Cadillac of tractors?

   / Cadillac of tractors? #191  
ROFLMAO, why would that not surprise me? Do you have bags on their rear ends to collect the manure or is that too may options and added items?

Seriously, your position is extremely weak, at best, and has no merit. You need to come out of the 60's.

You can't simply say "your position is extremely weak" you have to prove your point, you haven't, at least soundguy has engaged that end.

And I have no idea what ROFLMAO means.

"have bags on their rear ends to collect the manure". Their rear ends? Whose rear ends? What are you talking about here?

And one more time, I get all the options of the 3520 on the 3320 but the turbo!

I need to come out of the 60's? I run my house on solar, how about you?

Rob
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #192  
Well folks, I figure if a fellow doesn't want a Turbo he doesn't need to have one or justify why he doesn't need on.:thumbsup:

On the other hand if you want a turbo then you can get one without justifying why!:thumbsup:

On the other hand if a technical discussion is being entered into most of us here don't got the education in that field to properly express our views. All we can do is parrot whatever data we find. :thumbsup:
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #193  
This reminds me of all of the "old timers" that complain about leaps/progress in technology... Guess we should all be using old narrow front end tractors!

With no power steering. That is just extra parts to break too. :laughing:
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #194  
Benefit? just the opposite.. the higher you go UP the more the NA engine will suffer.

the more fuel=more poloution is not a direct ratio. How cleanly the fuel is being burned has to factor in.

I can burn an open pail of diesel with a rag in it as a wick and it's going to smoke pretty fiercely...

as for as not having a turbo failure on a non turbo machine.. that's the only thing I see out of this discussion that is an absolute.

I see you side stepped the old low power process or vs the new high power hi heat processor issue. While it helps your point.. it helps mine too. :)

soundguy


What are we talking about here? I like the 3320, it's 4 hp less than the 3520. At 1k feet do you honestly think you're going to get any real benefit from altitude? I don't.



The 3320 is 4 hp less that the turbo 3720. How much faster do you think you'll do it? The 3520 uses 2.4 gph the 3320 uses 2.0 gph, you'll be using more fuel = more pollution.



Apples and oranges. It's not about chrome, we're talking about engines. In my book the turbo isn't worth it. I still get all the features as the turbo tractor for less money, less noise, less stress and less parts.



You missed the point, If an engine doesn't have a part that part can't fail. If it doesn't have a turbo than it can never have turbo failure! Do turbo's fail? Yes, you want to pay to get it rebuilt, that's your business but if I can avoid having to ever rebuild something that's the option I want.



Big difference, the 3320 loses very little to the 3520 (11%).
As far as any electronics, what is the major cause of parts failures? HEAT, push a semiconductor and it has a greater chance of failure, you're making my point.

Rob
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #195  
With no power steering. That is just extra parts to break too. :laughing:

Yep.. can't have a power steering failure on a machine with no power steering.

can't have a 4wd failure on a 2wd machine.

cant have a rops or seatbelt failure on a machine with no rops or seatbelt.

By robs's logic.. no machines should have those sinc ethey are extra parts that can be broken.

like spark arresting mufflers.. ( costs more and harder to build than straight pipes.. thus.. not needed??? )

the list can get endless when you look into technological improvements...

soundguy
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #197  
And I have no idea what ROFLMAO means.

Do you have bags on their rear ends to collect the manure or is that too many options and added items

Rob

ROFLMAO

rolling on the floor laughing my (donkey) off

the 'bags' comment was in reference to your reply of 'not mine' which was a reply to my comment about heavy equipment having turbo chargers. Which.. if you actually go out and hit a caterpillar, or similar heavy equipment dealer and go poking thru.. you'll walk a looooong time before you find any NA pieces of big heavy equipment. That's why the poster was asking you if you were still using a mule team or horses.. etc. ( I realize some 'small' diesels are produced that are NA ) My guess is as an econopmy model / cost saveing feature similar to detuning an engine so that you can have the same block and all internals, and sell 2 models with just a few hp difference by simply deturning the injector pump and governor.. yet not have to have the tooling for 2 different engines..

soundguy
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #198  
No you don't, the 3520 has more horsepower.

