1736 vs 1742 and dl 120 vs dl 125

bacononeactual · Jul 29, 2015

I was thinking about an LS 3135 cab, but now I'm looking at getting either a 1736 cab or a 1742 cab in the next few days since the price difference is only a few grand more (at least for the 1736) and the Massey is arguably a better, or at least better known, brand. Two questions.

1. Other than the hp what is the difference between the 1736 and the 1742? Dealer says that they are the same size but Massey's specs show the 1742 as 8 in longer with a bigger fuel tank, albeit with the same cab height. Not sure what's up there. I probably dont need the extra hp for my use but would hate to have missed out on other important features since the price difference is only about $2,500.

2. 1736 comes with a dl 125 loader, but dealer will switch out the dl 120 loader from another tractor for me for a modest fee. From what I can determine the 120 has more total lift to pin height and hard lines rather than hoses on the loader arms. A dealer said that the 120 is made by su manufacturing (possibly hsu manufacturing), which I've never heard of, while 125 is made by quickie. Which one is better? Seems like the 120, but I'm not sure if I am missing anything.

Thanks!

onceacop · Jul 30, 2015

Go with the larger tire if you can, see the difference between these two, 14.9-24 vs 12.4-24

http://www.tractorhouse.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=9283099

http://www.tractorhouse.com/listingsdetail/detail.aspx?OHID=9339137

I looked at specs and the tractor appears larger than the 1736. It weighs about #250 more also. The larger 14.5 gallon tank will give you great range. I'd opt on the 1742.... Not sure where the 1749 pricing comes in but that gets you in to the larger engine which satisfies all the rest of the larger 1700 compacts up to the 1759. That engine is a 4 cyl vs 3 cyl but the 1742 would be great. Search the forum on loaders. There are several threads about the 00 series vs. 05 series. I have a 135 loader on my 1758. I like the lines and how they are routed. It has worked fine for me and appears of good build quality. Some here have a 130 loader and love that one with no issues. I'd say either loader will do want is required of the tractor and what ever your preference then go with that. I have R1 tires on rig and like the bite. Massey is a great tractor and at least my dealer takes pride in that fact. Dealer attitude and badge pride was one decision in my purchase.

bacononeactual · Jul 30, 2015

Thanks. Wasn't aware that the larger tire was an option. I'll look into that.

I guess I need to see them side by side because the dealer swears that the 1736 and 1742 are the same size, but you are seeing the same thing as me in the specs (i.e., that the 1742 appears to have a larger/longer frame size - although I still think it odd that this could be the case and yet the cab height is exactly the same on the two).

TSO · Jul 31, 2015

It's actually called Radius Steel, Soo Tractor division...which made the loaders. I have the DL130 and am very happy with it. I posted the specs comparison between it and the DL135, and both are very close overall, and there are likely pros and cons to each.

ALO-Quicke produces the new version loaders.

I would also look at the 1742... It's more likely that you would regret having less power than more power.

bacononeactual · Aug 2, 2015

Thanks. What's up with the little buckets with no sides that seem to come with the 125/135. Why would you want that?

bacononeactual · Aug 2, 2015

TSO said:
It's actually called Radius Steel, Soo Tractor division...which made the loaders. I have the DL130 and am very happy with it. I posted the specs comparison between it and the DL135, and both are very close overall, and there are likely pros and cons to each.

ALO-Quicke produces the new version loaders.

I would also look at the 1742... It's more likely that you would regret having less power than more power.

By the way TSO, what are the benefits of the new loader style? Only one that I potentially see is that it is easier to change the soft lines.

TSO · Aug 2, 2015

bacononeactual said:
By the way TSO, what are the benefits of the new loader style? Only one that I potentially see is that it is easier to change the soft lines.

Well... I only compared the DL130 & 135, not the 120/125. But, the 135 has an available factory 3rd function available, and apparently the loader cross member was positioned to increase headlight visibility. Numbers wise, depending on which measurements were used and at which position, the 135 won the numbers battle (on paper anyhow).

TSO · Aug 2, 2015

View attachment 435468

bacononeactual · Aug 2, 2015

Interesting. I couldn't open your attachment, but the 125 specs seem worse than the 120 specs. That's what originally concerned me.

