Buying Advice Cabela's selling Compact Tractors

[IslandTractor]

Rear remotes may be cheap and good enough for snow plows and simple stuff, but not for things that require rapid coordination and timing of loader functions with the third function. Here I am operating a Kubota M135X with the plow functions slaved to the rear remotes. I'm proficient, and it stinks in comparison to having everything on a joystick loader control which is why my equipment is set up with a 3rd function as electric over hydro buttons on the joystick. YouTube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bl9T23W-ik

I used rear remotes to control a grapple. Worked extremely well. I don't know what you are using your third function for on your NX other than operating the grapple or 4n1. Most folks don't use FEL remotes to do much else. I don't doubt that there might be other tasks where a true third function would be a real benefit but I haven't come across any situation in my non commercial use. I really think the 4 on the floor vs automatic tranny analogy is appropriate. If you've never gotten used to shifting then auto transmission may well be better but once you've formed some muscle memory, using a separate lever just plain works.

 

[MinnesotaEric]

I used rear remotes to control a grapple. Worked extremely well. I don't know what you are using your third function for on your NX other than operating the grapple or 4n1. Most folks don't use FEL remotes to do much else. I don't doubt that there might be other tasks where a true third function would be a real benefit but I haven't come across any situation in my non commercial use. I really think the 4 on the floor vs automatic tranny analogy is appropriate. If you've never gotten used to shifting then auto transmission may well be better but once you've formed some muscle memory, using a separate lever just plain works.

You said it yourself: "You haven't…."

Why do you keep asserting to those of us who have?

 

[IslandTractor]

You said it yourself: "You haven't…." Why do you keep asserting to those of us who have?

Because I haven't seen anything but a grapple or bucket on your NX.

Why do you keep going over the top with your recommendations? You haven't owned your tractor for even a year and still seem to be figuring out how to operate it without breaking it. Perhaps you should get a bit more seat time before advising others.

 

[MinnesotaEric]

Because I haven't seen anything but a grapple or bucket on your NX.

Why do you keep going over the top with your recommendations? You haven't owned your tractor for even a year and still seem to be figuring out how to operate it without breaking it. Perhaps you should get a bit more seat time before advising others.

Because of my heavy equipment operating experience.

Also, recall you're the guy asserting to everybody over on the Kioti forum that your 40hp tractor can do the work of a 60 hp tractor without consideration that larger tractors tend to work faster.

Moreover, a consistent theme is your assumption that other people have no money, share your identical views, and have never driven or used to exquisite proficiency, anything with a clutch.

All I can say is that it seems to be impossible for you to understand any perspective that is different than how you'd do it.

I'll bottom-line it for you: any system that groups all the controls together for one hand without need to move that hand from one set of controls to another will always be more efficient.

 

[IslandTractor]

Because of my heavy equipment operating experience. Also, recall you're the guy asserting to everybody over on the Kioti forum that your 40hp tractor can do the work of a 60 hp tractor without consideration that larger tractors tend to work faster. Moreover, a consistent theme is your assumption that other people have no money, share your identical views, and have never driven or used to exquisite proficiency, anything with a clutch. All I can say is that it seems to be impossible for you to understand any perspective that is different than how you'd do it. I'll bottom-line it for you: any system that groups all the controls together for one hand without need to move that hand from one set of controls to another will always be more efficient.

1) Larger tractors work faster when they are not broken perhaps. You seem to damage your equipment regularly and certainly more often than any other TBN member I've come across in almost ten years. Think about it.

2) Waste not, want not. Pissing away money on gadgets and more HP than needed to do the job is simply wasting resources. If you have extra cash, send it to Oxfam or Save the Children.

3) You seem to think nobody could clear land before someone reprogrammed your engine to put out an extra 15 hp. All the land clearing functions your tractor provides are also present in a 45hp version of the identical tractor which is more than adequate. You could run a six ft bush hog with 33hp at PTO just fine. You might even manage to use it without breaking it. Your extra hp doesn't improve your loader functioning one iota. Using extra HP to ram things will break it however.

4) Don't trust my experience, ask others about their experience. Have you read any posts from others doing land clearing who felt a DK40/45 was not enough tractor to get the job done?

5) I acknowledged that some remote functions might benefit from a diverter or third fxn valve but I also pointed out that the vast majority of users here are only operating a simple grapple cylinder. No need for fancy valves to do that simple task. If you like playing Nintendo games with your joystick that's fine but don't oversell the need for something other than a basic control valve for a simple task.

