Comparison Kubota or John Deere

[TSO]

revised previous post (specs)

 

[TSO]

You chose to use the 400x instead of the stronger 400cx, and the H180 NSL instead of the stronger H180 MSL, why?
Even so, your numbers are still lower than the numbers on the deere website. The Deere website list the lift at the pins at 2539.
But why not use the strongest MSL loaders for a comparison? Even with your skewed numbers the only tractor that has significantly more lift is the Mahindra.
What info do you have that proves which manufactures test their loaders with a bucket?

Don't get upset about it ... I'm not trying to start anything here. This isn't a "my loader is stronger than yours" post... I'm just posting what info I found. But, the numbers I used WERE from the Deere site.

I did not use the MSL loaders because they are not standard, and none of the other tractors have that option. Now, if you want to use a non-standard loader, that's fine, we can do that. I'll adjust the numbers accordingly, and I'll include the 500mm @ 59" number as well. Which, I'll be honest, I don't understand the large difference in numbers between the MSL & non-MSL loaders regarding their 500mm specs - they seem to defy physics. The numbers at the pins (between standard and MSL) are very close, and all other geometry appears similar. The MSL loader weighs 173 lbs more. So, I remain skeptical of their advertised numbers... when they are so drastically different from the standard loader. I have downloaded the manuals from most of the manufacturers (when I was researching my last purchase) and the JD manual suggests that the MSL loader on the 400cx actually lift more to full height at 500mm than it does at the pivot-pin, and the 400cx lifts virtually the same to 59" at PP and 500mm). That doesn't make any sense.... and it seems that JD engineers have found a way to defy logic when they designed the MSL loaders!

Also, regarding buckets... every tractor I've owned, the manual stated something like "bucket attachment used during testing" (that's not verbatim) and for these particular tractors, that size is 72". My Massey bucket is 285 lbs. I don't have my LS manual anymore, but it was in there. Is it presumptuous for me to assume that every manufacturer tests with their buckets on? I suppose. But, it's just as presumptuous for you to assume that they don't.

Looks like JD did beef up the H180 loader weight specs over the 400x specs, though the loader lifts about 3" lower. They pretty much all use a standard bucket for the measurement... Not a whole lot of weight variations with a 72" wide hunk of metal. Here are the numbers of competing large CUT cab tractors. Note that Deere has the lowest 3pt lift of any the competition (not sure why). Also note, that the TYM, LS, Kioti & Mahindra loaders were not fully represented because they do not post lift numbers at 500mm... However the Mahindra & Kioti loaders list the highest weight lift potential at the pivot pin measurement ... FYI.


TRACTOR----LOADER MODEL---3PT LIFT @24"---LDR LFT @ 500MM----LDR LFT @ PP---LDR LFT height-----LDR LFT 59" @ PP---LDR LFT 59" @ 500mm
Massey 1758----DL130------------3084lbs---------------2056------------------2527-------------113.5"-------------2648-----------------------2299---------------------
Kubota L5740--LA854-------------2980lbs---------------1878------------------2489-------------112.3"-------------3097------------------------2509---------------------
Deere 4066R---HL180nsl---------2500lbs---------------1846------------------2486--------------109"---------------2957-----------------------2022---------------------
Deere 4066R---HL180msl--------2500lbs----------------2178------------------2477-------------109"---------------2944-----------------------2825---------------------
Kubota L6060---LA1055----------2976lbs----------------1784------------------2361-------------112.3"--------------NA-------------------------NA----------------------
Deere 4720------400x------------2500lbs----------------1742------------------2368-------------1128"--------------2701-----------------------2154---------------------
Deere 4720------400cx-----------2500bls----------------2571------------------2383-------------112.8"-------------2696-----------------------2639---------------------
Mahindra 2555---2555CL---------2945lbs----------------N/A-------------------3122-------------115.4"--------------NA--------------------------NA---------------------
Kioti NX6010-----KL6010---------3177lbs----------------N/A-------------------2761-------------108.3"--------------NA--------------------------NA---------------------
TYM T554---------TX55------------2945lbs---------------N/A-------------------2478-------------109.8"--------------NA--------------------------NA----------------------
LS XR4046--------LL4102---------2756lbs----------------N/A-------------------2500--------------96.1"--------------NA--------------------------NA---------------------

 

[TSO]

Yes, but also how much money have you put into your tractor after purchasing it. It seemed like for a while there it was being worked on. I'd rather spend the money and have it already be ready to go.

I don't think Eric made any modifications to his tractor that added something already found on another tractor. He fortified different parts, added hydraulics, wiring, sound-proofing, skid-plates, etc etc. Your post is disingenuous.

 

[RedNeckRacin]

Yep, I totally agree with you Tom. But I'll add, here on TBN, most owner/operators use their tractors for a small variety of tasks and rarely change the configuration in any way.

I never had to remove weight from my tractors. I have added alot of weight to my already 1500lb heavier JD than a comparable Kubota. If you have a specific application where you need a light weight then so be it. For tractors, increasing the weight increases the traction and pulling power. I also have never been concerned with compaction so that certainly helps.

 

[arlen4720]

Don't get upset about it ... I'm not trying to start anything here. This isn't a "my loader is stronger than yours" post... I'm just posting what info I found. But, the numbers I used WERE from the Deere site.

