Holly F...ng Branson!!!!!!!

[2515R Dude]

True to an extent. I don't think price point (premium price) is an indication of quality.
Before I bought a tractor I watched a few Messicks video comparing same size JD to the Kubota. I really wanted the green paint but realized that I was paying for the paint not the quality.

JD is running on previously earned credit like Shevy and gmc. Unfortunately, I hear Kubota started doing the same

 

[5030]

Hasn't Branson been replaced by something else?

 

[2manyrocks]

Branson merged into TYM, but I think they still sell these.

 

[WinterDeere]

True to an extent. I don't think price point (premium price) is an indication of quality.
Before I bought a tractor I watched a few Messicks video comparing same size JD to the Kubota. I really wanted the green paint but realized that I was paying for the paint not the quality.

You’re saying Deere was more than Kubota? I’ve often heard the reverse, Kubota being even more expensive than Deere. I supposed they’ve gone back and forth over the years and models, both are priced well above most of the rest of the market.

Deere and Kubota both have a lot of costs built into their pricing, that the other brands don’t, at least to the same level. Maintaining a consistent chain of parts availability on models going back usually 40 years is hugely expensive, as is supporting the vast network dealerships each has. That’s all before you factor in more time in design analysis and iteration, for things such as the above, ensuring their loader arms or cylinder rods don’t snap in use.

I think all brands can have build problems, and they should be addressed, but design problems point more toward company ethos as a whole.

 

[tradosaurus]

You’re saying Deere was more than Kubota? I’ve often heard the reverse, Kubota being even more expensive than Deere. I supposed they’ve gone back and forth over the years and models, both are priced well above most of the rest of the market.

Deere and Kubota both have a lot of costs built into their pricing, that the other brands don’t, at least to the same level. Maintaining a consistent chain of parts availability on models going back usually 40 years is hugely expensive, as is supporting the vast network dealerships each has. That’s all before you factor in more time in design analysis and iteration, for things such as the above, ensuring their loader arms or cylinder rods don’t snap in use.

I think all brands can have build problems, and they should be addressed, but design problems point more toward company ethos as a whole.

This was back in 2021 when I bought my MX5400 for $30K after using the 20% NCHA discount. Pretty sure that price was hard to beat by any brand.

Now? Not so much but I would probably stay with Kubota.

 

[ptsg]

You’re saying Deere was more than Kubota? I’ve often heard the reverse, Kubota being even more expensive than Deere. I supposed they’ve gone back and forth over the years and models, both are priced well above most of the rest of the market.

Deere and Kubota both have a lot of costs built into their pricing, that the other brands don’t, at least to the same level. Maintaining a consistent chain of parts availability on models going back usually 40 years is hugely expensive, as is supporting the vast network dealerships each has. That’s all before you factor in more time in design analysis and iteration, for things such as the above, ensuring their loader arms or cylinder rods don’t snap in use.

I think all brands can have build problems, and they should be addressed, but design problems point more toward company ethos as a whole.

I don't know but it seems like you're putting too much credit on the "design analysis and iteration" of the so called "premium brands".

The reality is that any brand can and will have failures. Honestly, when it comes to loaders, backhoes and front axle failures, like 95% of the issues are definitely operator related.

Being part of various US based forums, it's just crazy what some people do with a loader and backhoe on a tractor. Then stuff inevitable breaks and all of the sudden, the manufacturer is at fault under all kinds of theories to blame them and demanding warranty repairs. A skidsteer or an articulated loader (ie: Avant, Giant, etc) would be a much better option.

I'm not sharing these pictures to bash any brands or start anything. It's just goes to show it happens to all brands.

 

[WinterDeere]

I don't know but it seems like you're putting too much credit on the "design analysis and iteration" of the so called "premium brands".

The reality is that any brand can and will have failures. Honestly, when it comes to loaders, backhoes and front axle failures, like 95% of the issues are definitely operator related.

I'm a design engineer, have been for 30+ years. So maybe I'm quicker than most to blame the engineer when I see a failure, since I see so much bad design in my line of work, that could have easily prevented many problems if handled better.

Speaking of loaders, short of corrosion or build issues, the goal of the design engineer should be a loader that can never be broken by the operator. Most loaders these days are designed for a specific tractor model, and so unlike the old days, the engineer knows the exact capacities and pressures involved. Simply don't specify a loader arm cross section that can ever fail within the breakout force limits of the hydraulics.

This isn't exactly rocket science, but it does require either a combination of very expensive FEA software and an engineer who's actually capable of using it properly, or a lot of testing and design iteration. Both of these represent large expenses to a smaller manufacturer, and may be only within the budget of some of the more premium brands. I see this everyday in my line of work, and in fact a large part of my business is offering such design services to manufacturers who cannot afford to support the cost of such software and staff capable of using it.

Yes, there will always be people who abuse their equipment. But given the huge brand image penalties of broken equipment showing up on internet forums, I'd be doing my damnedest to design something like a loader such that it can never fail under the loads to which it can be subjected on the machine for which it was designed.

 

[dfkrug]

I'm a design engineer, have been for 30+ years. So maybe I'm quicker than most to blame the engineer when I see a failure, since I see so much bad design in my line of work, that could have easily prevented many problems if handled better.

Speaking of loaders, short of corrosion or build issues, the goal of the design engineer should be a loader that can never be broken by the operator. Most loaders these days are designed for a specific tractor model, and so unlike the old days, the engineer knows the exact capacities and pressures involved. Simply don't specify a loader arm cross section that can ever fail within the breakout force limits of the hydraulics.

I agree to a point, and I am very critical of bad engineering design, too.

"...the goal of the design engineer should be a loader that can never be broken by the operator..."

Dynamic forces due to excessive speed, e.g. driving the loader too fast into immovable objects, are hard to design for. How much of a safety factor would be economical? Rhetorical question.

 

[WinterDeere]

Dynamic forces due to excessive speed, e.g. driving the loader too fast into immovable objects, are hard to design for. How much of a safety factor would be economical? Rhetorical question.

Good point! I guess no matter how hard we try for "unbreakable", someone will always invent a new way to break something.

I'm not a tractor design engineer, I work in a completely different industry, but I suspect the answer to the question of economics is very dependent on scale. It is probably much more practical to make a 40 hp CUT "unbreakable" within the expected budget of the machine, and proably also much more necessary to do so on the smaller machine, than a 400 hp commercially-operated machine.

Because the 40 hp CUT is subjected to the hands of every inexperienced weekender who ever wanted a tractor, and the 400 hp machine is generally operated by someone with much more experience who is operating the machine in a professional capacity, I'd guess that the desire for safety margin is probably much higher on the lower horsepower machine.

 

[2515R Dude]

All legid concerns, but looking at the cracks on the backhoe, what would be possible an operator's error?
It is not a loader one can rum in to a stump. This part cannot be loaded more than the force of the hydraulic cylinder can develop, right?