Used Value vs Age

[wolc123]

If I was in the market for a new CUT of more than 27 hp, I would look for and consider paying more for a late model , pre Tier 4, if one could be found with low hours and in good condition. Tier 4 compliant CUT's use more fuel to produce less power.

If enough efficiency improvement could be found to make up for the "clean exhaust" losses, then I would lean more towards a Tier 4 compliant model.

The problem is, most of the engineering development is now focusing on electric and hydrogen power. That makes it unlikely that enough added efficiency will ever be found to make a Tier 4 compliant diesel CUT cost effective.

 

[espacef1fan]

I don't have numbers for tractors but my dad's SUV goes straight from 40 MPG to 26 MPG during a regen. And I bet it would easily do 43/44 MPG without all the emissions on it.

On tractors, the fact you need to run the engine at least above 2000 RPM to keep the DPF or DOC happy, says a lot about how efficient these emission systems are. Basically forcing you to operate at wide open when something like 1200 to 1500 RPM would be plenty using like 1/4 of the fuel.

Lower rpm doesn’t always mean less fuel used, especially if the engine is designed to operate efficiently at an rpm that works with other emissions equipment.

 

[fried1765]

Lower rpm doesn’t always mean less fuel used, especially if the engine is designed to operate efficiently at an rpm that works with other emissions equipment.

"operate efficiently"?
It seems quite obvious that higher RPM will always be less fuel efficient, with or without "other emissions equipment".

 

[Hay Dude]

Not true

Ok because 30 trillion debt looks real good on the balance sheet.
Maybe some more multi-trillion dollar boondoggles coming soon for “infrastructure“

 

[Hay Dude]

How much less efficient? Got some numbers/data specific to tractors?

Well for starters I can tell you that a vehicle with a dpf injected with diesel fuel is using more diesel fuel than the same diesel engine without a dpf. Its also less reliable since there’s more parts to wear out or fail. That also lowers efficiency.
Is that enough data for ya?
Why do you think pre emissions diesel equipment is so sought after?

 

[espacef1fan]

Well for starters I can tell you that a vehicle with a dpf injected with diesel fuel is using more diesel fuel than the same diesel engine without a dpf. Its also less reliable since there’s more parts to wear out or fail. That also lowers efficiency.
Is that enough data for ya?
Why do you think pre emissions diesel equipment is so sought after?

Some tractors like Branson don’t use extra fuel injected to create heat. They are completely passive if you run the tractor hard enough.

Also some that can inject, don’t inject, if you run it hard enough.

I would be surprised if a modern 50hp tractor would use anymore fuel than an older 50hp tractor at rated power .

 

[espacef1fan]

Well for starters I can tell you that a vehicle with a dpf injected with diesel fuel is using more diesel fuel than the same diesel engine without a dpf. Its also less reliable since there’s more parts to wear out or fail. That also lowers efficiency.
Is that enough data for ya?
Why do you think pre emissions diesel equipment is so sought after?

Also used equipment is USED which means while there may be less parts to wear out, they are further along in the process of wearing out than new machines.

Also used machines represent buying someone else’s neglect/problems.

Neither is a good case for claiming improved reliability nor reduced liability of paying for parts(most used machines without emissions equipment are no longer under warranty )

 

[mo1]

New tractors have certainly gotten much more expensive after the significant changes with the 2014 emissions restrictions. This has kept prices up on the newer pre-emissions used tractors as a result as people often do choose between new and lightly used. The prices of 40+ year old units or somewhat newer ones with a lot of wear have NOT changed all that much as people don't normally comparison shop between a brand-new tractor or a 50 year old one. We have also have a big disruption to the supply chains with the whole coronavirus ordeal and it is much more difficult to get new tractors right now, period, so the price of any new or newish tractor is going to be higher than a year or so ago as well.

I don't see much evidence of the 2014-up units being noticeably less desirable than the 2013 and older units. If that was the case, you would see people getting very little for trade-ins on tractors made since 2014 and also the prices of a 2014 used tractor would be noticeably less than that of an otherwise similar 2013. We do not see that.

As far as whether or not the 2014-up units are particularly troublesome with regards to emissions or the near-ubiquitous adoption of electronic engine controls, about the only common issues I have heard in utility and compact tractors relate to one specific model of Kubota being very troublesome and some people with flaky throttle and ECU electronics on smaller CNH utility tractors. I haven't personally had any issues but haven't had the tractor for years yet. The exhaust smells noticeably different than a 2013 and older unit and there is an extra switch on the dash that the owner's manual essentially says to not touch, but that is all I have seen so far. The rated fuel usage according to Nebraska between the pre-2014 and 2014-up versions of my tractor show the new units use about 1/2 gallon more per hour at full load than the equivalent older engines, but the current engines do also make more power and torque across the entire powerband.

 

[ptsg]

Lower rpm doesn’t always mean less fuel used, especially if the engine is designed to operate efficiently at an rpm that works with other emissions equipment.

I can get like 2 to 4 more hours out of a full tank of fuel by running the brush mower at 540E, that's around 1800 engine RPM, versus running the mower at standard 540 which put the engine at 2500 RPM. How is that not using less fuel?

Same on driving on the road. If I push it to 2500 RPM, I can almost see the fuel gauge moving. If I keep it under 2000 RPM, it will take a lot more time to move.

But then again, my tractor has a fully mechanical engine. No electronics whatsoever. So the others with Common rail may act differently.

 

[paulfun9]

Look this emissions stuff is in the long run, a good thing.

Everyone should be able to agree cleaner air is better.

In today’s world lower emissions almost always correlated to more efficiency as well. We all like saving money on diesel right?

I care less about the smell as I am waiting for delivery of my cabbed Massey 2850M, but you are lying if you say it was healthier for you to breathe what my 1975 JD 1120 spewed in my face everytime I ran it.

It’s also well understood what keeps these systems healthy now so ownership costs shouldn’t be too bad, either.

This makes me laugh!
Emissions have cost us fuel mileage since day one.
No direct comparrison for tractors but every car, truck and motorcycle I own with emissions has given less mpg than a similar vehicle before.