My new MF1526 only here for one hour

[PoorPlowboy]

6hp is about 20% in that size comparison. Definitely a noticeable difference.

 

[Don87]

6hp is about 20% in that size comparison. Definitely a noticeable difference.

But the question that I'm trying to get answered is...............
Is that PTO or engine HP on the old tractor. OP listed engine HP for the 1526. we need a model number on the old tractor for a good comparison.

If the 'old' tractor was 32 hp at the PTO, that is one heck of a difference considering that the 1526 is only 20 hp at the pto.

 

[radrock]

OK. Got it back today.
Seems what happens was: there is some valve that balances front and rear hydraulics. When, as the dealer puts it, the factory installs the FEL they are supposed to change or adjust this valve to balance between the front and the rear PTO. Every once in a while they forget to do this, which is what happened on my tractor. By the way, the "factory" he talked about is actually the Massey assembly facility for foreign made tractors. Anyway, all is well. I'll post pictures in the next day or two.

I do notice, and will ask about in another thread, that this 26HP Massy seems much, much, less powerful than a 32HP tractor I used to own. Is there really that much of a difference for a few HP? Or--- I owned the previous tractor in Missouri at 600 ft elevation. I own this tractor in Colorado at 6,000 ft elevation. Does elevation make that much difference for small diesel engines? I know RV owners always go for diesel because they say a diesel is not affected by elevation as compared to gas engines.

Another interesting to me tidbit. Got to talking with the young guy who delivered my tractor. Turns out he was the 2008 Champion Calf Roper at the Cheyenne Frontier Days rodeo. Then busted up his knee but is hoping to make a comeback in next years rodeo circuit. I like to watch rodeo, and have immense respect for those guys and what they put themselves through.

MikeZ

Aww. Wish I had seen this earlier. I have a 1526 and had the same problem. I bought my mower separate so didn't notice it until I had the tractor for a couple of weeks. The problem is with the relief valve in the loader valve. Incorrect setting. I haven't had any problems at all since then. Another funny thing. You live in Colorado and was in Missouri. I am from Colorado but live in Missouri now! Altitude will have an impact on all motors. Most cars are computer controlled and can adjust the correct air fuel ratio by them self. We had a motor grader in Colorado and it was a old dog. They took it to a job in New Mexico that was down to 1000 feet in altitude and that thing was a horse down there. You might ask your dealer if they can set it up but they may not being it is new.

 

[radrock]

I'm curious about that too, and they had no answer. One thought is that it was good for one lift and pulled all the fluid one way, then the fluid was no longer available. I don't know if that makes any sense or not. They had to make the fix in the box that controls the FEL operation. Anyway, I ran it around some last night and it works well. My next chore is adjusting cutting height on the Caroni flail mower-- I have to get a couple of 18 or 19 mm wrenches, 3/4 inch is a hair too big.

Two of you asked the same question. Mine would lift one or two times as well. The relief setting was bad enough that it would quickly heat up and bypass. In other ward it was bypassing as soon as you started it up and was not suppose to. All the fix was two little shims under the valve.

 

[mjzman]

Don, the old tractor was a Mahindra 3215. Which is a turbo tractor, but again at that time I was at 600 feet. I couldn't remember so looked it up. That tractor was rated 32 engine horsepower and 25 PTO horsepower. The Massey is rated 25 engine and 20 PTO, so that's a 22% difference in engine power which I guess actually is significant. But if what I read on another thread is accurate that there is close to a 3% power loss per thousand feet, then my 25 engine horsepower at sea level Massey is only the equivalent of 20.5 engine horsepower here in Colorado Springs. Wow, that is significant. And the PTO horsepower equivalent drops to 13?? Or is that calculated differently? I'm glad now that I did not buy the little Kioti I was looking at as it was only 22 or 23 engine horsepower and weighs near 1,000 pounds more.

At least here on the prairie the ground is perfectly flat, so while I notice the HP difference I can still do everything I want to do with this tractor. I wish I could have kept the Mahindra (a 2006 model) but when I left Missouri four years ago I did not think I would be needing a tractor and it seemed too expensive to haul across the country (I went to Washington State for three years before coming here to Colorado).

I wish someone made a small frame tractor with a 30-35 HP engine for those of us at high altitude. Or a small frame, smaller engine turbodiesel. I haven't heard of any of those.

MikeZ

 

[DeereRack]

I wish someone made a small frame tractor with a 30-35 HP engine for those of us at high altitude. Or a small frame, smaller engine turbodiesel. I haven't heard of any of those.

MikeZ

Have you looked at the MF 1533 - 1540? nice little tractors

 

[WilliamBos]

Have you looked at the MF 1533 - 1540? nice little tractors

Exactly! The 1540 is turbocharged.

 

[mjzman]

I know its a matter of whose definition, but to me a 1540 is not a small frame tractor. It's more medium frame, the same as the Mahindra 3215 I used to own when I lived in Missouri. That was a nice tractor too, and as I've mentioned, I kind of wish I had not had to sell it. But those are bigger than what I was looking for this time. Ninety percent of its use will be to cut about one acre of so-called 'lawn' and it will have to cut the rest of my thirty-five acres of prairie grass maybe once a year (if it ever rains again!).

I searched the web and the only tractor that seems to be what I'm talking about is a Branson 2800h. It looks to be a small 28 hp turbo charged tractor. But even if I had previously known about it I would not have bought a Branson because of service availability.

Anyway I have done a little more work with my 1526 and while the power difference is noticeable as I said, I find it is still a hard working tractor that does everything I want it to do. Guess my attitude was like somebody comparing the power of a race car to a minivan when really 60 is the most he is ever going to do.

 

[DavesTractor]

Don, the old tractor was a Mahindra 3215. Which is a turbo tractor, but again at that time I was at 600 feet. I couldn't remember so looked it up. That tractor was rated 32 engine horsepower and 25 PTO horsepower. The Massey is rated 25 engine and 20 PTO, so that's a 22% difference in engine power which I guess actually is significant. But if what I read on another thread is accurate that there is close to a 3% power loss per thousand feet, then my 25 engine horsepower at sea level Massey is only the equivalent of 20.5 engine horsepower here in Colorado Springs. Wow, that is significant. And the PTO horsepower equivalent drops to 13?? Or is that calculated differently?
MikeZ

Sounds like you have figured this out. On our dyno, the 3215 will put out about 27-28 PTO HP at 300 feet elevation and 80 degrees. That model was under-rated a couple HP per our unofficial testing. So your new tractor, without a turbo and starting with a smaller engine is just about 50% of the PTO power you had. We tend to watch for that around here and if a guy lives up in elevation we try to sell them a turbo model or the next size larger engine.