Fixin' to pull the trigger

[rScotty]

Re: MX4800: I am shopping the Grand L, MX, and M5660, so I learned this from my dealer. Kubota is slow to update their site. There is info on the main page about the updated Mx series, but there is no build page yet. Also, see this video: Kubota 2020 New Products \\ Dealer Meeting in 10 minutes. - YouTube

OK, I see it now. You can sort of infer what is happening by the tab on their site for "Prior MX series". Thanks for the link to the new products. Always nice to hear Neal speak. That size tractor interests me since I have one..... the M59 has the same engine.

Since you are looking at those tractors, how do you feel about the turbo vs naturally aspirated? Does it make any difference to you? What are you looking at specifically in those size tractors? Which tranny? Does the turbo really add a lot of cost? I guess I'm surprised that anyone would want a non-turbo diesel given the turbo's reliability & advantages.
Are there any naturally aspirated advantages I'm overlooking?

Probably everyone knows what I'm about to say but it's worth repeating:
Sometimes there is good pricing on new models just as the come out. Especially when Kubota offers their dealers special prices on certain models at their dealer conventions. That's how we bought our M59.

Of course older models just being discontinued can be had at wonderful prices, and then you have a model history to go on - but that all depends on a narrow time and place window.
rScotty

 

[Trillium Farm]

Since you are looking at those tractors, how do you feel about the turbo vs naturally aspirated? Does it make any difference to you? What are you looking at specifically in those size tractors? Which tranny? Does the turbo really add a lot of cost? I guess I'm surprised that anyone would want a non-turbo diesel given the turbo's reliability & advantages.
Are there any naturally aspirated advantages I'm overlooking?rScotty

Generally speaking manufacturers add a turbo when they want to add more HP, but do not want to go to the expense of developing a new motor. Whenever a turbo is added you'll have more stresses on everything mechanically connected with the engine. If the turbo is called upon from time to time, this will work OK, but if called upon constantly or often you need a mototor with more HP and no turbo, the former will last longer and be cheaper to maintain by a lot.

 

[tlj87]

Since you are looking at those tractors, how do you feel about the turbo vs naturally aspirated? Does it make any difference to you? What are you looking at specifically in those size tractors? Which tranny? Does the turbo really add a lot of cost? I guess I'm surprised that anyone would want a non-turbo diesel given the turbo's reliability & advantages.
Are there any naturally aspirated advantages I'm overlooking?
rScotty

I recently started a thread about our selection over in the dedicated Kubota Buying/Pricing sub-forum that outlines what we're thinking. https://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/kubota-buying-pricing/419366-l5460-mx5400-m5660suhd.html

As for turbo vs. non-turbo: For me, it isn't a deciding factor. We live at about 1,000 ft. elevation, so loss of power isn't a concern here. On the tractor that the new Kubota would likely be replacing, a gas Ford 3000, for the past 10 years, I have put on an average of 100 hours per year. The new machine would have more functionality (loader), so I anticipate about 125 hours per year. I don't think that any added stress placed on the engine by a turbo would manifest itself during my ownership. Say I keep the machine until I retire and then get a new one. That's about 30 years away for me. So, 30*125 = 3,750 hrs. A lot of hours to me, but not a lot of hours compared to a unit used in an ag/commercial setting.

 

[rScotty]

Generally speaking manufacturers add a turbo when they want to add more HP, but do not want to go to the expense of developing a new motor. Whenever a turbo is added you'll have more stresses on everything mechanically connected with the engine. If the turbo is called upon from time to time, this will work OK, but if called upon constantly or often you need a mototor with more HP and no turbo, the former will last longer and be cheaper to maintain by a lot.

OK, that's fair. And your explanation of the old vs new engine design also explains something that was bothering me ..... Which was this: Why did adding turbos cause nothing but trouble for engines 30/40 years ago, while engines & turbos on newer engines don't seem to suffer any negative effects from turbocharging? In fact, if anything the opposite seems true.

Turbos themselves seem to have gone from being expensive sources of trouble to something that is relatively inexpensive and requires minimal attention for the life of the engine.

I'm guessing that it all comes down to today's best engines being designed right from the start to support the maximum HP that they might ever produce with a turbo, while in the past that wasn't how engine design was done. One reason for that change would be that turbos just weren't popular or necessary back before emissions regs. Today turbos are used more often, so engines get designed for them right from the start.
rScotty

 

[nards444]

OK, that's fair. And your explanation of the old vs new engine design also explains something that was bothering me ..... Which was this: Why did adding turbos cause nothing but trouble for engines 30/40 years ago, while engines & turbos on newer engines don't seem to suffer any negative effects from turbocharging? In fact, if anything the opposite seems true.

Turbos themselves seem to have gone from being expensive sources of trouble to something that is relatively inexpensive and requires minimal attention for the life of the engine.

I'm guessing that it all comes down to today's best engines being designed right from the start to support the maximum HP that they might ever produce with a turbo, while in the past that wasn't how engine design was done. One reason for that change would be that turbos just weren't popular or necessary back before emissions regs. Today turbos are used more often, so engines get designed for them right from the start.
rScotty

yeah I agree the old mindset on turbos just isnt there. Engines 2-3 decades ago were junk really for the most part. Today these turbos are controlled by computers and such which doesnt allow them to run wild and burn engines up. people said the the same thing about turbos on the F150s and such, and they are working great.

