Suggestions for 40-50 hp class

[bsekf]

Dealer search and Contact didn't work. How long have they been around? Specs sound pretty light weight. Anybody have experience with the 48 hp model/FEL? (4820 or T494 Series 3)

Does TYM replace the Long Landtrac, the Bronson and the Montana Korean built compacts? Any parts interchange? Never heard of them till this post.

 

[rumwrks]

Not sure why the find a dealer didn't work - I went to Find a Dealer and punched in Buffalo New York in the search and got a bunch (a lot more than I have around me alas).

Anybody have experience with the 48 hp model/FEL? (4820 or T494 Series 3)

I have a 2024 5520H which is the same as the 4820 excepting it has a turbo on the engine (add about $1500, a bit happier running the 8" chipper). I haven't had it long enough to really say I've beated it into submission yet. So far .. so good...

The 4820/5520 is a legacy Branson model that's been fairly well proven out. Branson and Tym fully merged so all of the "Branson" tractors are now labeled Tym. I don't know who made the old Long's.. they seem to be an abandoned brand. Montana was a made by one of the parent companies (Kukje which made Branson), although I think it was a contract label.

They did change a few things I'm not entirely happy about. The 3pt is a touch jerky on the way up (reportedly all? most? many anyway of the newer Korean tractors do this now - the started all using some sort of stepper hydraulic which isn't great). I also don't think the loader is quite as overbuilt as the ones made pre-merger were although it's still pretty much top of class weight capacity wise.

The 3 number variants come with some more shine, default rear remote and support more rear ports (the 48/5520 only technically support two and it's an add on). The console & cab is a touch nicer in the 494/574 and there's a rear handle for the 3pt (I'm cabless so I can just reach over the fender.. I could see it being handy for the cabbed version).

I chose it over the 494/574 (same engine 494 is the non turbo 574 is turbo) for a couple of reasons. The 494 has essentially the same front end design as the smaller body 474 except it's wider which puts more leverage on it, this is IMHO a touch under built and if you lurk around the forums there's a person every week or so who blew out their front end (which given the # sold isn't .. to bad.. but also..). They claim they fixed the front end issues this year but when I bought there certainly wasn't enough ground truth data for me to feel comfortable. The rear lift capacity is nominally lower on the 48/55, but if you look at the axle its built heavier so take that for what it's worth. The 48/5520 is also shorter and a touch squatter so I believe it's a bit more stable (or at least looks like it).

My comparison tractors were a handful of kubota's L4740 (used, almost bought but the seller skeezed me out) an MX5200, and an L6060. The Kubotas were definitely smoother, the FEL on the 4740 supported lift and curl (the BL200 on the 5520 .. not really.. if you hit juuust the right point it kind of does but it's really single function at a time). The mx and the 6060 were arguably a touch heavier built, I think the operating comfort was higher on the 6060 and comparable ish on the MX. The kubotas also had a lot more electronic gew gaws and blew out my budget a bit to much.

 

[jyoutz]

Not sure why the find a dealer didn't work - I went to Find a Dealer and punched in Buffalo New York in the search and got a bunch (a lot more than I have around me alas).



I have a 2024 5520H which is the same as the 4820 excepting it has a turbo on the engine (add about $1500, a bit happier running the 8" chipper). I haven't had it long enough to really say I've beated it into submission yet. So far .. so good...

The 4820/5520 is a legacy Branson model that's been fairly well proven out. Branson and Tym fully merged so all of the "Branson" tractors are now labeled Tym. I don't know who made the old Long's.. they seem to be an abandoned brand. Montana was a made by one of the parent companies (Kukje which made Branson), although I think it was a contract label.

They did change a few things I'm not entirely happy about. The 3pt is a touch jerky on the way up (reportedly all? most? many anyway of the newer Korean tractors do this now - the started all using some sort of stepper hydraulic which isn't great). I also don't think the loader is quite as overbuilt as the ones made pre-merger were although it's still pretty much top of class weight capacity wise.

The 3 number variants come with some more shine, default rear remote and support more rear ports (the 48/5520 only technically support two and it's an add on). The console & cab is a touch nicer in the 494/574 and there's a rear handle for the 3pt (I'm cabless so I can just reach over the fender.. I could see it being handy for the cabbed version).

I chose it over the 494/574 (same engine 494 is the non turbo 574 is turbo) for a couple of reasons. The 494 has essentially the same front end design as the smaller body 474 except it's wider which puts more leverage on it, this is IMHO a touch under built and if you lurk around the forums there's a person every week or so who blew out their front end (which given the # sold isn't .. to bad.. but also..). They claim they fixed the front end issues this year but when I bought there certainly wasn't enough ground truth data for me to feel comfortable. The rear lift capacity is nominally lower on the 48/55, but if you look at the axle its built heavier so take that for what it's worth. The 48/5520 is also shorter and a touch squatter so I believe it's a bit more stable (or at least looks like it).

