MChalkley
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2000
- Messages
- 3,198
- Location
- Eastern Virginia
- Tractor
- EarthForce EF-5 mini-TLB (2001)
Moving anything, including air, requires energy. Pulling air through an air filter, for example, requires energy. Thus the claims of greater hp using "free-flow" filters, etc. Likewise, pushing air through the exhaust system, particularly the muffler, requires energy. Turning the radiator fan requires energy, as does the alternator, etc. They all add up to fairly substantial amounts, which is why the "net" hp is considerably lower than the "gross" hp. If all this leads you to believe that "gross" hp is a pretty useless figure, congratulations. It's straight out of the marketing department, and you know what that means. Now, if all you want to use it for is comparing engines, using the same measurement standard, of course, then it's reasonably useful. Just don't think you've got that much hp to use for any work you're planning to do.
Net hp is measured at the flywheel.
PTO hp is measured at the rear PTO.
Kubota obviously derives their tractor model numbers from the net hp. My L4310, for example, has 43 net hp. Does anyone know if Kubota has ever derived the model number from gross hp? Do any other manufacturers do so, or have they ever done so?
MarkC
Net hp is measured at the flywheel.
PTO hp is measured at the rear PTO.
Kubota obviously derives their tractor model numbers from the net hp. My L4310, for example, has 43 net hp. Does anyone know if Kubota has ever derived the model number from gross hp? Do any other manufacturers do so, or have they ever done so?
MarkC