Limitations of a sub compact?

[motomanpat]

What are the limitations of a sub compact tractor? I am interested in buying a small tractor mostly for mowing but also am interested in a FEL. As I have been looking my thought's keep going,what am I not going to be able to do with a sub compact tractor? I really would appreciate any info owners of sub compacts might have.

 

[bp fick]

The subcut is smaller. It has great maneuverability, really decent power from its compact diesel engine. It is fun to operate. With HST, easy to stop and go, with a small turning radius. It doesn't require 1/2 the barn to store and will sip fuel. Lighter and easier to transport. Lower mass and weight means less tracking on lawns. These are some of the positive features. The price of a subcut is also smaller, which makes buying easier.

The above are mostly made possible by its diminutive stature, which produces the little compact's limitations.

The hydro pump produces an adequate, but limited amount of lifting capacity, in line with its smaller loader bucket. Many times the small diesel engine is made to rev somewhat higher to produce its horse power. It simply has less bulk and weight, which means traction, even with 4 wheel assist, can only be so good. Its smaller mass also limits the subcuts ability to be a tow vehicle, as it can get out manned by a large trailer, which it may be able to move, but how safely? And, can it really stop it on a steeper grade?

Most subcuts also come with a vulnerable plastic cooling fan on the HST, instead of cooling lines to the radiator. A feature that can produce much angst when damaged.

It's low center of gravity makes it safer on hills to mow, but also sorely limits its ground clearance in the woods or having the ability to trudge through really deep snow. Obviously, It cannot cultivate plants taller than 6" or so.

It is a small tractor.

 

[RoyJackson]

A subCUT is all that the majority of residential owners with ½ to 2 acres who expect to do the following tasks:
Mowing as primary task
Lifting nothing heavier then a few hundred pounds (two or three bags of mulch, sand or cement).
Snow removal on a short driveway (50-60 feet).
No brush cutting.

In other words, most folks who live in a suburban development.

That's what's practical...but some folks just want a larger machine.

 

[TripleR]

Pretty much what BP said.

I may or may not be in agreement/disagreement with Roy. I have two SCUTS, a 2660 and 2305 and do cut "brush" with them, just not "heavy brush". I do have to back into most of it or risk damage to the tie rods and such. I use them where my bigger tractors won't fit. If large areas need cutting, I will use a much bigger tractor.

I also have used mine to clear my 265 foot driveway and on a couple of occasions a quarter mile of our county road, but won't do that again.

I pretty much agree they are better on smaller properties, but I used them for over seven years on my 300+ acre farm. I have bigger tractors, but either they would be at another farm or I didn't want to change equipment around.

I have to admit though, if I did not have bigger tractors as a back up or for the big jobs, I would have gone with CUT. Hope I didn't muddy the waters too much. As always, just my opinion and YMMV.

 

[radioman]

as far as limitations go with a cut/scut, it's pretty much weight proportional. smaller size means less capacity and speed, doesnt mean "not capable". Just more time. When roy mentioned short driveway for snow clearing, I really think its a matter of where you live. If you get alot of snow, a front mounted blower works just as good as a larger tractor for long driveways. again speed is proportional to size. if you only get a few inches, a plow will do just fine, even with a scut/cut.

 

[tsteahr]

I know Roy has lots of experience, but I think he is being a little harsh. A scut for 1/2 to 2 acres is overkill. A scut with a 60" deck is quite capable of mowing more than 2 acres in a reasonable amount of time. For mowing 1/2 an acre I think a small ride on would be faster and easier, depending on the maneuvering required.

A SCUT will lift far more than two or thee bags of mulch, sand or cement. If you can fit it in the bucket, it will lift it. A rough comparison would be a scut bucket will handle about 3 times what a wheel barrow load would be. A bucket expander is also available for the Kubota BX.

Using a scut to remove snow on a 50-60 ft drive also way overkill and would be better served with a small walk behind blower (or a good shovel). I clear snow from my 120ft drive with front mounted blower in just a few minutes. The scut / blower is way overkill for my drive. I believe 500+ ft is quite reasonable to clear in short order. 12 ft wide drive is cleared in three passes with most front 50" blowers.

