Compact Tractors are Designed All Wrong

[Rowski]

Driver

I do wish it was smaller too. The links the others posted, Aebi & Holder, look like something smaller in the compact size. I do remeber seeing similar vehicles in Germany when I was there visiting as a kid. I'm sure the hydro must be reliable in a big heavy machine like this. I haven't heard anything about this machine or seen one other than the NH web site.

Where abouts in VT are you located?




Derek

 

[hayden]

Very thought provoking. I like the idea of a symetric front/rear tractor, especially after clearing 1/2 mile of road this past winter with a 3PH snow blower.

As for replacing the 3PH attachment system, I'm sure a much better arrangement could be designed, but it would require waving the magic wand over the industry to get everyone to make implements the new way. BobCat has actually made great progress propogating a new standard. Standards are funny in their ability to first accelerate progress, then bring it to a grinding halt. The IBM PC architecture comes to mind as an example as I type this.

As for powering via hydraulics, that's exactly what bobcat does, but it's not without it's drawbacks. The hook up and removal sure does look easier, but after reading the recient posts about people having to relieve the pressure in their attachments and getting sprayed with oil it doesn't sound like a total picnic. At the same time, I never come away clean from hooking up a 3PH implement either.

The other hydraulic issue is cost, which runs directly counter to your desire (mine too) to have compacts cost less. First, hydraulic motors are high-precision items and are costly. All the simple gear boxes on our implements would be replaced with hydraulic motors AND in most cases still require a reduction gear box of some kind. This would drive up the cost of implements. Also, the tractor's hydraulics would need to be able to deliver the full engine power via hydraulics. Using the Northern Tool hydraulic power cheat sheets, I figure a 30HP tractor would need a 28GPM pump at 2000 PSI to deliver the 30 HP to an implement. That's much more pump than we have today, and means more $$. The other issue is around efficiency. Pumps and motors are not 100% efficient, where gears practically are. You would lose order 20%-25% of your power in the hydraulics.

Personally, I don't find the 3PH system to be too bad, especially now that I keep all my implements on dollys and I can just roll them up to the tractor.

But I would go for the push-me-pull-you design with a 3PH on both ends. I can't see any down side to that at all.

I just got a welder. Why don't we cut our tractors in half and weld them together bass-ackwards to see what we get. Alternately we can wait to see if any tractors really do get broken in half by backhoes and create a Frankenstein from the remains.

 

[glennmac]

Peter, the only response I can offer to your technical points is that Power-Trac seems to have implemented a new interface, a raft of implements, and hydraulic powering at a decreased cost. How they have done it and whether they succeed in marketplace will be interesting to follow. I would love to see one.

As to those of you who mentioned Steiner on this and another thread, I thought Steiner was an articulating high end front mower. Can it attach FELs, hoes, brushcutters, blades and rakes?

 

[JackIL]

Glenn....The Steiner and Ventrac are articulated turf tractors that are most often used for mowing, but each has numerous attachments (Steiner claims over 25) that mount on the front hitch with the mower deck removed. Most of the attachments can be mounted interchangeably on either tractor and the changeover time is a matter of 2-3 minutes. These attachments include rough duty mowers for tall weeds and light brush, slip scoops, rakes (including a Steiner power box rake), blades, loader (Steiner), stump cutters, debris blowers, trenchers, power brooms, etc. Neither has a backhoe, but I have seen Woods and Kelly hoes adapted by dealers. The Ventrac also has an optional Cat I three point hitch that can handle smaller non-PTO driven implements. These tractors and their matching quick-change attachments are well-suited to the tasks and requirements of golf courses, parks, institutions, and homeowners needing more than basic mowing capabilities. The primary feature that attracted me is the capability to operate safely on slopes of up to 30 degrees when equipped with dual wheels both front and rear.

