4x30 Series Rumors?

rockyridgefarm · Mar 30, 2004

In addition to reducing the number of models, I think Deere will make more of the current options as standard equipment. It should be cheaper to include them in the initial assembly, and with more machines fully configured, make up selling attachments easier.

Here are some possibilities:
<ul type="square">

[*]Configure the 3 point to use external cylinders for all three links, integrating Top-N-Tilt.

[*]Include Mid PTO and Power Beyond as standard equipment.

[*]Improved iMatch (include the pto)

[*]MFWD as std. equip, all models

[/list]

Basically, I bet the move will be that if you want a tractor, you'll go to your dealer and the odds will be greatly increased they will have what you want in stock. No more: "I need a mid chassis, and want a 4410 (MFWD) and all they have is a 2wd 4210, guess I'll go down the street..." Instead the new 4420 will be there, priced like the 4310, already equipped with the options that allow you to add a mower, loader and or hoe and take delivery tomorrow. Without tying up the dealers best techs to deliver a new unit, so they can concentrate on servicing customers equipment.

timb · Mar 30, 2004

So what's the guess on what power levels would survive the transition? I always thought the current "nine" models of Deere CUTs had a certain method to the model proliferation madness. You could pick a general chassis size - then within that size pick a 'low' powered unit if you needed more chassis than hp, a high-powered unit if the opposite were true, or a compromise in between.

If Deere were to actually drop some of the power choices I could see it working out that Deere kept only the '4120', '4320', and '4620' by getting rid of the extremes within each general chassis size.

Of course that's pure conjecture but depending on what you're looking for in your particular needs that could be a step in the wrong direction.

(Unless a '4820' enters the mix!) /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Tim

rockyridgefarm · Mar 30, 2004

My Guess? 4125, 4420, 4720 .

Using the current numbering...

Who wouldn't want the highest power in each class, if it were priced attractively?

JayC · Mar 30, 2004

It seems logical to me. I never did understand why there were different HP ratings in each class. The only thing I can see why someone wouldn't get the highest HP rating in a certain class would probably be financial reasons. It only makes sense to get the highest HP rating. Same size yet more power. I'm not only talking about JD either. The other manufacturers do the same thing.

BillyP · Mar 30, 2004

One of the reasons could be so people will trade up and still stay in the same weight class? I would never have thought I'd see tractors traded in like automobiles. Well, it's not that bad but you get my drift.

Woodbeef · Mar 30, 2004

Ok now you've lost me on the I-match pto. Is not the I-match just a quickhitch setup? So how would they pull off an I-match pto?

BillyP · Mar 30, 2004

He's just day dreamin, Woodbeef /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

rockyridgefarm · Mar 30, 2004

Thinkin' outside the box.

One big problem with iMatch is that you still have to hook up the pto, and with a big bracket in the way. Someday, there will be a hookup for the pto included.

rockyridgefarm · Mar 30, 2004

Actually, the rumor is more value in the machines. I am just guessing what might be done.

I also figure that the designers will look at what features (Like Kubotas new 3 PH on L's) that they can leap frog.

mhalla · Mar 30, 2004

( Someday, there will be a hookup for the pto included. )
 And that day may be around the corner with at least one company (not a tractor company) actively working to solve that problem. It's one of the reasons I am waiting to buy a quick-hitch.

Mike