Tractor Definition

[Martian]

The specifications spell it all out clearly for most people to understand, I'm sorry that you don't.

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Did you read my post? You still haven't come up with a classification that everyone agrees upon that shows the Max is out of the SCUT market. I've looked at the specifications, more than once, so thanks for that recommendation.

 

[Don87]

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Did you read my post? You still haven't come up with a classification that everyone agrees upon that shows the Max is out of the SCUT market. I've looked at the specifications, more than once, so thanks for that recommendation.

You haven't read mine. And I went a little further.

I've forwarded all the pertinent information to NAAG.


Discussion over, time for action.

 

[LD1]

We aren't going to go through all this again. But my point is you still have not given a clear forefront definition of the classes of tractors that can be agreed on by everyone. Since there isn't one - it can't be wrong. This is what's been evading you, Don's tractor classification doesn't work for me and a lot of other people.

The specifications spell it all out clearly for most people to understand, I'm sorry that you don't.

Again, I dont get too worked up with "classifications". BECAUSE....there is nothing in stone. You can call it what you want, but just be mindful that what one person (or manufacture) considers a SCUT, an other person (or manufacture) may call a CUT.

SO...we have to do our due-diligence when shopping or comparing to make sure we are actually comparing apples to apples.

It is pretty clear that in kubotas mind, they draw the SCUT-CUT line between their B and BX models. IE: B=CUT and BX =SCUT in their eyes. Same with deere between the 10's and 20's. IE: 10=SCUT and 20= SCUT.

Mahindra thinks differently. And by them considering the max a SCUT, they are indeed changing the "game" of SCUTS. But by all fairness, if the Max is a SCUT, then so is the 20's and B's.

If ford decided to call their crown vic a "compact" car, and targeted the likes of "civics" and "corollas" in their comparisons and talk about how much more room and power "their compact" has......does that make any sense???? Just because other makes dont decide to follow suit and try to re-classify their line-up??

Just compair apples to apples. If you dont, you are only hurting yourself. You can call my L3400 a SCUT, or even a UT if you want, but that doesnt change how it performs or how it performs vs the competitions similar sized machines.

 

[Martian]

Again, I dont get too worked up with "classifications". BECAUSE....there is nothing in stone. You can call it what you want, but just be mindful that what one person (or manufacture) considers a SCUT, an other person (or manufacture) may call a CUT.

SO...we have to do our due-diligence when shopping or comparing to make sure we are actually comparing apples to apples.

It is pretty clear that in kubotas mind, they draw the SCUT-CUT line between their B and BX models. IE: B=CUT and BX =SCUT in their eyes. Same with deere between the 10's and 20's. IE: 10=SCUT and 20= SCUT.

Mahindra thinks differently. And by them considering the max a SCUT, they are indeed changing the "game" of SCUTS. But by all fairness, if the Max is a SCUT, then so is the 20's and B's.

If ford decided to call their crown vic a "compact" car, and targeted the likes of "civics" and "corollas" in their comparisons and talk about how much more room and power "their compact" has......does that make any sense???? Just because other makes dont decide to follow suit and try to re-classify their line-up??

Just compair apples to apples. If you dont, you are only hurting yourself. You can call my L3400 a SCUT, or even a UT if you want, but that doesnt change how it performs or how it performs vs the competitions similar sized machines.

I agree with you LD1! And that is exactly why I believe it really doesn't matter. I'm not stupid - I realize that Mahindra's Max 25 is bigger than the Deere 1 series, Kubota BX, MF GC, but that doesn't change how they perform. If you want to make the case that it's unethical that Mahindra is comparing a slightly larger machine, go ahead, but I'm not buying in. In the end we are comparing spec sheets and trying to make it real life - it doesn't work that way. We need to compare real life to real life, and there's a lot more to a tractor than a spec sheet.

 

[dfkrug]

I can't believe nobody has posted an actual definition from a dictionary yet...

Tractor: something that draws or pulls.

I was waiting for someone to do that.

Yes, a tractor is about using traction to do work. That includes the
lowliest riding lawnmower, which can pull a wagon. My tiny STX38
did that pretty well, actually. An ancient 70s era Crafstman riding mower
I owned actually had a rudimentary lifting hitch for a self-powered
rototiller. Also clearly a tractor, IMO.