 

[MinnesotaEric]

1) Larger tractors work faster when they are not broken perhaps. You seem to damage your equipment regularly and certainly more often than any other TBN member I've come across in almost ten years. Think about it.

In total, I've damaged three gas caps, one cab top, the front grill, two rear fender extensions, and the gas tank. I'm a believer of running what I've got, and fixing and modifying as needed. As a result, I fabbed up guards to protect stuff the first time the tractor made it back to a tinkerage. Remember, I'm the first to put an NX into the woods in North America and talk about it. The first to put on three sets of remotes when the factory said we couldn't. The first to put on a third function and make it with hard lines. The first to sound dampen the cab. The first to fab up and install belly armor, a thing that every tractor in this class should come with but doesn't. And then you must consider what kind of material I'm processing and how fast.

2) Waste not, want not. Pissing away money on gadgets and more HP than needed to do the job is simply wasting resources. If you have extra cash, send it to Oxfam or Save the Children.

Why did you get a tractor? Surely you could do some of those tasks with a spoon. Wasting your money, right down the drain.

3) You seem to think nobody could clear land before someone reprogrammed your engine to put out an extra 15 hp. All the land clearing functions your tractor provides are also present in a 45hp version of the identical tractor which is more than adequate. You could run a six ft bush hog with 33hp at PTO just fine. You might even manage to use it without breaking it. Your extra hp doesn't improve your loader functioning one iota. Using extra HP to ram things will break it however.

You're projecting. This is entirely your argument. Others have attempted to point out your factual errors, but facts fell upon def ears.

4) Don't trust my experience, ask others about their experience. Have you read any posts from others doing land clearing who felt a DK40/45 was not enough tractor to get the job done?

Never a worry that I'll trust your experience. After all, like your argument implies, given enough time, a person could clear a forest with a diner knife and a coping saw.

5) I acknowledged that some remote functions might benefit from a diverter or third fxn valve but I also pointed out that the vast majority of users here are only operating a simple grapple cylinder. No need for fancy valves to do that simple task. If you like playing Nintendo games with your joystick that's fine but don't oversell the need for something other than a basic control valve for a simple task.

Yes, nicer, more efficient setups work better and are easier to use. If a person can afford to get these nicer set-ups, then why not? After all, nicer set-ups makes tractor use and ownership all the more enjoyable and productive.

 

[ededic]

So how are the rear remotes on a Cabelas tractor?

 

[Cherokee140]

I've got a slipping C6/C7 disk. I'm holding out for a replacement disk rather than a straight up fusion like you've got. Heal up fast!

They did do that as well....cadaver bone replaces the destroyed disc....but they have to hold you together.

 

[GManBart]

Remember, I'm the first to put an NX into the woods in North America and talk about it.

That's going to be pretty hard to back up unless you know of every possible place anybody has ever posted about an NX tractor being used in the woods....just saying.

Either way, I don't see why this needs to turn into yet another massive thread drift by a few folks we know are never going to agree on much.

 

[Deerherd]

The Cabelas tractor does come standard with a diverter valve on the joystick. I think they should come standard on all tractors but that was before realizing children would go hungry.

 

[murphy1244]

That's going to be pretty hard to back up unless you know of every possible place anybody has ever posted about an NX tractor being used in the woods....just saying.

Either way, I don't see why this needs to turn into yet another massive thread drift by a few folks we know are never going to agree on much.

Way too much beer drank last night! A first for Eric too??

 

[IslandTractor]

The Cabelas tractor does come standard with a diverter valve on the joystick. I think they should come standard on all tractors but that was before realizing children would go hungry.

View attachment 416986

Yes, it does come with the button to control a third function valve. Pretty cheap to do that at the factory. It does not however come with a third function valve. No idea what they charge for that but it is almost certainly more than what an extra rear remote would cost. Rear remotes have multiple uses, FEL plumbed third function valves are generally used just for grapples and 4n1 buckets although I imagine a few people might install a hydraulically controlled front blade as well for moving snow.

The Cabelas 43 and 50hp models come with two rear remotes standard. It would be trivial to use them in a trial to see if the operator likes using rear remotes to control the grapple/4n1. As noted earlier, just buy the correct fittings (which you will need anyway if you go with third function valve) and appropriate length of 3/8" or 1/2" hydraulic hose with end fittings and you can be operating a grapple within ten or twenty minutes of putting the quick couplers on. Use it for a few weeks and see if it meets your needs. If not, shell out some bucks to the dealer or supplier for the third function valve and install it. Reuse all the quick connects and just have a hydraulic shop cut the long lines down to the appropriate sizes needed to plumb the third function. Easy peasy and no waste.

