474 v 494

[CloverKnollFarms]

I too would suggest those two models.

Seeing both TYM and former Branson models side by side on local Ag fairs, the differences are very noticeable in build quality, design and strength. Even the controls feel a lot more sturdier than the TYM ones.

One thing I used to say all the time, was to look at the rear end of a TYM and a Branson model. Branson will have big axle housings all the way to the wheel, big and thick 3 pt components, amongst other stuff.

Not saying TYM makes bad tractors by any means but I do hope they retain Branson engineering and build quality for the future models. It wold be a major step up for them.

Yeah, looking at the heft of the rear on the /20 models is a stark contrast to the 494 and 474. It is built much differently

 

[thoner7]

What are the issues with the front axle? It’s something that would be fixed in future models no?

Looking at the Brandon models - they are about the same weight, so how much heftier could they be really? I haven’t seen them in person but aren’t they more bare-bones than the tyms?

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

What are the issues with the front axle? It’s something that would be fixed in future models no?

Looking at the Brandon models - they are about the same weight, so how much heftier could they be really? I haven’t seen them in person but aren’t they more bare-bones than the tyms?

They don’t come with remotes… that’s all that is missing really. They have a nicer transmission with a 4 range hydro that shifts like butter. They have auto throttle, economy PTO etc. They are fully optioned, but the remotes are extra. The /20 series units are a smaller footprint than the 494 for sure, but basically the same weight. I’m telling you, look at the rear housing side by side and you will be astonished.

TYM has had some front axle hub failures due to a design issue with some C clip. A user here had it on a new unit, and TYM apparently admitted they are redesigning the part to be like the /20 legacy Branson models. This is what they told him. I dunno.

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

The rear axle housing is about 50-75% less bulky. There is a lot of material in the /20 series rear end.

 

[TractorTYMe]

I haven't seen a T474 with the axle problem yet, I think there is a design issue on the T494/574? I hope TYM resolves it soon, if I were you I'd get a 4820 or 5520. Tho I've 450 problem free hours on my T474.

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

The 474 seems to have a great following and very happy users. The 4820 is similar in footprint, but with more weight and higher capacities. The 4820 is a chunky little tractor, probably the heaviest in its class when you consider its footprint. It is 14” smaller in length than the 494, but it doesn’t give up much weight. They actually list the footprint of the 474 as LARGER than the 4820… and the 4820 is heavier. The /20 are built heavier for sure. Those are just facts.

 

[stoyan79]

2 rear remotes come standard on 4820/5520 cab models. Optional on open station.

4820/5520 is beefiest/heaviest tractor in it's class.

 

[thoner7]

Ahh ok, I didn’t realize the 4820 was size wise more like the 474.

It’s hard to find a dealer with all the models in stock to compare them

 

[aesanders]

Ahh ok, I didn’t realize the 4820 was size wise more like the 474.

It’s hard to find a dealer with all the models in stock to compare them

The 4820 is wider than the 474 by about a foot, and sits up quite a bit taller with larger wheels, more on the size of the 494. It’s a foot shorter than the 494 though, but class wise it’s considered on par with the 494 size machine.

 

[CloverKnollFarms]

Yes, per TYM the 4820 is wider (more stable) than the 474. The 494 is even larger, with basically the same weight as the 4820. Every part on the 4820 is built heavier, in a smaller package, than the 494. Ive driven all three, but was surprised at how much more compact the 4820 is compared to the 494. I’d aslo reiterate, the 4-range hydro was a big selling point on the /20 series for me.