4x4 vs 2x4

[ModMech]

I don't understand all the passion for 4x4 tractors????

Most every "loader" used by governments and in construction are 4x2s like the ford 555 etc, true many have a BH installed but that's another conversation. Based on comments, one might wonder how our fore-fathers ever managed w/o 4x4, it should be impossible :shrug:

4x4 adds weight were it is useless, over the front tires, the front is NOT the primary drive! It also adds to cost and additional maintenance requirements.

Where I am from, a "4x4" tractor has 4 wheels across the back, because that is where the work gets done. A properly designed 4x2 tractor with a rear weight bias, loaded R1 tires will perform just as well as a 4x4 and if it were to get stuck, you would have a chance of getting it unstuck without use of a large wrecker, something that is untrue of a 4x4 - when they are stuck they are REALLY stuck!

Now, for the same WEIGHT of tractor, a 4x4 will typically out perform a 4x2 in terms of tractive effort, which is why almost all "SCUTS & CUTS" are 4x4. I prefer a well designed but heavier tractor and 4x2, obviously.

 

[GManBart]

I don't understand all the passion for 4x4 tractors????

Probably because they allow you to do things easier than if you only have 2WD in many situations (note, I said many, not all).

Most every "loader" used by governments and in construction are 4x2s like the ford 555 etc, true many have a BH installed but that's another conversation. Based on comments, one might wonder how our fore-fathers ever managed w/o 4x4, it should be impossible :shrug:

Untrue. Most true "loaders" have 4wd. The 555 is a backhoe/loader, which is a different style machine, and every variation except for the earliest 555/555 Special was available with 4wd. I can't talk to the earliest loaders, but when started working in a quarry in 1987, all the wheel loaders were 4wd, and that hasn't changed.

4x4 adds weight were it is useless, over the front tires, the front is NOT the primary drive! It also adds to cost and additional maintenance requirements.

Also untrue. Having a certain amount of weight on the front axle helps when you have powered front wheels. It's actually possible to get in a situation where the rear tires are spinning, but the fronts are on dry/solid ground, and can pull you out because they're powered, and have enough weight on them to give useable traction.

A properly designed 4x2 tractor with a rear weight bias, loaded R1 tires will perform just as well as a 4x4 and if it were to get stuck, you would have a chance of getting it unstuck without use of a large wrecker, something that is untrue of a 4x4 - when they are stuck they are REALLY stuck!

If you have a properly designed 4x4 tractor with R1 tires, it will go places that a 4x2 tractor with R1s can't manage. To suggest otherwise is just silly. If you get a 4x4 tractor really stuck, it's a situation that would have also caused the 4x2 to be really stuck....the fact that the 4x4 tractor was able to go farther, deeper, etc before getting stuck just proves it has greater capability in bad conditions. All that means is you have to use your head, and stop before it gets really stuck, and you'll be able to get more done than if you were limited by a 4x2 machine.

Now, for the same WEIGHT of tractor, a 4x4 will typically out perform a 4x2 in terms of tractive effort, which is why almost all "SCUTS & CUTS" are 4x4. I prefer a well designed but heavier tractor and 4x2, obviously.

???? Like more weight isn't sometimes a negative? There are people that use their machines for a variety of tasks, some of which have weight limitations. People here have talked about bridges they need to cross, not wanting to tear up their lawn, not wanting to damage septic fields they have to cross etc. They can have a lighter machine, with FWD, and be able to do the tasks that would require a much heavier 2wd tractor, and in some cases, the 2wd tractor still wouldn't be able to do the job.

4wd is popular because it works! Look at any application that requires the most traction, on anything but really good surfaces, and the best vehicles for the job will be sending power to the front wheels.

 

[LD1]

great post G-Man. I dont think I could have said it better.

To each his own. But from an operation and get-more-done standpoint, I dont think there is any negatives to a 4wd. It will win everytime.

 

[cartod]

Gman nailed it. Why anyone would choose a 2wd over a 4wd on most any situation is beyond me. I would even take the leap that a 4wd tractor is safer because it allows you to work slower in touchy situations.

 

[LD1]

I would even take the leap that a 4wd tractor is safer because it allows you to work slower in touchy situations.

And allows all for tires to help stop you when going on hills. Instead of just the two rears.

 

[k0ua]

And allows all for tires to help stop you when going on hills. Instead of just the two rears.

And anyone that ever slid down a hill with a 2wd tractor know exactly what that feels like..:shocked:

 

[PMA]

I have 4x4 and never used it except to lubricate it. It's flat here.