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing bad about third function valves dedicated to the FEL. I have one on my DK40 but only because a WRLong kit came free with a 4n1 bucket I bought off eBay. I installed it and use it but it honestly is no better than just running $40 worth of hose under the tractor and using the rear remote valve to control the grapple/4n1.

As the Oracle says, some people find it very convenient to use automatic transmissions and joystick mounted buttons. Fair enough. But, if you want to save $500-1000, and have one fewer electrical device to cause trouble down the road, test out the rear remote strategy before investing in a third function valve to control a grapple.

No children were starved or orphaned in preparation of this response.

 

[TSO]

Yes, it does come with the button to control a third function valve. Pretty cheap to do that at the factory. It does not however come with a third function valve. No idea what they charge for that but it is almost certainly more than what an extra rear remote would cost. Rear remotes have multiple uses, FEL plumbed third function valves are generally used just for grapples and 4n1 buckets although I imagine a few people might install a hydraulically controlled front blade as well for moving snow.

The Cabelas 43 and 50hp models come with two rear remotes standard. It would be trivial to use them in a trial to see if the operator likes using rear remotes to control the grapple/4n1. As noted earlier, just buy the correct fittings (which you will need anyway if you go with third function valve) and appropriate length of 3/8" or 1/2" hydraulic hose with end fittings and you can be operating a grapple within ten or twenty minutes of putting the quick couplers on. Use it for a few weeks and see if it meets your needs. If not, shell out some bucks to the dealer or supplier for the third function valve and install it. Reuse all the quick connects and just have a hydraulic shop cut the long lines down to the appropriate sizes needed to plumb the third function. Easy peasy and no waste.

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing bad about third function valves dedicated to the FEL. I have one on my DK40 but only because a WRLong kit came free with a 4n1 bucket I bought off eBay. I installed it and use it but it honestly is no better than just running $40 worth of hose under the tractor and using the rear remote valve to control the grapple/4n1.

As the Oracle says, some people find it very convenient to use automatic transmissions and joystick mounted buttons. Fair enough. But, if you want to save $500-1000, and have one fewer electrical device to cause trouble down the road, test out the rear remote strategy before investing in a third function valve to control a grapple.

No children were starved or orphaned in preparation of this response.

Don't forget that you still need to spend money on the hoses and connections to bring hydraulics up from the rear remotes. I think it cost me just under $200 when I did it on my LS. So the savings aren't necessarily as drastic as you're indicating.

Personally, I'd prefer spending $500 on an electric diverter, like the one I use for my rears... Then plumb it to divert your curl function. The shortened hose requirement would probably equal around $100, and would therefore only cost $400 more than using rear remotes.

 

[Deerherd]

Don't forget that you still need to spend money on the hoses and connections to bring hydraulics up from the rear remotes. I think it cost me just under $200 when I did it on my LS. So the savings aren't necessarily as drastic as you're indicating.

Personally, I'd prefer spending $500 on an electric diverter, like the one I use for my rears... Then plumb it to divert your curl function. The shortened hose requirement would probably equal around $100, and would therefore only cost $400 more than using rear remotes.

You are trying to use logic in dealing with this person? The first basic safety rule with an FEL is to NEVER take your hand off the FEL control when raised but he advocates that practice in all his posts by his separate lever to open/dump. Most roll over accidents happen with a raised FEL.

I wouldn't own a tractor without a diverter on the FEL because of plow use in the winter and grapple use the rest of the year. It's much safer and intuitive and as far as the children are concerned, all the ones I see are too fat anyways.

 

[IslandTractor]

You are trying to use logic in dealing with this person? The first basic safety rule with an FEL is to NEVER take your hand off the FEL control when raised but he advocates that practice in all his posts by his separate lever to open/dump. Most roll over accidents happen with a raised FEL. I wouldn't own a tractor without a diverter on the FEL because of plow use in the winter and grapple use the rest of the year. It's much safer and intuitive and as far as the children are concerned, all the ones I see are too fat anyways.

Did it ever occur to you that neither the tractor nor FEL are typically in motion when opening or closing the grapple? Or that the grapple when operated is virtually always at ground or waist level while doing anything other than dumping the load?

Rollovers occur most often while the tractor is moving not stationary. And, the only time a grapple is raised high is to dump the load onto a pile or truck/trailer. Do you dump loads while tooling around on uneven terrain?

 

[MinnesotaEric]

That's going to be pretty hard to back up unless you know of every possible place anybody has ever posted about an NX tractor being used in the woods....just saying.

