broke dk55, BOOO Kioti

Kaw · Dec 10, 2011

Well, first off I am not new to the tractor game. I have run tractors and other machines for a very long time. Not as long as some on here but long enough.. The dealer not wanting to warrenty parts is not the only reason I wont be going back.. More to it than I care to say on here, and with that I wont say any more its a long story..

Coyote machine · Dec 10, 2011

5030 said:
<snip>...The OP should have bought and installed a Kioti Approved unit. he didn't and in my opinion, has no recourse other than to open his wallet and chalk it up to being cheap at the outset.

Sorry, I have to disagree with this part of your post. Kioti can refuse to pay for damage caused by another manufacturer's backhoe or other implement, but CANNOT dictate what the OP must use or buy and attach to their tractor. I'm not saying that is what you said; just that expecting the OP to buy a Kioti branded hoe is what Kioti might like to see but doesn't remove the OP's choice to buy another brand, and he should not be faulted for doing so. That said, IMHO the selling dealer should have to disclose that doing so eliminates any coverage by the tractor mfg.

Let's say the Woods hoe was more money than the Kioti, would you still argue that the OP should have bought the Kioti brand? Or that Woods was the mfg. for the Kioti branded hoe. No matter what it is up to the buyer to beware and face the consequences of conflicting product warranties. Hence the term: Caveat Emptor, buyer beware!
In the OP's specific situation the selling dealer is responsible for the sale to the OP of a separately warrantied bhoe, not covered by the tractor mfg. if damage occurs to the tractor as a result of using it on the tractor.
Woods would be responsible it it's bhoe caused damage IF properly installed on the tractor, by the authorized dealer.

Here is another manufacturer restriction on the retail buyer: I just bought an '011 Toyota Forerunner. It is available with a performance package, special air filter and various items, that CANNOT be sold until after the initial sale of the vehicle to a retail buyer, and it cannot be financed in the vehicle cost amount!
I do not know why, and have never seen any similar restriction until just last week?!:confused2:

Coyote machine · Dec 10, 2011

Kaw said:
Well, first off I am not new to the tractor game. I have run tractors and other machines for a very long time. Not as long as some on here but long enough.. The dealer not wanting to warrenty parts is not the only reason I wont be going back.. More to it than I care to say on here, and with that I wont say any more its a long story..

Sorry to have assumed you were new to the tractor 'game'

Went by the number of posts- my bad.
So, where are you from? Signature gives no clue? Don't have to say, but it helps for us to help you and so on...
Hope you get it fixed to your satisfaction.
Too bad you've had dealer troubles beyond this situation.

5030 · Dec 10, 2011

aczlan said:
Au contraire. Woods and/or the selling dealer should take care of it if this issue was caused by a Woods backhoe or by an incorrectly installed subframe.
Aaron Z

That will depend ENTIRELY on what entity installed the hoe and/or subframe (if indeed there was a subframe).....

As usual, the OP is leaving out details that profoundly act on the final outcome and is making a carte-blanche statement as to their attitude/opinion concerning Kioti Tractor, when. in fact, there are a lot of missing parts to the puzzle, parts that predicate the outcome and the opinion garnered by people reading this thread.

I can say from first hand experience (I owned a hoe at one time that I had mounted on a Kubota with a Kubota dealer installed (and correctly I might add) subframe and I can state firsthand that, that particular hoe exterted enough strain on the 3PH in some situations, to sever the weld that attached the sway chain to the clevis. Happened more than one time, most likely due to my actions concerning the backhoe and it's operation, however, I know first hand about the forces applied to the back end of a tractor with a hoe.

Now, if there was no subframe, or if there was (a subframe) and it was installed by the dealer, the OP or whomever, incorrectly (or if there was none), I could see major damage being done to the castings/3ph components because I fully understand the forces that can be applied.

So, my questions are...

Was there a subframe?
Was the subframe installed correctly and by whom?
Was the hoe correctly sized for that particular machine?
If the hoe was installed by the OP, did the OP installe it correctly or wing it?
Did the OP check the fastener torque and tightness of the subframe (if one was installed at all)?
Finally, did the OP use the hoe in such a way as to apply damaging forces to the tractor or the tractor components.... (by that I mean it's entirely possible and quite feasible to apply severe lateral forces by using the hoe to move the unit or by using the hoe as a prying tool. The forces acting on the bucket, through the hydraulics are magnified back through the hoe frame and linkage, into the tractor itself.

I really have no dog in this game other than to state there are major pieces of the puzzle missing and the OP making blanket statements that are clearly prejudiced (in my view).....

Don't own a Kioti but I'm reasonably certain they are a fine machine. I'm just a Kubota person......

LD1 · Dec 10, 2011

aczlan said:
Au contraire. Woods and/or the selling dealer should take care of it if this issue was caused by a Woods backhoe or by an incorrectly installed subframe.

