1025R vs 2032R vs Kubota ??

94BULLITT · Sep 21, 2013

TommyB33 said:
Also confirmed the fluid used was Rimguard. Will still be picking up some weights for the front for added stability.

I got front weights for the BX. They are not genuine Kubota weights but they are made just like them. I think they were $10-15 less. You may find a dealer that sells them. They number of them is 5011, they are 52lbs. They also have a 5013 that are 77lbs. IIRC mine were around $1.15 a LB.

gnawbone · Sep 22, 2013

94BULLITT said:
If you have the money I doubt you will regret a larger tractor.

I have a similar size property and need as the OP. I'm currently using a JD5105, 6' Woods finish mower, and a JD 6' rotary cutter. The 5105 is just plain too big - the weight of it is creating "troughs" or "dents" in the ground - I can only use it from mid-July to about now otherwise the ground is too soft and the tractor damages it. I'm looking for something smaller (lighter). I have about 3.5 miles of trails (8' wide average) and 3 different areas ranging from 2 to 7 acres that I mow. Part of the year I mow them with the JD and the rest of the year with a front mount Grasshopper 61" zero turn (it is a beast!).

This is an interesting thread as it is helping me sort through the same dilemma as the OP, so thanks for all of the responses - they are very helpful!

TommyB33 · Sep 27, 2013

I wanted to provide an update. We have 8 hours on our new B3200 and I honestly can't imagine a better sized tractor. It is big enough to easily handle our 4' rotary cutter, but small enough to wind its way up hills in between young walnut trees - something our old Massey could not do. The HST is so easy, and I have yet to have the tractor bog under any circumstances.

Thanks everyone for their input.

TommyB33 · Sep 27, 2013

I wanted to provide an update. We have 8 hours on our new B3200 and I honestly can't imagine a better sized tractor. It is big enough to easily handle our 4' rotary cutter, but small enough to wind its way up hills in between young walnut trees - something our old Massey could not do. The HST is so easy, and I have yet to have the tractor bog under any circumstances.

Thanks everyone for their input.

RalphVa · Sep 27, 2013

My 1025 has not bogged with on the 4' bush hog, like the 4010 used to. The 4010 with 5 less hp bogged only occasionally. What's wrong with that? Just slow down. I'd rather have a 1019 if they made one to use less fuel. The 4010 would cut stuff tall as the hood. It'd only bog occasionally on very solidly grown grass. I'd take a little bogging every once in a while for the 0.46 gph fuel consumption of the 4010.

Ralph

RalphVa · Sep 27, 2013

My 1025 has not bogged with on the 4' bush hog, like the 4010 used to. The 4010 with 5 less hp bogged only occasionally. What's wrong with that? Just slow down. I'd rather have a 1019 if they made one to use less fuel. The 4010 would cut stuff tall as the hood. It'd only bog occasionally on very solidly grown grass. I'd take a little bogging every once in a while for the 0.46 gph fuel consumption of the 4010.

Ralph

xring100 · Sep 27, 2013

RalphVa said:
My 1025 has not bogged with on the 4' bush hog, like the 4010 used to. The 4010 with 5 less hp bogged only occasionally. What's wrong with that? Just slow down. I'd rather have a 1019 if they made one to use less fuel. The 4010 would cut stuff tall as the hood. It'd only bog occasionally on very solidly grown grass. I'd take a little bogging every once in a while for the 0.46 gph fuel consumption of the 4010.

Ralph

If they did i honestly doubt you would even notice a difference in fuel consumption although you look to be measuring your fuel consumption out to a hundredths of a gallon per hour, You'd probably have to measure the fuel you added with a graduated cylinder and filling to exactly the same point on the tank. It would only really burn more fuel when you were loading it up to the point that it would have bogged down with the reduced power level. especially if the only difference in the motors was in the setting of the injection pump to obtain the lower power level. If you have the same rotating mass, bore and stroke, intake then frictional and pumping losses, will be the same.

Most of the Time My M8540 85hp consumes between a 1/2 a gallon and 3/4 gallon an hour when I'm doing wood work and thats moving around 10,000 lbs plus what ever wood i'm hauling. Brush hogged for 6 hours with a 7 footer and only used between 5 -6 gallons total. I've run a 3 bottom plow through hard ground and i was burning near 3 gallons an hour. Running my hydraulic splitter with the engine at 2100 RPM Burns about a gallon an hour. No bad for a tractor that has a maximum hydraulic output of over 20 HP The point is that diesels only burn burn enough fuel to match the load put on the engine. a 3.8L engine will have more losses to over come than a 1.1L So it will burn slightly more fuel just idling.

srimkus4195 · Sep 28, 2013

I own a JD 1023E great little tractor it has a H120 loader, 60D deck cuts through everything and a Sicma Phoenix T-4 (48inch) rotor tiller from McGee Farm Equipment, Miss. USA Great price nice people (Sicma makes JD tillers)
The tractor is a first step Category 1 tractor, I use it on my 2 acres for lawn cutting, mulch installation, rocks and the tiller for my (garden no adjustment needed for the drive shaft) etc... I cut-up and removed 20ft downed trees on my property and my neighbors properties after a storm. But as I stated it is a small tractor it weights 1300 lbs deck weights 326lbs tiller 398lbs.plus my butt.. Its to light to dig to remove grass but I bought teeth for the bucket it will go into dirt move it also rock mulch trees hay what ever... so you have to decide what your needs are, if not for farming it will work great for you. The best time to buy will be in February and July that is when JD has there sales, rebates etc.

ovrszd · Sep 28, 2013

xring100 said:
If they did i honestly doubt you would even notice a difference in fuel consumption although you look to be measuring your fuel consumption out to a hundredths of a gallon per hour, You'd probably have to measure the fuel you added with a graduated cylinder and filling to exactly the same point on the tank. It would only really burn more fuel when you were loading it up to the point that it would have bogged down with the reduced power level. especially if the only difference in the motors was in the setting of the injection pump to obtain the lower power level. If you have the same rotating mass, bore and stroke, intake then frictional and pumping losses, will be the same.

Most of the Time My M8540 85hp consumes between a 1/2 a gallon and 3/4 gallon an hour when I'm doing wood work and thats moving around 10,000 lbs plus what ever wood i'm hauling. Brush hogged for 6 hours with a 7 footer and only used between 5 -6 gallons total. I've run a 3 bottom plow through hard ground and i was burning near 3 gallons an hour. Running my hydraulic splitter with the engine at 2100 RPM Burns about a gallon an hour. No bad for a tractor that has a maximum hydraulic output of over 20 HP The point is that diesels only burn burn enough fuel to match the load put on the engine. a 3.8L engine will have more losses to over come than a 1.1L So it will burn slightly more fuel just idling.

Very well stated Dave. I don't pay much attention to fuel useage either and normally think of it in general terms as you described above. The 8540/9540 Kubotas hold so much fuel they'll run a VERY long time on a tank full too.

With the money invested in initial buy in costs of tractor and equipment I don't get too excited about fuel. I run 450-500 hours a year. I'm more concerned about the tractor completing the tasks at hand in a confident manner.