My comparison tractors were a handful of kubota's L4740 (used, almost bought but the seller skeezed me out) an MX5200, and an L6060. The Kubotas were definitely smoother, the FEL on the 4740 supported lift and curl (the BL200 on the 5520 .. not really.. if you hit juuust the right point it kind of does but it's really single function at a time). The mx and the 6060 were arguably a touch heavier built, I think the operating comfort was higher on the 6060 and comparable ish on the MX. The kubotas also had a lot more electronic gew gaws and blew out my budget a bit to much.

Hmm. The MX is pretty basic without a lot of electronic “gew gaws.”

 

[rumwrks]

Hmm. The MX is pretty basic without a lot of electronic “gew gaws.”

Yeah, I mean definitely compared to the newer grande L series.. In this case I was specifically looking at the motors and the Kukje engine is .. pretty dead simple for a modern motor.. at least comparatively. It's mechanically injected with no ECU at all. It does have a DPF but you can pith that if you really need to and nothing actually breaks (except you get a warning light). The older Kubota 40 series was probably closer technologically speaking.

It's probably a touch irrational but I do like simpler things (the downside of working in computers for 30+ years is you learn a deep distrust of the things haha). There are of course upsides and downsides in either case.

I was close to pulling the trigger on the MX but couldn't quite make the price work... Between the two IDK.. they're very comparable I think the Kubota is still a bit more polished in some ways.

 

[paulsharvey]

Massey Ferguson 2850/2860M Power Shuttle, if you can afford it. Now, I'll admitbi haven't read every single post, but glanced over the first dozen or so. The $30k budget is pretty limiting, but if you can scrounge another $5k, here is a fantastic, new, power 4 brand machine, with a lot of utility, while also having some of the nicer things.

 

[bsekf]

Rumworks, Thank you for the details! Long Landtrac has a Mitsubishi engine and drive train. But is a Compact so if you try to get 50 hp out of it things break. I broke 2 front axels before I got a "made in US" one. Some of the Montana and Branson models were identical to some of the Landtrac and parts interchanged. Reverser went out of Landtrac and they had to remove the loader frame and all the tin to fix it, over $2000 in labor. Maybe all tractors are like that????

TMY specs say a dry clutch for the hydrostatic, I don't understand that, thought hydrostatic was a big wet disk clutch? I want a wet disk clutch and a hyd reverser. Not sure I want to lose 5 +hp with Hydrostatic. Keep looking at the JD 5055E, but getting old and still expensive. That Massey looks interesting. Not many 50 hp Utilities in the used market.

I'll go back to the dealer search. thanks again.

 

[rScotty]

I’m on year 6 of owning 20 acres. Ive relied on farmers to plant my food plots and I’d like to end my lease and start doing this myself. I also started a tree farm and will need a tractor for that part. FEL work and Disk ground work will be main functions. My options nearby are:

-John Deere and kubota both have good dealers but are significantly more expensive.

-Massey Ferguson dealer 30 min away

-KIOTI and New Holland dealer 20 min away.

-CaseIH 20 min away

Are any of these brands better than the others and why? Price is a factor. I don’t have unlimited funds, unfortunately.

40/50 hp is right at the Horse Power dividing line between a modern Compact type or Utility type tractor. Either will work. We started with subcompacts, then compacts, and finally worked up to Utility type back about 20 years ago. Haven't needed much in the way of repairs since, but parts & service are a phone call away.

Not all manufacturers make Compacts and Utilities or call them as such. A quick way to tell them apart is that Utiiity types are more popular with farmers. Utilities will weigh 50% more than Compacts and the extra weight is built in rather than bolted on. The Utility type will lift more at both ends, have a smoothly operating cat II 3pt hitch, have more gearing options, and are generally more rugged built. But Utilitys are larger as well as heavier. You wouldn't want to mow your lawn with a Utility tractor - though you would want it to mow a field. And for chores around a few acres, a Compact is more convenient and plenty good enough.

Let me make a suggestion for your search. Try Ignoring prices altogether and set your sights instead on what you want to do with it and which features will matter to you when using your tractor.
Prices are always negotiable, but if you throw out the most and least expensive brands, I think you'll find that tractor prices don't really vary much from one manufacturer to another.

On prices, figure a $40,000 tractor with a standard 5 year note, and it may make more sense to negotiate a 1% difference in financing than can be saved on initial price between a cheap one and one of the more popular makes. So why not buy exactly what you want?

Luck,
rScotty

 

[rumwrks]

I broke 2 front axels before I got a "made in US" one. Some of the Montana and Branson models were identical to some of the Landtrac and parts interchanged. Reverser went out of Landtrac and they had to remove the loader frame and all the tin to fix it, over $2000 in labor. Maybe all tractors are like that????

