Commercial Use?

[Tennsawdust]

The other Huge issue is that, while the combination of a skid steer and mini-ex would be the ideal solution the skid steer alone is more than three times the cost of a fully loaded RK37. (A Deere 333G is just over $100,000 plus attachments while a full tilt RK37 with attachments is $33,000 or about $650/month with insurance) Even buying used it would be out of the realm of possibility. He has no desire to take on a full time excavation business, which is what would be required to pay for that type of equipment.

Equipment acquisition cost is relatively low relative to repair and employee injury cost over time.

The point is that there a number of tasks around the jobsite that a compact TLB could do. Larger jobs would still be done by sub-contractors, but there are more than enough small jobs that the RK37 can do that it would easily pay for itself and then some, not to mention not having to wait f or a sub to show up to do a 30 minute job. He does a lot of remodeling work so there are many times he is calling in a sub to do less than two hours work and with the economy improving it is becoming harder and harder to get them to show up for anything much less a small job. That significantly impacts his ability to service his customers. As mentioned before, it is $250 minimum just to get equipment on site, before they do anything. With multiple jobsites going at once those fees add up. If only 3 of them per month are eliminated that more than pays for the tractor.

My tractor is 3,700 pounds bare tractor weight. In my opinion a 3,100 pound tractor, nor a 3,700 pound bare tractor is stable enough on a construction site. Backhoe is excellent rear ballast.

I have worked construction as a plumber. Machinery is always overworked in practice.

With all due respect Jeff, the cost argument just doesn't work. To suggest that an additional $80-100 thousand just washes out in a small business is off base.

It really is a fairly simple thing. He can afford a compact tractor. His other option is to continue to have to wait on a subcontractor to get around to doing those small tasks for him. Similar tractors are used on residential construction sites every day. The question is whether the RK/TYM product is any less suited to the use than a similar Kubota or Deere. I personally don't see anything about it that would make it less suitable, but if someone has managed to find a weakness it would be interesting to know.

(P.S I've done both commercial and residential construction since I was a teenager, so I'm well aware of what kind of duty the equipment can see. Most of the commercial crews were very hard on equipment. They don't own it so anything short of getting themselves fired is fair game.)

 

[wagne223]

I have been around a lot of construction sites. I have a close friend that maintains the wells and supply systems for several fern farms.
I have another friend that does major land scape work.

I have never seen a utility tractor used by anyone doing construction work.

The closest thing would be the water guy. He has an L39 TLB. A TLB is a lot different then a utility tractor with a backhoe attachment. However, he has said the TLB is basically a motorized wheelbarrow now. He can do his work faster with a mini ex.

The landscape guy only uses a skidsteer.

I'm sure he could get by for a bit, or get his business started with a utility tractor if that is what he can can afford. Just know he will be itching to get a more capable task specific machine after the first few jobs.

 

[Tennsawdust]

Astute observation. Tractors can do a lot of things around a construction site but it is a tractor, not an excavator, wheeler loader, true TLB, etc. We have to address this in our warranty policy as all other brands do.

Outside of automobiles, I don't think I have ever bought a piece of equipment that didn't have a different warranty (or in some cases no warranty) for commercial use.

I think it is inevitable that small business owners like my friend would take a look at the RK tractor line because it really does offer some good value for the money. The RK37 is just small enough to pull behind his half-ton and just capable enough to be of good use.

As you said, there is a lot of compact tractor can do. It is a bit of a Swiss army knife, which is why they show up at jobsites. The heavy jobs have to be left to heavy equipment, but there are a lot of tasks where heavy equipment is overkill. A compact tractor can easily spread gravel in a basement or dig out that collapsed gutter drain. If you are already paying $1,000 a month or more to have that kind of stuff done then the RK37 starts to look awfully tempting.

 

[Tennsawdust]

I wouldn't recommend one for full time excavation work. As you said, that would be way too slow. If he were doing that he would want different equipment. What he is looking to do is all those piddly little jobs that crop up in his type of work. I could see a mini excavator in his future, but the immediate need is a bit different than that.

Every time I've finished up a house the guy that shows up to do the final dress on the lawn before seeding has always had a compact tractor in tow. If they have to move dirt they use a skid steer, but they figure they are too heavy for final smoothing. It has always been a compact tractor with turf tires putting the finishing touches on it.

A friend has a plumbing business in Nashville he has a skid steer and two mini-excavators going, but also has a subcompact TLB because it will go places even his smallest mini-ex can't (especially low basements and under decks.) Everything has it's place.

