Buying Advice First Tractor - Which way to go?

[TJP89]

That is what my brother thought until in the mid-90's he bought a JD 7800 with all the options including FWA. After he had it 5-6 years he was ready to trade it and nobody wanted it especially the JD dealers. He bought an Agco that year and has since evaluated all tractors on their immediate value to the farm. The green paint does not hold its value like it used to. That is not to say he avoids green paint as they bought a 9460R a couple of years ago as well as a new combine - he just doesn't add in value for green paint anymore. His newest tractor - last year was an Kubota M135.

That's a good point, but a little out of place as the 9460 is I believe a 400+HP tractor. Once you get up to that kind of HP, there are only 3 real competitors, JD, CIH, and MF, with the majority being with JD and Case. Whole different equation there. We're only talking small UTs at the most here, not even 100HP like that Kubota. Lots of makers, lot less $$$.

I do agree though, the JD paint doesn't mean what it used to. I have a friend who bought a JD 3038E about the same time as I bought the Kioti. I got a lot of cracks about my cheap foreign tractor. But while the Kioti never faltered all winter in -15 degree weather, I now hear that one of the first times my friend went to plow his driveway, he found oil all over the floor, and a cracked engine case from some pressure problem in the oil system. His tractor (same money as mine) spent most of the winter in the shop getting a new engine. I haven't heard any more comment about my off brand tractor.

Not saying JD is worse, but they're by no means hugely better.

 

[ishiboo]

The issue with the HP/weight comparison is there is no single correct answer.

More HP than you need is a waste, yes.

More HP than you have traction for? That depends on what you're doing. If you are brush hogging, tilling, back hoeing, etc... enough horsepower is necessary to run the implements optimally. If you are pulling a disc, tilling, etc. all the time... you need enough traction to exploit that horsepower. Traction is both weight as well as tires, so it's often a function of overall size.

Too much horsepower you simply waste fuel, too much weight... same deal. Not only that but you sink in to wet fields, clay, compact the soil, etc. With my tractor I operate on lawns, my field is clay, etc... it is the absolute largest I would want to go weight-wise. Sure, I could get a 7,000 lb utility with the same power as my 6010... but it'd simply screw everything up.

People tend to generalize here, when it comes to a tractor the heaviest highest horsepower is the best, the heavier box blade is always better, etc. That's not at all the case. They then justify their own purchases with that formula. The most important things are build quality, engineering, and applicability to the tasks at hand... which is a case-by-case basis and not only specific to someones needs, but their own personality.

 

[blucoondawg]

The issue with the HP/weight comparison is there is no single correct answer.

More HP than you need is a waste, yes.

More HP than you have traction for? That depends on what you're doing. If you are brush hogging, tilling, back hoeing, etc... enough horsepower is necessary to run the implements optimally. If you are pulling a disc, tilling, etc. all the time... you need enough traction to exploit that horsepower. Traction is both weight as well as tires, so it's often a function of overall size.

Too much horsepower you simply waste fuel, too much weight... same deal. Not only that but you sink in to wet fields, clay, compact the soil, etc. With my tractor I operate on lawns, my field is clay, etc... it is the absolute largest I would want to go weight-wise. Sure, I could get a 7,000 lb utility with the same power as my 6010... but it'd simply screw everything up.

People tend to generalize here, when it comes to a tractor the heaviest highest horsepower is the best, the heavier box blade is always better, etc. That's not at all the case. They then justify their own purchases with that formula. The most important things are build quality, engineering, and applicability to the tasks at hand... which is a case-by-case basis and not only specific to someones needs, but their own personality.[/QUOTthatI agree with the exception of the box blade issue, I believe weight is the most important factor in a box blade, yes build quality is important but build quality is generally pretty good in the major brands. Obviously you don't want a 8' wide fully hydraulic Gannon behemoth behind a bx sized machine but I'm a firm believer that the heaviest blade that your tractor can handle is the best one to have. It simply allows the blade to do is job much better especially in hard soils.

 

[bruceha2000]

..... , nowadays if you buy a 20hp tractor it will be scarcely larger than a riding lawn mower and its ability is going to be greatly diminished due to lack of weight.

