Haying with compact tractor

[aczlan]

I look at that video and I see the baler pickup tossing and tossing the hay. I have always wondered why balers didn't run a pickup more like a combine pickup so that it gently just fed a stream in.

He was baling some very short hay in a small windrow, it should look more like this:

Aaron Z

 

[Creamer]

I understand but still the combine pickups were so much smoother and picked up cleaner. I will bet they were more expensive though and probably not as rock friendly.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

B.S. flag waving :whistleblower::whistleblower::whistleblower:

I'd like some proof that ALL mfg's void warranties based on that use. All, you say.

A couple or three years ago, a guy "on this sight" shelled out the pto on his new "L" series Kubota while it was still under warr... Kubota REFUSED warr., telling him L series should not be used for baling hay, that they built the "M" series for baling!

Who ever the guy was, (I don't remember) wasn't very happy with THAT bill, and Kubota never covered it!

I'll stick to baling with a FARM tractor! thankyouverymuch!

SR

 

[aczlan]

Here is the thread (from 2002): http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/haying/15697-baling-hay-cut.html
Per the thread, Kubota said that because the baler's minimum HP was higher than the tractor's PTO HP, it was abuse. The owner was planning on a lawsuit under the Magnum Moss Warranty Act. Not sure where it went as the thread kind of petered out.

Aaron Z

 

[sd455dan]

Yeah, This line from post 17 covered it: Kubota does have a catch-all phrase in the operators manual stating: "Use with implements which exceed the maximum specifications stated below, or which are otherwise unfit for use with the Kubota Tractor may result in malfunctions or failures of the tractor ... [Any malfunctions or failures of the tractor resulting from such use with improper implements are not covered by the warranty.]"

Still can certainly understand why the owner would have been (upset) with a catastrophic failure.

The thread reinforces my belief that given a choice, low RPM - high torque engines/drivetrains are preferable to a comparable (at least with reference to rated Horsepower) engine that has to run at an elevated RPM to achieve the same HP in CUTS /UTs

Sounds like the baler was about 17%? over Kubotas safe rating...

Also interesting that Kubota was printing brochures at the time showing an L series operating a larger round baler- http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/...47-174963-kubotal4310hstbalinghay-cropped-jpg

Wonder if they still show a similar size L with a round baler on the new brochures?


Entertaining thread

 

[Farmer495]

Seems to me square baler specs now have min PTO HP and WEIGHT of tractor to disallow compact use.

 

[RickB]

Here is the thread (from 2002): http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/haying/15697-baling-hay-cut.html
Per the thread, Kubota said that because the baler's minimum HP was higher than the tractor's PTO HP, it was abuse. The owner was planning on a lawsuit under the Magnum Moss Warranty Act. Not sure where it went as the thread kind of petered out.

Aaron Z

So much for the 'all manufacturers' thing. We have one instance involving one brand. And a new TBN legend.

 

[aczlan]

So much for the 'all manufacturers' thing. We have one instance involving one brand. And a new TBN legend.

And, its not a blanket prohibition, its a "don't use a implement that is too big for your tractor or we wont cover it under warranty when it breaks" prohibition.

Aaron Z

 

[CobyRupert]

Back in the early days of hale baling... people with little tractors would run the baler with a separate helper motor on the baler.

 

[CobyRupert]

BTW. You can find the Amish making square bales and pulling the baler with 3 or 4 horsepower (3-4 horses), and the baler is ground driven.