What most here would agree on is that a ZTR riding mower is NOT a
tractor. It mows, but that's it. No trailers, hitches, etc, for traction
work. LD1 was first to mention the ZTR.

Does a tractor have to have a 3-pt or PTO? No way. No one here
would deny that a CASE 580 TLB is a tractor, right? My bro's
Freightliner is a tractor, for sure.

To further muddle this definiton, go look at a Bobcat Toolcat. That's
called a utility vehicle. Kinda like calling a Kubota RTV a golf cart.
The Toolcat has a 3-pt and comes with a FEL.

Who here thinks of a skidsteer as a tractor? They kind of have their
own category, but I would say loader work qualifies it as a tractor,
even it is no good at pulling things. Pushing is also traction work.

Food for thought.

 

[LD1]

If you want to make the case that it's unethical that Mahindra is comparing a slightly larger machine, go ahead, but I'm not buying in.

I have no problems with a company comparing its machine to a slightly smaller one if the other company doesnt make one the same size, and they are comming out with one that fits in-between two competitor models, sure we all expect them to pick on the smaller one right??

Thats not the issue, the issue is that deere and kubota BOTH make a tractor that spec almost IDENTICAL to the max, yet they choose to NOT compair to it. WHY???? Instead, they compare to the 10 series and BX, which is a bit more than "slightly" smaller IMO.

We seem to agree that people need to compair apples to apples right?

Well, if the Max is an apple, the kubota apple is the B2x20 and deere 2x20 series. And the BX and the 10-series.....well, they'd be like a grape in comparison

 

[NHmitch]

I really do not want to jump in the middle of this, because I think that people are taking the definitions personel and getting upset, but all I can say is, if it looks like duck, If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. The whole CUT/SCUT/UT/whatever is a marketing scheme. These terms were not around years ago, and they have come out with them when these companies realized that their market was changing to the homeowner buyer more than the traditional farmer. They had to rework their sales pitches, and how they dealt with people. I have no doubt that my tractor is a small tractor, and it is a very capable tractor, but it is not in the same boat as a large AG tractor and was never meant to be. It was manufactured in Japan to work rice paddies, and tilling fields, and it is only 15hp, yet very powerful. The bottom line is when I see someone selling a tractor, I look at the HP, and see if it will fit my needs, and wether it has 4 wheel drive, and the PTO's that I need. I think that we are getting caught up in marketing tactics, and thats what the manufactures want, because they want you to go to them, because they always want to appear that you are getting a bigger, better machine, and they want you money. The truck dealerships have been doing this for years by adding words like Hemmi, Duramax, ect. Anyways, not to ramble on, but I think at the end of the day, we all have tractors, and they all have similar diesel engines, and they all are meant to work, so to me, it really does not matter what the tractor is called. If you look at the grey market tractor industry in the US, and you take a grey and compare it to an identical model with a different tag on it, the dealerships call it a gray, and will not touch it ad will not recognize it, and will not supply you with parts because of politics, and sales. The bottom line is a lot of your tractors are made by the same companies overseas, and rebranded, and to them, a tractor , is a tractor, is a tractor. So, please do not get upset over marketing techniques, and titles. That is not the point of the forum. We are here to help each other, and to have a place that is enjoyable to spend time on reading about what we all get enjoyment out of, out tractors. Anyways, I think that I have enjoyed looking at just about every tractor that I have seen on here, and to me, the titles do not matter..

 

[Don87]