My Craftsman garden tractor (made by Husqvarna) is 24 HP, weighs 575 pounds and can't get out of its own way backing up a "not all that steep" hill with the 54" mower. It also can't get out of its own way backwards up much of any slope with the 250# 50" blower mounted (with chains, 55# weight on the back + another 70# of sand) and loses traction as soon as it hits ice or one rear wheel loses traction whether going forward OR backward.

So ... :thumbsup: on the weight recommendation. I'm in a similar boat (actually, I have about 1/4 the acreage but with similar field to woods ratio it IS the same boat) as the OP which is why I'm reading the thread I don't have the "can 1 tractor do the lawn, fields and woods thought", that was quickly put out of my mind a couple of years ago when I first found TBN. I STILL haven't gotten the real tractor because other things keep me too busy to do the things I need one for. But when I do get one, hopefully this year, there are areas where I currently try to blow snow (and eventually succeed with much backing and forthing making turn arounds or repeatedly digging the stupid thing out of a hole it dug for itself) that will be handled MUCH faster with a bucket even if I have to make a few trips to dump the snow.

 

[ishiboo]

My Craftsman garden tractor (made by Husqvarna) is 24 HP, weighs 575 pounds and can't get out of its own way backing up a "not all that steep" hill with the 54" mower. It also can't get out of its own way backwards up much of any slope with the 250# 50" blower mounted (with chains, 55# weight on the back + another 70# of sand) and loses traction as soon as it hits ice or one rear wheel loses traction whether going forward OR backward.

nowadays if you buy a 20hp tractor it will be scarcely larger than a riding lawn mower and its ability is going to be greatly diminished due to lack of weight.

A Craftsman GT with a 24hp gasser is zero comparison to a Kubota BX1860, for example... despite having 18hp. The BX1860 also makes a GREAT and very capable garden/lawn tractor for doing the pieces of work it is designed to do.

 

[Roadbuilder6]

My Craftsman garden tractor (made by Husqvarna) is 24 HP, weighs 575 pounds and can't get out of its own way backing up a "not all that steep" hill with the 54" mower. It also can't get out of its own way backwards up much of any slope with the 250# 50" blower mounted (with chains, 55# weight on the back + another 70# of sand) and loses traction as soon as it hits ice or one rear wheel loses traction whether going forward OR backward.

So ... :thumbsup: on the weight recommendation. I'm in a similar boat (actually, I have about 1/4 the acreage but with similar field to woods ratio it IS the same boat) as the OP which is why I'm reading the thread I don't have the "can 1 tractor do the lawn, fields and woods thought", that was quickly put out of my mind a couple of years ago when I first found TBN. I STILL haven't gotten the real tractor because other things keep me too busy to do the things I need one for. But when I do get one, hopefully this year, there are areas where I currently try to blow snow (and eventually succeed with much backing and forthing making turn arounds or repeatedly digging the stupid thing out of a hole it dug for itself) that will be handled MUCH faster with a bucket even if I have to make a few trips to dump the snow.

It is obvious you don't have much seat time in a sub compact tractor... Comparing a lawn tractor to a sub compact tractor is a dumb comparison. I have a 24hp John Deere 2320 (which isn't a subcompact but still very small) and it could easily lift 900bs, and could do everything I asked it to do. I also have other real heavy equipment for work and this tractor for what it is, is incredibly powerful, even the true subcompact tractors can do a lot of work. Please don't give advice on what size is the best for OP if you don't have seat time in the size you are going against.

 

[blucoondawg]

I never said a subcompact was completely useless they obviously work for what they're intended for. The op is asking for recommendations for a tractor for upkeep of a large parcel of land and was wondering if it is possible to have 1 machine for that and lawn mowing. A small sub compact is not the machine for the task. You aren't going to be able to work with trees and large logs very well in hilly less than ideal conditions or be able to do much field work. He will be able to garden and mow lawn and drag a road and do other lawn care. I have been cutting and skidding a lot of firewood for a lot of years and know those very small tractors are not ideal for heavy work. Op is better off with a larger tractor that will handle the majority of the work better which is going to be maintaining that large plot of land, the lawn care can be done by the wife with a push mower, OK maybe go self propelled .

 

[bruceha2000]

A Craftsman GT with a 24hp gasser is zero comparison to a Kubota BX1860, for example... despite having 18hp. The BX1860 also makes a GREAT and very capable garden/lawn tractor for doing the pieces of work it is designed to do.

