CK30 vs DK40 size....

[mossyoakpenn]

Hello all! Long time lurker and first time poster here. In the next two days I will be getting a CK30 or a DK40 both with FEL and BH. The CK35 is not available to me so its out of the question. I like the 40 better due to the dual HST paddles vs the rocker on the 30 (have trouble fitting my foot around the brake every time I move forward to reverse) and the fact it can lift twice as much with the FEL. What Im worried about is the physical size of the DK40. The tractor will be used for plowing snow on a 3/4 mile driveway, maintaining logging roads, controlling erosion and other various tasks around my 20 acres. My concern is that the 40 will be too big for use in the woods where it will spend a decent amount of time. What do you all think?

 

[VictorW]

I have a CK30hst and a friend has a DK45, same size as the 40. The DK is bigger in physical dimensions but I think your jobs need that size with stronger fel, 3pt, and overall weight. Six foot back blade or box blade is about all the CK can handle. My friend runs his in wooded areas without trouble. I could probably manuver in tighter places better than him but the overall greater power makes up for the DK's bigger size. Members here with a DK40 or 45 will help you better with the woods concern. I believe one of the members had a CK and went with a DK and never looked back. Just give them a day or two to answer.

 

[k0ua]

I did not notice a lot of difference as far as woods maneuvering when I went from B7500 (smaller than a CK30) to L3400, (same size as CK 30) and my current DK35se (almost same as DK40se.. Just 4 inches shorter, and about 200 lbs lighter). Oh sure there is some difference, but not a lot in that regard. There is a lot of difference in capability's With a hydrostatic transmission on the last two tractors, I can see-saw around obstacles very rapidly. If it was me.. I would get the DK40se. Just a lot more capability, and more comfort too. Lift more, pull more, push more, carry more. you get the picture.

 

[kco]

+1 for K0ua's comments, I also have a DK35. I went from a smaller, and much older Kubota L275DT and was concerned with the size and maneuverability. Although on paper the L275DT is supposed to have a shorter turning radius (with one locked wheel) the DK35 is much more maneuverable. The DK35's front wheels turn much sharper and the extra weight also helps.

I also prefer the two pedal HST over the rocker style. Also, the DK comes with a remote hydraulic port which I use for a snowblower chute rotator. The 3 point operating lever at the rear is another feature I appreciate.

My summer use is mainly on wooded, hilly, narrow trails. I have no trouble weaving in and out of small spaces.

Since I was concerned with the DK size I got the DK35 rather than the DK40. Knowing what I know now, I would have gone with the DK40 for the extra snowblowing power. The DK35's loader has half the lift capacity of the DK40. I sort of considered that desirable because it would prevent me from over-stressing the DK35 which has essentially the same tractor frame.

Both are great tractors, but I'd definitely go with the DK40.

 

[mossyoakpenn]

Thanks a lot so far guys. This is exactly what I was looking for. Keep the recommendations coming!

 

[murph1]

I am surprised you can even find a DK.

 

[motownbrowne]

I have a Kubota mx4700, which is about the same size as the DK. It's great in the woods. I don't think you'll regret the bigger machine.

 

[alancamby]

I was in the same dilemma a year ago for my small 14 acres. I was looking at ck35 and dk40.

Now that I have the DK40 I am surprised how many times the DK was just barely able to lift, pull, or push to complete a job. The DK felt so huge in the dealers lot but now seems so much smaller.
You will quickly find the DK 40's limitations and realize how glad you are that you did not go smaller. Looking back I am so glad that I did not get the CK.

Sure the CK might be a little smaller for the woods. I feel very comfortable in the woods with the DK. My property is very technical in my woods. There are a few rocks and trees that I have dragged out of the woods that took every bit of traction and lifting power that the DK had.

I think there are very few people who will say that they wish they had bought a smaller tractor. I hope to keep the DK for the rest of my life. If I have to replace it, the replacement sure will not be smaller.

 

[Raw Dodge]

I always wish the tractor was a little bigger, never smaller, especially if trailering it is few and far between, I say go with the 40 and it's way more capable loader..

 

[cat fever]

I agree with all the comments so far. I was making the same choice 4 months ago. For me it was a HP thing. I could have got by with a 50 HP, I went with the 66 HP and have never looked back.
Other than to look back and make sure what I'm dragging is still there.