 

[toddler]

Glen,
Power-trac actually does cost more if you look at their impliments. My 60" 3pt hitch snow thrower was $1200. Power-trac's is $3200. My tiller was about the same price, but you drive over the area you till with theirs. Their mowers are a few hundred more than a mid mount, although clearly a superior design, and their rought cut mower is a lot more than a rotary cutter. The initial cost of the tractor and loader is slightly less compared to an equivalent Kubota, say the 1430 to an L3010 with a bucket, but add a mower, snow thrower, rotary cutter, and rotary tiller, and you've now exceeded the Kubota cost. I think the power-trac machines are awsome, and if we get the property we're looking at, I may get a 1430 because the property has LOTS of slopes. Unfortunately, Power-tracs are not less money in the long run. Take a look at wisconsin tractors too, if they were hydrostatic, they'd be competitive. They may be competitive if you don't need a hydrostatic trany.

When Kubota designs a 50ish HP version of NH's TV140, I'll buy it! Till then, I'm happy enough with my toy.
Todd

 

[patrickg]

I'M sorry, how many degrees of front wheel deflection left and right did you say you would get with full sized tires in front? What would be the turning radius on the L4610? Other than these questions I think you are on to something (or is that, on something?). Oh yeah, about the love beads, consider using the safety break away love beads circa '66 or so, the ones that broke easily when grabbed by a cop oops I mean officer of the law or a red neck and did not allow the wearer to be manhandled or choked by same. Some looked tough, heavy leather and all but with a small thread continuing the loop in back.

Patrick

 

[toddler]

Last post, mentioned prices. Was wrong. Did the math. Powertracs 1430 compared to my B2710, with my impliments, is very close. $19500 for my Kubota, $22,400 for the power track. Math done with loader, 60" mower, snow thrower, tiller, and rotary cutter. Guess you'd have to balance shipping costs on the power trac against sales tax. Then you'd have to balance how hard it would be for power trac to come and service my machine PRN. Lastly, got to give re-sale to the Kubota.

Tough decisions!
Todd

 

[jimmoore]

Yep, Glenn, the compact tractors are designed bass akwards. But, being a poor boy with an old tractor w/o all the bells and whistles, the hookup time is nothing compared to doing all the tractor does by hand. It is the most used and best work saver of anything I have ever bought! Being retired and on low income, I will never be able to buy a new one or even a newer one. so I will just keep on repairing "ol blue" as needed till one or the other of us just gives out. I am thankfull for what I have.

jim

 

[glennmac]

Patrick, remember the tractor would articulate, so the turning radius would be far superior to a compact tractor.

Toddler, I dont know the pricing of the Power-Trac (I cant seem to download it) but WillingtonPizza has claimed that he got his for 3 or 4 grand less than a comparable Kubota. As to what direction you drive with a tiller, I dont know. As I read one of their models--the 2445, I think--the tiller would go on the back.

Jim, yeah we gotta live within our budgets and be thankful for what we've got in life, but we can still fantasize.

 

[toddler]

I compared the 1430 to my Kubota because it's a 30hp diesel. I would probably be more reasonable to compare it to the B2910, which is another $800-1000. I used power-trac's cheapest 60" mower, the commercial 60" or 72" are over a thousand more. I'm guessing all Kubota's decks are commercial duty, so using the B2910 and the 1430 with a comercial 60" deck, the difference is about the same.
The 2445 is I think a 45HP engine and costs signif more. It's designed to be a TLB.
Just my personal opinion, but I think the 1430 is their best design to compare to traditional designs. The 1460 too, but it has a much shorter impliment list. Just a 90" rough cut mower, no finish mower or rotary cutter. It does say it has an electonically controlled PTO. I'm not sure that means it can use normal spline driven 3pt hitch impliments. I requested liturature, so I let you know.
Todd
ps) I think the one WilmingtonPizza bought has a suburu/robinson gasoline engine. I don't expect they'll run several thousand hours like a Kubota diesel. The 1400,1800, and2400 models have diesel engines.