Would you pay $1,500 for 14% more HP?

[RjCorazza]

Tough call...
I shopped the L60 series 8 years ago, and quickly determined that I had to draw the line somewhere. I ended up with the L4060 because it was a similar weight (very slightly less than the 4760-6060) and that it shares the same basic engine as the higher HP models.
The only time I can run out of HP is grinding stumps, but a dense stump will anchor any one of the L60 tractors if you go too fast.

 

[rumwrks]

But, the minute contractors show for estimates and see this view, prices escalate quickly for services. It’s crazy out there, man. First world problems I know, but thus, the tractor purchase.

Hehe, fair enough. It'll definitely be a project.

For the record I opted for the extra 55hp mostly for running larger PTO stuff with a comfortable margin. Would I have been about as happy either way? probably..

But I'm also shopping for a used small excavator in the 7k lb range for similar projects (and yes I KNOW that's also way light for stumps.. but I have reasons and not that many stumps to actually remove in comparison plus a lot of other work a smaller machine is perfect for).

I priced the tractor backhoe at around $7k and I'm seeing excavators that will "work well enough" in the $18-25k range (still working on pulling the trigger..). So for the extra dollars it seemed like a worthwhile trade off functionality wise (I also have a lot of small timber to move around and small culverts to put in and some light road work that the mini exc will be just ducky for). I reckon I'll also likely be able to recoup most of the $ from the excavator if I decide I'm eventually done with it... as long as I don't make some huge mistake with it hah.

 

[paulsharvey]

Ok, so I'm guilty of not reading everything, but I did read atleast the first 1/3rd, and didn't see it mentioned.

There is kinda a myth on TBN, that HP is only needed for PTO, and that tractor weight is most of what is needed for ground engaging work. That's a half true; for almost everything ground engaging, you need to be able to pull it at the optimum speed to make it work right; discs, plows, ect. Being able to pull a disc in Low, at full RPM, at maybe 3 mph, might not do much of anything, but the same disc at 5 mph, might work perfect. Same with loader work; to a limited degree; you want to be able to most work in medium. Your also going to want that speed and power to climb hills, climb out of a hole. ect. HP doesn't replace traction, but traction doesn't fully replace HP either.

All that is a long way to say, yes, I'd absolutely pay the increase, and get the extra HP.

 

[sandman2234]

Ok, so I'm guilty of not reading everything, but I did read atleast the first 1/3rd, and didn't see it mentioned.

There is kinda a myth on TBN, that HP is only needed for PTO, and that tractor weight is most of what is needed for ground engaging work. That's a half true; for almost everything ground engaging, you need to be able to pull it at the optimum speed to make it work right; discs, plows, ect. Being able to pull a disc in Low, at full RPM, at maybe 3 mph, might not do much of anything, but the same disc at 5 mph, might work perfect. Same with loader work; to a limited degree; you want to be able to most work in medium. Your also going to want that speed and power to climb hills, climb out of a hole. ect. HP doesn't replace traction, but traction doesn't fully replace HP either.

All that is a long way to say, yes, I'd absolutely pay the increase, and get the extra HP.

Yep, what he said! I would be spending the money too!
David from jax

 

[sd455dan]

Thank you for the advice and absolutely, this has been my experience at other project locations. But, the minute contractors show for estimates and see this view, prices escalate quickly for services. It’s crazy out there, man. First world problems I know, but thus, the tractor purchase. A man quickly has to figure out what he’s willing to do and when he will pick up the phone.

Lots of stumps? and you might want to do this at your own rate? Several TBN'rs have bought a well used industrial TLB and then also something like you are actually looking at.

As others said weight is your friend and the difference in the digging power of a 12000+ lb backhoe for ~15k is worth the price increase over adding a backhoe attachment to a new machine imo, plus you have a spare machine with far greater FEL lifting ( like double) and bucket pushing power as well and you don't need to dismount a backhoe from your new machine and can leave other 3 point implements you use a lot mounted up and ready to go.

I am still kicking myself for not buying a TLB sooner although wish I had spent a few more bucks to get a better cared for unit.

They aren't great at any one thing but are a Jack of all trades that can many times be bought for 50 cents a pound. Just as a reference Most old TLB's have enough FEL to actually hang some chains on the FEL bucket, pick up a new 55 HP CUT and literally drive away with it.

If you aren't handy with tools and replacing a hose once in a while maybe better to hire it out ,but an older Industrial TLB can be one of the best bargains out there, If a person could get to demo digging out two identical stumps with a new add on factory backhoe and a full size TLB back to back it would be a real eye opener when they look at how long it took to get the stump out of the ground the added reach of a TLB is undervalued as well.. again jmo.

Add a thumb and you can unload a trailer as well.