I really do not want to jump in the middle of this, because I think that people are taking the definitions personel and getting upset, but all I can say is, if it looks like duck, If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. The whole CUT/SCUT/UT/whatever is a marketing scheme. These terms were not around years ago, and they have come out with them when these companies realized that their market was changing to the homeowner buyer more than the traditional farmer. They had to rework their sales pitches, and how they dealt with people. I have no doubt that my tractor is a small tractor, and it is a very capable tractor, but it is not in the same boat as a large AG tractor and was never meant to be. It was manufactured in Japan to work rice paddies, and tilling fields, and it is only 15hp, yet very powerful. The bottom line is when I see someone selling a tractor, I look at the HP, and see if it will fit my needs, and wether it has 4 wheel drive, and the PTO's that I need. I think that we are getting caught up in marketing tactics, and thats what the manufactures want, because they want you to go to them, because they always want to appear that you are getting a bigger, better machine, and they want you money. The truck dealerships have been doing this for years by adding words like Hemmi, Duramax, ect. Anyways, not to ramble on, but I think at the end of the day, we all have tractors, and they all have similar diesel engines, and they all are meant to work, so to me, it really does not matter what the tractor is called. If you look at the grey market tractor industry in the US, and you take a grey and compare it to an identical model with a different tag on it, the dealerships call it a gray, and will not touch it ad will not recognize it, and will not supply you with parts because of politics, and sales. The bottom line is a lot of your tractors are made by the same companies overseas, and rebranded, and to them, a tractor , is a tractor, is a tractor. So, please do not get upset over marketing techniques, and titles. That is not the point of the forum. We are here to help each other, and to have a place that is enjoyable to spend time on reading about what we all get enjoyment out of, out tractors. Anyways, I think that I have enjoyed looking at just about every tractor that I have seen on here, and to me, the titles do not matter..

Part of what you are seeing is a 'carry-over' from another thread, that was dedicated to the Mahindra Max 25, and the Kubota BX 25.

Mahindra has decided to compare it's 'compact' tractor' to a 'sub-compact' tractor..........no comparison. Which is why I sent an e-mail to NAAG, to inform them of the false advertising.

 

[Martian]

I was waiting for someone to do that.

Yes, a tractor is about using traction to do work. That includes the
lowliest riding lawnmower, which can pull a wagon. My tiny STX38
did that pretty well, actually. An ancient 70s era Crafstman riding mower
I owned actually had a rudimentary lifting hitch for a self-powered
rototiller. Also clearly a tractor, IMO.

What most here would agree on is that a ZTR riding mower is NOT a
tractor. It mows, but that's it. No trailers, hitches, etc, for traction
work. LD1 was first to mention the ZTR.

Does a tractor have to have a 3-pt or PTO? No way. No one here
would deny that a CASE 580 TLB is a tractor, right? My bro's
Freightliner is a tractor, for sure.

To further muddle this definiton, go look at a Bobcat Toolcat. That's
called a utility vehicle. Kinda like calling a Kubota RTV a golf cart.
The Toolcat has a 3-pt and comes with a FEL.

Who here thinks of a skidsteer as a tractor? They kind of have their
own category, but I would say loader work qualifies it as a tractor,
even it is no good at pulling things. Pushing is also traction work.

Food for thought.

Excellent points.:thumbsup:

I have no problems with a company comparing its machine to a slightly smaller one if the other company doesnt make one the same size, and they are comming out with one that fits in-between two competitor models, sure we all expect them to pick on the smaller one right??

Thats not the issue, the issue is that deere and kubota BOTH make a tractor that spec almost IDENTICAL to the max, yet they choose to NOT compair to it. WHY???? Instead, they compare to the 10 series and BX, which is a bit more than "slightly" smaller IMO.

We seem to agree that people need to compair apples to apples right?

Well, if the Max is an apple, the kubota apple is the B2x20 and deere 2x20 series. And the BX and the 10-series.....well, they'd be like a grape in comparison

I know what your saying. I really do understand where your coming from, I just don't agree that such negativity is required to deal with it. If it makes you sleep better at night knowing that Mahindra is comparing their product to the B's of the world, make it happen.:thumbsup:

I really do not want to jump in the middle of this, because I think that people are taking the definitions personel and getting upset, but all I can say is, if it looks like duck, If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. The whole CUT/SCUT/UT/whatever is a marketing scheme. These terms were not around years ago, and they have come out with them when these companies realized that their market was changing to the homeowner buyer more than the traditional farmer. They had to rework their sales pitches, and how they dealt with people. I have no doubt that my tractor is a small tractor, and it is a very capable tractor, but it is not in the same boat as a large AG tractor and was never meant to be. It was manufactured in Japan to work rice paddies, and tilling fields, and it is only 15hp, yet very powerful. The bottom line is when I see someone selling a tractor, I look at the HP, and see if it will fit my needs, and wether it has 4 wheel drive, and the PTO's that I need. I think that we are getting caught up in marketing tactics, and thats what the manufactures want, because they want you to go to them, because they always want to appear that you are getting a bigger, better machine, and they want you money. The truck dealerships have been doing this for years by adding words like Hemmi, Duramax, ect. Anyways, not to ramble on, but I think at the end of the day, we all have tractors, and they all have similar diesel engines, and they all are meant to work, so to me, it really does not matter what the tractor is called. If you look at the grey market tractor industry in the US, and you take a grey and compare it to an identical model with a different tag on it, the dealerships call it a gray, and will not touch it ad will not recognize it, and will not supply you with parts because of politics, and sales. The bottom line is a lot of your tractors are made by the same companies overseas, and rebranded, and to them, a tractor , is a tractor, is a tractor. So, please do not get upset over marketing techniques, and titles. That is not the point of the forum. We are here to help each other, and to have a place that is enjoyable to spend time on reading about what we all get enjoyment out of, out tractors. Anyways, I think that I have enjoyed looking at just about every tractor that I have seen on here, and to me, the titles do not matter..

Please go on, I'm ready to talk about something else.:thumbsup:

 

[CompactTractorFan]

My neighbor, who is a full time farmer, traveled to a show that had Bug Bud featured there. It's a custom made tractor with its own custom made implements. He said it can work one acre of ground in one minute.

That must have been a sight to behold...

 

[LBrown59]

1*What is a SCUT????.
2*And who makes them?

1*A subcompact is right between a compact and a garden tractor.
2*Kibota JD and MF.

3*Nobodies definition of two classes of a tractor are the same.
4*That's why saying that the Max is deceptive can't be possible.

3*It is when clearfied as stated in #1 above.
4*The MAx is false misleading advertising at best.
They simply do make build or offer a unit that compares to the Kibota JD and MF.

And as I said in the other thread.. I dont care WHAT anyone calls them.
5*Just compare them appropriately. IE: apples to apples.
The problem arises when a manufacture (kubota and deere) believe their 2x20 and B-series are CUT's and their 10-series and BX are SCUT.
Then another MFG goes out and makes a tractor the EXACT SAME SIZE as the B and 2x20 and somehow, just by calling it a SCUT,
6*they think its okay to compare it to the MUCH smaller BX and 10-series:confused2:

Again, I dont care what they are called. Mahindra can call it a SCUT, but for crying-out-loud, compare it to the right tractors from other brands.
7"Most" customers are smart enough to look through their BS, and when they do, it makes mahindra look pretty foolish.

Sorry...off topic there. But they are ALL tractors none-the-less. Just different sizes.
8* An S-10 or ranger is STILL a truck, just like a 1-tons and bigger. Just different sizes.

5*Max don't get this.
6*It's anything but OK.It's just plain decetiful!
7*Sure does : but there are enough naive people that will buy into the lie and a few Maxs will be purchased simply because.so many people are so gullible.
8*Yeah but only Max would compare an S10 with a 1 ton.

 

[DK35vince]

1*A subcompact is right between a compact and a garden tractor.

So explain to us where a compact begins, and why.

 

[Martian]

So explain to us where a compact begins, and why.

And where garden ends. I'm thinking anywhere between a Home Depot/Lowes/Sears lawn tractor to a Kubota L5740 (60HP) and Deere 4720(66HP). Seems like a very wide gap to be calling a SCUT

 

[oliver2255]

ok heres my perspective undder ten hp lawn mower, 10 to 25 hp garden tractor 25 and up tractor you get up to big bud class you have a monster

 

[shane]

There are a lot of big trucks running the roads that are called tractors. Road tractor, tractor trailers, etc. I think the real question is not "what is a tractor" but what is the classifications of tractors. Farm, lawn, road, CUT, SCUT, etc.

