25HP and under tractors are not designed to skirt Tier IV emissions requirements. They still need to meet the emission requirements, although the emissions requirements for 25hp and less are much more forgiving and manufacturers can get away with it by simply playing with fuel and timing without having the need to add a DPF and all sorts of non sense.I opted for the Kubota L2501 over the L3301 based on simplicity. The L2501 has no computer and no diesel particulate filter. It is probably as simple as a tractor gets today.
However, in the interest of full disclosure, the simple L2501, designed to skirt Tier IV emissions requirements, (legally) spews a lot of diesel particulates. According to those more knowledgeable than I on emissions, the L3301 with a Tier IV diesel particulate filter/incinerator spews less than 1% of the pollution load of an L2501 with a traditional, low-tech muffler.
I don't think anyone WANTS a less clean burning engine.I for one appreciate today's cleaner burning diesel engines.
I don't know if I'll agree with 90% just based on the posts I've seen on various FB pages of issues. I'd agree with 50%-60% is operator induced.Neil Messick, of Messick's Tractor in Pennsylvania, states in his videos on emissions technology that 90% of emission technology problems are created by OPERATOR ERROR.
I remember a recent post where a dealer had driven to a customers property three times to respond to regeneration complaints. Each time the dealer showed the customer how to initiate the regeneration process. The third visit the dealer told the customer succeeding regeneration visits would be $250. No more regeneration problems reported to the dealer from that customer.
I have had my Kubota L3560 for eight years. It was the first Tier IV tractor sold new by my Kubota dealer. It passes through regeneration every sixty engine hours without a hiccup.
Then there is the additional exorbitant price to have the system/DPF cleaned or replaced every x number of years.
I hope that is close to reality but we will see. Also, mufflers cost a fraction of a DPF.The average residential tractor operates eighty engine hours per year, according to industry surveys.
3,000 hours DPF Life / 80 hours = 37.5 years of residential use prior to DPF replacement.
Diesel Particulate Filter supersedes tractor muffler.
At some point in time DPF needs to be replaced.
At some point in time tractors with mufflers need the muffler replaced.
I already have 110 in under a year so once we move to our retirement property in a few years, I expect use to increase so I'll use 200 hrs. a year which means replacement every 15 years. Probably twice in my remaining lifetime. I hope that's as bad as it gets and I can afford it.
Neil Messick, of Messick's Tractor in Pennsylvania, states in his videos on emissions technology that 90% of emission technology problems are created by OPERATOR ERROR.
I remember a recent post where a dealer had driven to a customers property three times to respond to regeneration complaints. Each time the dealer showed the customer how to initiate the regeneration process. The third visit the dealer told the customer succeeding regeneration visits would be $250. No more regeneration problems reported to the dealer from that customer.
I have had my Kubota L3560 for eight years. It was the first Tier IV tractor sold new by my Kubota dealer. It passes through regeneration every sixty engine hours without a hiccup.
Then there is the additional exorbitant price to have the system/DPF cleaned or replaced every x number of years.
The average residential tractor operates eighty engine hours per year, according to industry surveys.
3,000 hours DPF Life / 80 hours = 37.5 years of residential use prior to DPF replacement.
Diesel Particulate Filter supersedes tractor muffler.
At some point in time DPF needs to be replaced.
At some point in time tractors with mufflers need the muffler replaced.
I wouldn't worry about it....in 15 years, the way this country is going, your diesel engine will have been legislated out of existence. Or even buy diesel fuel. Have you seen the news reports this week of the attacks on Exxon, Chevron, and Shell - by their own stockholders?
But that's okay, you don't have one, right?
Have you seen the news reports this week of the attacks on Exxon, Chevron, and Shell - by their own stockholders?
Not accurate. There have been hundreds of hostile takeovers orchestrated by stockholders. Some want to keep the company profitable, up and running smoothly, while others want to run the Company into the ground for different reasons. Usually because they're competitors.Shoot, I thought the oil majors were having annual shareholder meetings, required by law, at which the shareholder/owners shape the company future through electing directors.
In the case of Shell, because of its British/Dutch heritage, I expect a significant number, probably a majority of its shareholders, are non-US.
Presumably almost all shareholders of stocks are interested in the long term profitability of the businesses they own.
LOL that's funny right there
Not accurate. There have been hundreds of hostile takeovers orchestrated by stockholders. Some want to keep the company profitable, up and running smoothly, while others want to run the Company into the ground for different reasons. Usually because they're competitors.
And Royal Dutch Shell is an International Corporate Conglomerate listed on the NYSE. It would be wrong to assume any one group owns a majprity of them.
Like I said above, the people with the most cash are the Big Tech Companies. By far. Not even close. They have to do something with it and there's nothing they love more than meddling. Why did Bezos buy the Washington Post to use as his own personal Blog? MGM? Both are losers with little to no outlook for a profitable future, so....
He who tells the people what to think does not have to be King.
We're not going to change each others minds, so let's just accept that and move along
Yeah, which brings us to the question: Why would 'stockholders' buy into a Company that produces 'fossil fuels' (one of the biggest misnomers ever) for a living and try to kill the fossil fuel industry, their very own investments?The reports I've seen say that these stockholders want the major oil companies to get away from fossil fuels and go with something that produces less carbon. Which is why I made that post about availability of diesel fuel. If they quit making diesel we will all be in trouble - and paying exorbitant prices if we are able to buy it.