 

[halfBaked2024]

I made the 15% power jump (+$2,000) going from a Kubota L4760 open station to a L5460 cab tractor. Same tractor & base engine but with an added turbo. I wanted a cab and the L5460 was came available after searching for months in 2022. For my mostly mowing purposes I don’t notice the extra power. An increase in fuel usage and regens definitely . I typically run out of traction before power.

I had not thought about an increase in regens due to the turbo (this will be my first piece of diesel equipment). I’m reading these Kukje engines don’t regen as often as other engines, but will the addition of the turbo increase the frequency?

 

[deezler]

Heck I would pay $1500 just to hear the noise of the turbo spooling when you cold start the machine, or lay into a pile (add load). I love turbos.

While you are quoting a small increase in peak power (14% or 7 hp or whatever), keep in mind that the peak torque increase may be even greater, and you probably will have a lot more area under the power band curve if you were to plot it out. IE, there may be more substantial % improvements in power delivery at lower RPM than the single number at peak power that you're quoting. And even more % improvement when up at any altitude, as others have mentioned.

Worth it.

 

[halfBaked2024]

Ok, so I'm guilty of not reading everything, but I did read atleast the first 1/3rd, and didn't see it mentioned.

There is kinda a myth on TBN, that HP is only needed for PTO, and that tractor weight is most of what is needed for ground engaging work. That's a half true; for almost everything ground engaging, you need to be able to pull it at the optimum speed to make it work right; discs, plows, ect. Being able to pull a disc in Low, at full RPM, at maybe 3 mph, might not do much of anything, but the same disc at 5 mph, might work perfect. Same with loader work; to a limited degree; you want to be able to most work in medium. Your also going to want that speed and power to climb hills, climb out of a hole. ect. HP doesn't replace traction, but traction doesn't fully replace HP either.

All that is a long way to say, yes, I'd absolutely pay the increase, and get the extra HP.

Critical point made here on implements working properly, thank you. I am also concerned about having the power get out of a frustrating situation, which I’m sure to do to myself. I have seen from some contractors working out here with varying degrees of experience that most situations where equipment gets hung up is due to the operator: the equipment just is what it is. As a new operator, I expect to get into sticky situations pretty often.

 

[IndyIan]

This is a HST machine? If you can use the pto hp for a wider snowblower, mower, tiller, running a round baler, disc bine, its a good idea. Or you're at altitude.
My take with a HST for ground engagement is that you shouldn't run it at much lower than PTO rpm, so the revs are going to be pretty close all the time anyways, and I'd rather have the engine start to strain and let me know I'm finding the limits rather than breaking a front axle trying to lift the whole gravel pile with the loader, or burn out the HST trying to pull the box blade or plow in mid range, because it has the hp for it.

Is anything else on the drive train or cooling system up graded with the extra HP?
My tractor was the same machine for 40-45-50hp versions except the 50hp got an an engine oil cooler. The HST, axles, hydraulic fluid cooler, rads, were all the same, so I figured the 40hp would be easier on the whole tractor, and I'm not going to wear out the motor in the 3-4000 hours I'm ever going to put on in 30-40 years.... All 3 engines would run basically the same rpms anyways.
For a geared machine, I think the turbo's and extra hp is better and if your can't downshift on the move, the turbo is great for just adding more torque if you need it, and you can run lower rpms if you want, the trans doesn't care unless your really lug it.

 

[halfBaked2024]

Hehe, fair enough. It'll definitely be a project.

For the record I opted for the extra 55hp mostly for running larger PTO stuff with a comfortable margin. Would I have been about as happy either way? probably..

But I'm also shopping for a used small excavator in the 7k lb range for similar projects (and yes I KNOW that's also way light for stumps.. but I have reasons and not that many stumps to actually remove in comparison plus a lot of other work a smaller machine is perfect for).

I priced the tractor backhoe at around $7k and I'm seeing excavators that will "work well enough" in the $18-25k range (still working on pulling the trigger..). So for the extra dollars it seemed like a worthwhile trade off functionality wise (I also have a lot of small timber to move around and small culverts to put in and some light road work that the mini exc will be just ducky for). I reckon I'll also likely be able to recoup most of the $ from the excavator if I decide I'm eventually done with it... as long as I don't make some huge mistake with it hah.

I have gone back and forth so much on the miniX vs. backhoe attachment debate, my head still hurts over it. I think for my property and what I want to do, getting a TLB utility baseball player on the bench as a financial investment and a rented miniX where/if needed will be the way to go.

New tractors in these $30-$40K prices ranges are now entering a critical place in the marketplace due to a wave of Chinese excavators flowing in from across the pond masked with quality Japanese engine manufacturers. This is a similar product push MTD did with push mowers that we all got the joy of experiencing: junk chassis with Honda motors. Engine ran like a top while new pieces of the mower broke off or failed.

Prices will be very attractive for the hobbyists out there like me and it will be even more challenging to find the true value in what you are buying.