Horsepower change in 4520 and 4720 CUTs?

[froggy]

I was looking at some literature on 4000 series and for some unknown reason I compared it to the specifications on the JD website. The web site specifications show the engine horsepower for the 4520 and the 4720 as 60hp and 66hp respectively, while the literature I have shows 53hp for the 4520 and 58hp for the 4720. My question is when did they changed the horsepower for these two models?

 

[nmu98]

The difference is where the HP is rated. The lower is PTO the higher is engine ratings.

 

[froggy]

The 53hp and 58hp numbers were for the engines. I didn't quote pto numbers.

 

[BleedGreen]

Horsepower went up in both of those engines when they were re-done for Interim Tier 4 status.

 

[froggy]

Horsepower went up in both of those engines when they were re-done for Interim Tier 4 status.

Thanks, I didn't know about the interim change.

 

[ddivinia]

Horsepower went up in both of those engines when they were re-done for Interim Tier 4 status.

When was that effective? I guess my ole 2008 4520 is the lower HP I bet.

D.

 

[AKfish]

D. - so what...? Most of those horses can't be "put on the ground", anyway. For ground engagement work -discing, dragging, FEL work. Now, PTO work is a whole 'nother question.

Might make runnin' a baler or a bigger mower a more attractive option.

Or maybe JD will offer a dual rear wheels setup! I'd like to see what a dual wheel 45-4720 with cab would look like.

AKfish

 

[ddivinia]

D. - so what...? Most of those horses can't be "put on the ground", anyway. For ground engagement work -discing, dragging, FEL work. Now, PTO work is a whole 'nother question.

Might make runnin' a baler or a bigger mower a more attractive option.

Or maybe JD will offer a dual rear wheels setup! I'd like to see what a dual wheel 45-4720 with cab would look like.

AKfish

Oh, I get it. I bought a 4520 instead of a 4720 for the same reason. The real deal is resale. If somebody has the choice of a 53 hp 4520 or a 60hp 4520 which one would bring more money? JD should have made them different model numbers or converted to the new numbering schema.

D.

 

[Engine66]

D. - so what...? Most of those horses can't be "put on the ground", anyway. For ground engagement work -discing, dragging, FEL work. Now, PTO work is a whole 'nother question.

Might make runnin' a baler or a bigger mower a more attractive option.

Or maybe JD will offer a dual rear wheels setup! I'd like to see what a dual wheel 45-4720 with cab would look like.

AKfish

AK...agree, agree, agree...BUT...those extra horses help get work done far quicker and allow a greater use of ranges when you have the traction. My 4720 in B range gets me from point to point quicker and can pull heavy loads uphill in A range. Sometimes traction is lost no matter what size/hp tractor you have. My old 38 HP orange tractor was almost permanantly used in low range and would stall under load unless it was highly revved. Now, 58 hp later, I am clearing snow, moving material, grading, hauling, raking, etc. at a greater clip and saving time. I recently completed a few projects in a single day (looong days)...something that would have taken a couple before. That time difference was critical since the ground was dry and rain followed by more rain, and then some more. Ground became unworkabe and spongy. Had I had my old tractor, I would be half-done waiting for next year for similar conditions again. I'm sure you have big weather changes in AK and know what I mean. New England weather is always on the move and any time conditions are ripe to get something done, those extra horses help me finish before the next cloudbreak. (Although I paid dearly for them)

 

[AKfish]

Good point - resale difference.

Realistically, as you have stated before, the increased horsepower isn't that much of an advantage - if at all.

'Spose it could translate into using a bigger mower or running a round baler (4720...?).

A local farmer that put up some of the bales (small squares and rounds) that I bought for my horses has a new JD465 (I think) silage baler. It has an acid spray attachment that preserves high-moisture hay and makes it possible to get a hay crop during year's when many grower's are experiencing significant losses (like this season).

He was running the baler with a new, JD5525 (2WD). It looked like the baler was smaller and kicked the tractor around alot less than an older, plastic wrapper JD baler that was hooked up to a JD3010. I wanna think that the older baler was a JD535 or 545.

Both balers were just sprinting down the rows, but that old baler would really shake that 3010 (with FEL, too) around whenever he'd stop to kick a bale out! I couldn't imagine hooking a 4720 up to the older baler but it might power that newer model.

AKfish

 

[ddivinia]

Good point - resale difference.

Realistically, as you have stated before, the increased horsepower isn't that much of an advantage - if at all.

'Spose it could translate into using a bigger mower or running a round baler (4720...?).

A local farmer that put up some of the bales (small squares and rounds) that I bought for my horses has a new JD465 (I think) silage baler. It has an acid spray attachment that preserves high-moisture hay and makes it possible to get a hay crop during year's when many grower's are experiencing significant losses (like this season).

He was running the baler with a new, JD5525 (2WD). It looked like the baler was smaller and kicked the tractor around alot less than an older, plastic wrapper JD baler that was hooked up to a JD3010. I wanna think that the older baler was a JD535 or 545.

Both balers were just sprinting down the rows, but that old baler would really shake that 3010 (with FEL, too) around whenever he'd stop to kick a bale out! I couldn't imagine hooking a 4720 up to the older baler but it might power that newer model.

AKfish

Old round baler, new round baler - unless it is a really small one I would not put it behind a 4x20. I run my 467 round baler on my 5525 4WD and I would not want any less tractor. In many cases I think the baler or cutter would be running the tractor, not the other way around.

D.

 

[AKfish]

AK...agree, agree, agree...BUT...those extra horses help get work done far quicker and allow a greater use of ranges when you have the traction. My 4720 in B range gets me from point to point quicker and can pull heavy loads uphill in A range. Sometimes traction is lost no matter what size/hp tractor you have. My old 38 HP orange tractor was almost permanantly used in low range and would stall under load unless it was highly revved. Now, 58 hp later, I am clearing snow, moving material, grading, hauling, raking, etc. at a greater clip and saving time. I recently completed a few projects in a single day (looong days)...something that would have taken a couple before. That time difference was critical since the ground was dry and rain followed by more rain, and then some more. Ground became unworkabe and spongy. Had I had my old tractor, I would be half-done waiting for next year for similar conditions again. I'm sure you have big weather changes in AK and know what I mean. New England weather is always on the move and any time conditions are ripe to get something done, those extra horses help me finish before the next cloudbreak. (Although I paid dearly for them)

Well... you've made a very good case for having the extra horsepower. When conditions are good -- ya gotta make hay when the sun shines!! And those extra horses will make difinitely get ya movin' faster!

AKfish