

[To20Chris]

Bob, I think your concerns about the CK25 derive from a "mowing-centered" point of view. I've probably never needed the full 30hp of my LK, and I'm sure I would not miss the 5hp. The only reason I take mine up over 2200rpm is to get the hydraulic pump up to presure/volume, or (rarely) to get the PTO up to speed. I would miss the traction with a lighter tractor though. So I would say that a CK25 would be capable of anything I have used my LK for so far. Most of the time, more power only makes the wheels spin faster - it is only really needed to turn the mower blades.

Also, if you compare a CK25 gear to a CK30HST, the differences in power to ground and power to PTO will be even smaller than 5hp.

Having said that, I still don't know which one I'd buy. It would depend on the price difference, and I would have to put the LK3054XS back into the mix. My bet is that I'd end up with the LK, for the lowest cost (?) and highest hp, and give up a few features.

As far as the CK20 goes, it is a very capable smaller frame CUT, and if size is a limitation, it may be the way to go. The CK20 gear model suffers in comparison to the gear models of it's bigger brothers (no live PTO, no shuttle). The CK20HST stands up well compared to the HST versions of the CK25/30.

 

[readytogo]

You mean I shouldn't plow with my new CK 30? /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
Well, should I milk it or slaughter it? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[KiotiJohn]

</font><font color="blue" class="small">( You mean I shouldn't plow with my new CK 30?
Well, should I milk it or slaughter it? )</font>
Spoken like a true owner who knows the truth because he's actually BEEN ON the tractor being talked about!
It's so easy for some people to become "experts" on what a tractor will do simply by reading the specs! NOT. John