 

[Ortimber]

I agree with the above responses. Turbos are very reliable today and it seems like other issues (emissions, wiring, electronic gizmos) are much more prone to failure.

 

[aczlan]

yeah I agree the old mindset on turbos just isnt there. Engines 2-3 decades ago were junk really for the most part. Today these turbos are controlled by computers and such which doesnt allow them to run wild and burn engines up. people said the the same thing about turbos on the F150s and such, and they are working great.

Also, a lot of the problematic older turbos were oil cooled with the oil, seal and bearing technology that was available back then. Now days with water-cooled turbos, modern oils and ceramic bearings and seals, that has changed significantly.

Aaron Z

 

[Trillium Farm]

OK, that's fair. And your explanation of the old vs new engine design also explains something that was bothering me ..... Which was this: Why did adding turbos cause nothing but trouble for engines 30/40 years ago, while engines & turbos on newer engines don't seem to suffer any negative effects from turbocharging? In fact, if anything the opposite seems true.

Turbos themselves seem to have gone from being expensive sources of trouble to something that is relatively inexpensive and requires minimal attention for the life of the engine.

I'm guessing that it all comes down to today's best engines being designed right from the start to support the maximum HP that they might ever produce with a turbo, while in the past that wasn't how engine design was done. One reason for that change would be that turbos just weren't popular or necessary back before emissions regs. Today turbos are used more often, so engines get designed for them right from the start.
rScotty

Yes as you said, engines are designed for turbos from the get go, but also now we have better lubrication. Turbo'd engines require a bit more care on start-up and on shutting down, but these days they are mostly trouble free. Personally I still prefer to go up on engines size and avoid the turbo if given a choice.

 

[jezreel]

So I went to my third Kubota dealership. This experience was better than the first two. Friendly fella. Answered all my questions. . . then some. He was young, but he appeared to know his product well. After this visit, I am certain I will be buying Orange. Here is what I learned today.

1. As discussed earlier, the MX4800 is no longer being produced. The MX line is being replaced by two machines with different numbers (can't remember what they are). The only MX4800s out there are the ones already on the lot. The place I was at today, had no MX4800s, but had 2 MX5200s.

2. I am a bit disappointed in the amount the dealer came off the price of the Tractor/Loader/R4 Tires. The Kubota build price online is $30,802. The price the dealer gave me for the Tractor/Loader/R4 Tires was $29,175. The difference being $1627. That is just over 5% off. After reading the forums about Kubota, I was expecting a bit closer to 10% off. There are 2 incentives that take more money off. . . Kubota Finance Rebate and Orange Plus 1 & 2 which take off another $1650. So with that I reckon it brings it up to 10% that I was looking for.

3. The guy priced out one of the MX5200s he had on the lot. The difference between the L4701 and MX5200 with the same implements is $2422. I am sure the L4701 will be PLENTY of tractor for my property, and needs, but I bigger is better. . . Right? I just don't know if I can justify the extra $$$$ at this time. Buying a tractor or building a shop. . . You try to go a bit bigger than you think you need to. I think I am doing that with the L4701, so I don't know, maybe going to the next level is biting off too much.

I think that is it. I am ready to buy, I just need to wait on the closing of our new house. The banker told me today, not to take out any loans (for the tractor) until we have closed. I'm ready to get to work!

 

[Trillium Farm]

So I went to my third Kubota dealership. This experience was better than the first two. Friendly fella. Answered all my questions. . . then some. He was young, but he appeared to know his product well. After this visit, I am certain I will be buying Orange. Here is what I learned today.
1. As discussed earlier, the MX4800 is no longer being produced. The MX line is being replaced by two machines with different numbers (can't remember what they are). The only MX4800s out there are the ones already on the lot. The place I was at today, had no MX4800s, but had 2 MX5200s.
2. I am a bit disappointed in the amount the dealer came off the price of the Tractor/Loader/R4 Tires. The Kubota build price online is $30,802. The price the dealer gave me for the Tractor/Loader/R4 Tires was $29,175. The difference being $1627. That is just over 5% off. After reading the forums about Kubota, I was expecting a bit closer to 10% off. There are 2 incentives that take more money off. . . Kubota Finance Rebate and Orange Plus 1 & 2 which take off another $1650. So with that I reckon it brings it up to 10% that I was looking for.
3. The guy priced out one of the MX5200s he had on the lot. The difference between the L4701 and MX5200 with the same implements is $2422. I am sure the L4701 will be PLENTY of tractor for my property, and needs, but I bigger is better. . . Right? I just don't know if I can justify the extra $$$$ at this time. Buying a tractor or building a shop. . . You try to go a bit bigger than you think you need to. I think I am doing that with the L4701, so I don't know, maybe going to the next level is biting off too much.
I think that is it. I am ready to buy, I just need to wait on the closing of our new house. The banker told me today, not to take out any loans (for the tractor) until we have closed. I'm ready to get to work!

The price he quoted you was because you were enquiring, once you go there to close the deal things will change, I'm sure. For $2400 difference I'd go with the MX5200, it's hard to get the right size (HP) tractor the 1st time, 99% of the new buyers underestimate how many horses they really need. Keep us informed and good luck.