CK20 redesign ?

[Slackdaddy]

Is there ever a news reseale when a "new" model is coming out ?
People have said that the CK20 needs a 3 range hydro to keep up with the
B20 kuboto's, just hate to buy a CK20 and have the "new and improved" model show up on the show room floor a week later.

If the CK20 had a 3 range and an integrated BH (like the B20"s)
I would have bought one last year.

Nick

 

[wallace]

Don't think you will ever see that, The CK20 just had a little face lift this past year. along with the loaders and backhoes.

 

[IslandTractor]

It is dangerous to disagree with Master Yoda Wallace but I think Kioti had better add a 3 speed HST to the CK20 pronto if they don't want to lose sales. The extra one horsepower that got added last year does little to overcome the difficulty the CK20 has going up even a slight slope in high gear while either mowing or just traveling with a BH attached. On a fairly mild slope I work on in front of my house, I literally had to mow uphill in low then change to high range when I got to the top to mow down. Even mowing sideways with the bushhog was mostly done in low.

A middle range for the HST would solve that problem and give new life to the CK20 allowing it to compete more effectively with the B2x20 series. The CK20 is an excellent machine with a best in class loader so why not fix the Achilles heel?

 

[garydc]

I am the happy owner of a 07 ck20 I bought in july to replace an older kubota b6200. So far I love the tractor and I got a very good deal on it, but I think Kioti should look at bumping the horses a couple more and adding a mid range in the hydro in the future to retain sales, as I said I love the little beast but when it comes time to replace if the I,ll possibly be looking at the other orange again. Gary

 

[Dmace]

I don't get it, everyone wants a few more horsepower and another gear. Well then, buy the CK30. It has a three speed HST and 8 more horsepower. What's the point of making two tractors with the same power and capacities but on two different sized frames?

I admit I have found a few things I could not do easily with my CK20HST but what it has done is amazing for it's size and power and if I needed more I would buy a larger tractor.

If everyone makes their smallest tractors bigger every year, the people who don't need the extra power and capacities will have to pay for more than they need. I like the CK20 just the way it is...

 

[IslandTractor]

I don't get it, everyone wants a few more horsepower and another gear. Well then, buy the CK30. It has a three speed HST and 8 more horsepower.

Because there is little advantage to the CK30 over the CK20 for many tasks and the smaller tractor is easier to manuver, weighs less, smaller to store, cheaper (smaller) attachments and matches better with smaller properties.

I know there are lots of dedicated CK30 guys out there but I did not find there was enough of a difference between the two to justify the upgrade. When I did upgrade I skipped over the CK30 to the DK.

The CK20 is a great tractor. The comments regarding 3 speed HST are to make it even better. I am not one who thinks it needs more horsepower, just better gearing.

 

[rimshot]

My CK20 equipped with a hoe and FEL have yet to win an uphill speed race. I guess I shall just have to settle for a different way to take the hill out of play. I will let the CK20 eat it for breakfast.

Here's a picture of the stump that got in the way last weekend. It took all of one and a half hours to remove this stump and it was loaded with a heavy root base bound with gravel.

rimshot

(all this and still making it to the top of the hill to boot)

 

[Dmace]

That's a nice looking stump, rimshot. But how did you ever move it with just 21hp and no third gear...?

 

[Gittyup]

Because there is little advantage to the CK30 over the CK20 for many tasks and the smaller tractor is easier to manuver, weighs less, smaller to store, cheaper (smaller) attachments and matches better with smaller properties.

A 1000 lbs heavier, much higher hydraulic pump capacity, 9-10 more HP (50% more hp), and a 3-range tranny offers many advantages for just about ANY task the CK's would be used for. You argue that loaders are about the same. I think this is the only place they are about "comparable". But, the difference is like 10%, and 10% is not insignificant to me. Further, the better hydraulics means it'll operate more quickly. For just about every other task the CK30 is way more tractor and way more capable. You can run bigger everything, and that translates directly to greater productivity. It'll pull more, push more, lift more on the 3pt, transport faster, clear deeper ditches and ground protrusions.

The same argument about smaller size having advantages also applies to the CK35 vs the DK35 too. But, I wouldn't argue that the DK35 "has little advantage" over the CK35 any more than I'd say the same when comparing the DK35 to the DK40.

For me, even the CK25 was a better choice than the CK20. I didn't layout the extra money for the CK30 because PTO hp wasn't as paramount to the tasks I planned to do. But, all the other "little advantages" made a big difference. I don't think I'd have been happy with a CK20 for my uses. I bought too small once and wasn't about to do it again.

 

[IslandTractor]

A 1000 lbs heavier, much higher hydraulic pump capacity, 9-10 more HP (50% more hp), and a 3-range tranny offers many advantages for just about ANY task the CK's would be used for. You argue that loaders are about the same. I think this is the only place they are about "comparable". But, the difference is like 10%, and 10% is not insignificant to me. Further, the better hydraulics means it'll operate more quickly. For just about every other task the CK30 is way more tractor and way more capable. You can run bigger everything, and that translates directly to greater productivity. It'll pull more, push more, lift more on the 3pt, transport faster, clear deeper ditches and ground protrusions.

The same argument about smaller size having advantages also applies to the CK35 vs the DK35 too. But, I wouldn't argue that the DK35 "has little advantage" over the CK35 any more than I'd say the same when comparing the DK35 to the DK40.

For me, even the CK25 was a better choice than the CK20. I didn't layout the extra money for the CK30 because PTO hp wasn't as paramount to the tasks I planned to do. But, all the other "little advantages" made a big difference. I don't think I'd have been happy with a CK20 for my uses. I bought too small once and wasn't about to do it again.

I just knew the CK30 guys would be touchy about my comments. I'm not knocking the 30 just pointing out that the CK20, even more so if it had 3 speeds, is an amazing piece of machinery. For ground engaging tasks I would certainly agree that the CK30's extra umph would make tasks go faster but for loader work I don't see a big advantage. If I bought a CK30 today I'd get the Woods loader which would be a significant difference but frankly 100lbs of extra lift with the KL130 over the KL120 doesn't amount to much. What's the use of all that extra hydraulic output if the loader can't use it? The CK20 needs three speeds to be near perfect and the CK30 needs a better loader to kick it up a notch.