Choosing between used JD 4720 and 5075

[Joe2399]

Going to buy my first tractor (used) this year. Small farm/property: ~40 acres. Mostly woods with hills, some fields, some old fields that are 10yrs overgrown I want to reclaim.

So mostly my use would be: brush hogging, reclaiming fields, making trails through the woods, possibly clearing some woods, loader work for gardens and woodchips for trails, etc

The 4720 sounds like the right size generally, but given I will be working in the woods a lot, figured maybe I'd want/need the added stability and power of the bigger tractor (dragging logs out, etc); ie, a 5075 (probably M, though maybe E would do?)

I've never operated either. Dunno if I'd prefer hydro or power-reverser, but imagine I'd get used to either fine.

Any input appreciated! Thanks

 

[MinnesotaMorg]

I am in the same situation as you, 55 acres but mostly pasture/field. I am going the 75hp route simply because of the size. I want the tires to be as big as I can afford, but then again I'm planning on using mine for snow removal along a long driveway.

 

[mo1]

Going to buy my first tractor (used) this year. Small farm/property: ~40 acres. Mostly woods with hills, some fields, some old fields that are 10yrs overgrown I want to reclaim.

So mostly my use would be: brush hogging, reclaiming fields, making trails through the woods, possibly clearing some woods, loader work for gardens and woodchips for trails, etc

The 4720 sounds like the right size generally, but given I will be working in the woods a lot, figured maybe I'd want/need the added stability and power of the bigger tractor (dragging logs out, etc); ie, a 5075 (probably M, though maybe E would do?)

I've never operated either. Dunno if I'd prefer hydro or power-reverser, but imagine I'd get used to either fine.

Any input appreciated! Thanks

A 5 series tractor is quite a bit different than a 4 series tractor. The 5 series tractors are full-sized utility tractors, the 4 series tractors are compact tractors. The 5 series units are noticeably taller and heavier, have considerably more 3 point lift capacity on a category 2 3-point, have considerably more loader lift capacity, and the MFWD 5 series units are significantly less maneuverable due to their much heavier planetary MFWD front axle vs. the bevel gear setup in a 4 series but have noticeably more ground clearance. In short, they are a larger, heavier tractor. There is certainly some overlap in what size of tractor can do what job, and you didn't say anything that would make one or the other an obvious choice over the other. Things that would obviously tip the scales in favor of the 4 series would be if you want to haul it on a trailer behind a smaller truck or have very tight quarters; things that would tip the scales in favor of the 5 series would be running hay equipment, lifting silage bales, 5x6 round bales, or large squares, or running tillage equipment for more than a food plot in size.

The 5 series runs the gamut from very simple units like an open station 2WD 3 cylinder 5E with the dry clutch synchronized SyncShuttle/TSS transmission to the 5R which costs six figures and has most of the electronic gadgetry of the big rowcrop units. Regarding feature set, essentially anything you could have gotten as an option on a 4720 with the exception of a hydrostatic transmission you can get as an option on a 3 cylinder 5E. Some of the fancier stuff on the current 4R like fender-mounted 3 point controls that weren't available on the 4720 aren't available on the 3 cylinder 5Es, but are available on the 5075M. Do note the 5075M is noticeably larger than the 5075E, all 5Ms are made on the same frame and the 5M is available with either 3 or 4 cylinder engines. The 5E line has a different frame for the 3 cylinder and 4 cylinder versions, the 3 cylinders are smaller than the fours. The 5M is larger than either 5E line.

Regarding transmissions, it is a personal preference as any of them can be used in about any usage scenario. You will learn to operate whichever one you get. I personally prefer a dry clutch gear transmission, even for loader work. Others will like a wet clutch electrohydraulic reverser, others yet swear by hydrostatic units. The only options that are strictly required in my mind are standard on all of these units, which would be position and draft control on the 3 point, a live or independent PTO, differential lock, and a couple of hydraulic remotes.

 

[Joe2399]

A 5 series tractor is quite a bit different than a 4 series tractor. The 5 series tractors are full-sized utility tractors, the 4 series tractors are compact tractors. The 5 series units are noticeably taller and heavier, have considerably more 3 point lift capacity on a category 2 3-point, have considerably more loader lift capacity, and the MFWD 5 series units are significantly less maneuverable due to their much heavier planetary MFWD front axle vs. the bevel gear setup in a 4 series but have noticeably more ground clearance. In short, they are a larger, heavier tractor. There is certainly some overlap in what size of tractor can do what job, and you didn't say anything that would make one or the other an obvious choice over the other. Things that would obviously tip the scales in favor of the 4 series would be if you want to haul it on a trailer behind a smaller truck or have very tight quarters; things that would tip the scales in favor of the 5 series would be running hay equipment, lifting silage bales, 5x6 round bales, or large squares, or running tillage equipment for more than a food plot in size.