Ground clearance is the biggest issue with a scut. If you are working in the woods or really rough terrain you probably need a bigger machine with more clearance.

A scut is a little tractor, not a big tractor. But it is a tractor none the less. Not to be confused with a ride on lawn mower. With being a tractor also comes the need to have a much higher safety awareness.

With all due respect, for those people who have never used a tractor and are considering one, if the biggest machine one has ever used is a garden tractor (or smaller) you have absolutely no idea what a scut is capable of. At least that was my experience.

 

[jenkinsph]

I have given this quite a bit of thought too, as I consider which way to go with my next purchase. I am in the middle trying to decide whether to get a larger tractor (6xxx) first or a smaller subcompact or X7xx riding mower. Obviously buying the smaller tractor at its lower cost delays purchaseing the larger tractor for a much shorter time than doing the reverse of getting the large tractor and waiting to buy the small unit. So, I have had to consider what assets the small tractor has that I really need.

For landscape work I find the subcompact tractors are not as good for mowing as the X7XX riding mowers. For suburban yards both of these small units can fit where the larger tractors can't go. Having the small tools can really help lower the amount of labor needed to do finish work. The ability to do any real dirt work with these small tractors is limited, though it beats doing it manually. I am hoping that a small tractor/riding mower will be able to fill in the tight and close spaces that the larger tractors have trouble with.

A subcompact tractor is much better for instance tilling, landscape raking, pine needle raking, in a small yard with lower branches than the larger tractors. Given enough time you can get alot done with these small units. I would bear in mind that they are small and limited in their abilities to perform jobs which require alot of tractive force. For the larger jobs there is no substitute for a heavier tractor. Trying to force a small subcompact to perform the tasks that are normal for my 4520 or larger will yield poor results and take a long time to accomplish.

FWIW, I am considering the progression of using the X749 mower, 4520, 110tlb and either a 6115 or 6430 to cover the bases. I would still keep the small gas trimming mowers and tools but sell off the older 820 and 3030LS. I mention all of this to demonstrate one of the lessons learned over the years having owned a number of different tractors. That is the 8 in 1 tool problem, trying to make one model do it all, doesn't work out very well. I have often mentioned here on TBN that I don't want a fel in the way on my tractor so having the tlb as a separate machine is a real benefit IMHO. I reserve the right to change my mind at any time though.:laughing:

For those people trying to decide between a larger riding mower and a subcompact tractor it can be a tough choice. I would recomend you really think about your long term needs and uses, that is "what is the primary task going to be for the long term" to aid you in the decision process.

 

[RoyJackson]

I know Roy has lots of experience, but I think he is being a little harsh. A scut for 1/2 to 2 acres is overkill.

What I wrote would be about the maximum I'd do with a subCUT for a person living in a suburban area (i.e. a development with neighbors within a few hundred feet.
Overkill in some respects? Yeah, I agree...but if a guy wants a tractor, it would be an OK fit.
You want to talk about overkill? I've got a 35 HP (30 at the PTO) tractor on 2½ acres. And I use an 84" (yes, 7 FEET) RFM on about an acre on finished lawn. Now, that's overkill! But, I got the tractor I want at a great price...and that RFM came as part of the deal.
(I do brush cut about 3 acres too).

 

[sandman2234]

This question brings an old saying to mind. Simply put, how do you eat an elephant? Answer is simple, one bite at a time. Having owned a 13hp and now a 65hp, for most of the operations requiired, it. Is simply the amount of time(and fuel) required. Most chores can be accomplished by both with limitations on both. Each has their drawback, so you need to figure your requirements and then pick a tractor based on that. David from jax

 

[flusher]

What are the limitations of a sub compact tractor? I am interested in buying a small tractor mostly for mowing but also am interested in a FEL. As I have been looking my thought's keep going,what am I not going to be able to do with a sub compact tractor? I really would appreciate any info owners of sub compacts might have.

You can do a lot, but with SCUT horsepower levels, it takes more time to get the jobs done than it would with larger CUTs or even larger utility tractors.

And the lift capacity of SCUT FELs is small (generally less than 1000 lbs) so don't expect to move heavy stuff like large round hay bales.

