Gentlemen,
To be honest I held the paperwork up as I really did not get a warm and fuzzy with this machine. It lead me to consider the 9960 Cab tractor beside it. I am going to hold off on that test drive. Looking at one of JD Youtube videos, purely by chance of searching for specs on the 9960, the Deere Rep mentions the 4.4 or 4.5 liter Deere engine as compared to the 3.8 Liter engine on the 9960. He noted the "no replacement for displacement" argument. Everything in my driveway is Diesel. Needless to say the 03' 7.3 Liter PSD Excursion versus the 05' 6.0 Liter PSD in my F350 did not help. Granted the 6.0 PSD has issues beyond displacement. That said it does come to mind.
In short I thought I would be remiss in not making mention of this concern. I am going to rely on high RPMs to make enough power for these tractors to function normally? Do they have a decent torque reserve in the field. I'm used to everything making "working HP" at 2100 or less with yard movement capable at half that figure. Do I need to relearn what is necessary RPMs?
Bingo.
Most modern small/medium sized tractors, especially CUTs, achieve rated HP at much higher RPMs than in times past. Worse, it is usually necessary to operate the engine at or near rated speed to obtain specified PTO RPM, e.g., 540 RPM. This increases wear and adds hours when doing light PTO work such as mowing light cover.
For this reason, and others, I too prefer the "old tech" approach, i.e., CID.
Last fall, I shopped for a 60 PTO HP tractor for mostly mowing duty. I really wanted an
M7040 but ended up buying an "old tech" MF 2635 after shopping several brands. The 220 CI long stroke Perkins designed engine in the MF achieves 540 PTO RPM at 1750 engine RPM allowing me to cruise along with plenty of governor and foot throttle left for the tough spot, saving fuel, wear and tear and keeping hours down. It is also much heavier than the
M7040 and significantly less expensive.
Dean