The 5 series runs the gamut from very simple units like an open station 2WD 3 cylinder 5E with the dry clutch synchronized SyncShuttle/TSS transmission to the 5R which costs six figures and has most of the electronic gadgetry of the big rowcrop units. Regarding feature set, essentially anything you could have gotten as an option on a 4720 with the exception of a hydrostatic transmission you can get as an option on a 3 cylinder 5E. Some of the fancier stuff on the current 4R like fender-mounted 3 point controls that weren't available on the 4720 aren't available on the 3 cylinder 5Es, but are available on the 5075M. Do note the 5075M is noticeably larger than the 5075E, all 5Ms are made on the same frame and the 5M is available with either 3 or 4 cylinder engines. The 5E line has a different frame for the 3 cylinder and 4 cylinder versions, the 3 cylinders are smaller than the fours. The 5M is larger than either 5E line.

Regarding transmissions, it is a personal preference as any of them can be used in about any usage scenario. You will learn to operate whichever one you get. I personally prefer a dry clutch gear transmission, even for loader work. Others will like a wet clutch electrohydraulic reverser, others yet swear by hydrostatic units. The only options that are strictly required in my mind are standard on all of these units, which would be position and draft control on the 3 point, a live or independent PTO, differential lock, and a couple of hydraulic remotes.

Appreciate the detail, thanks. I think what you said here sums it up: "There is certainly some overlap in what size of tractor can do what job, and you didn't say anything that would make one or the other an obvious choice over the other. " <-- which is why I'm having a hard time figuring out what I need.

I'm not gonna be doing anything with hay, nor any serious tillage. So that would point me to the 4720. Except that I will be spending a lot of time in the woods, on hilly terrain, and my thought there is maybe I would really appreciate a larger heavier higher-clearance more stable tractor for that. But obviously sacrificing maneuverability in the woods isn't great.

And I could always fill the tires and get wheel spacers on a 4720 to get more weight and stability, right? But then maybe I want the added power of a 5075(probably M) for moving wood and dragging logs out of the woods...

Pros and cons...

Anyways, being new to tractors, just want to make sure I'm not missing anything obvious. Appreciate the input.

 

[9973720wb19]

i've owned both - go with the 5 series. because of : weight, size, front tires, more stable etc.

 

[Wobblin-Goblin]

Back about ten years ago, I seriously looked at the 4720 in both hydro and Power Reverser. For a compact tractor, it was a lot of tractor. Ultimately went with MF, but that was mostly due to dealer situation, not the tractors themselves.

I think a JD hydro is decent, but a JD Power Reverser is even better all around.

 

[mo1]

Appreciate the detail, thanks. I think what you said here sums it up: "There is certainly some overlap in what size of tractor can do what job, and you didn't say anything that would make one or the other an obvious choice over the other. " <-- which is why I'm having a hard time figuring out what I need.

I'm not gonna be doing anything with hay, nor any serious tillage. So that would point me to the 4720. Except that I will be spending a lot of time in the woods, on hilly terrain, and my thought there is maybe I would really appreciate a larger heavier higher-clearance more stable tractor for that. But obviously sacrificing maneuverability in the woods isn't great.

And I could always fill the tires and get wheel spacers on a 4720 to get more weight and stability, right? But then maybe I want the added power of a 5075(probably M) for moving wood and dragging logs out of the woods...

Pros and cons...

Anyways, being new to tractors, just want to make sure I'm not missing anything obvious. Appreciate the input.

I think you may want to demo or at least drive around a 4 and 5 series machine to see what size/maneuverability/ground clearance you are looking for. Do remember that the 5075M is noticeably larger than the 5075E. The wheelbase is almost a foot longer and the tractor weighs about 50% more compared to a 5075E. The 5075M weighs more than twice what a 4720 does, and is almost two feet longer. I would suspect if you are considering a 4 series machine and are considering it due to its maneuverability, you are probably going to be looking at the 5E rather than the 5M due to the 5M being noticeably larger and less maneuverable than the 5E.

