I'm about to do the first 50 hour service...

[bp fick]

Kubota, friend, Kubota did!
It's right in my OM and WSM - 50 hours. The bigger question (to Kubota) is, "why'd you change your mind, to 300/400?"

Lots of reasons. Better Super fluids. Research (Kubota's own) proved the combination of the better fluids and filtering capabilities made the frequent, full drop unnecessary. Socio-political pressure to not waste so much oil. Marketing pressures to lower total owner maintenance costs by extending the change intervals.

It is a multiple choice question. Any or all of the above. Take your pick.

 

[TripleR]

Your a veteran of tractors, what do you think?

I pretty much follow the Manual and advice from my dealer. The exceptions are that I don't wash air or fuel filters.

Like a lot of "seasoned citizens", most of my experience is with the older tractors as only within the last few years have I been able to afford new, modern, higher tech equipment, so I am definitely still in the learning stage and probably always will be.

I always told the Officers I trained and/or supervised to never think you know it all and never stop learning. After 32 years on my job, I was still trying to improve my knowledge base until I turned my stuff in and walked out the door for the last time.

 

[JOHNTHOMAS]

Kubota, friend, Kubota did!
It's right in my OM and WSM - 50 hours. The bigger question (to Kubota) is, "why'd you change your mind, to 300/400?"

TA DAA!!! I was hoping someone would come up with that answer!!! I believe that's the true and right answer. :thumbsup:The manufacturer came up with the 50 hours:thumbsup: many, many, many years ago. Now that same manuf that came up with our information to start with has came up with a new more modern answer. If we believed them before, how come we don't believe them now???????? Now, the manufacturer says when, by hours, to change which fluids and which filters and it's different than the answer from many, many, many years ago.
Now there are always the skeptics that believe the manuf wants the equipment to tear up so they build in problems that will cause the product to self destruct at a certain point in time or at a certain point of usage but I'm pretty skeptical of those people. I sure won't listen to them when it comes to my maintenance schedule. I won't hardly listen to them about anything. I think they are very confused and paranoid.

 

[DiezNutz]

Now that same manuf that came up with our information to start with has came up with a new more modern answer. If we believed them before, how come we don't believe them now????????

Oh I do get your point. BP already listed as good of potential answers as we're going to get.
If it's more of, "Research (Kubota's own) proved the combination of the better fluids and filtering capabilities made the frequent, full drop unnecessary.", then I'm more satisfied with that.

If it's more of, "Socio-political pressure to not waste so much oil. Marketing pressures to lower total owner maintenance costs by extending the change intervals.", then I'm not nearly as impressed. I already posted somewhere else about how this has been the trend in the auto industry for some time now.

Do we know? Has Kubota actually said? Bottom line, none of it (except perhaps better fluid?) actually changes the number of metal particles that are going to be sheared off during break-in. That's a fixed quantity. They don't magicially dissipate the longer you leave them in...

Now there are always the skeptics that believe the manuf wants the equipment to tear up so they build in problems that will cause the product to self destruct at a certain point in time or at a certain point of usage but I'm pretty skeptical of those people. I sure won't listen to them when it comes to my maintenance schedule. I won't hardly listen to them about anything. I think they are very confused and paranoid.

I'm not sure what prompted you to say this, because noone here including me has said anything to the effect of such a conspiracy theory. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not insinuating I'm confused or paranoid.

We all want to do what is best for our equipment, that's the limit of my concern. Beyond that, is a desire for an official explanation from Kubota, for my own understanding, and to satisfy my own curiosity. Until then, I'll have to be satisified with the speculations we've already considered.

I'll say again: from 50 hours to 400 is a pretty big leap. Coming from an engineering and manufacturing background, and thinking about what if I implemented an analogous change, the quality & reliability folks would be swarming me for explanations. They're not going to blindly accept it "because I said so."

 

[beppington]

Conspiracy theory here: If advising new tractor owners to change their oil at the first 400 hours instead of 50 hours causes the tractor to last say 9 years instead of 10 years, on average, (insert whatever numbers you're comfortable with), you'd have to buy a new tractor 10% sooner (again, on average). I'd think that the Kubota employee that came up with that could expect to receive a hefty bonus for coming up with that.