Aaron Z

I agree 100%. And it sounds like the dealer is going to take care of him:thumbsup:

5030 said:
As usual, the OP is leaving out details that profoundly act on the final outcome and is making a carte-blanche statement as to their attitude/opinion concerning Kioti Tractor, when. in fact, there are a lot of missing parts to the puzzle, parts that predicate the outcome and the opinion garnered by people reading this thread.

Not really. All the peices of info we need to know are here. He had the right sized backhoe WITH a subframe installed by the selling dealer who also sells woods, and advised him that the woods BH was a better unit. Now the BH broke his tractor. I dont see any fault or wrong doing by the OP. Dealer....maybe??? Maybe for not disclosing the info about the warrenty, or possibly faulty installation, but it sounds like they are going to make it right.

5030 said:
Was there a subframe? Answered in post #6 by the OP
Was the subframe installed correctly and by whom?answered in post 16 by the OP
Was the hoe correctly sized for that particular machine?It is the one the dealer reccomended. Again, see post 16. And also, according to woods, the BH90x is for a 30-70HP tractor. And the kiotis (according to this sight) are built pretty heavy for their HP. So it should handle it just fine. One size smaller (BH80x) is only good (according to woods) for up to 45HP
If the hoe was installed by the OP, did the OP installe it correctly or wing it?
Did the OP check the fastener torque and tightness of the subframe (if one was installed at all)?OP did NOT installit. See post 16
Finally, did the OP use the hoe in such a way as to apply damaging forces to the tractor or the tractor componentspossibly?? Maybe??? but even incorrect use (if everything was installed and working properly) shouldnt tear a tractor appart @ only 50hrs:confused2: And considering the OP states he is not a newbie, I have to think he knows what he was doing

The way I see it, it is pretty straight forward. All the peices we need to know are here:

1. OP bought a DK55 from dealer A.
2. OP wanted a BH for the DK55
3. Dealer A reccomended a Woods 90x as he felt it was a better hoe than kioti's
4. OP agreed and had dealer A install Woods hoe, unaware that it would void his kioti warrenty
5. Only 50hrs of use and tractor broke
6. OP took it to dealer B as he says Dealer A is hard to get ahold of.
7. Dealer B doesnt want to get into the middle. As it clearly states that kioti warrenty is voided. And Dealer B may or may not deal in woods equipment.
8. OP calls Dealer A and says bring it to me and I will make it right.
9. It sounds as if dealer A is going to get the OP back up and running without it costing The OP any money.
10. Dealer A may get his $$ from either kioti, or woods, or just decide to eat the cost. It all depends on what they find as the cause.
........10a. If it was inproper install, I thinkthey will eat the cost
........10b. If it was something wrong with the hoe/mount, they will probabally pressure woods to pay
........10c. If it was faulty kioti parts/castings, they will probabally pressure kioti to pony up

KAW: Does that pretty much sum it up????

aczlan · Dec 10, 2011

LD1 said:
The way I see it, it is pretty straight forward. All the peices we need to know are here:
1. OP bought a DK55 from dealer A.
2. OP wanted a BH for the DK55
3. Dealer A reccomended a Woods 90x as he felt it was a better hoe than kioti's
4. OP agreed and had dealer A install Woods hoe, unaware that it would void his kioti warrenty
5. Only 50hrs of use and tractor broke
6. OP took it to dealer B as he says Dealer A is hard to get ahold of.
7. Dealer B doesnt want to get into the middle. As it clearly states that kioti warrenty is voided. And Dealer B may or may not deal in woods equipment.
8. OP calls Dealer A and says bring it to me and I will make it right.
9. It sounds as if dealer A is going to get the OP back up and running without it costing The OP any money.
10. Dealer A may get his $$ from either kioti, or woods, or just decide to eat the cost. It all depends on what they find as the cause.
........10a. If it was inproper install, I thinkthey will eat the cost
........10b. If it was something wrong with the hoe/mount, they will probabally pressure woods to pay
........10c. If it was faulty kioti parts/castings, they will probabally pressure kioti to pony up

KAW: Does that pretty much sum it up????

Sounds like those are the facts to me.

Aaron Z

Martian · Dec 10, 2011

LD1 said:
The way I see it, it is pretty straight forward. All the peices we need to know are here:

1. OP bought a DK55 from dealer A.
2. OP wanted a BH for the DK55
3. Dealer A reccomended a Woods 90x as he felt it was a better hoe than kioti's
4. OP agreed and had dealer A install Woods hoe, unaware that it would void his kioti warrenty
5. Only 50hrs of use and tractor broke
6. OP took it to dealer B as he says Dealer A is hard to get ahold of.
7. Dealer B doesnt want to get into the middle. As it clearly states that kioti warrenty is voided. And Dealer B may or may not deal in woods equipment.
8. OP calls Dealer A and says bring it to me and I will make it right.
9. It sounds as if dealer A is going to get the OP back up and running without it costing The OP any money.
10. Dealer A may get his $$ from either kioti, or woods, or just decide to eat the cost. It all depends on what they find as the cause.
........10a. If it was inproper install, I thinkthey will eat the cost
........10b. If it was something wrong with the hoe/mount, they will probabally pressure woods to pay
........10c. If it was faulty kioti parts/castings, they will probabally pressure kioti to pony up

KAW: Does that pretty much sum it up????