And the lift height is less so it sometimes is hard to use a SCUT FEL to load stuff in a dump truck.

SCUTs generally have narrow wheelbases so they are can be tippy unless you trick them out with wider tires or dualies.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

A SCUT will lift far more than two or thee bags of mulch, sand or cement. If you can fit it in the bucket, it will lift it. A rough comparison would be a scut bucket will handle about 3 times what a wheel barrow load would be. A bucket expander is also available for the Kubota BX.
.

I think that you might want to rethink that. Most wheel barrows hold from 4-6 cubic feet. I have yet to see any SCUT that will hold 12 cubic feet let alone 18 CF. I always thought that a SCUT loader bucket was about the same size or just a little bigger than a wheel barrow, but never 2-3 times the size. :confused3:

 

[sandman2234]

Without doing the calculations for the math to exactly determine the size, it is pretty obvious that a 42", 48" or 60" bucket available from Bush Hog for a 15 to 25 hp tractor with the lowest part of it's capacity at 570 pounds (highest at 2300), it is going to OUTWORK ANY WHEELBARROW that I have ever seen, even with the strongest of young men behind the handles, or even three or four of them.
I often have jobs that my 65hp, 7000 pound tractor CANNOT do, that my little Ford 1100 did on a regular basis. I used to load the Ford in the back of my 1/2 ton pickup with the bush hog sticking out past the tailgate a couple of feet, and move it from location to location. Now my 1/2 ton pickup won't even safely pull the 7000 pound beast, but if I get it to a job, it does it in so much less time. However, for operations around my house, the 7000 pounder does almost everything quicker. However, due to limitations such as size, it won't fit into smaller areas, or turn around in them, so extra work is delegated to my Steiner lawnmower that used to be handled by the subcompact tractor.
Open spaces seem to eat more horsepower easily, whereas smaller combined areas tend to limit what you can use, thereby limiting the size.
Figure out what jobs you can and might need doing and lets go from there...
David from jax

 

[deepNdirt]

I think that you might want to rethink that. Most wheel barrows hold from 4-6 cubic feet. I have yet to see any SCUT that will hold 12 cubic feet let alone 18 CF. I always thought that a SCUT loader bucket was about the same size or just a little bigger than a wheel barrow, but never 2-3 times the size. :confused3:

I can key in on this one..... as i have for many years mixed cement in a wheelbarrow and usually without spilling can only do 2x 80 lb bags is the max, just a few days ago I decide to give my 4 ft. FEL a try with mixing some cement, it would hold 2 x that amount ..4- 80 lb bags than that of a wheelbarrow, plus dumping the FEL was much easier on my back , If ever owning a tractor without a FEL you might not know what you'd be missing as I did with My cut Kubota for many years, then after getting the Yanmar and rigging it with a FEL I could never see myself having any size tractor without one, Yes the smaller SCUTS are limited although still would be much better driving with 3 bags of mulch in the FEL then pushing a wheelbarrow up hill with the same amount, No brainer!:thumbsup: IMO a good size tractor to have for between 2-10 acres would be a tractor 18-25 hp, if you have more land than that buy a few goats, they'll take care of the rest,

 

[Transit]

The problem or i should say the challenge is to size the tractor to the intended uses. The flaw is that one "FINDS" new uses. That's why i need a bigger tractor. A 900 Lb FEL doesn't cut it any more, maybe a 3,100 lb FEL, a cab with AC for the hot days and heat for the cold? Next a Hot Tub and a 54 inch 3-D TV. Get a big enough tractor and live in it.

 

[sandman2234]

Roy, that isn't overkill. Same size lot with a 23hp 5foot diesel mower, backed up with a 65 hp JD, a 90 hp Ford and then buying a 60 hp Duetz is overkill. David from jax

 

[Jaylegger]

Engines and hydraulic pumps (flow/pressure) with more HP can potentially do more work per hour than those with less. The wheelbase, ground clearance, overall weight, height, and length of SCUT's may be a limitation or benefit depending on job and/or site. I would hazard a guess that the greatest limitation of many SCUT's out there is the operator and if equipped with backhoe the digging depth.

