Comparison JD 5045E vs.NHWM45 vs. KUbota MX4700

[vtsnowedin]

Thanks for the comments Guys keep them coming. from what I can see in the spec sheets they all have the same engine block and a turbo but perhaps not the same turbo? So the difference in HP comes from the heads and the computer chip running the injectors. So these tractors will have the same weight when carrying the same attachments. As I have told several SUV drivers that were driving too fast in a snow storm ,"Once you touch the brakes , everyone has four wheel brakes, and you just volunteered to take the brake and all season radial tire test at 70mph while everyone else here thought it might be better to try it at under 55 with real snow tires on. That's why your 50K SUV is upside down in the median showing all the natives your new all season radials as they drive on by to home and supper.
But I digress,
Back to the tractors.
List price between a 45 and a 55 is just $1449 different and as they are both on the bottom end of the range for that engine block probably have similar fuel consumption and durability. I will have to think about that for sure.

 

[Verticaltrx]

Both the Deere and Kubota use mechanical injection, no computers whatsoever. The difference in hp on the Deere's comes from different injection pump settings and possibly different turbo settings. The turbo is only on the Deere's for emission reasons, the previous models didn't have them and actually made slightly more power.

 

[vtsnowedin]

Both the Deere and Kubota use mechanical injection, no computers whatsoever. The difference in hp on the Deere's comes from different injection pump settings and possibly different turbo settings. The turbo is only on the Deere's for emission reasons, the previous models didn't have them and actually made slightly more power.

Interesting. I've had truck drivers of brand new tri axles sporting CAT engines break down due to a fried computer chip and have been told that you can select from and change the horse power of those engines just by changing the control chip. The catch is that the higher the horsepower selected the shorter the warranty is. But I'm not a diesel mechanic and what I don't know far exceeds what I do know. Thanks for sharing that info.

 

[vtsnowedin]

I'm starting to come around on the 45 vs. 55 horse power issue and am now leaning towards 55 for either a NH workmaster or get a 5055E. What is persuading me other then opinions here is reading through the spec sheets of square and round balers and seeing the minimum PTO HP recommended. 35 for the smallest square baler JD. and 45 for the smallest round baler.
Also the Nebraska tractor test for the 5055E had excellent fuel consumption numbers which with crude oil over $105 a barrel will become more and more a factor for all of us.

 

[Verticaltrx]

I'm starting to come around on the 45 vs. 55 horse power issue and am now leaning towards 55 for either a NH workmaster or get a 5055E. What is persuading me other then opinions here is reading through the spec sheets of square and round balers and seeing the minimum PTO HP recommended. 35 for the smallest square baler JD. and 45 for the smallest round baler.
Also the Nebraska tractor test for the 5055E had excellent fuel consumption numbers which with crude oil over $105 a barrel will become more and more a factor for all of us.

If you are going to be round baling go with as much hp as you can afford, if it's still in budget I'd even look at the 5065e. As I said before, we have a JD 446 round baler (4'x4' bales). It works good behind our 65 pto hp tractor, but even better behind our 82 pto hp tractor. Round balers really suck up the power, especially once you get into heavy hay and on hills.