Really Kubota! rated speed 395 RPM faster than PTO speed??

[kuboman]

Of course. All engines do that, eventually.

JayC

Don't take my word. Go to the Nebraska Tractor test site and check any modern tractor with 150hp or more.:thumbsup:

 

[MHarryE]

But we aren't talking about an over 150 HP engine here. The engine in the M9540 has only a 20% torque backup vs. 35% minimum for what I think of as a good pulling tractor (like I mentioned our JD has 47% so it will really bear down an pull through tough spots). The bare engine in the M9540 puts out about 99 HP at 2600 rpm and 91 HP at 2200 rpm. Fuel efficiency is better at 2200 rpm as measured in HP-hr/gallon, about 14% better than running at full engine speed. Kubota isn't hiding anything, the numbers are all available. Seems like the question is will the 8 HP difference between max rated power and std PTO speed be the difference between getting the job done or not. If it will do the job okay, the improved fuel economy at the lower engine speed looks pretty nice to me.

 

[kuboman]

But we aren't talking about an over 150 HP engine here. The engine in the M9540 has only a 20% torque backup vs. 35% minimum for what I think of as a good pulling tractor (like I mentioned our JD has 47% so it will really bear down an pull through tough spots). The bare engine in the M9540 puts out about 99 HP at 2600 rpm and 91 HP at 2200 rpm. Fuel efficiency is better at 2200 rpm as measured in HP-hr/gallon, about 14% better than running at full engine speed. Kubota isn't hiding anything, the numbers are all available. Seems like the question is will the 8 HP difference between max rated power and std PTO speed be the difference between getting the job done or not. If it will do the job okay, the improved fuel economy at the lower engine speed looks pretty nice to me.

I am betting the increase in torque will do the job better than the 8hp.