Also remember that the 5075E (as well as the 5075M) also can be had with a 2WD front axle. People generally don't discuss these machines much here, but they are still made and bought because they are maneuverable. Quite a few of them sell around my area as they are used to jockey around in tight spaces with a bale on the loader or scooping up manure, and for turning sharp corners in hay fields. The maneuverability of a 2WD 5E is pretty similar to that of a 4 series sized machine as the 5E isn't that much longer and the turning radius is similar, but the ground clearance is much higher on the 5E. In my experience, a 2WD 5 series sized tractor with filled tires will outpull an MFWD 4 series sized tractor with filled tires and is no more likely to get stuck, probably a bit less likely as it has more ground clearance and sinking up to the axle on one takes a deeper mud hole. If the 2WD 5 series machine has ag tires and the MFWD 4 series has industrial tires like many of them do, it's not even close, the 2WD 5 series machine has a lot more traction.

You can fill the tires and put spacers on both the 4720 and the 5 series machines.

 

[Joe2399]

I think you may want to demo or at least drive around a 4 and 5 series machine to see what size/maneuverability/ground clearance you are looking for. Do remember that the 5075M is noticeably larger than the 5075E. The wheelbase is almost a foot longer and the tractor weighs about 50% more compared to a 5075E. The 5075M weighs more than twice what a 4720 does, and is almost two feet longer. I would suspect if you are considering a 4 series machine and are considering it due to its maneuverability, you are probably going to be looking at the 5E rather than the 5M due to the 5M being noticeably larger and less maneuverable than the 5E.

Also remember that the 5075E (as well as the 5075M) also can be had with a 2WD front axle. People generally don't discuss these machines much here, but they are still made and bought because they are maneuverable. Quite a few of them sell around my area as they are used to jockey around in tight spaces with a bale on the loader or scooping up manure, and for turning sharp corners in hay fields. The maneuverability of a 2WD 5E is pretty similar to that of a 4 series sized machine as the 5E isn't that much longer and the turning radius is similar, but the ground clearance is much higher on the 5E. In my experience, a 2WD 5 series sized tractor with filled tires will outpull an MFWD 4 series sized tractor with filled tires and is no more likely to get stuck, probably a bit less likely as it has more ground clearance and sinking up to the axle on one takes a deeper mud hole. If the 2WD 5 series machine has ag tires and the MFWD 4 series has industrial tires like many of them do, it's not even close, the 2WD 5 series machine has a lot more traction.

You can fill the tires and put spacers on both the 4720 and the 5 series machines.

Stopped by two JD dealers today. For one thing, I already know more about both the 4 series and 5 series than the sales guys, which is disappointing. But anyway, it was good to look at the tractors in person. I agree with you about the 5E vs the 5M. The M definitely feels too big for my property. The 5075E or the 4066 both feel like they could work. Though I didn't love the clearance on the 4066 (I assume 4720 is the same) - especially considering much of my use will be in the woods.

I do want 4wd, though. I think that'll be pretty helpful in the woods, especially cuz I have a lot of muddy or hilly areas. So a 4wd 5075E is starting to look like the front-runner, but still considering a 4720.

Another consideration: reviews (here on TBN) for the 5075E are pretty mixed (3.2 avg), whereas reviews for the 4720 are great (4.7 avg).

 

[Wobblin-Goblin]

Another consideration: reviews (here on TBN) for the 5075E are pretty mixed (3.2 avg), whereas reviews for the 4720 are great (4.7 avg).

The JD 4000 Twenty series is one of the finest compact tractor series ever built.

 

[WVH1977]

I think you would be happy with either one of those tractors. I know I would. I have a New Holland TC40 and love it. It has been good to me and I own it. However if I buy one again I am leaning heavy towards a 5 series type tractor. I am only on 16 acres but could definitely use the extra grunt/weight/HP of the bigger 5 series.

I just recently acquired a excavator from a family member. It was BIG to me. I cleared 3 acres with a 14,000 lb. mini-ex for my house site. I thought that was big but it took me 35 to 40 minutes on big stumps to get them out the ground and some I could not lift out of the hole. This new excavator I have is 24,000 lbs. Takes about 5 minutes now on similar stumps. My point is I thought the excavator was HUGE and more than needed but now that I am operating it, I would not want anything smaller for the application I am using it for.

You can always add a smaller tractor down the road but I would be leaning towards the bigger tractor to start with the clearing/reclaiming fields. Oh, and get a grapple right off the bat! You will not be disappointed.