TSO · Aug 3, 2015

Not sure why it didn't show ... I'll try it again.

Also, here was a previous discussion on the matter: http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/massey-ferguson-owning-operating/329463-dl130-vs-dl135.html

bacononeactual · Aug 3, 2015

Fantastic, thanks. Not sure where you took all of your numbers from but that is far more detailed than anything I've seen online or in any massey brochures. Since I am looking at the 1736/1742 and they take the smaller 120/125 loader it's not directly applicable, but I assume that a comparison like you did there would be similar for the 120/125 with perhaps some better numbers down low. I'm interested that the 125/135 has such bigger cylinders than the 120/130, but I guess that does not necessarily correlate to lift capacity. It would be a bonus to be able to occasionally move pallets of shavings around for the wife and they are probably around 1800 lbs, hence my interest in the specs. Anyway, need to make up my mind tomorrow so I guess I'll just compare in person and decide.

TSO · Aug 3, 2015

bacononeactual said:
Fantastic, thanks. Not sure where you took all of your numbers from but that is far more detailed than anything I've seen online or in any massey brochures. Since I am looking at the 1736/1742 and they take the smaller 120/125 loader it's not directly applicable, but I assume that a comparison like you did there would be similar for the 120/125 with perhaps some better numbers down low. I'm interested that the 125/135 has such bigger cylinders than the 120/130, but I guess that does not necessarily correlate to lift capacity. It would be a bonus to be able to occasionally move pallets of shavings around for the wife and they are probably around 1800 lbs, hence my interest in the specs. Anyway, need to make up my mind tomorrow so I guess I'll just compare in person and decide.

Those numbers are directly from the loader manuals.

Not sure if you'll be able to move 1800lb pallets with the DL120/125. Considering my forks weigh roughly 375, I can only lift about 2390lbs on top of a pallet.

MO MF Dealer · Aug 3, 2015

We have both in stock and here are some images of both the 1736 and 1742 next to each other. 1742 is longer tractor and hard to capture the correct angle to show that but they are different. If you look at the loader and length the hood extends compared to loader you can see the difference.

ErikVann · Aug 3, 2015

bacononeactual said:
Thanks. What's up with the little buckets with no sides that seem to come with the 125/135. Why would you want that?

I am curious about the buckets too. My 1742 has the 120 loader, came with nice deep bucket with w bolt on cutting edge. The buckets on the 125/35 loaders look so small and delicate compared to the 20/30 loaders.
One more vote for the 1742, the bigger tires are great, very happy with with the 1742.

bacononeactual · Aug 3, 2015

Interesting, thanks. So it is a little bigger. Guess that I'll have to educate my dealer. The bucket thing is weird. Seems like the deeper bucket would be better. Can't figure out why they are going to that style. I guess that they want it to look like a skid steer... or perhaps less metal lowers cost.

TSO · Aug 4, 2015

I'd also be interested to know how much the dealer wants to charge you to install the DL 120 instead of the 125. The DL 120 should be all leftover stock, so unless my original assumption on the matter was correct in that the new loaders are cheaper for Massey to purchase (still wondering why they switched suppliers when the Soo loaders had such a great track record)... I don't know why you would have to pay more to get a 120.

bacononeactual · Aug 4, 2015

Dealer wanted $100 to swap a 120 in place of the 125. Basically 1 hour labor to swap out the loader mounts. I think that I'll probably just stick with the 125 since the specs are basically the same. Not sure how I feel about the skid steer looking bucket however.

Adam1742 · Aug 5, 2015

The hood on the 1742 is considerably larger than the 1736's.

bacononeactual · Aug 5, 2015

Dealer got 1736 in today. Already had the 1742. I looked at both. I think the 1736 is fine for what I need it for, but I don't like the little skid steer bucket that was on the 125 loader. I am going to have them get me the bucket with the normal sides and possibly also a bolt on cutting edge since I will use it to scrape the driveway in the winter.

bacononeactual · Aug 5, 2015

Also, I can say that I thought that the fit and finish was better than the LS 3135. This is appropriate since it costs more, and is bigger, and is not a knock on the LS.