I know I wasn't trying to compare the GT to an SCUT as even close to equals. My point was you can get garden tractors (basically riding mowers really) with more HP than small CUTs and get nowhere fast under the wrong conditions due to the lack of weight which was the part of the post I replied to and agreed with - weight matters - and it was an example of that.

But ... MSRP on the Kubota site says the 1860 is a REALLY REALLY expensive lawn mower. The 1860 with turf tires and a 54" deck is over $11K. If you move up to the 2360, same size deck and a loader valve (no loader) it is $13.5K. Yes the 1860 weighs over twice what my GT weighs and you can add implements to it like a small loader and it has a 3 PT, neither of which can be had for my GT and with the $2K blower would very likely handle the areas I have trouble with. The 1860 seems to have been replaced by the 1870 which you can buy without a deck for "only" $10K, $11.8K with the 54" deck - $9K more than my "biggest GT Sears makes".

I have to wonder:

How the heck do you get a REAL tractor (*) that the OP and I need for anywhere NEAR his $15K mark shy of "well used" if the smallest of the small costs $13K with a 48" bucket (no mower or blower)?

In the larger sizes, the L3910 4WD gear shift, no implements at all: $21K and that is 36HP, less than some suggest is needed, $25K (again with NOTHING) for the 45HP 4701.

* sorry, I'm not taking a BX into the woods. And BTW, the prior owner of this place did the "one tractor for all jobs" purchase. He said his BX was really too small for the job.

 

[blucoondawg]

You would have to shop used to get a large tractor for that price, there's a lot of used stuff that is barely broken in, just have to find it

 

[bruceha2000]

I never said a subcompact was completely useless they obviously work for what they're intended for. The op is asking for recommendations for a tractor for upkeep of a large parcel of land and was wondering if it is possible to have 1 machine for that and lawn mowing. A small sub compact is not the machine for the task. You aren't going to be able to work with trees and large logs very well in hilly less than ideal conditions or be able to do much field work. He will be able to garden and mow lawn and drag a road and do other lawn care. I have been cutting and skidding a lot of firewood for a lot of years and know those very small tractors are not ideal for heavy work. Op is better off with a larger tractor that will handle the majority of the work better which is going to be maintaining that large plot of land, the lawn care can be done by the wife with a push mower, OK maybe go self propelled .

She might prefer to do the field work on the tractor and let him mow the lawn while walking

To Roadbuilder: I wasn't trying to give the OP an opinion on what size he should buy since I have the SAME question and a very similar situation. I was only remarking that I have suffered the effects of too little weight for the job at hand and thus agreeing with the post I quoted saying the weight of the machine needs to be suited to the tasks it will need to perform. My GT and snow blower work just dandy on the relatively flat gravel parking area I have to clear. I have learned not take it across a slope (and it doesn't have to be much of a slope!) that will cause it to "walk" sideways down hill if one wheel loses traction and don't plan to back up any hill while blowing snow, make cul-de-sacs. Like everyone, I am learning what it can do, what it can't do and how to live with that until I get a bigger tractor that can both move snow with a bucket in areas where the GT fails and pull firewood from the very "up and down" woods.

I mowed the fields several times with my GT last year after paying farmer Al up the road to mow the 6' tall stuff that was there (more undesirable weeds than anything) just to keep the weeds down. Not near as fast as Al did it with his big sickle bar and 35 HP Mahindra but just as fast as I could have done it with a SCUT and 54" belly mower since that is what I have. The land is pretty lumpy with ledge popping up here and there so "mowing as fast as the tractor can go" with a belly mower is not advisable anyway. And while one can buy small sickle bar mowers for SCUTS, the "big" ones are ~54" and cost as much as my GT with 54" mower. So the IDEAL situation for ME, would be to use the "turn tight" GT for mowing around the house (and many obstacles) and for blowing the parking area, with a real tractor for gathering/moving firewood and mowing the fields with a 7-9' sickle. The big tractor would also be used for all other big tasks that come up once one has such a utilitarian machine like moving dirt, gravel, leveling, etc. And maybe the fields can be convinced to grow hay instead of weeds at some point. And maybe there are areas with soil deep enough over the ledge to plow and plant stuff. I'm sure once I have the tools, I will find more uses for them than I can think of now.