Heaviest 55h.p tractor
- Thread starter gmol
- Start date
- Views: 4007
varmint
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2003
- Messages
- 2,572
- Location
- Northern Maryland
- Tractor
- Kubota B8200, then a Kubota L3130 HST, now a Kubota L3400 HST
Just off the top of my head, I will say I've got a friend with a Deere 2355- it meets the 55 HP requirement, and with it's Deere loader on the front, and filled tires, (two wheel drive) that sucker pushes 10,000 lbs! Of course, it's not really a CUT. Your answeres oughta be interesting.
slowzuki
Elite Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 4,100
- Location
- New Brunswick, Canada
- Tractor
- Kubota L5030 HSTC, MF 5455, Kubota M120, Allis Chalmers 7010
We use a International 584 that tips the scales near 10,000lbs maybe a bit less. 52 pto hp, It is cabbed, loadered, 4wd and filled tires (16.9 x 30)
Dargo
Super Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2004
- Messages
- 5,981
- Location
- S. IN
- Tractor
- Jinma, Foton, TYM, Belarus, Yanmar, Branson, Montana, Mahindra and maybe some green and orange too.
I don't know what it is, but I'd be curious as to what is. It would tell me what to avoid. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif This last spring I spent all too much time getting my Kubota L5030HSTC out of the mud at property I own. Even with the R4 tires on it (giving it a wide footprint - and they are not loaded) I still had big issues of sinking in soft soil. It has a cab, and I was using the loader and a bush hog to clear trails. I still had plenty of power to pull logs, push them out of the way, and run the bush hog in heavy growth, but I wouldn't have minded to be lighter. I was trying to "tip toe" across muddy areas, but I got buried up past my axles several times. Since there was nothing around, and even if I had a winch, there was nothing to winch off of. Fortunately I was able to "paddle" myself out with my loader.
Nothing against someone's tractor if they consider it the heaviest, but it will be one I sure wouldn't want for my needs. Oh yeah, according to the scales at my co-op, my L5030HSTC with my loader and 6' bush hog weighs 6935 with me in it. I need the power it puts out, but even that weight is too much for where I need to go. I know ag tires get more grip, but they also sink more.
Nothing against someone's tractor if they consider it the heaviest, but it will be one I sure wouldn't want for my needs. Oh yeah, according to the scales at my co-op, my L5030HSTC with my loader and 6' bush hog weighs 6935 with me in it. I need the power it puts out, but even that weight is too much for where I need to go. I know ag tires get more grip, but they also sink more.
Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
<font color="red">
I know some one has the answer out there. What is the heaviest for it's class in the 55 hp.p range ?
</font>
HEAVIEST: Any brand with a mother-in-law sitting on it!
LIGHTEST: Any brand with a politician on it, they are so full of hot air that the tractor floats like a balloon.
I know some one has the answer out there. What is the heaviest for it's class in the 55 hp.p range ?
</font>
HEAVIEST: Any brand with a mother-in-law sitting on it!
LIGHTEST: Any brand with a politician on it, they are so full of hot air that the tractor floats like a balloon.
beenthere
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Messages
- 18,534
- Location
- Southern Wisconsin, USA
- Tractor
- JD_4x2_Gator, JD_4300, JD_425, JD_455 AWS, added JD_455, JD_110, JD_X485(sold)
Don't know the heaviest (guess one can always add weight) but the Deere 4720 is 3700 lb at 58 hp.
The heaviest in the mid size class is the 3720 with 2900 lb at 44 hp.
The heaviest in the mid size class is the 3720 with 2900 lb at 44 hp.
MikePA
Super Moderator
<font color="blue"> What is the heaviest for it's class in the 55 hp.p range ? </font>
Heaviest can be a good or a bad thing. It depends upon where and how you want to use a tractor. Most (all?) farmers want to limit soil compaction so a lighter footprint, which can be achieved through a lighter tractor or spreading the load out over wider/more tires, is more desirable. A heavier tractor can also mean that lower quality steel was used in the tractor requiring more of it to achieve the same strength.
