new tractor, kioti or mahindra

[Texasmark]

The one thing I question about it was the motor size. Much smaller than the Mahindra and turning more rpm. It is difficult to find a torque chart on any of these tractors but I am thinking a larger motor turning less revs should equal more torque.

Engine HP is measured by a nasty equation that boils down to this simple fact: [Torque (ft-lbs) x RPMS]/5252 = brake HP. Older tractors were heavy and huge beasts turning low rpms. As technology improved torque was replaced by increased rpms allowing for a smaller package. This reduction in size fit well with designers of modern day small-medium tractors.

My 1960's era tractors operated at around 1000 rpm for the peak in the torque curve and PTO rated rpms were 1200, reverencing my 2000 Ford with the 4 cyl engine. A MF 35 I had with the Perkins 3 cyl diesel was 1000 for the peak. Haven't seen data on the rest I have owned over the years. My 6530 is 4 cyl like my 2000, peaks at 1600 and runs out to 2600 for rated 65 hp in an engine package about the size of the Ford delivering twice the HP.

The only time the 6530 was "technically challenged" was when I hooked this JD cultivator to it, which is left over from the days when I used it behind my 100 hp JD 4230, and initially failed to set my "draft" control and 3 pt. 3rd member length (setting the 10"sweeps pitch) correctly.

 

[screamin400]

I know what torque is. So are you agreeing a larger lower revving engine has more torque?

 

[Texasmark]

I know what torque is. So are you agreeing a larger lower revving engine has more torque?

I'm not a propulsion engineer but I have noticed in gasoline, diesel, and steam engines, the longer the path for the fuel burn, the longer the time you are getting "work" from it. The longer the stroke, the longer it takes to complete a cycle, hence low rpms. Hence long strokers do the best job of high torque engines. Problem with that is size and when dealing with cast iron blocks and all, weight.

Back in the day, the 'Motor" brand auto manual had all the specs for gasoline automotive engines. Easy to see the difference in under square, square, and over square engines and their applications. Under square did the lugging, square was half and half, and your hotrods that revved up fast and screamed (like the little 1955 Chevy 265 V8 small block that won race after race upon it's inception), where over square.....meaning they had wide bores and short strokes.

 

[sloeffle]

Back in the day, the 'Motor" brand auto manual had all the specs for gasoline automotive engines. Easy to see the difference in under square, square, and over square engines and their applications. Under square did the lugging, square was half and half, and your hotrods that revved up fast and screamed (like the little 1955 Chevy 265 V8 small block that won race after race upon it's inception), where over square.....meaning they had wide bores and short strokes.

Not to take this thread too far off topic. My 59 Fordson has and under square motor and peak torque is around 1600RPM. Coincidentally, PTO speed is 1600RPM. Personally, I'd choose a larger 4 cylinder motor over a 3 cylinder turbo-charged motor any day of the week. Less mechanical components to possibly break.

 

[RSKY]

Little Tractor in Metropolis Illinois was forced to quit putting prices on the Net because they were underbidding local dealers all over the U.S.. Somebody would go to their local Kioti dealer and look at the tractor, call Little and he would sell and ship it to them cheaper than the local dealer. That was about ten years ago when I was shopping so they may not underprice anybody else now. Especially since Kioti has completely revamped their dealer network. But I would still give them a call.

RSKY

 

[TractorNH]

When I compared all of the options I was looking at it boiled down to Kioti and Mahindra as well. I have 5 Mahindra dealers all within an hour of me but only 1 Kioti dealer just over an hour away (that also sells Mahindra). Mahindra also doesn't have DPF for emissions so none of the problems that come with that either.

 

[Grumpa Wally]

I have only had experience with a 2011 Mahindra 5035. I have not owned a Kioti. From all I have read, Kioti quality is comparable to Kubota quality. I now own a Kubota M7060HD12 and can say the difference in Kubota quality above the Mahindra is a lot. In the rear hydraulics, steering, electronics, engine, hoses, fit and finish Kubota is far beyond Mahindra.

 

[8u9ey3]

The MX5100 is the best in it class and a lot of tractor for the money. I've been looking hard at 50-55hp tractors lately and have settled on the MX. Great machine!

When I bought my L3800 a couple years ago, I looked at the comparable Mahindra, as I have a dealer just down the road. Mahindra makes a good tractor, but they aren't as refined as Kubota and just a bit rough around the edges.

There's more to it than just what the spec sheet says, the Mahindra out spec-ed the L3800 a bit, but I like the L3800 much better and have no regrets at all...

Kubota will have a much higher resale, trade-in value down the road also.

The MX has a large following and I've not read anything negative about them. I'll be shopping for a low hour used MX5100 in the next couple years.