India built John Deere's

[sixdogs]

I'm not comfortable with that HP statement.

 

[Tony S]

That what I was thinking to. Not planning to go back to that dealer, for sales anyway.

 

[vtsnowedin]

If you go to the Nebraska test site you will see that they haven't tested every single model or variation John Deere makes. the closest test is for the 5055E. A lot of good info there even noise levels and fuel consumption per hour at various RPMs. The horse power they list and care about is the PTO horse power which is a bit less then the total engine HP. Mostly it confirms that , What JD says they will do. "They will do".
For a 5045E JD lists in my manual at 37 PTO horsepower or 27.7 kW.
http://tractortestlab.unl.edu/deere/5055e.pdf
The 5045E has the weight and MFWD to get all its power to the ground but if you need more power then 45/37 to get your job done on time they will be glad to sell you one in any size you want.

 

[deere5105]

In briefly looking back through the thread I didn't see where it stated what implements you had that you planned to use or acquire. I believe the 5045E would handle 6' implements without issue. As previously stated, I wouldn't let them talk me into less tractor than I wanted/needed. My 5303 is probably more tractor than I require, but I got a good deal on it and frame/size wise there was no difference. Just got a little more hp than I set out looking for.

 

[vtsnowedin]

As to horsepower requirements I'd take a good look at what machinery I wanted to run in the next several years then look up the PTO power needed to run them. Round balers for example use a lot of power 50 PTO or better for some models and a square baler with kicker and towed wagon on anything other then dead level requires both PTO power plus sufficient machine weight to not get pushed around going down hills. Match the tractor to the job and you can avoid trading up later.

 

[Tony S]

I've got a 8' disc that I have taken some outside cutters off to make it more like a 6'. 6' 3pt mower, 2 bottom pull behind plow. But I plan to get a 6' roto tiller in the future. Mostly food plots and trail mowing/repair. But over the years I have skidded a lot of oak and popple logs, so I plan to continue this to pay for the tractor. My little oliver has been pretty good for this so far but I think its time to up grade my tractor and some equipment. Wife said it alright. $wd would be nice but the little oliver has worked good for 25 yrs so far. Sometime I have to make two trips for a big tree but most times I can get it done in one if not to tight of corners.

 

[94BULLITT]

It is a whole different ball game once you put a loader on a 2WD tractor. They do not go where you think they should in 2WD.

 

[deere5105]

I've got a 8' disc that I have taken some outside cutters off to make it more like a 6'. 6' 3pt mower, 2 bottom pull behind plow. But I plan to get a 6' roto tiller in the future. Mostly food plots and trail mowing/repair. But over the years I have skidded a lot of oak and popple logs, so I plan to continue this to pay for the tractor. My little oliver has been pretty good for this so far but I think its time to up grade my tractor and some equipment. Wife said it alright. $wd would be nice but the little oliver has worked good for 25 yrs so far. Sometime I have to make two trips for a big tree but most times I can get it done in one if not to tight of corners.

For the tasks mentioned, the 5045E should do fine. As always, the 5055E would better if an option. If buying new or if possible, I would prefer the 16.9-28 rear tires.

 

[Tony S]

For logging I will have chains on the back and the rear tires will be loaded. Won't be perfect but should work I think. I will continue to look for 4wd but they do seem to be scarce unless I go new.

 

[deere5105]

For logging I will have chains on the back and the rear tires will be loaded. Won't be perfect but should work I think. I will continue to look for 4wd but they do seem to be scarce unless I go new.

One perspective would be there are less 4wd units for sale used because folks are pleased with them and the reason for more 2wd is folks moving to a 4wd. That is my personal experience. The 2wd was more nimble mowing and working in tight spaces, but not enough to make me go back. The loader operation benefits of the 4wd are not even close unless you are solely moving loose material on flat, hard ground.

 

[sixdogs]

There were a lot of new 2WD in central Ohio and not all that many 4WD. Must be that bigger farms use them to pull wagons or run augers or pumps or whatever.

 

[hosspuller]

If all you have is a single tractor, 4 wd is a must. Especially with a loader... In an operation with multiple tractors, it pays to dedicate the tractor to the job. 4 WD is a frill for a mobile power unit ie feed grinder, auger, blower, etc

 

[Verticaltrx]

If all you have is a single tractor, 4 wd is a must. Especially with a loader... In an operation with multiple tractors, it pays to dedicate the tractor to the job. 4 WD is a frill for a mobile power unit ie feed grinder, auger, blower, etc

I'd agree, but I'd go as far as to say with only one tractor you want BOTH a loader and 4wd. Once you have that there are a lot of benefits to having a 2wd tractor without a loader. For almost all field work I prefer a 2wd, as well as for light chores (as mentioned above.) For heavy loading, digging, clearing, etc 4wd is very beneficial. The only way I'd consider a 2wd loader tractor nowadays is if it were strictly being used on a fairly level and firm jobsite or farmstead and had plenty of rear ballast. Also, 2wd loader tractors are mainly used for loading and lifting, not nearly as effective as a 4wd for pushing and digging.