 

[MtnViewRanch]

I can key in on this one..... as i have for many years mixed cement in a wheelbarrow and usually without spilling can only do 2x 80 lb bags is the max, just a few days ago I decide to give my 4 ft. FEL a try with mixing some cement, it would hold 2 x that amount ..4- 80 lb bags than that of a wheelbarrow, plus dumping the FEL was much easier on my back , If ever owning a tractor without a FEL you might not know what you'd be missing as I did with My cut Kubota for many years, then after getting the Yanmar and rigging it with a FEL I could never see myself having any size tractor without one, Yes the smaller SCUTS are limited although still would be much better driving with 3 bags of mulch in the FEL then pushing a wheelbarrow up hill with the same amount, No brainer!:thumbsup: IMO a good size tractor to have for between 2-10 acres would be a tractor 18-25 hp, if you have more land than that buy a few goats, they'll take care of the rest,

I'm not saying that you might as well have a wheel barrow and of course it is a lot easier than manual labor.:thumbsup: All I was commenting on was that the FEL bucket on a SCUT was not 3 times the size of today's average wheel barrow.

 

[jenkinsph]

Justification?

Isn't that something women consider when looking at your toys?


My thought is that if I can turn it around in the yard it fits.:laughing:

 

[RalphVa]

I've a compact JD of 18.5 hp diesel that is somewhat equivalent to a new JD 2320 or Kubota B class of similar hp. It's been great on my 8.5 very hilly and uneven acres. I was a beast moving our record 56" of snow this winter. Not long after I bought it, I moved about 23 tons of gravel from a delivered pile out front to a trail that runs across the top and down a bit of my 100' high hill in back. The FEL or the 3ph will lift 1,000-1,200 #. The FEL lifts high enough to dump it into a pickup. The 3 ph doesn't lift too high. The 4010 is high enough to not have clearance problems of a 2305 or Kubota BX. The hydraulic cooling fan is the engine fan, and the hydraulic cooler is located in front of the engine radiator. It's equally as compact for using an underdeck mower as a 2305. A friend of mine has a 4010 that he uses for mowing with an underdeck. I have a 4' bush hog.

My neighbor is like Roy. He has a 40ish hp JD that he uses on his 5 acres with similar topography as our 8.5. He has a wicked mountain road like driveway to take care of and is using it for a lot of dirt moving.

Ralph

 

[Chilly807]

The problem or i should say the challenge is to size the tractor to the intended uses. The flaw is that one "FINDS" new uses.

There's a whole lot of truth in that statement..

The only way to decide how much tractor you need is to lay out exactly what you want to do with it regularly. I could use a backhoe a couple times a year, and a dozer maybe once every two years. So, there's no point in me buying either a backhoe or something with enough power to act as a dozer. I'd like to have both, mind you.. I'll hire someone to do those jobs, they can pay for the extra machinery, not me.

A lot of the replies to this thread have been right on the money. The first one I'll comment on is safety. If the tractor is overwhelmed by the trailer it's hauling or the bush hog hanging off the back, it's not safe.

Never mind what they say, size counts.. if it's too big or too heavy to fit into the area you're working in, it's pick and shovel time.

I have to drive around my house to load attachments because my septic tank/line/field is in the way on the short route. Bigger tractors with AG tires are tough on lawns, I've left some nasty tracks when the ground was soft.

Will it fit into your garage? Does the ROPS fold? How much ground clearance do you need?

Can you hold enough fuel for a day's work, or are you stopping to fuel every couple hours? Mind you, I'm usually ready for a break myself after a couple hours, so it's not always a problem.

I have 10 acres, about 7 in pasture. I spent the past two afternoons mowing pasture with a 5 foot bush hog, another afternoon will see it done. A smaller tractor will mean more time, and possibly less comfort over rough ground.

We haul out firewood in the winter and remove snow from a 250 foot driveway.

Long and short of it is, almost everything we do could be done with a smaller tractor, except maybe shift small round bales. It would take longer and the machine would work harder. As it is, I was reflecting on my choice this afternoon, and I'm glad I got the size I did. It's a good match for my abilities and the chores it does.

Being able to haul it around behind a truck is a real plus if you have more than one location to use it. Nothing I have will haul the 3400, so it's limited that way.

Sean