IslandTractor
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2005
- Messages
- 15,802
- Location
- Prudence Island, RI
- Tractor
- 2007 Kioti DK40se HST, Woods BH
And the DK don't have no stinkin seat switch!!
Make that no $4500 stinkin seat switch!:laughing:
And the DK don't have no stinkin seat switch!!
If Daedong detuned the engine, they would reasonably give it a different name and rating no?? That's what every other diesel manufacturer does. Why does Kioti list the same model and same displacement??? The DK series motor was bored and stroked to get higher output. That one was naturally aspirated. If Daedong is varying the turbocharger psi to modify output on the 3F183T, then there absolutely will be implications for duty cycle. Why is there no mention of this in any of the Daedong/Kioti literature? Is the 3F183T rated for continuous, medium or intermittent duty at 60hp??? Surely you went over this with the dealer before ordering??? Do you even know whether your engine is actually 1.8 liters? I cannot find any technical info at all that isn't rehashed news releases with limited data. Of course you will undoubtedly have thought about all of this before I did so please don't keep us in suspense any longer. How exactly do the four versions of the 3F183T differ from each other?
Regarding the cooling system, I don't care how efficient it is, it is going to require cleaning of the radiator screen to keep it efficient when mowing. If I recall the laws of physics properly, the 60hp variant will put out significantly more heat at PTO RPM than the 45hp model. It stands to reason that the 45 will therefore be more tolerant of chaff in the radiator screen and remain at normal operating temperature longer. Your mower looks brand new so perhaps you haven't experienced the pleasures of monitoring the temp gauge while trying to mow midsummer. And, remember, it was the same engineers in Korea who designed the cooling system for the DK. I assure you that cooling system works fine until the radiator screen gets clogged so I'm pretty sure the same issue will occur with the NX.
Again....there are more errors here than we can point out. Deere used the same model number, 4042T, for the engine in all of the 4x20 series machines...didn't cause any problems, and no special mention of it was made. The obvious answer, to pretty much all of these ridiculous questions, is that the engine was built to be capable of producing 60hp at whatever duty cycle they normally use...likely constant duty. The difference in PTO power from the 45hp version to the 60hp version isn't going to create a huge difference win how much heat is generated....regardless, it's a safe bet they factored that in when they sized the cooling system.
So you seem to accept that the only difference between the four engines is the EPROM flash. Amazing. Selling tractors like haute couture where the name justifies the price as there really is no other difference. $4500 for a click of a mouse.
How can you guys swallow that??
Why hasn't someone just figured out an aftermarket chip programmer. Daedong didn't invent the process. Why can't a dealer just reprogram a NX4510?
Bottom line here is that anyone buying a NX should have a REALLY good reason for buying anything other than the 4510. And, if you do decide to "upgrade", bring a tube of K-Y jelly with you to the dealership.
Bottom line here is that anyone buying a NX should have a REALLY good reason for buying anything other than the 4510. And, if you do decide to "upgrade", bring a tube of K-Y jelly with you to the dealership.
For anybody interested in actual facts about fuel consumption for tractors of varying horsepower, but the same displacement, we can thank the Nebraska Tractor Test protocol for absolutely refuting the kinds of nonsense some folks claim.
The Deere 4x20 series all had the same engine setup....4 cylinder, 2.4L, turbo-charged engines. Three of the four were tested, with the following results:
4720 - 51.77hp PTO, and 3.3gal/hr.
4520 - 46.58hp PTO, and 3.0gal/hr.
4320 - 41.58hp PTO, and 2.9gal/hr.
For those really quick folks, you'll notice that the bigger engines made more horsepower for each gallon of fuel used per hour.
4720 was 15.68hp per gallon, per hour.
4520 was 15.52hp per gallon, per hour.
4320 was 14.33hp per gallon, per hour.
Yep, the 4720 was more efficient than the smaller engines. Dial it back to make the same power as the smaller engines, and the fuel consumption would be either identical, or so close as to be a non-factor. Even if you ran them at PTO speeds and "wasted" power because you sized your implements wrong, and it's still not going to add up to a massive difference for folks who use their CUT the typical 100-200 hours per year.
Go from the 4320 to the 4520, and you're going to "waste" 20 gallons per year if you ran at PTO speed all the time (200 hours which is on the high side), and didn't need to because your implements were the wrong size. In reality, you're not going to be at PTO speed all the time, so it's going to be less than that....holy, moly, it might be $30 a year or some other catastrophic figure!
REALLY?? I didn't know I was spending your money or had to have a specific reason to buy something that I wanted, not sure why you think everyone only needs what size you say they need, that's just ridiculous. If the price differences in the nx models bothers you so much, why don't you contact a kioti rep and discuss your concerns.
REALLY?? I didn't know I was spending your money or had to have a specific reason to buy something that I wanted, not sure why you think everyone only needs what size you say they need, that's just ridiculous. If the price differences in the nx models bothers you so much, why don't you contact a kioti rep and discuss your concerns.