Buying Advice Not for sale in Nebraska?

[_RaT_]

Nebraska's loss for sure.

 

[Grandad4]

Some Kubota models are tested in Japan under protocols of an international body (the OECD). The protocols followed in the Nebraska tests are related in some way to those established by the OECD, and I think there is reciprocity between Nebraska and other OECD test programs.

Beyond that, one can only guess why a manufacturer would choose not to have a particular model undergo any such tests, but it probably boils down to a financial decision more often than not. For example, if a tractor already sells well in markets that do not require such certifications, would the additional sales resulting from testing cover the additional costs?

Of course there's a marketing dimension to consider as well. After all, if auto manufacturers can successfully use racing such as NASCAR to promote their brands, tractor brands can probably also be promoted by referencing their relative performances in the slightly less thrilling Nebraska tests. But that beats the alternative of not having objective data, I guess

 

[Trigger]

Interesting, on the link that Rick posted if you search for kubota it does bring up a few models, the last test was a L5030 in 2006. Perhaps it takes a while for the new models (40 series) to get tested? Also alot of the older M like m6800 m9000 etc were tested. Only 5 tests since 98 I guess thats as good as none really...maybe that website doesnt list every test though im not sure.


EDIT:

found a link with more test results looks like they tested a m108 in 2008 but thats the latest.
http://tractortestlab.unl.edu/testreports.htm

 

[MessickFarmEqu]

Some Kubota models are tested in Japan under protocols of an international body (the OECD). The protocols followed in the Nebraska tests are related in some way to those established by the OECD, and I think there is reciprocity between Nebraska and other OECD test programs.

I'm not sure that Nebraska will accept the OECD testing that Kubota does. Otherwise we would not have this problem. Big Green is a major funder of the program and the grumbig that you hear makes it seem like they twist things to suit their needs. Testing a tractor costs over $250k and apparently its very difficult to get models scheduled to even get the tests done. Nebraska is not a very big market for the few models that Kubota sells in this size, so its probably not cost effective to deal with all the red tape.

 

[Tractor Factor]

Health care for tractors.

 

[beemerphile]

There is nothing that cannot be screwed up by the application of government to a "problem". Just because something NEEDS to be done, does not mean it needs to be done by government. As an example, the UL rating on electrical items. No-one can "buy" the UL rating because their reputation for integrity is more important to them than any single bribe could be. Can you "buy" a government bureaucrat? Yep, fairly cheap. If a non-government entity could become the standard of acceptance for electrical safety, why not tractors?

Nebraska farmers are the losers from this, not Kubota.

 

[newbury]

From 2008
http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-buying-pricing/118254-nebraska-tractor-tests-kubota.html

from 2007

snip

The conversation reguarding Nebraka tests has happened about a dozen times now. The reason that Kubota does not Nebraska test their tractors is because they are done at a different international testing center that pretty well everyone else EXCEPT Nebraska accepts. I've also heard company chatter that Deere pumps a fair amount of money into that center and is able to get their machines tested more quickly and at a lower cost than other companies. The expense to get a machine tested was pretty remarkable, along the lines of $100,000+ per model. For a company like Kubota that changes models every 3-4 years its simply not worth the cost of entry to sell product in that state. Its got nothing to do with trying to hide poor performance of anything of the sort.

From this thread

I'm not sure that Nebraska will accept the OECD testing that Kubota does. Otherwise we would not have this problem. Big Green is a major funder of the program and the grumbig that you hear makes it seem like they twist things to suit their needs. Testing a tractor costs over $250k and apparently its very difficult to get models scheduled to even get the tests done. Nebraska is not a very big market for the few models that Kubota sells in this size, so its probably not cost effective to deal with all the red tape.

lots more info on this forum.

But given Messicks estimate of the cost to test a tractor in 2007 (100K) and now (250K) it seems that the price is going up.

And having worked with Army equipment based on a HUUMV and a shelter that has undergone testing programs I think the $250K cost could be an understatement.

Now if we could get the Federal and state governments involved in the testing we could probably get the price up to a full million at least. And have major conferences with papers being presented on "The Effect on the Angle of the FEL When Testing Loading of Animal Waste". Entire symposia on the 1/4 inching valve!

Think how many more people could be ungainfully employed!

 

[johnrex62]

I am unfamiliar with the U of Nebraska program, but just because I thought this was interesting and casually related.

I did some work for an insurance company a number of years ago that required testing of all office equipment before the company would allow the purchase of the item for use in it's facilities. They required the vendor to provide three units free of charge for destructive testing.

There were quite a few computer options that were unavailable for purchase by this company because the vendors did not wish to sacrifice the inventory at no fee for this testing process.

 

[jim442]

And what is the cost to be tested??? If every state came up with a test procedure they could charge for it would be a nice little moneymaker. The Ne test is another outdated government regulation that was started to be a benefit to the consumer before truth in advertising regulations were on the books. Proof again that no government agency EVER goes away even if it actually solves a problem. I remember a UL test that had to be performed on air valves that consisted of dropping a steel ball from a certain height on the valve. So, while you might get electrocuted from the thing you were safe from a steel ball attack!

 

[montelatici]

There is nothing that cannot be screwed up by the application of government to a "problem". Just because something NEEDS to be done, does not mean it needs to be done by government. As an example, the UL rating on electrical items. No-one can "buy" the UL rating because their reputation for integrity is more important to them than any single bribe could be. Can you "buy" a government bureaucrat? Yep, fairly cheap. If a non-government entity could become the standard of acceptance for electrical safety, why not tractors?

Nebraska farmers are the losers from this, not Kubota.

Don't know about this. The non-governmental investment rating companies called junk investments AAA and caused the current crisis.

I prefer to see the CE-mark on electrical products, frankly.