Tractor Sizing How Much Can A Sub Compact Tractor lift?

[check]

Have you considered getting a second older used machine to do some of the tasks your BX isn't the best fit for? My friend started small and then couldn't get himself to buy a New bigger tractor due to cost so he went the used 2 wheel drive route for under 4000. and is very happy indeed.

A very good question, and there are several reasons. First, I have already spent all I care to. Second, no place to store it. Third, I already have too many toys to maintain. Fourth, I am VERY nervous about buying a used tractor. And finally, I really don't need it. When I move dirt, etc., I just use more trips than I would with a bigger tractor - no big deal.

 

[TomSeller]

I agree. And fortunately, my second property is only about 700 years down the road, so I can just drive there, even in the winter.

That's a long commute

 

[AxleHub]

That's a long commute

Not if you have a flux capacitor lol.

 

[k0ua]

Not if you have a flux capacitor lol.

And a DeLorean to put it in

 

[check]

Not if you have a flux capacitor lol.

Glad to see you guys are paying attention, LOL. Post is now corrected.

 

[jenkinsph]

Greetings Jenkin,

1. Glade's recent post lacked some logic in it.

If you've read thru this thread to date, you'll find several larger tractor owners admit they were quite surprised at what my test on my scut showed for lifting weight. Glade mentioned in 3 posts alone on this thread the number was quite impressive and unexpected. Yet in his recent post he talks about how only scut owners defend the size and that larger tractor owners are just giving an opinion viewpoint for new potential user inquiries. The point on this is: if they are surprised and impressed at actual numbers . . doesn't that mean their viewpoint is quite dated or inaccurate? Isn't that exactly why scut owners are defending their tractor category, because opinions are expressed that don't agree with reality? Nobody arm twisted anyone to admit they were impressed . . they just were. And the new prospect guys don't have the experience to defend considering a scut.

2. Your point about all tractors have a sweet spot is exactly correct. Yet too many times I read posters on many tjreads who seem unable to define where a scut fits in. They claim its too small for tractor work and too big for lawn work . . And their conclusion is always the same . . get a lawn mower and a bigger tractor. Your point and mine is . . Scuts are the largest selling category right now for a reason . . Its a good sized sweet spot. A friend of mine who has owned tractors for decades told me that too often early buyers of scuts or eatly small cuts were disappointed because their needs didn't fit as they hadn't originally planned their desires very well. So then they got larger and became happy. As a result my friend tells me their opinions NOW reflect that long ago experience and not the realities of equipment approval in the last 6 or 8 years. Things have changed (their needs) but not their memories compared to today.

3. Unless of course if you're inventing a new ballast method.

I agree with Glade that compact/utility owner operators are not discounting the abilities of sub compact tractors. Most of the members here who participate on a regular basis are up to date for the most part. There are all different sizes of tractors and with enough seat time and experience you get a pretty good idea of the limitations of the various sizes. A lawnmower does a great job with mowing my lawn. A compact tractor does a good job putting in the lawn and for small field renovating and grading. For larger jobs a larger tractor is a better fit, for small jobs a sub compact is a good fit.

I am grateful to have good lawnmowers for the mowing tasks, in years past I have had to do with less than adequate machines. These newer mowers enable me to keep the larger tractors off the grass with rare exceptions.

I am also grateful to have the larger compacts to build these small landscapes up to 5 acres as that is the mainstay of my work.

There are times I have needed much larger tractors to move more dirt, if these jobs continue I will buy a larger tractor. There are times that a subcut could be very handy to have, if I see this need increase I will consider buying one of them too.

What I don't want to do is mow these manicured lawns with a sub compact which has been ballasted to use a fel and/or pull heavy loads. I also don't want to depend on a subcompact to move large amounts of dirt or remove stumps in the landscaping build process. I can't move enough material fast enough to make a living that way. My needs may be very different from a homeowner with one piece of residential property, and a subcut may be just the ticket for their use.

 

[AxleHub]

I couldn't agree more. Lifting 900lbs with the short wheelbase, and narrow width of a scut just sounds scary to me, unless it's only a few inches off the ground.

When I had a 24hp scut, 500lbs felt pretty significant. If your load is 4ft up, and your balance is thrown off with 600lbs, bad things will happen real quick, if you're not fast with the controls!

Especially if you're not the type to back down hills with heavy loads..

Greetings CDenny,

In the scut you had, 500 lbs felt heavy to you. But if you recall from my test results . . I indicated that when I tested I was on my level lawn and had only the ballast of my rears being loaded . . nothing else. And while I was test loading I wasn't even on the tractor to act as ballast. And in testing that . . I had the fel off the ground by 2 feet to see the results.