Either way, I don't see why this needs to turn into yet another massive thread drift by a few folks we know are never going to agree on much.

I cannot find anybody who purchased an NX series earlier and talked about it on the web. At the very least, I'm the first person to talk about it here on TBN and the first NX my dealer sold and my dealer was the first to take NX series as inventory since everybody else ordered in the out-going DX series.

Deerherd has a very good point that escaped me last night about the ability to drop the loader in a heartbeat if (or better said, when) the rear wheels start to leave the ground because one's hand is always on the loader controls rather than elsewhere running a third function.

 

[TSO]

It's obvious that it would be a stupid position to defend, maintaining that a rear remote plumbed to the front is actually "better" than a true 3rd function or diverter...

However, it is reasonable to defend saying that a rear remote is more cost effective, IF you have truly limited usage requirements for the front hydraulics.

But spending a few hundred extra bucks for the advanced functionality does make more sense in the long run, even with limited usage, considering the long term convenience, likely better resale value, more available functionality (keeps your rear remotes free for other things), etc.

Silly to even argue about this

 

[MinnesotaEric]

Way too much beer drank last night! A first for Eric too??

Dead sober, but nursing two iPhoto libraries merging since I purchased a new 960GB SSD for my MacBook Pro to make more room for this summer's photos, videos, and toe-tappers.

 

[MinnesotaEric]

They did do that as well....cadaver bone replaces the destroyed disc....but they have to hold you together.

I had dead guy femur installed when I had my S1 fused up to my L4 back in 2002. By now, that bone is all mine. I also had dead guy ACL ligament installed in my right knee back in 1988.

 

[IslandTractor]

Don't forget that you still need to spend money on the hoses and connections to bring hydraulics up from the rear remotes. I think it cost me just under $200 when I did it on my LS. So the savings aren't necessarily as drastic as you're indicating.

Personally, I'd prefer spending $500 on an electric diverter, like the one I use for my rears... Then plumb it to divert your curl function. The shortened hose requirement would probably equal around $100, and would therefore only cost $400 more than using rear remotes.

I'm not arguing that an electric diverter or third function isn't a reasonable solution for many people. My point is that a simple, inexpensive DIY solution is available for those who are waffling about the value of a diverter/third function installation. A grapple is so useful that adding one, even if it is just a bucket grapple, should be a priority for anyone involved in land clearing. If $3000 for a turnkey solution (grapple, adapter, third function) is out of reach, the project (with a bucket grapple) can be done for under $500 if you already have a rear remote.

Yes, absolutely you do need to buy quick connects and hoses with appropriate fittings. However those items are essentially the same as what are needed for setting up a third function valve. The only real difference is the length of the hoses. If someone bought long hoses to try out with rear remotes and then decided to get a third function valve, they just need to take the long hoses to a hydraulic shop to be cut to size and have new fittings squeezed on.

I suppose the cost of four quick connects ($25) and 20 feet of hose x2 ($80) could cost even more than $200 at a local hydraulic shop but the same things can be ordered from Surplus Supply for a bit over $100. Of course if you later needed the local shop to modify the hoses they would probably charge $50 or so to cut the hoses and put new end fittings on.

Still, at a total cost of well under $200, virtually all of it reusable with a third function set up, it is a pretty good deal. And, you can do it in your backyard with nothing more complicated than a couple vise grips and teflon tape. It took me longer to screw the various fittings on than it did to route the lines and secure them with zip ties. More permanent clamps and bulkhead plates can be added if the system works to your satisfaction.

1/2" NPT QUICK COUPLER F/F S20-4
Surplus Center
Maybe add a 90 degree adapter to avoid a big loop of hose at the rear of the tractor: 1/2 NPTM to 1/2 NPTF 90 ELBOW

And please, unless you know of examples where a tractor rolled over while UNLOADING a grapple or clamping down on a load, don't go starting rumors about how dangerous opening and closing a grapple is. Silly. Opening or closing a grapple has zero impact on the dynamic stability of a tractor as the tractor is stopped when that operation occurs. Static stability of a tractor goes up the moment the load from an elevated grapple is dumped. Your hand IS on the FEL stick while the grapple is moving up or down and that is what affects stability. It is only the opening and closing of the grapple that require moving your hand off the joystick and that only happens at rest. And, lest we forget, your hand is still within six or nine inches of the joystick. Do you also think removing one hand from the steering wheel of a car to shift gears is dangerous? Safety police require two hands on the wheel!