fuel consumption l4400 vs mx 4700 vs mx5100

[leveled]

According to a little quick math applied to Kubotas performance curves:

The mx5100 will use 3.83 gal/hr running full hp @ 2700 rpms.

The mx4700 will use 2.94 gal/hr running rated hp @ 2700 rpm.

The l4400 will use 2.78 gal/hr running rated hp @ 2600 rpm.


As a closet nerd I happened to have some Kubota engine specs on hand from some recent tractor shopping.............I am also a very good driver

NO WAY!

 

[art]

IF, notice I said IF you were to run these engines non-stop on the govenor at full load tht is what you would burn.

It is not daily life with the unit, most times it's about half of that number.

 

[slowzuki]

My L5030HSTC burns what the book says when I keep the snowblower full and work it hard. 10 gallons lasts about 4 hours when working her wide hard. Tooling around with the loader that same 10 gallons lasts 12-20 hours

 

[LD1]

In reality, I doubt their would be a noticable difference in fuel consumption.

Basically, with a diesel engine, HP is determined by how much fuel is burned.

AND, HP determines how much work can be done. It is about as simple as that.

A larger and more HP tractor will burn more fuel per hour, but it can also do more work in that hour.

It would make for an interesting expirement, but if you had a L4400 with a 6 foot cutter and cut 25 acres, how much muel will it burn???? What about a MX4700 and appropriate cutter??? or the 5100 and cutter???? I bet the difference would be les than you would think.

Personally, I am just a hobby guy. And I could really careless about fuel consumption. If I need my tractor for something, I need it. Now I mught have a different outlook if I was working ground for 12 hours a day, but I do not.

 

[LD1]

Another interesting comparison, allthough a little different.

DAD has a 61" ZTR with a 23HP motor. I have a JD240 garden tractor for a mower with a 46" deck. HIS mower will burn about 2-2.5 gallons per hour:confused2: While mine will only sip about a half gallon per acre.

BUT I can only mow 1 acre per hour. He can mow 4-5 acres per hour.

So in the end, the efficency is the same. 1 gallon of fuel will mow 2 acres.

This can scaled up as well. What is the gallon per HR usage of a BIG 4x4 400+HP tractor compared to my little L3400???? Not even close right? But I bet he can plow an entire 100acre field on the same or less fuel than I can. And he can be done in a day and it would take me weeks to plow.

 

[Country1]

thank you milkman you just made it easy on me. The 4700 it is. The extra few hp is not worth the extra gallon a hour. I figured the turbo if anything would help fuel some guess not. I reckon its just there for emmisons. I was really wanting them adjustable links on the 3 pt. But not at a extra gallon a hour price tag.

I sure hope you don't base your purchase decision off of milkman's figures?....
(No offense milkman...)

Post back please...

 

[milkman636]

If you are not using all of your rated hp at 2700 rpms you will use less fuel.

The fuel consumption is published by Kubota in grams per kwh.

http://www.kubotaengine.com/products/pdf_en/24_v2403mt_27.pdf

All I did was convert the grams to gallons. If you disgree with the numbers double check my math or argue with Kubota. I was just trying help a guy out here.

The turbocharged mx5100 will use more fuel than the the mx4700 in any application. The turbo will help in high altitudes or at the upper limits of the tractors output. If he's not operating there, the turbo probably won't pay off.

If his primary concern is operating costs he is probably using his tractor alot and may realistically never see any benefit from the turbo.

 

[Country1]

We all know you where just trying to help the OP and that's a good thing. It just that your figures are unrealistic for "normal" use. I don't think many of us use our tractors at 100% duty cycle. I might be wrong though.

 

[CANdiyMXER]

I have a MX 5000, because it has more horsepower i seldom work it above 1800 RPM. I can't believe how little fuel it uses even when I am doing heavy loader work.

Fuel usage is a factor of work energy, a 4700 may use less fuel per hour, but it will work longer and harder to perform the same load task as a bigger machine does in a shorter period. In the end even if fuel consumption matched, wear and tear on the 4700 would be higher.

 

[STROKETHIS]

Well between the 4700 and 5100 if there is that great of a fuel change then the 4700 is a no branier. The hp gain of the 5100 is not enuff to explian the fuel usage. I do like the adjustable links on the 5100 but not enuff for that kind of fuel hit. I also am on the fence bout a turbo. I just dn;t think a mid size tracotr needs a turbo and the 4700 and 5100 are the same motor with the 5100 having a turbo i really feel it is just for emissions and thats why the hp gain is so small. I mean the turbo on the 5100 is tiny tiny. Only reason this q came up is that my dealer has a few 5100 on the lot and is willing to make a deal on them. I can get into the 5100 for 500 bucks more then the 4700. But i think im still leaning toward the 4700.