My tractor fel arms had the quick attach at 77#, the forks at 115#, a wood pallet at 24#, and gradually 870+ # of concrete edgers. And still the tractor sat with all 4 wheels flat on the ground. Each time lowering and then lifting as I added. And yes . . I kept pressing on the payload to evaluate if the tractor backend was getting "light" which it wasn't.

Then I got on the tractor . . Raised it to the height of my full sized pickup bed and then lowered the fel and drove on flat ground at a fel height of 2 feet . . Knowing full well I could . . . Lift it to greater than my pickup bed height and it could stand on its own . . without me even being on it on flat ground.

I can't help you felt 500 lbs felt heavy to you. Maybe some scuts are like that . . but I'm sure there are plenty more than just mine that don't feel that way.

What I do know is . . I was deliberately testing . . because I don't want to figure out my margin of error when I'm using the tractor . . because that is not the time for testing.

I started this thread to encourage others with scuts to test their units to find out what their margin of error might be and to demonstrate that ALL scuts aren't just pigeon-holed at a 500 pound maximum lifting ability (with or without bucket ????)

I also wanted to clarify everything attached to the fell arms so that new prospects might better understand what the total picture is and not some nebulous brochure description where they can't tell if the bucket is or isn't included.

Now in the process of this testing . . it seems like the thread has collected a high percentage of larger tractor owners and that is fine. And expressing their opinions is welcome too. But lets be clear . . testing trumps opinions.

I'm happy to listen to many opinions . . but I hear them the first time and incorporate it into the testing process or my consideration. 6 or 7 times when some repeat their opinion . . doesn't make it anymore valid or worthy.

But it is interesting just how many larger sized tractor users gravitate to a scut thread . . Isn't it Almost like a wolf pack lol.

Everyone who invests in a new or different tractor . . In my opinion . . should do some controlled testing before they use it on a serious basis . . because in my opinion there are things you can learn on the job . . Like the vatiables . . but there are things important to know or understand before the job . . like the outer margins.

Now wouldn't it be nice if some of the larger tractor owners got some of their scut friends to come and join the discussion . . or don't they have any scut friends

 

[gladehound]

Greetings CDenny,

In the scut you had, 500 lbs felt heavy to you. But if you recall from my test results . . I indicated that when I tested I was on my level lawn and had only the ballast of my rears being loaded . . nothing else. And while I was test loading I wasn't even on the tractor to act as ballast. And in testing that . . I had the fel off the ground by 2 feet to see the results.

My tractor fel arms had the quick attach at 77#, the forks at 115#, a wood pallet at 24#, and gradually 870+ # of concrete edgers. And still the tractor sat with all 4 wheels flat on the ground. Each time lowering and then lifting as I added. And yes . . I kept pressing on the payload to evaluate if the tractor backend was getting "light" which it wasn't.

Then I got on the tractor . . Raised it to the height of my full sized pickup bed and then lowered the fel and drove on flat ground at a fel height of 2 feet . . Knowing full well I could . . . Lift it to greater than my pickup bed height and it could stand on its own . . without me even being on it on flat ground.

I can't help you felt 500 lbs felt heavy to you. Maybe some scuts are like that . . but I'm sure there are plenty more than just mine that don't feel that way.

What I do know is . . I was deliberately testing . . because I don't want to figure out my margin of error when I'm using the tractor . . because that is not the time for testing.

I started this thread to encourage others with scuts to test their units to find out what their margin of error might be and to demonstrate that ALL scuts aren't just pigeon-holed at a 500 pound maximum lifting ability (with or without bucket ????)

I also wanted to clarify everything attached to the fell arms so that new prospects might better understand what the total picture is and not some nebulous brochure description where they can't tell if the bucket is or isn't included.

Now in the process of this testing . . it seems like the thread has collected a high percentage of larger tractor owners and that is fine. And expressing their opinions is welcome too. But lets be clear . . testing trumps opinions.

I'm happy to listen to many opinions . . but I hear them the first time and incorporate it into the testing process or my consideration. 6 or 7 times when some repeat their opinion . . doesn't make it anymore valid or worthy.

But it is interesting just how many larger sized tractor users gravitate to a scut thread . . Isn't it Almost like a wolf pack lol.

Everyone who invests in a new or different tractor . . In my opinion . . should do some controlled testing before they use it on a serious basis . . because in my opinion there are things you can learn on the job . . Like the vatiables . . but there are things important to know or understand before the job . . like the outer margins.

