schmism, I can agree with that statement.
the issue (in my mind) is spending a bunch of time, energy and money adding something that (in my mind) clearly (and grossly) exceeds the orginal expection of the use of the machine.
As long as it really "exceeds the original expectation". As Mith stated, all the
tractors we are talking about in this thread had optional loaders available.
durring the design of my small CUT, it was fully intended to come with a FEL so front axles, frames, attachment points were all designed to handle the increased weight, and stress that is put on those points/components.
Same goes for my John Deere 317, it has a thicker frame, cast iron front axle assembly with large diameter axles, individual wheel brakes and onboard hydraulics. You could purchase a loader directly from John Deere or by aftermarket from Johnson. If you wanted to go further you could by a small Brantly Backhoe that would fit it also.
Here is my story:
I currently have about 6 acres out in the country and was in need of a tractor. The house was new and the yard was not landscaped at all, not to mention I needed to put up a barn/fence for the horses and do a garden. I went to the dealers and looked at all sorts of different tractors. The compact utility tractors with the attachments I wanted were well out of my price range. I started looking at used tractors, but the CUT tractors really hold their value, so there wasn't too much of a price break there. I ended up doing a little research on Garden sized tractors and which ones had the options of adding a loader and other attachments. I ended up at the John Deere dealer and bought my 317.
I then started looking for a 44 loader for it, yes there are some out there, but they average about $2500 if they are in good condition. I had some steel available and chose to build one instead, total cost of the loader was around $600, alot less than a used 44 loader.
Once I was done with the loader I took it over to the neighbors house to show it off. At first he kind of laughed at it, but then I went out behind his barn and showed him what it would do. We moved 22 tons of gravel and spread it in his driveway. He was very impressed with the tractor/loader combination and frequently asks to borrow it.
Have I spent my time well ................... I think so. It gave me a good winter project and having the loader has cut down alot of time on projects, where without it, I would have been using a shovel.
Have I spent my money well ................... Yup, I saved ALOT buy buying the garden tractor and building the loader, when compared to buying a new CUT with a loader. As a bonus I have a tractor that is the "right" size for my place and what I plan on doing with it. (I didn't mention it above, but I did dig a 4 foot deep horse pond with it.)
Does it exceed the original expectation of the use of the machine ??........... I don't think so, it was offered with a loader and all I did was build my own instead of buying a John Deere loader. John Deere advertised the 44 loader as having a lift capacity of 400 lbs (that is lifting capacity above and beyond the weight of the loader itself.). Why would they advertise that capacity and then put a weak front axle under it? The answer is simple, when they designed the tractor it was fully intended to have a front loader on it ??. (Kind of sounds familiar.)
the issue isnt the SIZE of the machine (BX line of kubota's are very capable)
Take a look at the spec sheet on the Kubota BX Loader, it is rated to have a 400 lb lift capacity, same as my John Deere 317. So I agree, the issue is not the SIZE.
The bottom line is common sense. The tractors we are talking about in this post are Garden Tractors, which are a built a lot stronger and beefier than your average Murry Lawn Mower. If you plan on spending the time, money and effort to build a loader, do a little looking, find a tractor with a strong frame that will handle the additional weight and abuse.
Scott