LMan1967
Gold Member
For whatever reason, that math doesn't seem to work out. It's not a linear progression there..:laughing::confused3:
first tractor for 30+ acres mountain land
- Thread starter trinculo
- Start date
- Views: 5909
For whatever reason, that math doesn't seem to work out. It's not a linear progression there..:laughing::confused3:
joshuabardwell
Elite Member
Are you saying the curve flattens out, or spikes up? Is it expensive to get to 40 HP, and then cheap to get from there to 100+? Or is it cheap to get to 40, but if you want to go higher, it shoots up? I think you're saying the first one.
I just agreed to purchase a 2008 L3240 HST with 250 hrs + FEL and a bush hog. The local gentleman is delivering it tomorrow and bought it new from one of the two local dealers where he has had it serviced. It looks to be in very good condition and has been garage kept and used primarily for mowing. The man I am buying it from has a larger Kubota and bought this so he didn't have to remove his backhoe when he needed to mow.
So i went to one of the two local Kubota dealers, where I had gotten some prices from him on a new machine (L3200) , to look at some additional implements and told him what I was planning on purchasing.
He told me that nobody wants the hydrostatic machines and that in the mountains or doing any "real work" that the transmissions would slip and burn out and that it was an $8k repair. I asked him why a good number of the machines on his lot were HST and he said he would only sell them to people for mowing and light work and that the HST was likely the reason that the person was selling the machine that I was planning on buying.
I called two other dealers that I had been talking to and they had no idea what he was talking about and said MOST of the machines they sell were the hydrostatic machines and that they had never had one fail. They also said that by all accounts a Hydrostatic tractor was *better* in the mountains.They also concurred that the deal I was getting ($15K) was a good price and that they couldn't offer anything close in this price range, So . . . . .
Is this a common problem with the HST tractors?
Should I be concerned?
Also the topic on the topic of tires I have received conflicting information.
I have been told that Ag (R1) tires are better in the mountains because they have better traction, contrarily I have been told that most people want R4 tires because they sit lower and make the center of gravity lower.
I have also been told that putting liquid ballist in the tire is good and bad depending on who was opining.
Can anyone share any common wisdom here?
Thanks for al the help.
So i went to one of the two local Kubota dealers, where I had gotten some prices from him on a new machine (L3200) , to look at some additional implements and told him what I was planning on purchasing.
He told me that nobody wants the hydrostatic machines and that in the mountains or doing any "real work" that the transmissions would slip and burn out and that it was an $8k repair. I asked him why a good number of the machines on his lot were HST and he said he would only sell them to people for mowing and light work and that the HST was likely the reason that the person was selling the machine that I was planning on buying.
I called two other dealers that I had been talking to and they had no idea what he was talking about and said MOST of the machines they sell were the hydrostatic machines and that they had never had one fail. They also said that by all accounts a Hydrostatic tractor was *better* in the mountains.They also concurred that the deal I was getting ($15K) was a good price and that they couldn't offer anything close in this price range, So . . . . .
Is this a common problem with the HST tractors?
Should I be concerned?
Also the topic on the topic of tires I have received conflicting information.
I have been told that Ag (R1) tires are better in the mountains because they have better traction, contrarily I have been told that most people want R4 tires because they sit lower and make the center of gravity lower.
I have also been told that putting liquid ballist in the tire is good and bad depending on who was opining.
Can anyone share any common wisdom here?
Thanks for al the help.
PapaPerk
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2004
- Messages
- 2,293
- Location
- USA
- Tractor
- Kubota L3830, Ford Golden Jubilee, 1939 Sears Economy, Polaris Ranger 400, Honda Foreman 450 ES, 2004 Dodge Diesel 3500
Are u getting a loader on the tractor?
If you are using the tractor in fields and not operating on lawns, etc I would run the ag tires. Also ballast is a must. Filling the tires is probably the easier method. Just the back tires. Look into Rim Guard or windshield washer fluid.
The Kubota 30 and 40 grand l tractors are very nice. You should have no problems. They are the Lexus of the compact tractor world. Make sure to operate the tractor in 4wd when on hilly ground. Tractor in 2wd only can run away on u.
If you are using the tractor in fields and not operating on lawns, etc I would run the ag tires. Also ballast is a must. Filling the tires is probably the easier method. Just the back tires. Look into Rim Guard or windshield washer fluid.
The Kubota 30 and 40 grand l tractors are very nice. You should have no problems. They are the Lexus of the compact tractor world. Make sure to operate the tractor in 4wd when on hilly ground. Tractor in 2wd only can run away on u.