That's the way I see it, followed this since the start. Just didn't feel like typing it all out, so thanks LD1

Coyote machine · Dec 10, 2011

LD1 said:
I agree 100%. And it sounds like the dealer is going to take care of him:thumbsup:

Not really. All the peices of info we need to know are here. He had the right sized backhoe WITH a subframe installed by the selling dealer who also sells woods, and advised him that the woods BH was a better unit. Now the BH broke his tractor. I dont see any fault or wrong doing by the OP. Dealer....maybe??? Maybe for not disclosing the info about the warrenty, or possibly faulty installation, but it sounds like they are going to make it right.

The way I see it, it is pretty straight forward. All the peices we need to know are here:

1. OP bought a DK55 from dealer A.
2. OP wanted a BH for the DK55
3. Dealer A reccomended a Woods 90x as he felt it was a better hoe than kioti's
4. OP agreed and had dealer A install Woods hoe, unaware that it would void his kioti warrenty
5. Only 50hrs of use and tractor broke
6. OP took it to dealer B as he says Dealer A is hard to get ahold of.
7. Dealer B doesnt want to get into the middle. As it clearly states that kioti warrenty is voided. And Dealer B may or may not deal in woods equipment.
8. OP calls Dealer A and says bring it to me and I will make it right.
9. It sounds as if dealer A is going to get the OP back up and running without it costing The OP any money.
10. Dealer A may get his $$ from either kioti, or woods, or just decide to eat the cost. It all depends on what they find as the cause.
........10a. If it was inproper install, I thinkthey will eat the cost
........10b. If it was something wrong with the hoe/mount, they will probabally pressure woods to pay
........10c. If it was faulty kioti parts/castings, they will probabally pressure kioti to pony up

KAW: Does that pretty much sum it up????

One correction to this line of thinking: points # 4 & 7, Kioti does NOT VOID their warranty, they just do not offer coverage on NON- Kioti attachments, or any damage to the tractor as a result of use of same.

Kaw · Dec 10, 2011

LD1 said:
I agree 100%. And it sounds like the dealer is going to take care of him:thumbsup:

Not really. All the peices of info we need to know are here. He had the right sized backhoe WITH a subframe installed by the selling dealer who also sells woods, and advised him that the woods BH was a better unit. Now the BH broke his tractor. I dont see any fault or wrong doing by the OP. Dealer....maybe??? Maybe for not disclosing the info about the warrenty, or possibly faulty installation, but it sounds like they are going to make it right.

The way I see it, it is pretty straight forward. All the peices we need to know are here:

1. OP bought a DK55 from dealer A.
2. OP wanted a BH for the DK55
3. Dealer A reccomended a Woods 90x as he felt it was a better hoe than kioti's
4. OP agreed and had dealer A install Woods hoe, unaware that it would void his kioti warrenty
5. Only 50hrs of use and tractor broke
6. OP took it to dealer B as he says Dealer A is hard to get ahold of.
7. Dealer B doesnt want to get into the middle. As it clearly states that kioti warrenty is voided. And Dealer B may or may not deal in woods equipment.
8. OP calls Dealer A and says bring it to me and I will make it right.
9. It sounds as if dealer A is going to get the OP back up and running without it costing The OP any money.
10. Dealer A may get his $$ from either kioti, or woods, or just decide to eat the cost. It all depends on what they find as the cause.
........10a. If it was inproper install, I thinkthey will eat the cost
........10b. If it was something wrong with the hoe/mount, they will probabally pressure woods to pay
........10c. If it was faulty kioti parts/castings, they will probabally pressure kioti to pony up

KAW: Does that pretty much sum it up????

yep you got it all right there as i had.. Now if 5030 would have read from the start he would have gotten all the info.. instead AS USUAL starts reading from where ever without have gotten all the info and ASSUMING a lot..

IslandTractor · Dec 10, 2011

Kaw said:
yep you got it all right there as i had.. Now if 5030 would have read from the start he would have gotten all the info.. instead AS USUAL starts reading from where ever without have gotten all the info and ASSUMING a lot..

Yes, he did deserve that little dig.

Never hurts to read back a few posts before jumping to conclusions. To be fair it was kinda confusing and LD1:thumbsup: did a great service summarizing the issues and history in a way that we should all follow. It is real easy to get tied up in opinions or thoughts before establishing and outlining the facts for all to see.