/pine
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 12,450
:thumbsup::thumbsup:
The blurry line between CUT and UT???
- Thread starter gladehound
- Start date
- Views: 13628
OP
gladehound
Veteran Member
Draw a vertical line with only black (CUT) on the left side and only white (UT) on the right side.
View attachment 453210
Bruce
I like that!
/pine
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 12,450
So that's what that movie was about...!
OP
gladehound
Veteran Member
The American Society of Agricultural Engineers (ASAE) defines a compact utility tractor as:
"a small agricultural tractor equipped with a 540-rpm PTO and a three-point hitch designed for Category I implements only. These tractors generally have a mass less than 4,000 lb; have less than 40 PTO hp; and are primarily designed and advertised for use with mowers and light-duty material handling equipment. (from ASAE standard S390.3)"
Based on this definition, anything over 4000 pounds (and I would say over 4,000 pounds in the open station variant) or made for Cat II implements is not a CUT and is by default a UT. The aforementioned Kioti DK55 that I've always considered the perfect example of the grey zone between CUT and UT would then be a UT based on the ASAE definition due to weight and the Cat II 3pt and >40PTO hp. But the definition does have the word "generally" in it. I would still consider a Kioti NX to be a CUT even with the optional Cat II link ends and even if it is over 40 PTO HP and slightly over 4,000 pounds for the simple reason that base model in this series is Cat I, under 4,000 pounds and under 40PTO hp.
I never knew there was an actual standard from a reputable organization before now. This clears things up for me.
"a small agricultural tractor equipped with a 540-rpm PTO and a three-point hitch designed for Category I implements only. These tractors generally have a mass less than 4,000 lb; have less than 40 PTO hp; and are primarily designed and advertised for use with mowers and light-duty material handling equipment. (from ASAE standard S390.3)"
Based on this definition, anything over 4000 pounds (and I would say over 4,000 pounds in the open station variant) or made for Cat II implements is not a CUT and is by default a UT. The aforementioned Kioti DK55 that I've always considered the perfect example of the grey zone between CUT and UT would then be a UT based on the ASAE definition due to weight and the Cat II 3pt and >40PTO hp. But the definition does have the word "generally" in it. I would still consider a Kioti NX to be a CUT even with the optional Cat II link ends and even if it is over 40 PTO HP and slightly over 4,000 pounds for the simple reason that base model in this series is Cat I, under 4,000 pounds and under 40PTO hp.
I never knew there was an actual standard from a reputable organization before now. This clears things up for me.
OP
gladehound
Veteran Member
Of all the characteristics in the ASAE definition for a CUT, I would consider weight the most important. A tractor's primary job is to pull or push and weight is the biggest determinant of pulling or pushing capability.
/pine
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2009
- Messages
- 12,450
Some color to the "Shades of Grey"...:thumbsup::thumbsup:
TSO
Elite Member
That's interesting... My buddies L5240 has Cat2 lower ball-ends, but it's practically identical to my MF1652 in specs, and mine doesn't accept Cat2. But, I like your topic. I think the blurred lines are getting even more blurred. We now have several brands that offer 60'ish HP and Cat1/2 hook-ups, which can be had with HST or Gear Trans. These include modern loaders that can lift 2500+ lbs.
Weight might be a good indicator, but there are inconsistencies with that as well. The 50hp Mahindra 5035 weighs quite a bit more than competing CUT's, but I wouldn't consider that a UT either.
Maybe we can use Transmission options as a factor? It seems that currently, what sets the CUT & UT class differential is Trans options. Anything HST is CUT and below. Anything without an HST option is UT and up ??????
chim
Elite Member
Let me throw something out there. Gladehound posted what could be considered the definitive answer to the mystery. We do have other things that come into play:
1. We love acronyms. To have a correct acronym roll off one's tongue makes him a real expert. To use the wrong acronym makes him look like a dummy.
2. Bigger is better. I want MY tractor to be a UT and not a CUT. CUT's are just overgrown lawnmowers and are for Harry Homeowner. If I hang enough suitcase weights on my tractor it WILL BE a UT!
3. Someone else may have an opinion about the size. This was illustrated to me when we got the L3200 back in 2012. Wifey (farm girl) told her cousin we bought a new garden tractor
1. We love acronyms. To have a correct acronym roll off one's tongue makes him a real expert. To use the wrong acronym makes him look like a dummy.
2. Bigger is better. I want MY tractor to be a UT and not a CUT. CUT's are just overgrown lawnmowers and are for Harry Homeowner. If I hang enough suitcase weights on my tractor it WILL BE a UT!
3. Someone else may have an opinion about the size. This was illustrated to me when we got the L3200 back in 2012. Wifey (farm girl) told her cousin we bought a new garden tractor
OP
gladehound
Veteran Member
I wonder how long it will be until an unquestionable UT (something in the 6000 to 8000 pound range for the bare tractor) comes with an HST option? And my DS4510HS has no HST option but is clearly a CUT by the ASAE definition.
When you mention 60hp and cat. Cat 1 and 2 ends the Kioti NX comes to mind. The base version of this series meets all requirements of the CUT definition. So I think of all the NX series tractors as CUTs because they are on a base Platform that is clearly CUT.
But the NX does really push the definition! I certainly would not argue with anyone who called a 60hp NX a UT. Even though I would not agree with them, it is so far into the grey area that that I wouldn't disagree either. The DK55 on the other hand is clearly on a larger frame than the NX. The lower hp DK55 is clearly a UT to me while the NX is a CUT that has been fattened to exceed the normal CUT definition. It comes back to the platform it's built on, the size of the components.
OP
gladehound
Veteran Member
Let me throw something out there. Gladehound posted what could be considered the definitive answer to the mystery. We do have other things that come into play:
1. We love acronyms. To have a correct acronym roll off one's tongue makes him a real expert. To use the wrong acronym makes him look like a dummy.
2. Bigger is better. I want MY tractor to be a UT and not a CUT. CUT's are just overgrown lawnmowers and are for Harry Homeowner. If I hang enough suitcase weights on my tractor it WILL BE a UT!
3. Someone else may have an opinion about the size. This was illustrated to me when we got the L3200 back in 2012. Wifey (farm girl) told her cousin we bought a new garden tractor
#3 is hilarious! My friends has a 3 year old son (mom is a farm girl and the son frequents the old farm). The 3 yr old looked at my previous Small frame CUT and said "uncle Ron, you should get a bigger one!". I did and he hasn't commented but I'm sure it still looks small!
Certainly adding weights to a tractor doesn't change its class. But it does change how hard it will pull on an implement. If you are at the upper end of CUT weight you definitely have to be careful with some implements designed for CUTs.