Sent from my iPhone using TractorByNet

 

[foreman Etexas]

I have ended up in some situations that I was really glad had 4wd to get me out and back home. It may not be needed 90% of the time but the other sure paid for itself...

 

[Texasmark]

My Branson is the first 4x4 vehicle I ever purchased. Having had several 2wd tractors with loaders it is the only way to go. Other thing that put me onto them was pulling power vs hp. With 4 tires tugging you can pull a lot more and do work comparable to significantly higher hp 2wd.

Mark

 

[TSO]

In fairness, ModMech seemed to be speaking about industrial tractors, things that are much bigger and heavier than the compact tractors that most of us have. There's a big difference between my 5000 lb residential tractor, and a 12000 lb commercial loader.

With this 4x4 tractor, and my previous smaller 4x4 one ... I am in 4wd almost exclusively. I can keep it in 2wd if I'm just tooling around from one place to another, but if I'm doing any "work" with it, I switch to 4wd. It substantially increases grip, stability, and disturbs the ground LESS because there's less slip-spin for the rears.

For a CUT, 4x4 is a no-brainer.

 

[ovrszd]

I still say to get an effective 2wd tractor you must have an AG tractor design, where the majority of the tractor weight sits on the rear tires. The other day we got 7" of snow. Our neighbor at our farm cleared his relatively steep gravel driveway with his old JD4240 w/FEL, 2wd, no ballast weight, no chains, 50% tread R1s. My M9540 wouldn't have had any luck doing that.....

With that said, I think technology has advanced significantly over the past 20 years as well. That's why now it's rare to see a 200+HP tractor working in an AG field that isn't 4wd. The 4wd models are just sooooo much more economical. The technology has allowed them to work so much more efficiently.

 

[LD1]

Kinda like the video a few days ago of the ~20hp steam engine tractor out-pulling a monster HP modded deere 4wd. Technology sure has changed.

4wd allows one to do more work than an equal size/weight/hp tractor in 2wd. Plain and simple and I dont think anyone can deny that.

Which also means that a 4wd tractor can do equal work as a larger tractor that only has 2wd. That means it would be lighter (less turf damage), and likely more fuel efficient with a smaller HP motor and less weight.

That jd4240 weighs about double a M9540, and likely has a loader that can lift double as well. Doubt it even knew it was moving snow.

Kinda like plowing in a truck. Take a single axle dump lot of the state and county plow trucks around here. VERY effective in 2wd. Yet a 1/2 ton and 7' blade is almost worthless in 2wd even with the plow up.

Compare a 2wd that is similar in weight and tire size to that M9540, and there is no doubt you would be WAY more effective.

With having a 4wd tractor, I have the option of 2wd OR 4wd. It dont matter what I am doing, heavy FEL work, blading, plowing, etc. It never ceases to amaze me how much more effective this tractor is in 4wd.

 

[wmonroe]

To me the 2x4 vs 4x4 debate has a lot, if not almost all, to do with terrain. I would never attempt to pull a loaded hay wagon up my driveway with my ford 961 but my Kubota has no issues. My neighbor that farms my place will not take a loaded hay wagon and bailer setup down one of the hills on my place with his 1066 (his usual baling machine), but if he is running the mfwd tractor then he has no issues.

Although my brother in law that farms about 5000 acres in central Illinois runs almost all mfwd tractors except for a 1466 that only runs an auger. I'll have to ask him sometime why they don't choose 4x2 instead, it's not like they are buying a smaller tractor in mfwd so there must be a reason.

 

[ovrszd]

That jd4240 weighs about double a M9540, and likely has a loader that can lift double as well. Doubt it even knew it was moving snow.

Compare a 2wd that is similar in weight and tire size to that M9540, and there is no doubt you would be WAY more effective.

With having a 4wd tractor, I have the option of 2wd OR 4wd. It dont matter what I am doing, heavy FEL work, blading, plowing, etc. It never ceases to amaze me how much more effective this tractor is in 4wd.

Actually, according to Tractordata.com, the JD4240 Cab tractor operating weight is 12,300lbs. His tractor was open station so probably 500lbs less, or 11,800. Add on his FEL which would probably be 2,200lbs and he's at 14,000. I'm at 9,710lbs. So he's about 45% heavier than I. And that was my whole point. He's heavier, carrying an FEL on the front, with worn out R1s and could negotiated his driveway in 2wd, because that's all he's got. My tractor wouldn't do that on snow. I'd hafta use 4wd. And that's because he carries such a high percentage of his weight on the rear tires. I'm actually heavier in the front than the rear. That's the difference between an AG tractor and a Utility tractor.