I'm sure Kubota does have statistics on how long their products last, so they can establish their warranty period if for nothing else, & if they can use those statistics in other ways to boost earnings ...

Kinda like the shampoo company employee that came up with the idea to add one word at the end of the standard directions printed on each bottle: "Repeat"

 

[TripleR]

I don't believe any variation of "planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence" is a viable business model in today's highly competitive business climate. Tractor, car, truck etc sales are heavily related to longevity, so no one is going to do anything to compromise that.

 

[DiezNutz]

I'm sure Kubota does have statistics on how long their products last, so they can establish their warranty period if for nothing else, & if they can use those statistics in other ways to boost earnings ...

Without a doubt.
I'd like to believe that the proper research was done and the change from 50 to 300/400 was made having full support of the engineering community.

It's also supposable that the reliability/marketing/PR/bean counter troops got together over drinks and warranty claims, and said "this is a calculated risk we can afford to take", and the engineers were none the wiser.

Who's to say. :drink:

 

[DiezNutz]

I don't believe any variation of "planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence" is a viable business model in today's highly competitive business climate. Tractor, car, truck etc sales are heavily related to longevity, so no one is going to do anything to compromise that.

Mostly true... also some gray area.
The following isn't exactly news, least not to those in the industry, but cars and trucks are designed to last for the warranty period, with added conservative margin in the manufacturer's best interest, and little beyond. Perhaps the most shining proof of this is the Extended Warranty, which has practically become its own industry. In many cases autos, new vehicles will well exceed their Q&R targets (some obviously better than others), and that's great for everyone involved. :thumbsup:

The auto industry relies heavily on marketing strategies, and one major bedfellow (and another offspring industry) are those new car customer satisfaction surveys: J.D. Power, Strategic Vision, etc. Manufacturers put sometimes ridiculous focus and pressure on franchise dealers to consistently have their brand(s) rate high among these surveys, because a significant portion of future sales hinge on it... or so they're told. Coincidence that the surveys and ratings only cover up to the first 3 years of ownership? Not. If the focus was really on longevity, the surveys would be concentrating on the 8-10 year or more veteran owners how well their XYZ has held up for them; they don't.

According to the USDOT, the average new car is traded in about every 4 yrs at 55K miles; leased vehicles, 3 yrs/36K. Thus ends the non-transferable warranty, and/or commences the hobbling of the transferable warranty.

Rest-assured the bean counters are taking ultimate interest in this myriad of facts and figures, and not missing a bean. (Well, maybe sometimes they miss some beans, and the government hands out more. Another topic, another time.)

Now having said all of that (whew!), fortunately for us the tractor industry is still marching to the drum that we love the sound of. At least for now, I wouldn't lump them in with cars & trucks, the business models and attitudes are different enough. Although, things like extended maintenance schedules could be signs of shifting trends that I wouldn't be thrilled to see. As long as our expectations and buying patterns of tractors don't significantly change, then hopefully neither will the things we like about the tractor industry. :thumbsup:

Total thread hijack, sorry. We can go back to the fluid change dilemma.

 

[TripleR]

And we all know how well that business model worked for the auto industry

I believe the "planned obsolescence or built-in obsolescence" has been changed by companies such as Toyota/Honda and others that emphasize longevity. American car companies have had to dramatically improve quality/durability to become competitive again and now make as good of vehicles as anyone. I Keep a truck or car a minimum of ten years and had to stop buying American long ago.

 

[DiezNutz]

To a large extent the emphasis still seems to be on "let's make sure we don't have any stupid problems in the first few years that will kill us in the ratings"; the focus of the surveys/corrective actions really hasn't shifted yet.

I agree that the focus will need to shift more toward longevity; thanks to our continuing economic woes, people will be hanging onto their late model-to-new vehicles even longer. The above USDOT figures should reflect this trend in coming years.

I Keep a truck or car a minimum of ten years...

Same here, I don't fit the statistics. Next to the wife's '10 (which replaced a '99), the next newest we own is an '02, and beyond that we have at least one vehicle representing every decade back about 60 years.