NHmitch
Platinum Member
I would go with R1's if you are not worried about driving on your front lawn because they will leave marks, but they will give you much more traction. R4's are kind of a cross between R1's, and turf tires. I would load your tires, and I actually have my front tires loaded on my 4x4 tractor, and they have been loaded for 30 years with no issues. I would just check with an LS dealer first, but that will provide you with extra ballast. Definitely the rears. If you need to take the loader off to mow, so you have a better turning radius, I would add suitcase weights to the front. The big thing is that you will have to take it slow to start, and until you get into your comfort zone. Also make sure you wear your seatbelt all of the time with the ROPS up. I have very hilly land as well, and I have almost rolled my tractor, and my grandfathers 100hp Deere, and it happens so fast you don' t have time to react. Thats great that you found a tractor, and you will have to post photos when you get it! Congratulations!
joshuabardwell
Elite Member
Why don't you give the R4's a try before you worry too much about it. The debate about R4 and R1 is a hot one, and there are pros and cons to both. R1's have more traction, it's true, but they are also narrower. R4's are specifically designed for loader work, and are wider. R4's are also usually thicker, which means they resist punctures better than R1's, which is a priority if you are doing a lot of work in the woods.
If you swap your tires, you will also have to buy new wheels, because R4 tires do not generally fit onto the same size wheels as R1 tires--not an insignificant expense. You may find that R4's do everything you need and then some, and if you don't like them, you may find that chains make up the difference instead of a whole new set of tires.
joshuabardwell
Elite Member
As for loading the tires, there is some debate here too. Loaded tires are good in that they don't put any additional weight on the axle, and they are as low to the ground as you can get, lowering your center of gravity. Good for stability and traction. But on the other hand, you can't easily un-weight the tires if you wanted to for some reason (want to lighten up the tractor to leave a lighter footprint in the wet ground), and loaded tires do not take weight off the front axle, which is a must for loader work. By comparison, a ballast box on the three-point-hitch can easily be dropped if needed. It rides behind the rear axle, which means that it takes weight off the front axle, which is a must for loader work.
Check your user manual to confirm this, but it's my impression that most compact tractors with loaders are specced for either a heavy ballast box OR a slightly lighter ballast box WITH loaded tires, not loaded tires by themselves. The reason for this is that loaded tires alone leave all of the weight of the loader (and its cargo) on the front axle, which the axle is not designed to take. Additionally, the weight of the loaded tires is simply not enough to counterbalance the full weight of the loader for safe operation (e.g. not tipping over or raising the rear wheels off the ground while going downhill). Therefore, no matter what, if you have a loader, you should be looking at a ballast box too. Then you just have to decide whether, in addition to the ballast box, you want loaded tires.
One advantage of loaded tires that I didn't mention is that they are still helping you out even when you have a different implement on the 3ph. If you are out there hogging or what-have-you, you won't have the ballast box on the 3ph, because you'll have another implement back there. Some implements are as heavy as a ballast box, but many are not, and in that case, the additional stability of the loaded tires can be a godsend.
Check your user manual to confirm this, but it's my impression that most compact tractors with loaders are specced for either a heavy ballast box OR a slightly lighter ballast box WITH loaded tires, not loaded tires by themselves. The reason for this is that loaded tires alone leave all of the weight of the loader (and its cargo) on the front axle, which the axle is not designed to take. Additionally, the weight of the loaded tires is simply not enough to counterbalance the full weight of the loader for safe operation (e.g. not tipping over or raising the rear wheels off the ground while going downhill). Therefore, no matter what, if you have a loader, you should be looking at a ballast box too. Then you just have to decide whether, in addition to the ballast box, you want loaded tires.
One advantage of loaded tires that I didn't mention is that they are still helping you out even when you have a different implement on the 3ph. If you are out there hogging or what-have-you, you won't have the ballast box on the 3ph, because you'll have another implement back there. Some implements are as heavy as a ballast box, but many are not, and in that case, the additional stability of the loaded tires can be a godsend.
So i took delivery of the tractor today. It looked like it was basically new. It came with a 5' Howser bush hog with extra new blades.
It does have the R4 rear tires already filled with ballast. I was also mistaken about the loader it is the LA 724 which i believe is a stronger loader. IT has the quick connect bucket. It apparently is still under warranty. 251 hours for 15k all in delivered, so i did go over my original budget but got way more tractor than I had planned on. Thanks for all the advice.
It does have the R4 rear tires already filled with ballast. I was also mistaken about the loader it is the LA 724 which i believe is a stronger loader. IT has the quick connect bucket. It apparently is still under warranty. 251 hours for 15k all in delivered, so i did go over my original budget but got way more tractor than I had planned on. Thanks for all the advice.
ddb123
Platinum Member
trinculo said:
Sounds like a great tractor. My L3540 has loaded R4s and LA724 loader. You are going to be really happy. The HST is just like the "other two" dealers told you. That first guy was just trying to sell you one of HIS tractors. My property is hilly and the HST is worlds better than the gear I used to have. With 4wd the R4s will give you all the traction you need. And to top it off, you got a great price. Congrats and happy tractoring.
P.S. Pictures make us happy