I did not use the MSL loaders because they are not standard, and none of the other tractors have that option. Now, if you want to use a non-standard loader, that's fine, we can do that. I'll adjust the numbers accordingly, and I'll include the 500mm @ 59" number as well. Which, I'll be honest, I don't understand the large difference in numbers between the MSL & non-MSL loaders regarding their 500mm specs - they seem to defy physics. The numbers at the pins (between standard and MSL) are very close, and all other geometry appears similar. The MSL loader weighs 173 lbs more. So, I remain skeptical of their advertised numbers... when they are so drastically different from the standard loader. I have downloaded the manuals from most of the manufacturers (when I was researching my last purchase) and the JD manual suggests that the MSL loader on the 400cx actually lift more to full height at 500mm than it does at the pivot-pin, and the 400cx lifts virtually the same to 59" at PP and 500mm). That doesn't make any sense.... and it seems that JD engineers have found a way to defy logic when they designed the MSL loaders!

Also, regarding buckets... every tractor I've owned, the manual stated something like "bucket attachment used during testing" (that's not verbatim) and for these particular tractors, that size is 72". My Massey bucket is 285 lbs. I don't have my LS manual anymore, but it was in there. Is it presumptuous for me to assume that every manufacturer tests with their buckets on? I suppose. But, it's just as presumptuous for you to assume that they don't.

I'm not upset , I like discussing this kind of stuff .
I've noticed that all of the MSL's publish similar specs, not just jd.
The h180 and the 400cx have larger cylinders than their NSL counterparts, so they have more lift. I just wanted to make sure everybody is comparing the strongest loaders from each manufacturer.

 

[TSO]

I'm not upset , I like discussing this kind of stuff .
I've noticed that all of the MSL's publish similar specs, not just jd.
The h180 and the 400cx have larger cylinders than their NSL counterparts, so they have more lift. I just wanted to make sure everybody is comparing the strongest loaders from each manufacturer.

Does it make sense to you that the JD MSL loaders can lift as much or more to full height at 500mm than at the pivot pins? Likewise, does it make sense that they also lift as much or more to 1.5m @ both the 500mm & PP measurement? I'm not disagreeing that the JD MSL loaders indeed appear to be strong, but how can those numbers be accurate? Why would it be as strong or stronger with the weight extended?

I can't wrap my head around it. It's like when you pose an "origin of their God" question to a highly religious person and they respond that "our tiny minds simply cannot grasp the concept" ... Maybe JD is more ethereal than I thought? ;-)

If there is real truth behind the engineering (and not just advertising propaganda), I really would like to know how it works. I know that the Massey numbers are accurate, but only because I personally tested them. And clearly, if you factor all of the numbers, my loader isn't the strongest, so there's no ego here ... Just trying to be accurate.

 

[arlen4720]

Does it make sense to you that the JD MSL loaders can lift as much or more to full height at 500mm than at the pivot pins? Likewise, does it make sense that they also lift as much or more to 1.5m @ both the 500mm & PP measurement? I'm not disagreeing that the JD MSL loaders indeed appear to be strong, but how can those numbers be accurate? Why would it be as strong or stronger with the weight extended?

I can't wrap my head around it. It's like when you pose an "origin of their God" question to a highly religious person and they respond that "our tiny minds simply cannot grasp the concept" ... Maybe JD is more ethereal than I thought? ;-)

If there is real truth behind the engineering (and not just advertising propaganda), I really would like to know how it works. I know that the Massey numbers are accurate, but only because I personally tested them. And clearly, if you factor all of the numbers, my loader isn't the strongest, so there's no ego here ... Just trying to be accurate.

JD says that the self leveling linkage give a mechanical advantage in the lift. All the MSL loaders seem to be rated like that. In the case of my loader, the numbers can't be too far off because I have lifted 2400 pound pallets to full height. I wouldn't want to carry one like that, but it does lift it. The pallet forks weigh 400 lbs and the center of mass would be somewhere around 20 inches forward of the pivot point.

 

[TSO]

JD says that the self leveling linkage give a mechanical advantage in the lift. All the MSL loaders seem to be rated like that. In the case of my loader, the numbers can't be too far off because I have lifted 2400 pound pallets to full height. I wouldn't want to carry one like that, but it does lift it. The pallet forks weigh 400 lbs and the center of mass would be somewhere around 20 inches forward of the pivot point.

I have done the identical lift with my Massey, so I don't doubt the accuracy of the overall lift numbers. I can also buy into the MSL loader offering a mechanical advantage, seeing as it lifts more than the non MSL loader. However, I still don't understand how the MSL loaders can lift the same or more weight extended at 500mm as they do at the pivot pins... Just doesn't make sense.

I'm glad you like your loader ... Seems very capable.

 

[AKfish]

I have done the identical lift with my Massey, so I don't doubt the accuracy of the overall lift numbers. I can also buy into the MSL loader offering a mechanical advantage, seeing as it lifts more than the non MSL loader. However, I still don't understand how the MSL loaders can lift the same or more weight extended at 500mm as they do at the pivot pins... Just doesn't make sense.

I'm glad you like your loader ... Seems very capable.

The NSL loaders from JD are rated to lift more at the pivot pins than the MSL loaders. That applies to the 400 thru 700 series loaders. That's what your research illustrates.

The load difference occurs when you measure lift @ 24" out from the pins. That's where the mechanical leverage of the leveling arms kicks in.

if you look at the geometry of the loader arms, the secondary leveling arm acts like a supporting brace. Similar to a jack-leg brace on a shed roof.

AKfish

 

[MinnesotaEric]

Yes, but also how much money have you put into your tractor after purchasing it. It seemed like for a while there it was being worked on. I'd rather spend the money and have it already be ready to go.

Nothing warrantable has broken. I modified my tractor to be able to do what I need it to do, a thing that I expected to do to any tractor that I purchased. If anything, my usage is testimony to just how good the Kioti product really is.

Check out the chain saw holder that I made. O the envy!