Compact Tractor Horsepower Comparisons

[scott_vt]

Mornin eaglemrpaul,
First welcome to TBN ! A lot of great people on here with a wealth of info.

Sorry if your off to a rocky start, but honestly both Ovrszd and N80 have very good points. By making your first post pro JD, and anti brand X, being a JD dealer you have to admit that your gonna catch some flak Your statements may be true, but used in a first post context makes some of us a bit apprehensive !

In ant event may the rest of your time on TBN be enjoyable !

 

[gamble77]

I won't be affraid to say that the tractor they were testing the JD against was a Kubota L5030. When I was at that station the Kubota put out 35pto hp, the JD over 45pto hp.

NOW...I know that this might seem a little fishy from the outside however, the two dyno's they were using were identical and each session they moved each tractor to the other dyno to be fair. I heard the Kubota never pulled over 38pto hp the whole 3-days...including very cool days when it should have been strong.

Take that for what you will, it was a test that was made to make the Deere look good, and it did that very well. I believe if you look at the Nebraska test and the unit's Kubota has submitted against comparable Deere's you will see the Deere's usually hold to their numbers better. Again, not trying to start a brand war here these are just plain facts...Kubota makes a good machine, if they didn't they wouldn't be where they are today.

 

[rback33]

Gamble,
Thanks for the added information. I hate to pick on the new guy over there, so you added info helps validate what he is saying. I Dave from Dave's tractor is on vacation and cannot respond, but he has said repeatedly that Mahindra underrates HP according to Dynos he has run. Now I know, he is a Mahindra dealer, but I think we all know him as a fair and honest guy by now. I strikes me as odd that Kubota would not do this as well. We certainly need more data to begin to call this race, but it does make me raise my eyebrows just a bit.

 

[donais]

i think all the brands should fly me in and i will bring a can of diesel and i can watch the dyno tests, to insure they are equal and fair, better yet they should all pitch in and buy me a dyno, send a test tractor and ill do it here.. ill need an assistant also. jon

 

[Champy]

i think all the brands should fly me in and i will bring a can of diesel and i can watch the dyno tests, to insure they are equal and fair, better yet they should all pitch in and buy me a dyno, send a test tractor and ill do it here.. ill need an assistant also. jon

Isn't this what the Nebraska Testing Facility does - provides an independent testing and analysis of the tractor specs? If so, the the issue resides with manufacturers that do not participate in this testing to provide us (consumers) with reliable, independent, and certified performance ratings. Without a standard reference system, the markeplace claims and manufacturer advertisments are promoting nothing more than the doctrine of caveat emptor (buyer beware).

Consumers are getting smarter, more capable, and more demanding. Reputable OEMs (JD; Kubota; NH; etc..) cannot survive over the long haul by inflating their rating numbers - hence many may be inclined to underrate for "performance margin of safety".

 

[dgl24087]

From the University of Nebraska tractor test site:

The University of Nebraska Tractor Test Laboratory is the officially designated tractor testing station for the United States and tests tractors according to the codes of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Twenty-eight countries participate in the tractor test codes, with active tractor test stations in approximately 25 of those countries. The OECD codes require that tractors be tested in the country of manufacture. Reciprocity agreements with the codes require that once an OECD test report is officially approved, it must be accepted by all participating countries.

So, by my interpretation, only tractors manufactured in the U.S. are subject to being tested at the U. of Neb., and the other member countries test based on OECD standards. Compacts generally are not subject to these tests as they are not considered true agricultural use machines. I think the cutoff point is 40 HP.

 

[donais]

i just wanted a free dyno and play with alot of free tractors....i also want to retire but they say i have to earn my pension first.. on a serious side is there a url for the u of n tests???

 

[rback33]

i just wanted a free dyno and play with alot of free tractors....i also want to retire but they say i have to earn my pension first.. on a serious side is there a url for the u of n tests???

I think so... seems I have been there before.. I'll look for it...

NE Tractor Test Laboratory

 

[N80]

The problem I have with tests like the one described by the OP is that such demonstrations (they aren't really tests) are intended to imply that such hp differences extend across the model lines of each manufacturer. In other words, JD model x has more hp than Kubota model z even though they have the same published hp specs and this is supposed to mean that all JDs (or whatever) have more accurate specs than all Kubotas (or whatever).

The demo might prove that model x has more hp than model z but it does not mean that this data can be applied to all models in either company and I would suspect that JD made its model selection very carefully. And if it was indeed the Kubota 5030, well, it has been discontinued for the 5040 I believe. Why do the test against a model that is going out and not the model coming in? I would guess, but can't prove in any way, that Kubota could probably pick a JD model that is a little overspeced and pit it against one of their similar hp models that is a little underspeced and show the same thing. That's a total guess of course. It could be true that all JD's are underspeced and all Kubotas are overspeced. I don't know. But if JD, or anyone else, is doing this sort of thing for publicity, and their machines are indeed underspeced, why don't they spec them accurately and win the race where it really counts...in the brochures, spec sheets and marketing?

I would be dissapointed to find that my tractor was overspeced. Especially if it wasn't doing something that 'x' number of hp should be able to do.

 

[rback33]

The problem I have with tests like the one described by the OP is that such demonstrations (they aren't really tests) are intended to imply that such hp differences extend across the model lines of each manufacturer. In other words, JD model x has more hp than Kubota model z even though they have the same published hp specs and this is supposed to mean that all JDs (or whatever) have more accurate specs than all Kubotas (or whatever).

The demo might prove that model x has more hp than model z but it does not mean that this data can be applied to all models in either company and I would suspect that JD made its model selection very carefully. And if it was indeed the Kubota 5030, well, it has been discontinued for the 5040 I believe. Why do the test against a model that is going out and not the model coming in? I would guess, but can't prove in any way, that Kubota could probably pick a JD model that is a little overspeced and pit it against one of their similar hp models that is a little underspeced and show the same thing. That's a total guess of course. It could be true that all JD's are underspeced and all Kubotas are overspeced. I don't know. But if JD, or anyone else, is doing this sort of thing for publicity, and their machines are indeed underspeced, why don't they spec them accurately and win the race where it really counts...in the brochures, spec sheets and marketing?

I would be dissapointed to find that my tractor was overspeced. Especially if it wasn't doing something that 'x' number of hp should be able to do.

Are you implying dishonest marketing here? Blasphemy There is no way that JD would do that test without knowing EXACTLY what it would do, and I would bet money those two were hand-picked for a purpose.