 

[RTBee]

A tractor is a tool. To be used however the owner/operator chooses. Maybe it voids a warranty maybe not. Would a $600 table saw do the job? What if you only have $100? A hand held circular saw will do. It's great to have the kind of money to buy the best of whatever to do what you want, but if you can't afford it (or don't choose to spend that much), then you use what you have or what you can afford.

 

[Tennsawdust]

A tractor is a tool. To be used however the owner/operator chooses. Maybe it voids a warranty maybe not. Would a $600 table saw do the job? What if you only have $100? A hand held circular saw will do. It's great to have the kind of money to buy the best of whatever to do what you want, but if you can't afford it (or don't choose to spend that much), then you use what you have or what you can afford.

It basically limits the warranty to 2 years, which is normal for commercial equipment.

In his case he a compact tractor would fill a current need and be easily justified from a budget perspective. I would say in this case those needs are closer to the circular saw needs, so he is buying a circular saw. He can rent or hire a tablesaw when it is needed, but there isn't enough need there to justify buying one. Buying it would also entail hiring someone to run it and after deliberately downsizing his business a couple of years ago to focus on his core competencies he is going to be very selective about any new ventures. The tractor would simply let him be more effective at what he is currently doing while offering a substantial return on investment.

 

[MossRoad]

It basically limits the warranty to 2 years, which is normal for commercial equipment.

...

Are we still talking about the RK tractor and 2 years of warranty for commercial use? Because, and maybe I'm not reading it correctly, I read it as commercial use is NOT covered under warranty. If he uses it in his contracting business, it voids the warranty. Am I mistaken?

 

[Diggin It]

He is aware that commercial use could limit the warranty (although he should inquire as to their meaning of "commercial construction" as residential construction may be considered a small business use).

Are we still talking about the RK tractor and 2 years of warranty for commercial use? Because, and maybe I'm not reading it correctly, I read it as commercial use is NOT covered under warranty. If he uses it in his contracting business, it voids the warranty. Am I mistaken?

* Definition of Non-Institutional Use: rk tractors Equipment and associated products that is purchased and exclusivily used for personal, consumer type of homeowner usage, non-institutional farming or other small business use which does not include demolition, paving, bulldozing, mining, quarry operations, commercial construction, gravel yard or commercial forestry operations.

http://rktractors.com/manuals/Limited Warranty Handout New.pdf

This is why Contract Law is so complicated and why specific wording is required. In my personal view, the terms allow a small business contractor to use it for residential construction, even though they're building houses for pay. Ten other people may interpret that ten other ways.

And if somebody really wanted to be detailed enough about it and got it before the right Judge, that clause could be tossed out for the typographical and grammatical errors.

Also, if you look at the PDF on the link, you'll see two different sets of durations:

Government & Non-Institutional Use Only*

All Other Use.

Which would the home builder fall under?

 

[Tennsawdust]

Are we still talking about the RK tractor and 2 years of warranty for commercial use? Because, and maybe I'm not reading it correctly, I read it as commercial use is NOT covered under warranty. If he uses it in his contracting business, it voids the warranty. Am I mistaken?

The warranty appears to break things down into two categories: "Government and Non-Institutional use", and "All other Use". Warranty terms are listed for each of those two categories. As written I would interpret it to mean that commercial operation (pending definition of what is considered "small business use") would fall under the "All other Use" clause and therefore be limited to the 24 month/2000 hour aggregate and 36 month/3000 hour powertrain warranty. I believe this is similar to what Yanmar itself states in their own warranties. I see nothing that indicates the warranty is forfeited entirely by commercial use. Doing so would need to be called out specifically in section C or E, which it is not.

 

[MossRoad]

http://rktractors.com/manuals/Limited Warranty Handout New.pdf

This is why Contract Law is so complicated and why specific wording is required. In my personal view, the terms allow a small business contractor to use it for residential construction, even though they're building houses for pay. Ten other people may interpret that ten other ways.

And if somebody really wanted to be detailed enough about it and got it before the right Judge, that clause could be tossed out for the typographical and grammatical errors.

Also, if you look at the PDF on the link, you'll see two different sets of durations:

Government & Non-Institutional Use Only*

All Other Use.

Which would the home builder fall under?

Define "commercial construction". That's construction for money.

comｷmerｷcial Dictionary result for commercial
/kəˈmərSHəl/
adjective
1.
concerned with or engaged in commerce.
"a commercial agreement"
synonyms: trade, trading, business, private enterprise, mercantile, merchant, sales; archaicmerchandising
"the vessels were originally built for commercial purposes"
2.
making or intended to make a profit.
"commercial products"
synonyms: profit-oriented, money-oriented, commercialized, materialistic, mercenary
"public opinion was inward-looking and brashly commercial"