Tractor Sizing TRACTOR WEIGHT as a SINGLE CRITERION IN TRACTOR SELECTION

[jeff9366]

Tractor weight provides most tractor "grunt" defining tractor capability in pulling applications.
Heavier tractors are built with thicker steel and thicker axles to withstand the stress of heavier loads.

Heavier tractors have larger diameter wheels/tires. Larger rear tires have a larger tire "patch" in contact with the soil, improving traction. Larger wheels and tires and a longer wheelbase permit heavier tractors to bridge holes, ruts and tree debris, increasing traction and reducing operator perturbation. Therefore, heavier tractors with large diameter wheels/tires have more tractive power pulling ground contact implements, pushing a loader bucket into dirt and pushing snow. Larger wheels and tires increase ground clearance, increasing the height at which crops may be cultivated.

Heavier tractors have FEL lift and Three Point Hitch lift in proportion to weight.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second and (narrowly) rear wheel ballast third. Tractor horsepower moves up in priority when considering power for PTO-powered implements such as Bush Hogs and snow blowers, but remains secondary to sufficient tractor weight.

 

[aczlan]

As someone who is looking for a loader tractor right now, bare tractor weight is unimportant to me.
I want something that has a diesel engine and at least 40HP at the PTO.
Anything that meets those two criteria will have (or can be ballasted to have) plenty of weight to do what I need to do (move round bales and run a round baler).

Aaron Z

 

[MossRoad]

I disagree with the OP. Weight and HP are equally important and very intertwined. There have been several threads on TBN over the years where people bought tractors that didn't have enough HP to get them up a hill.

 

[BAP]

Tractor weight provides most tractor "grunt" defining tractor capability. Horsepower is needed too but horsepower is less important. Tractor horsepower moves up in priority when considering power for PTO-powered implements like Bush Hogs, but remains secondary to sufficient tractor weight.

Heavier tractors have FEL lift and Three Point Hitch lift in proportion to weight.

Heavier tractors are built with thicker steel and thicker axles to withstand greater stress. As a newbie operator you are more likely to bend a light tractor than a heavy tractor.

Heavier tractors have larger diameter wheels/tires. Larger rear tires have a larger tire "patch" in contact with the soil, improving traction. Larger wheels and tires and a longer wheelbase permit heavier tractors to bridge holes, ruts and tree debris, aiding traction and with less operator perturbation. Therefore, heavier tractors with large diameter wheels/tires have more tractive power pulling ground contact implements, pushing a loader bucket into dirt and pushing snow. Larger wheels and tires increase ground clearance.

When considering a tractor purchase, bare tractor weight first, tractor horsepower second and (narrowly) rear wheel ballast third.

Obviously, you have never operated a “Gutless Wonder”. A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it’s power and can hardly get out of it’s own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

 

[airbiscuit]

So, if we put weight vs. horsepower to the test, it would be interesting to do a battle of the Kubotas:

BX2680 24.8hp 26x12x12 R4 Rear Tires Weight 1521 lbs
L2501 24.8hp 15x19.5 R4 Rear Tires Weight 2623 lbs

So, if we hooked a chain between them and said GO, which would have better tractive power? Having grown up on a farm with small hp John Deere B's—´ with their heavy cast iron wheels and large diameter tires, my money would be on the L2501 with its larger tires and extra weight.

I'm not saying horsepower doesn't matter. It is a significant consideration for PTO intensive operations. But if your tractor is too light, or your tires are too small, you're just spinning your wheels.

 

[4570Man]

At a 1100 pound advantage or over 50 percent heavier the L2501 would be the clear winner.

 

[4570Man]

Obviously, you have never operated a “Gutless Wonder”. A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it’s power and can hardly get out of it’s own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

Gutless wonder tractors still beats a tractor too light for the job. My L3240 pulled a box blade or plow slow. The L3800 is a lot higher power to weight ratio but when the going gets tough it sits there spinning its wheels. The l3240 was the smallest engine of that frame and more power would have definitely been better but a smaller tractor with equal power is worse.

 

[3Ts]

As someone who is looking for a loader tractor right now, bare tractor weight is unimportant to me.
I want something that has a diesel engine and at least 40HP at the PTO.
Anything that meets those two criteria will have (or can be ballasted to have) plenty of weight to do what I need to do (move round bales and run a round baler).

Aaron Z

Are you sure 40 hp can run a round baler? I'm assuming you mean full size 5x5 bales. When I looked into running one with my 5055E (50 hp) it didn't look like I had enough hp. - Note: I do not have a round baler, nor have I run one.

 

[chim]

Obviously, you have never operated a 敵utless Wonder? A Gutless Wonder is a tractor too heavy for it痴 power and can hardly get out of it痴 own way, let alone, operate equipment with any speed. Sure, it is well planted to the ground, but the only way you can get anything done is to be shifted down into a low gear. Too much weight can be just as bad as too little. Maybe in a flat state like Florida that works fine, but in any areas with hills it plain stinks.

Consideration of comfort, tasks and HP led me to what may well be my last tractor purchase. Top chore is mowing. The max RFM width for my property is around 7-1/2' because it isn't flat everywhere. Previous 32HP tractor with a 6' RFM sometimes slowed when mowing a couple hills when approached straight on in high range. For comfort, A/C was desired. Throwing 5HP at the A/C and another 5HP at the wider deck put the L4240 in the range of choices. It worked out very well. The tractor will mow anywhere in any direction in 3rd range low, which is plenty fast.

Snow removal is the fun thing when the grass doesn't need mowed. With loaded and grooved R4's and a custom mounted 8' Fisher plow, it/s been quite enjoyable.

The tractor is heavy enough for anything I need to do and doesn't mark the lawn.

 

[aczlan]

Are you sure 40 hp can run a round baler? I'm assuming you mean full size 5x5 bales. When I looked into running one with my 5055E (50 hp) it didn't look like I had enough hp. - Note: I do not have a round baler, nor have I run one.

I currently make and move round bales with a Kubota L3830 now (running a Ford 552 5x5 round baler, making most bales about 4' in diameter), but it doesn't have a loader and for the price of a loader ($3000-5000), I can pickup a older used 2wd tractor.

Aaron Z