New farm owners: CUT or UT?

[dcfresh7]

Wife and I bought our lil' slice of heaven 2 years ago, and are trying to budget for a 1st tractor. We have app. 15 acres, 10 of which are the pasture. It will be either Kubota or JD based on the dealers within a reasonable drive from us. Would like to get a front loader, 6-7' bush hog, post hole digger, aerator/overseeder, and a round bale spear(we will be switching to round bales next yr). We are currently negotiating with the gentlemen who owns the 15 acre field beside us, so its quite possible we'll soon have 25 acres.

I know its probably overkill to get the bigger utility tractor, but looking at the starting price points with some of the compacts, why not go bigger for less $$?

 

[fishheadbob]

Full size utility. A 6' or 7' bush hog is heavy and requires a fair amount of HP. Round bales go 300 to 600 pounds depending; you will find the rear tires not biting well with that weight in front of the loader, especially in slop. Round bales mean livestock which equals manure handling and more slop. Could you do all this with a compact tractor? Sure. Could you do it a lot quicker and easier with a larger one?
I use my 23 HP tractor for mowing in narrow rows and sometimes pulling a wagon; I use the 50 HP one for everything else. It skids logs, plows, discs, used to make hay with it, ran a fair sized tree spade, runs the woodsplitter, etc., etc. And it does those chores a lot quicker and easier than a little tractor pushed to its' limits.

 

[Rocky Hoffler]

I would like to see you go with 30 h.p. or better FEL and 4WD especially if you acquire another 10 acres. mowing would be a minium of a 5 ft. mower preferably a 6 ft. As I have no dog in this hunt take your time to get best possible tractor for your needs. I think more people have wished they went bigger than those that said I should have gotten a smaller tractor.

 

[RickB]

Utility tractor no question. fishead bob is spot on except even small round bales can weigh 800 lbs. Buy once, buy right.

 

[buickanddeere]

Bigger is better. As previously stated a compact tractor is too small. A lawn tractor for the grass and a real tractor for the field . 4WD for the loader. Iirc the Deere 5055E iirc is value priced and a capable machine .

 

[KiwiBro]

Bigger is better. As previously stated a compact tractor is too small. A lawn tractor for the grass and a real tractor for the field . 4WD for the loader. Iirc the Deere 5055E iirc is value priced and a capable machine .

A few issues with the sub-85HP 5000E series JD's. Certainly got crossed off my list some time ago because of them. Perhaps the newer ones are better.

 

[motownbrowne]

Could go either way. "Utility" models start at around 50 HP in most cases. I think you'll be fine with either one of the largest CUTs, which top out around 60hp or smaller utility models.

Interestingly, tractordata.com lists my Kubota, a 46hp mx4700 as a utility tractor, and the L6060 (heavier and more hp) as a CUT. As you can see, the line is a little blurry.

I would say that a 4x4 tractor in the 40-60 HP range is what you want, with a loader that can lift around 2500lbs at the pins and 3500lbs on the 3pt hitch.

A big deciding factor should be transmission type. Do you and your wife have experience running tractors? Will both of you be running it? Your kids? Neighbors? If you know how to safely operate a manual or hydraulic shuttle and you want to go with a bigger tractor, look at utility models. If you're new to tractoring, hydrostatic transmissions are easier to operate and safer for beginners to use. There are pros and cons to both, and lots of threads to discuss them, which you should check out. It isn't my intention to turn this into a gear vs hydro thread. Suffice it to say, you should research the issue and test drive both types.

Hydro models pretty much top out at 60hp. A 40-60 tractor will do what you want, provided it's heavy enough and has the needed lift specs. If they call it a CUT that doesn't matter. If you need more HP, more lift, or more weight, look at 60hp+ utility tractors.

 

[hosspuller]

Utility tractor for sure. I have a Deere 5200 mfwd FEL for 30 acres. It's been a good size and weight for me. Use it for haying (round & square) and all around stuff. A similar unit will do you well.

I would NOT get a CUT or anything less.

 

[Xfaxman]

Full size utility. A 6' or 7' bush hog is heavy and requires a fair amount of HP. Round bales go 300 to 600 pounds depending; you will find the rear tires not biting well with that weight in front of the loader, especially in slop. Round bales mean livestock which equals manure handling and more slop. Could you do all this with a compact tractor? Sure. Could you do it a lot quicker and easier with a larger one?
I use my 23 HP tractor for mowing in narrow rows and sometimes pulling a wagon; I use the 50 HP one for everything else. It skids logs, plows, discs, used to make hay with it, ran a fair sized tree spade, runs the woodsplitter, etc., etc. And it does those chores a lot quicker and easier than a little tractor pushed to its' limits.

Utility tractor no question. fishead bob is spot on except even small round bales can weigh 800 lbs. Buy once, buy right.

And the bigger 5x6 round bales that I use are 1200 to 1500 pounds.

 

[tjkadar]

Are you all doing horses or cows? If its horses, I would seriously look at Massey Ferguson and the Equine Saving Program. Nance Tactor is about 60 miles from Laurens. They are our dealer and they are closer to 90 miles from us. The savings program was simply too good to turn down.

Whenever I need parts, filters, etc., I call the parts guy and have the stuff drop shipped to the house. I have had one firmware update that had to be done and Nance made the trip out to my farm with no fuss, no muss.

Saving 32% off the price of the tractor was worth it to us (you can save up 34% depending on which model you purchase). Allowed us to get a lot more tractor than any of the competitors in the same price range. And it practically sips fuel! I'm averaging 1.3 gallons per hour from a 90 hp tractor over the past 150 hours of use.