Heaviest can be a good or a bad thing. It depends upon where and how you want to use a tractor. Most (all?) farmers want to limit soil compaction so a lighter footprint, which can be achieved through a lighter tractor or spreading the load out over wider/more tires, is more desirable. A heavier tractor can also mean that lower quality steel was used in the tractor requiring more of it to achieve the same strength.
Bob_Skurka
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2003
- Messages
- 7,615
<font color="blue"> Most (all?) farmers want to limit soil compaction so a lighter footprint, which can be achieved through a lighter tractor or spreading the load out over wider/more tires, is more desirable. A heavier tractor can also mean that lower quality steel was used in the tractor requiring more of it to achieve the same strength. </font>
Mike, intersting point about lighter tractors and soil compaction issues.
Here is a recent thread on Ag Tractor weights : How Much Should Your Tractor Weigh?
I think all this rolls back to the real issue of the intended uses of the tractor. For someone who is logging, get a big mean heavy machine. Same with someone who wants to carry a couple of the biggest round hay bales at a time. But for someone working on anything remotely close to ground that is planted on (whether that is a suburban lawn or a soybean field) then soil compaction is an issue which probably explains much of the trend toward some of the large track tractors from Deere, CAT, and New Holland.
Mike, intersting point about lighter tractors and soil compaction issues.
Here is a recent thread on Ag Tractor weights : How Much Should Your Tractor Weigh?
I think all this rolls back to the real issue of the intended uses of the tractor. For someone who is logging, get a big mean heavy machine. Same with someone who wants to carry a couple of the biggest round hay bales at a time. But for someone working on anything remotely close to ground that is planted on (whether that is a suburban lawn or a soybean field) then soil compaction is an issue which probably explains much of the trend toward some of the large track tractors from Deere, CAT, and New Holland.
Maka
Veteran Member
The Montana 5740C(cab) weighs in at 5555 lbs. This is a dry weight. Great for winch work. We run Tajfun winches and would use a 5 ton winch on that one.
I have one coming in without a cab and Koyker loader on Tuesday and will put grapples on the quick connect and a Tajfun winch on the 3 opoint. Tractor weight with no implements or loader will be about 4650lbs.
This is a cat 1 or cat 2 and will skid logs all day long.
Thanks,
Maka
I have one coming in without a cab and Koyker loader on Tuesday and will put grapples on the quick connect and a Tajfun winch on the 3 opoint. Tractor weight with no implements or loader will be about 4650lbs.
This is a cat 1 or cat 2 and will skid logs all day long.
Thanks,
Maka
beenthere
Super Star Member
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
- Messages
- 18,534
- Location
- Southern Wisconsin, USA
- Tractor
- JD_4x2_Gator, JD_4300, JD_425, JD_455 AWS, added JD_455, JD_110, JD_X485(sold)
Again, not sure what the "heaviest 55 hp tractor" has to do with anything. One can always add weight, be it loader, wheel weights, backhoe, winch, cab, etc. infinitum.
One could put 55 hp engine in a tank, and it may move it about, and only mention it to stretch the point. What good would it be?
Not meaning to de-mean the heavy tractors with 55 hp power plants, but don't see where this end of a discussion has useful meaning. Good balance of the weight to hp is important, depending on the conditions (hillsides, in the woods, etc. is one of those conditions).
Good flexibility seems to be to have the horses and not the weight, as that end of the spectrum brings up possibilities that have not existed in the past.
What am I missing here? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
One could put 55 hp engine in a tank, and it may move it about, and only mention it to stretch the point. What good would it be?
Not meaning to de-mean the heavy tractors with 55 hp power plants, but don't see where this end of a discussion has useful meaning. Good balance of the weight to hp is important, depending on the conditions (hillsides, in the woods, etc. is one of those conditions).
Good flexibility seems to be to have the horses and not the weight, as that end of the spectrum brings up possibilities that have not existed in the past.
What am I missing here? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
