Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 51,575
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
I'm glad you pointed that out. If i had I'm sure someone would have noticed I only (currently) own 2wd tractors. My last 4wd tractor was sold.. not just because it got as stuck as a 2wd can.. but beacuase of that pto hp issue, vs task at hand... 33hp and 4wd just wouldn't spin the mower I wanted.. just plain out needed more hp.
good post.
soundguy
good post.
soundguy
Farmwithjunk said:While that may be the case in a few isolated instances, it's far from being an accurate across the board statement.
There are far too many jobs that a person would do with a tractor that primarily require HP with traction as an absolute minimal consideration. If it takes 60 HP, it wouldn't matter if the 40 hp tractor was TEN wheel drive. You simply don't have the power. That'd be the case with most PTO chores. It's all about having adaquate HP.
If traction is an issue, MFWD will (somewhat) level the playing field. In my mowing business we have 3 MFWD tractors, one 95HP and two 80 HP. They don't perform any different in 4WD OR 2WD with a 15' batwing behind them UNLESS they're in mud or a very steep, slick hillside. Power is power. Traction has ZERO effect of a tractors ability to turn a PTO load.
And, using the same 40 for 60 concept, my 95 HP Deere 6430 WILL NOT replicate the performance of a 135/140 HP 2WD in drawbar pulling. Simply not that extreme of a difference. MFWD has an advantage, but let's be realistic about it.