talked to the owner of a kioti dealer other day which i happen to know(just came about wasnt in market for one), anyway he states that kubota is one of the lowest rated tractors out there as far as specs. says kioti has way higher lift capacties front and back and alot more flow as far as the hydraulic pumps. now i havent got into actual research of this myself, but was looking at some of your inputs for those who have owned/operated both and so on?? we do have a kubota now and have had for sometime, dont have to many complaints with it nice tractor. but when its time to replace wonder how much i should consider the kioti. is its usability as good or better?
Careful! Them there are fightin' words on this here forum. The unwritten rule seems to be "Thou shalt not question the superiority of Kubota".
I posted this comparison a little while ago (and was met with a torrent of derision). But, being an engineer, I tend to rely on hard numbers, as opposed to gut feeling and how things feel.
The plot below shows loader lift comparisons at the loader pin between a Kubota LA805 loader (spec'd out on a
L3560) versus comparable loaders from other brands in similar sized tractors. While I don't have the full loader curves for all brands (kudos to Kubota for supplying it to their customers) you can compare the lift capacities of the Kubota at the same lift height with the other brands. If you're comparing Kioti to Kubota, a DK10SE series is very similar in frame size to a Kubota
L3560. If you look at the green "x", you'll see the Kioti lifts about 46% more than the Kubota. That's an apples-to-apples comparison, and numbers don't lie.
Now, to get past the marketing hype, I think you have to ask yourself, "does it really matter"? For me, loader lift capacity was a major priority. I doubt that's the case for most people. As has been mentioned here already, high loader lift capacity does nothing for you if you can't keep the rear tires on the ground. This often requires additional ballasting, which may bring additional consequences (rutting in yards, the mess of filling tires and fixing flats, stress on axles, etc.). Only you can decide if that's important to you or not. As is oft-repeated here, I would make a decision based on what you need the tractor to do, not what it necessarily can do. If you don't need the loader lift capacity, or hydraulic flow, or whatever, why worry about it?
I do also, somewhat, agree with the comment that a dealer should be able to sell a tractor based on its strengths, as opposed to pointing out the weaknesses of others. It's one thing to present facts, it's another to try to use those facts to slander/bad-mouth another brand. You were there, so you know which approach it was. If it was the latter, I would be leary.
