Deere 5045e vs Kubota L4600/4701

[Bond699]

I was looking at the 38hp range, in both Kubota (l3701) and Deere (3038E). After driving them both, I thought Kubota had Deere beat on this model. And I still do.

I kept reading online, and everyone says think carefully about what you will do with the tractor now and in the future. Anticipate future needs. To date, I've used neighbor's tractors for plowing, tilling, and some bush hogging and finish mowing. He had R4 tires on his. After some thought, maybe a 45hp tractor would be better...especially for loader work.

So I began looking at the Kubota L4600/L4701 at a local dealer.

Then I noticed that Deere has a 5045e--it's a utility tractor instead of a subcompact tractor. The 5045e and the L4600/L4701 have very close net, gross, and pto horse power.

But, is it just me, or is the Deere 5045e a lot beefier tractor? In my area, the L4600/l4701 and the Deere 5045e are within a few hundred dollars. And yet the Deere weighs 1,700+ pounds more, has a wider wheelbase by 8 inches, has a great lifting capacity with the H240 loader.

I haven't driven a 5045e yet. I'm going to Monday. Anything I should look for in comparison to the Kubota L4600/4701? I guess turning radius and maneuverability and comfort in driving and operating is something to look for.

I'm pretty surprised there's this much overlap between a utility tractor and a subcompact tractor. I'm probably more of the traditional sub-compact tractor user as opposed to a real farmer.

 

[Jim Timber]

The 5e's seem like a larger platform, but the turning radius even with the 4wd front axle is rather good.

I ended up going with a smaller 512 loader since the 553 has been discontinued and the H240 is significantly longer than the 512 (keeping the OAL of the tractor shorter). You also have to consider the ballast needed to lift to the front axle/chassis/loader weight limits. Just because the loader can pick up 4000#, doesn't mean the back end is capable of keeping it up. So given the sheer amount of weight it would take to use the full capacity of the bigger FEL (loaded rear tires and a ballast box), I decided it wasn't realistic in my application and went with the smaller loader.

My ground has a lot of clay and doesn't drain well, which means mud for a lot of the growing season. If I was to ballast the tractor to lift to it's max capacity, I'd cut ruts everywhere I drove regardless of how much weight is in the bucket (or not). So yes, you can outfit these machines to lift a tremendous amount, but there's other considerations if you're going to do that.

 

[Jim Timber]

I found watching the video's of people using their tractors immensely beneficial in helping me decide what to get and what to avoid.

This has the wheels in either max width or close to it.

The 5045/55/65 all share the same engine and rear end. The 5075 has the same engine, but the transmission and rear end are different (bigger). So looking at youtube, you can gleam a bunch of info on if the tractor is sized for your application, and then you'll have to decide if you have enough HP to pull/use the equipment you want to.

I'm using mine as a logging skidder, fork truck, and earth mover. After all of that, I might plant some crops with it. So PTO horsepower and ability to pull a big plow or wide disk was secondary to the ground clearance and lifting capacity. Even with the smallest loader offered, I can pick a 24' 16" red oak (green), and that's pretty much the biggest wood I'd ever handle on my farm. I was also hoping to get a 5055e instead of the 45, but the machine I'm buying came up locally and was just too nice to pass up.

 

[GManBart]

I'm pretty surprised there's this much overlap between a utility tractor and a subcompact tractor. I'm probably more of the traditional sub-compact tractor user as opposed to a real farmer.

There isn't. The Kubota 4600/4701 is a larger Compact tractor. Sub-compacts are approximately half that size. The biggest Compact tractors get pretty close to the size/weight of the smallest Utility tractors.

It also depends on the brands you're comparing....Kubota tends to be the lightest for a given frame size/HP. On the flip side, Mahindra tends to be the heaviest for a given frame size/HP. Deere is somewhere in the middle, but seems to be on the heavier side, rather than lighter.

 

[Bond699]

There isn't. The Kubota 4600/4701 is a larger Compact tractor. Sub-compacts are approximately half that size. The biggest Compact tractors get pretty close to the size/weight of the smallest Utility tractors.

It also depends on the brands you're comparing....Kubota tends to be the lightest for a given frame size/HP. On the flip side, Mahindra tends to be the heaviest for a given frame size/HP. Deere is somewhere in the middle, but seems to be on the heavier side, rather than lighter.

Yeah, I misspoke on sub-compact vs compact. Still though, I'm strugging with how 2 tractors can be the same price. And there be a 1,700 pound difference and an 8 inch larger wheelbase. That's quite a bit of difference for tractors that are both the same horsepower.

 

[Jim Timber]

Horsepower doesn't mean anything for size comparisons. Weight is more of a factor of size than engine or PTO horsepower. Large sub-compact tractors cost more than the utility tractors they're a step down from. Subcompact's cost as much as a utility tractor much larger than them. It has to do with application, and volume of those units sold. There's also more going on in the little CUT's because they tend to have HST's instead of simpler (cheaper to manufacture) geared transmissions.