Now wouldn't it be nice if some of the larger tractor owners got some of their scut friends to come and join the discussion . . or don't they have any scut friends

I'll be the first wolf to any discussion about the limits. Doesn't matter if it is a Garden tractor, SCUT, CUT, UT, full size loader back hoe, wheel loader, skid steer etc. For some reason I just love exploring the limits and talking about them. That might be because when I had the 19hp tractor I took it to its limits nearly every time I used it. I spent so much time on three and sometimes 2 wheels that I began to think of that as normal. I would skid logs with the front in the air during the entire pull. I learned a lot about what that tractor could do with a crazy enough operator. Most of what I did with it I would never recommend that others do. I give props to the LB1914 for solid construction, I couldn't break it and I tried. I grew up around small tractors from Bolens and Satoh. The smallest Satoh only weighed 1200 pounds. But from a design perspective it was more like a small ag tractor than a SCUT. So while I've never owned a modern SCUT, I've owned / operated many small tractors over the past 40 years. During that same time I have also owned / operated many larger machines.

From this background, I feel like I have something to contribute to a discussion about tractor capacities in general. I have much more experience with the limits of small tractors than large tractors and I can communicate from that experience.

Many of the posters here that have larger machines also have or have had smaller machines. So they feel like they've been there, done that and want to share that experience for the benefit of others.

I can't add a lift test for a SCUT, and I'm not sure if I know anyone who has a SCUT (If I did I certainly would disassociate from them! just kidding !!!!!)

I can add a lift test from the past on my LB1914. A 19 hp CUT with a 1950's design. It was rated at 1650 pounds at the pins at ground level. My best measured lift was ~1200 pounds to 4 feet at the bucket edge (load hanging from a strap) which was ~26 inches out from the pins. That tractor was stable enough with the loader low and 800-900 pounds in the bucket on flat ground. But it was scary how a small side slope could cause it to lift a wheel! I really enjoy the stability of the larger tractor which seems almost freakish to me compared to the smaller one.

 

[LD1]

I'm happy to listen to many opinions . . but I hear them the first time and incorporate it into the testing process or my consideration. 6 or 7 times when some repeat their opinion . . doesn't make it anymore valid or worthy.

Goes both ways too.

But it is interesting just how many larger sized tractor users gravitate to a scut thread . . Isn't it Almost like a wolf pack lol.


Now wouldn't it be nice if some of the larger tractor owners got some of their scut friends to come and join the discussion . . or don't they have any scut friends

Sounds like someone wanting to stir up drama for lack of anything better to do.

I am going to make some generalizations, and this by no means implies it is true for everyone, or meant to offend anyone:

1. Alot of SCUT owners are new to owning a tractor. And alot have never owned or will own anything larger, or will ever operate anything larger.
2. Alot of "larger" tractor owners HAVE owned or operated SCUT's
3. Alot of larger tractor owners have many years experience with tractors of all sizes

You are speaking as if the same physics and dynamics do not apply to SCUT's as they do for larger tractors. THEY DO. Most all modern tractors from 20hp to 250hp are pretty much the same, just a different scale of size. Lift too much with a SCUT or lift too much with a 250HP machine and the same thing will happen.

Owners of "larger" tractors are just trying to help out. We dont care what size tractor you have. A tractor is a tractor. There is no need for comments like "large tractor owners gravitating like a wolf pack" or "if we have any SCUT friends" We come to this thread because we have knowledge and experience to offer to help others

 

[paulfun9]

Trust me folks this is not hard to figure out. Avoid injury! Avoid broken or premature wear on your equipment ! AVoid pointless discussion by simply understanding that even with a machine able to lift more than its rated for its not safe and by simply reading the owners manual it will be clear that 580LBS is what the factory has tested it to be safely operated with in varied conditions when the factory recommended ballast is installed.

For sure there is a small safety margin within that listing and to go looking for what it is, would be silly to say the least. If you know you need more lift ability than 580LBS buy a bigger machine and save the heartache later on when you zig instead of zagging and have that oops that leads to the neighbor having to get their bigger tractor to put yours upright or even worse help the emergency responders pull it off of your crushed body!

For those who want to overstep the limits there are consequences and sometimes they will take a toll. Giving advice here is in many cases to new operators who will be making lots of mistakes and to try to instill an IDEA that is wrong about lift capacity and stability that is fundamentally wrong from the start with no real factual testing other than one new persons perception to stability being argued with those who have many years of experience and have seen the hazards unfold first hand that the new operator has no clue about the how or why is absurd to say the least! Please understand some of us have heard this before and have been there with the emergency responders when the wife calls 911 because "OH MY GOD MY HUSBAN IS UNDER THE TRACTOR!"
I have seen it, done it, been around it and picked up the pieces afterwards and don't recommend it!