His tractor will do heavy tillage work a LOT easier than mine. To match him, I'd hafta use 4wd. Would burn more fuel and have a higher operational cost than him

Mine will do FEL work a LOT easier than his. And do it more cost effective. Just depends on useage.

I was watching my neighbor across the road hay his cattle yesterday with a JD4440 Cab 2wd, carrying big bales on the rear. He was unrolling on a snow covered pasture steep hillside. He could move around on that hillside in 2wd with no spinning or sliding around. Later yesterday afternoon my Son came over to get some Jeep parts out of our boneyard. It's on a less steep hillside. He was in a 2wd pickup and ended up at the bottom of the hillside stuck in the snow. I took my tractor out there and pulled him up the hill. I couldn't even tighten the chain in 2wd. That's my point about tractor design and balance. An AG tractor is just more efficient in 2wd because of design. So my neighbor can maintain his cattle herd with a more efficient 2wd AG tractor. Couldn't begin to do that with a Utility tractor or CUT tractor in 2wd.

Both designs have their place.

 

[Texasmark]

Probably because they allow you to do things easier than if you only have 2WD in many situations (note, I said many, not all).



Untrue. Most true "loaders" have 4wd. The 555 is a backhoe/loader, which is a different style machine, and every variation except for the earliest 555/555 Special was available with 4wd. I can't talk to the earliest loaders, but when started working in a quarry in 1987, all the wheel loaders were 4wd, and that hasn't changed.



Also untrue. Having a certain amount of weight on the front axle helps when you have powered front wheels. It's actually possible to get in a situation where the rear tires are spinning, but the fronts are on dry/solid ground, and can pull you out because they're powered, and have enough weight on them to give useable traction.



If you have a properly designed 4x4 tractor with R1 tires, it will go places that a 4x2 tractor with R1s can't manage. To suggest otherwise is just silly. If you get a 4x4 tractor really stuck, it's a situation that would have also caused the 4x2 to be really stuck....the fact that the 4x4 tractor was able to go farther, deeper, etc before getting stuck just proves it has greater capability in bad conditions. All that means is you have to use your head, and stop before it gets really stuck, and you'll be able to get more done than if you were limited by a 4x2 machine.



???? Like more weight isn't sometimes a negative? There are people that use their machines for a variety of tasks, some of which have weight limitations. People here have talked about bridges they need to cross, not wanting to tear up their lawn, not wanting to damage septic fields they have to cross etc. They can have a lighter machine, with FWD, and be able to do the tasks that would require a much heavier 2wd tractor, and in some cases, the 2wd tractor still wouldn't be able to do the job.

4wd is popular because it works! Look at any application that requires the most traction, on anything but really good surfaces, and the best vehicles for the job will be sending power to the front wheels.

+1. All said and my fronts have pulled my rears out numerous times and I have 50 gallons of water in each rear.

 

[Texasmark]

I still say to get an effective 2wd tractor you must have an AG tractor design, where the majority of the tractor weight sits on the rear tires. The other day we got 7" of snow. Our neighbor at our farm cleared his relatively steep gravel driveway with his old JD4240 w/FEL, 2wd, no ballast weight, no chains, 50% tread R1s. My M9540 wouldn't have had any luck doing that.....

With that said, I think technology has advanced significantly over the past 20 years as well. That's why now it's rare to see a 200+HP tractor working in an AG field that isn't 4wd. The 4wd models are just sooooo much more economical. The technology has allowed them to work so much more efficiently.

Well on the JD, I had the 1974 2wd 4230D 100 pto hp, cab and 3 ea 97# weights on each rear (no loader). I currently have a 2007 65hp diesel 4 wd weighing in at about 7000 # with cab and loader vs the 10k for the JD. I am using the same implements with the current tractor I used with the JD and run them in mid range gears at about 1/2 the fuel consumption....2.9 gph at full power loaded vs 6.

 

[redman135]

hello Yanmar1610d, If you have the money go for a 4x4.
1) You WILL have "misson creep", as you become more familier with which ever tractor you get.
2) 4x4 is much easier to work with and forgives a mistake that gets you stuck with a 4x2.
3) A 4x2 loader will get stuck in some rediculus places (slightly nose down on a hard gravel track for example).
4) you can put other drivers on the tractor and know they are less likely to get in trouble.

 

[Wolfy]

There are situations where 2wd works well. A, industrial backhoe loaders. B, tractors without front end loaders. C, the price was so low it was worth buying.