 

[NHmitch]

ok heres my perspective undder ten hp lawn mower, 10 to 25 hp garden tractor 25 and up tractor you get up to big bud class you have a monster

I would agree totally with you if it was a gas engine. I have a 21hp MTD riding mower, and it is great for mowing the lawn, but thats it. I have a 15hp diesel ag tractor, and there is no comparison at all. I refer to it as an Ag tractor, because it was rebranded by Bolens FMC and sold legally in the US about 25 years ago, and was intended for agriculture use. Rototilling, plowing, seeding, lifting, and just about any use that a Ag tractor is used for, it was never intended to be used for lawn care, and was, and has been used in Japan, and Europe as a very common agricultural farm tractor for smaller scale farms. Again, I really think that the definition is in the user, and what you use that machine for. The tractor produces 2700 rpm, have 8 speeds, and 4 wheel drive, and weighs 1/2 ton with hydraulics, 3 point cat1 lift and two PTO's. So, not to disagree, because that is a reasonable explanation, but there is a difference and a lot of small tractors have much higher HP than they really need, that is why people get hurt a lot when they buy these, and do not realize what they have bought, or how to use them. Here I go, I told myself I was not going to reply to this thread anymore...Oh well, this can also plow one acre in one minute, not really...Again, sorry, I really did not mean to extend this forum out anymore..

 

[oliver2255]

I would agree totally with you if it was a gas engine. I have a 21hp MTD riding mower, and it is great for mowing the lawn, but thats it. I have a 15hp diesel ag tractor, and there is no comparison at all. I refer to it as an Ag tractor, because it was rebranded by Bolens FMC and sold legally in the US about 25 years ago, and was intended for agriculture use. Rototilling, plowing, seeding, lifting, and just about any use that a Ag tractor is used for, it was never intended to be used for lawn care, and was, and has been used in Japan, and Europe as a very common agricultural farm tractor for smaller scale farms. Again, I really think that the definition is in the user, and what you use that machine for. The tractor produces 2700 rpm, have 8 speeds, and 4 wheel drive, and weighs 1/2 ton with hydraulics, 3 point cat1 lift and two PTO's. So, not to disagree, because that is a reasonable explanation, but there is a difference and a lot of small tractors have much higher HP than they really need, that is why people get hurt a lot when they buy these, and do not realize what they have bought, or how to use them. Here I go, I told myself I was not going to reply to this thread anymore...Oh well, this can also plow one acre in one minute, not really...Again, sorry, I really did not mean to extend this forum out anymore..

i should have specified gas or diesle because i do not see to many diesle lawn mowers at least not in aver joe price range:laughing:

 

[NHmitch]

Thats true, sorry, I did not mean to jump in on it. I actually was just reading Antique Power, and I thought that it was interesting that some of the first tractors sold in this country like the Titan 10-20 had around a 15HP engine, and weighted over 9000 lbs, and would plow several hundred acres. I am sure that it was slow, but they use to burn kerosene in them. Kind of neat tractors. I saw this video where the amish still use these old machines to this day:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZdpSUb5CDs]Amish Wheat Harvest - YouTube[/ame]

And this kind of falls in line with the discussion

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avLeAu5rDdk]Amish Tractor Pull *funny* - YouTube[/ame]

 

[flusher]

What makes a tractor a tractor and a glorified lawn mower a tractor?

My Huskee riding mower (18 hp B&S gas engine) with the 42" mid-mount deck is a lawn mower since it only has the shaft of the engine for powering the mower deck (no easy way to power front or rear mounted implements). My Bolens GT1452 (14 hp Tecumseh gas engine) is a garden tractor that has front and rear pto's and a simple hydraulic lift to raise and lower the rototiller that runs off the rear-facing pto. It can power front, mid and rear mounted implements. My Kubota B7510HST (21 hp diesel) is a SCUT that has mid and rear pto's, a true 3pt hitch, and an FEL with a 4-ft wide bucket.

 

[schmism]

I would agree totally with you if it was a gas engine. I have a 21hp MTD riding mower, and it is great for mowing the lawn, but thats it. I have a 15hp diesel ag tractor, and there is no comparison at all. I refer to it as an Ag tractor, because it was rebranded by Bolens FMC and sold legally in the US about 25 years ago, and was intended for agriculture use.

This is why i threw out the difference between tractor and non tractor based on build type.

frame on builds = sub compact/lawnmowers/ZTR/Jeeps/toolcats/UTVs/skidloaders (not-tractors)
and "split the case" designs = tractor

your example of the Bolens is a split half type design, much more of a tractor than a frame on build kubota BX series which is a shaft drive 2 piece bolt on frame (virtually the same as belt driven rear transaxle "lawn mowers" sold at local big box store) http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...tic-transmission-repair-underway-img_2790.jpg