and he'd have to pay more for those hp and his tractor would have an additional assembly that may hypothetically break in the future leaving him with a NA machine till he fixed it.. :)

soundguy
 
   / Cadillac of tractors? #199  
Well folks, I figure if a fellow doesn't want a Turbo he doesn't need to have one or justify why he doesn't need on.:thumbsup:

On the other hand if you want a turbo then you can get one without justifying why!:thumbsup:

On the other hand if a technical discussion is being entered into most of us here don't got the education in that field to properly express our views. All we can do is parrot whatever data we find. :thumbsup:

However, in the field of running turbochargers on diesel engines, there are millions and millions of hours logged and actuarial data to support their strong benefit over cost; not to mention their huge production/performance increase for the relatively small cost increase. Look at the industry. Other than small baby diesel engines, we live in a world that has moved on to turbo diesel engines.

Some people forget that their mighty CUT has less hp than my simple little lawn mower. My larger zero turn radius lawn mower has a 31 hp diesel engine. That's far more than a good percentage of the tractors owned here. Even on that sized engine, look into the engineering notes and you'll see not only where it was made to accept a turbo charger, but has lines run and brackets to attach a proper turbo charger.

My Kubota RTV1100 sucked on power as a naturally aspirated powered diesel. To me, it was a 17k waste. I added the appropriate factory Kubota turbo charger to it a while back and, oh snap, the machine comes to life and is an amazing machine. It went from almost never being used, 22 hours in the first year, to having almost 50 hours put on it since installing the turbo. Smoother, stronger and absolutely positively zero turbo whine (bummer).

If someone doubts the additional power provided by turbochargers, just go take the twin turbo chargers off of a D11 Cat dozer and try to use it. It's a worthless hunk of steel. Remind the operator to stop and let the oiler service the unit, saving the turbochargers) and he has a beast of a machine that pushes out thousands of HP and torque and will last tens of thousands of hours. No detailed pictures, but here is that D11. But, no, turbos are not so important on tractors. LOL! I think repairing and operating that sort of equipment qualifies me more than parroting incorrect information posted on the web. I've been trained, been there, done that, and ruined several T-shirts. :D

In that first pic, you can see my son up playing in the operator's seat, but you can also clearly see a new turbo mounted on the machine with the box the turbo came on still sitting on the tracks. They were replaced, I had proper oil pressure, the temp gun told me I had proper lubrication flow, there were no oil leaks, the power was back and I was finished!
 

Attachments

  • 03-27-07_1431.jpg
    03-27-07_1431.jpg
    450.9 KB · Views: 93
  • 03-27-07_1435.jpg
    03-27-07_1435.jpg
    470.4 KB · Views: 91
   / Cadillac of tractors?
  • Thread Starter
#200  
So is it ya'll's opinion that JD's turbo'd motors are better than all the non-turbo'd NH's, Kubota's, Mahindra's, etc.? (I do know some of those brands have some turbo models too)

From JD's side, here would be some of the reason I could think of to start using turbo's:

1) They really are better than NA motors, thus they beat the competition, generate more sales, & increase profits.

2) They somehow allow JD to save manufacturing dollars but still charge the same as an NA tractor, thus increasing profits.

3) The gov't has mandated they meet certain emissions limits, & a turbo is the only (or best) way they could figure out how to do it. But then, why aren't all the other brand using turbo's on (nearly) all their motors like JD.

As a for-profit company, JD certainly wasn't going to start using turbo's if they didn't have to ... so why did they? It can't be only to benefit the consumer, so what is it?
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

2020 EZGO GOLF CART (A50324)
2020 EZGO GOLF...
2013 Cadillac ATS Sedan (A50324)
2013 Cadillac ATS...
Bad Boy Outlaw XP61 Zero Turn Mower (A48082)
Bad Boy Outlaw...
2013 Hyundai Sonata Hybrid Sedan (A50324)
2013 Hyundai...
2012 VOLVO VNL TANDEM AXLE SLEEPER (A51222)
2012 VOLVO VNL...
2006 CATERPILLAR 320CL EXCAVATOR (A51242)
2006 CATERPILLAR...
 
Top