TMY specs say a dry clutch for the hydrostatic, I don't understand that, thought hydrostatic was a big wet disk clutch? I want a wet disk clutch and a hyd reverser. Not sure I want to lose 5 +hp with Hydrostatic.

Some of the newer Massey's are TYM's as well btw although it looks like the 2850/2860M are Agco/iseki (japanese motor anyway). That does look like a really nicely spec'd tractor as well.

The Rural King are also TYM's. I have some doubts buying rebranded remembering the Montana and other similar tractors that were kind of abandoned. I also figure that you're better off the more common the tractor is, that was a hesitation point on the 5520 for sure.

It seems fairly common to need to split a tractor or otherwise get into complex interior parts if you need to fix a lot of parts. The 2007 L4740 I looked at had been split twice, once to replace part of the PTO system and again to replace a pump. I reckon once you get into that it's just $$$$ because of the labor cost. Less of course if you can do it yourself, but yeah they way they're built with the engine and transmission as part of the structure kind of makes a lot of getting inside of them repairs a bit labor expensive unfortunately.

The front axle on a lot of the compact/compact utility tractors does seem to be a weak spot, partially because the loaders are really strong comparatively speaking - there seems to have been a bit of a spec war on the loader capacity and I'm not sure the running gear has always kept pace. The one guy I know who's blown out the front end on the 4820/5520 series is using it in a rock quarry and runs it in 4x4 all day.. every day.. hauling rock crush and he trashes a pinion gear that's just kind of overworked doing that. It didn't sound to bad (as these things go) to replace. Having sufficient weight on the 3pt certainly helps take some of the load off of the front end.. but.. if you're doing something like that IDK.. a skid loader would be a better tool hah (kind of want a heavy track loader with a 4 or 6 way blade for.. reasons.. basically as a baby dozer).

The Hydro's basically have two systems, first they have a range selector (the TYM 494 has three ranges+R, the 48/5520 has four ranges + R) to change that you have to stop the tractor, and fiddle with the thing to select the range. High on the 5520 is basically "flat road travel", it's not real happy with to much of a hill. 2nd and 3rd are pretty decent for traveling almost anywhere, and I've used 2nd for most "traveling work" like open field brush hogging. I drop to low for heavier loader work and tilling (mostly for the ground speed on the latter.. and similar for mowing around trees and the fence line where moving to fast is probably bad for everyone hah). Then there's the actual hydrostatic transmission which is basically a hydraulic driven continuous transmission. There's no manual "clutch" on the hydro machine and if the hydro is engaged at all you'll grind the gears so I'm actually not sure what that means in that specific case either - I know some of the tym docs are translated not well so it might well be that they just carried that over from the gear tractor improperly.

As for Hydro vs Gear.. IDK.. that's been beaten to death elsewhere. I certainly got back more from the turbo than I lost from going Hydro, I'm not sure you fully loose 5HP, maybe close.. I don't know if anyone's put a dynamo on this specific tractor - I do know that the loss isn't consistent between different tractors though so it's kind of a guess and (lack of) trust in the mfg's specs... I think it matters more what you're planning to do with the tractor. If you're doing a lot of ground work I think a gear tractor is easier on the body to drive, if you're doing a lot of loader work.. some of the new (in geological terms..) shuttle and syncroshift are pretty decent and the hydro's are pretty decent as well. I ended up with hydro partially because it was in stock and partially because I wanted others in my household to be able to drive it. Holding down the hydro go pedal can be tiring after a while, and there's a lot of different preferences for the type of pedal. The Kubota has a rocker pedal (forward -> forward, back is back), the older 40 series had a side tab on the rear so you could just move your foot over and back a touch to get reverse, my little B series does not and if you're backing up/going forward after a while it's a hell of a workout even on it. The Tym's have a two pedal system - left is forward, right is back.. it's still a bit of a workout if you're doing loader work all day. For ground work both of my tractors (and I think most modernish ones) have a cruise control option which basically just locks the pedal in place, that's only really useful for straight ahead work though not so much stop/go or forward/back.


I've had a few moments where I wonder if the 55 was big enough.. but then it's also bigger than I need for a lot of things so .. it's all a trade off.

 

[stoyan79]

Got this 4820CH in 2023. So far very happy. I paid $29,500 check, but now I think it's a bit more. Same as 5520, just no turbo.

If you want a cab, that is it. Old Branson design, pretty heavy build (over 5,000 lbs). No electronics, no sensors, old school Bosch mechanical pump. If you take off emissions garbage, engine won't notice.

2,700lb loader lift. Heat, a/c, radio, Bluetooth in cab. Only tractor that I know of with 4 speed hydrostatic transmission (everything else is 2 or 3 speed). Two standard rear remotes. Telescopic 3 point is standard. Front and rear wiper, work lights all around, doors on both sides. All standard.

 

[IH3444]

Do you mind me asking where did you purchase your Branson 4820CH Stoyan79? That is a very good buy.