Lots of variables in the different size brackets. I still can't believe how much people are willing to pay for tiny CUT's with 1500# loader capacity. You can get a full size for the same money and have enough lift to pick the other tractor up with the FEL.

 

[TripleR]

I think you are unnecessarily confusing the issue by what seems to be "buying by the pound". It's a pretty safe bet a UT and CUT of the same HP whether within or between brands are going to vary in weight and build. As mentioned Kubotas generally run lighter than Deere and others, good for some not for others.

As to price both often run more than some other well built if lesser known makes, so if weight and money are real considerations, which they are for many of us if not the primary factor I would certainly factor in other makes and models.

 

[BAP]

I think if you look at specs from John Deere, the JD 4044M is about identical specs to the Kubota L4600. Seems to be the same frame size and power. I don't know how it price compares.

 

[Bond699]

Thank you for your comments. You guys have helped me clarify, or narrow down, my question. As pointed out, the JD 4044M is the rough equivalent of the Kubota 4600/4701. Both are Compact Utility Tractors.

Why would someone buy a large CUT like the JD 4044 or Kubota 4600/4701 instead of a small UT like the JD 5045e? With the 5045e, it's roughly the same HP but more torque, more lifting power, bigger wheelbase, much more weight (1,700 pounds more)?

I guess one reason is the CUTs have hydrostatic transmissions where as that is not available on the 5045e. But what other reason? I guess lighter weight is better for dragging a finish mower or bush hog... But it seems for most other uses, a heavier tractor is better?

 

[TSO]

Thank you for your comments. You guys have helped me clarify, or narrow down, my question. As pointed out, the JD 4044M is the rough equivalent of the Kubota 4600/4701. Both are Compact Utility Tractors.

Why would someone buy a large CUT like the JD 4044 or Kubota 4600/4701 instead of a small UT like the JD 5045e? With the 5045e, it's roughly the same HP but more torque, more lifting power, bigger wheelbase, much more weight (1,700 pounds more)?

I guess one reason is the CUTs have hydrostatic transmissions where as that is not available on the 5045e. But what other reason? I guess lighter weight is better for dragging a finish mower or bush hog... But it seems for most other uses, a heavier tractor is better?

The main reason would be transmission options and maneuverability. I do landscape work with mine, much of which requires very fine movements, lots of close loader work (close to structures), lots of back-and-forth with grading, stump grinding, etc... So for me, HST trans was a necessity. But, I still needed a decent amount of loader strength, so that puts me at the top-end of the CUT (compact utility tractor) class. I can not step-up to the actual UT (utility tractor) class, because I would lose HST as an option. There are other differences, mostly in refinement, creature-comforts, and some features.

But, I think you need to understand "classification" a bit more here.

SCUT (sub-compact utility tractors) are the smallest class, typically under 25hp, and they resemble a "beefed-up" Garden Tractor, and these all have HST transmissions.
CUT (compact utility tractor) - this category has the widest range, starting at 20hp & 1500lbs size, all the way up to 66 hp & 4000lbs. (those weights do not include the loader, and like already mentioned, different brands will have different weight characteristics, and these are typically available with HST, Gear, Shuttle, CVT (only in the NH Cab models) and PowerShuttle transmission options.
UT (utility tractor) - typically starts at around 50hp & up, Gear, Shuttle, or PowerShuttle Transmissions. You will find the basic "work" models, or the more "deluxe" models, and you won't need any help differentiating between the two.

Also keep in mind, that different companies also offer variations in the CUT class. For example, the Kubota L4600/4701 are the more "basic" CUT models that Kubota offers. They also offer the "Grand L" CUT tractors, which offer more features, better transmission, cab, etc. JD does something similar. NH does as well. It would take too long to point out all the model differences, but again, it would be easy to differentiate between "basic" and "Deluxe" if you compared them in person. Also, if you're comparing that JD to Kubota, you'll probably have to look at the Kubota "M" series to get a proper comparison.

So, as others have mentioned, it's not just "weight, price, and HP" that you need to look at. If you did that, you would likely skip looking at JD & Kubota all together and go straight to LS tractors, or Kioti, TYM, etc. Those are "newer" or "lesser known" brands but every bit as capable. They offer the same (or in some cases better) features at a typically lower price. I don't know what that DEERE you are comparing goes for, but you can get an LS U5020/5030 (47 & 55 HP) utility tractor with loader for well under $30k... or an LS XU5065 (65 HP powershuttle) for around $37k with cab. They now also offer the "K" series tractors, which are more of a "budget" line of Utility Tractors, with HP & loader strength, but less features and more basic transmissions. If you are looking at straight HP/Loader & low cost, that would be worth looking into.

FYI